₦airaland Forum

winner01:
infinite regression
*face palm*
https://www.nairaland.com/2816262/god-created-everything-created-god

So you believe that an omniscient, omnipotent god has existed for eternity but works in ways that are suspiciously similar to random chance?

God created heaven and earth, I though he art I heaven. Where was he before that?

Look just because it was written long ago doesn't make it true, the early conception of the world that was extrapolated from the bible is very similar to the Babylonian one and guess what, they're both wrong. I'm sure you'll say God did that, but why? So that critical thinkers would doubt him and go to hell?

Or is it just a flawed primitive individual that wrote this?

winner01:
@ bolded, just one problem, the atheist seems to know all the means, and is sure God is not one of them.

Because we have no reason to believe that god is one of them, there is no point to most occurrences that happen in the universe. So he either doesn't exist or is in hiding.

But the god we see in the bible is all guns blazing, performing miracles all over the place.

Where is he today?

Today a man with cancer would go through chemo and then thank God when it goes into remission.

When my dad was sick three months back and was going to church for prayers, nothing happened up to the point that the pastor told my dad to go to the hospital.

A surgery almost a million naira later, my dad is still on medication.

Here's the kicker, he still thinks God did it!

KingEbukaNaija:
Oh he did

I'm sure you haven't studied physics enough to disprove Hawking's postulates.

KingEbukaNaija:
The creation story is true and the sequence of events checks out

Oh really? Plants came before the sun? Right? You're telling that is what science says? Well, you're just lying.

KingEbukaNaija:
The creator is conscious , intelligent and eternal . You might well explain how matter provided self awareness in humans .

You created a rule that everything must come from something why terminate it at that point?

I'll tell you why, it's to hide you're weak argument. Ok, what provided self awareness in your god?

KingEbukaNaija:
Some scientists proposed that the universe is eternal with claims that there is no singularity .

That's one possibility, energy has not been destroyed yet as far as physicists know. But wouldn't it be straight-up asinine to assume some god did it?

Christianity discourages critical thinking which is an inherent aspect of science. The period of time were christianity was at its peak is called the Dark Ages for a reason.

Don't supress the spread actual peer-reviewed science for a bunch of fairytales.

Ok, let's say for one second that Hawking made a big mistake.

This does nothing to validate your christian creation myth. First the sequence is completely different from how things came to be.

Secondly, your argument of who put gravity in place requires a fair amount of special pleading to work because it falls apart when you are asked who the creator of this creator is. You may say the creator is self-existing but we have evidence for this.

Third, I want you to consider that energy cannot be created or destroyed by any means that we know of and we know that all matter is made up of 'condensed' energy so it is possible to say that the universe expanded from a singularity (or point) of near-infinite energy.


PS: I want you to understand that gravity doesn't have to be put in place, it is merely a dent in the fabric of space-time caused by a particle that has mass.

Not all girls bleed when dis-virgined.
But to be safe you can always go for the poophole loophole.

Joshuabase:
this question shows you actually read and understood the post, well astrophysicists don't really know why this is so. Studying anti-matter would help us understand it's absence, problem is if matter interacts with matter it instantly vaporizes into pure energy and mesons. So creating and maintaining it is really difficult, therefore the cloud of ignorance that currently covers anti-matter.

Thanks a lot.

*pant* *pant*

Now that I've recovered from my sci-gasm I would like to say that I'm very impressed with your explaining skills here, you've dumbed quantum physics down to something a secondary school student can understand when teachers struggle to explain ordinary physics.

Now I just have one question: When energy forms baryonic matter, you said it also forms antimatter, now why is that we have far more matter than antimatter in observable space?

KingEbukaNaija:
Lol . Swipes at christianity all ready ? I thought you had the intention to find out the true religion from the lots we have .

You couldn't wait to spew it even conveniently

All he did was refute your evidence and now you're saying he's attacking your religion.

Why?

timonski:
It wasn't a genetic flaw. It started in his late teens.

It only becomes symptomatic later in life.

Also don't call another person a slowpoke when you can't even google a simple illness

timonski:
Wait! Isn't stephen hawkings that im.becile with an electronic voice?
Well. What do I expect from one who is mentally re.tarded.

Don't ever insult someone for a genetic deficiency he can't control. Besides, even with his condition he has achieved far more than you have all your life even with all your faculties intact

*slow clap*
This is very informative.
But it may have posted in the wrong section.

Wow, this pastor is a major jerk. You handled the matter very maturely without escalating it into something else and that was very pragmatic of you.

omojeesu:
Yes, we can and should, in fact cherry-pick which OT law to obey!

The Law has 3 main components: Ceremonial / ritualistic, moral and civil. The first essentially deals with worship, notably temple worship e.g. animal sacrifice, ceremonial cleansings, food items approved or not, no graven image, approved clothing, etc The second deals with human relationships e.g. thou shall not kill, steal, etc while the third generally emanates from the second to manage societal peace.

Jesus lived under the OT and perfectly fulfilled the Law. No one did before Him. It was impossible to even do so by any man then and after and now. Not only that. With authority and finality, He gave proper interpretation and understanding to the law correcting many wrong notions the religious leaders of the time gave the people.

Jesus put and end to the law namely the ceremonies and rituals. The moral laws are eternal. They sum up in Love of fellow humans, neighbours and enemies alike.

The material composition of clothes worn is immaterial to a person's salvation and relationship with God under the GRACE in the NT. (just as whether you eat pork or not won't affect God)

Of course, this can't be supported by any bible verse because it is just one of the many interpretations of the bible by man in order to suit his convenience.

winner01:
Oga nairaland is an atheist, and my best guess is that most of the mods/employees are
too (except maybe for islams section mods). I guess he knows what hes doing.
And its not like the "christian" topics that make front page on sundays are edifying.

Topics such as: 10 reasons for going to church, 10 types of church dancers, when the pastor pays for your wedding, why criticism of religion is important, reasons why guys go to church, 10 types of people you'll meet in church, Nigerian transgender talks about God and many other similarly shallow topics.

At least compared to islams friday topics, one can deduct that the mods are muslims.

As for the atheists, it beats me why there is no section for you guys yet. One can say the religion section is more of an "atheist section" in the real sense. Seeing the way y'all infest this section without control, (at least the sort of control in islams section), except maybe islam is less of a threat.

I dont think the power to pass accross atheistic messages to the mass totally lies with the mods neither do i know what is really going on but one thing is sure, the forum aint close to being pro-christian.

I suggest that an atheist forum be created where you guys can bore the hell out of yourselves with you stale stories on how "nothing created everything", and a day be set aside to move some of your "dont believe in God topics" to the front page.

But seriously op, direct your questions to oga nairaland, not the mods.

I seriously doubt that the mods are atheists, because how many atheists do we have in this country anyway?

Also, giving everybody a section will create many unhealthy circlejerk environments where differing opinions will not be entertained.

voltron:
I love the Muslim section and I always accept the doctrine of islam so i can post to that section.. the Islam section is surreal .. deeply fairy-tale land. I love it.. I wish all Muslims worldwide can behave like they do in the Muslim section.. oft lost in herbal remedies and miracle cures.. docile, submitted womenfolk and stately-sounding males. it is so unlike what we have come to associate with terrorists these days.

I on one hand do not advocate for a separate Atheist section. it is needless, Atheists values are best projected in real-life examples not forums of any kind. I once met a member of the Grail Movement.. while not Christian.. I could see and feel the impact the movement had on him and his family. I also got a revelation. Muslims and Christians are genetically the same.. we only see them through the veil of Jehovah and Allah. The impact they have on the human ecosystem is the same.

Hey, let them use their herbal medicines and miracle cures. Natural selection will eventually do its thing.

Idrismusty97:
I don't watch porns if that's what you implying.

Of course not.
*wink*

zeemahn:
ok

Well put. No point playing chess with a pigeon.

This seems like S&M (hopefully), nothing out of the ordinary here. As long as both parties are consenting and willing, there's nothing wrong.

Is it crazy how saying sentences backwards creates backwards sentences saying how crazy it is?

This isn't exactly a palindrome, though.

Dude, this isn't funny at all. This is straight-up slander and harassment. Sorry bro, sooner or later atheists will have equal rights in this fvcking country!

It's true, why can't we have equal opportunities with religious folk to make it to the frontpage? It's kind of reminiscent of what happens in real life.

I'm bumping this thread.

Edit: Let's take a consensus.
Johnydon22, plaetton, voltron, kingebukasblog, vooks, urahara, Teempakguy, hahn, betatron, winner01, gayjesus. I hope I'm not forgetting anyone.

omojeesu:
No, we are not. This passage, again, is purely OT. It can NEVER nullify the salvation Christ wrought for any man!

Are you implying that we can cherry-pick the Old Testament rules as we like?

Matthew 5:18-19
For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth
disappear, not the smallest letter, not the
least stroke of a pen, will by any means
disappear from the Law until everything is
accomplished.
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of
the least of these commands and teaches
others accordingly will be called least in
the kingdom of heaven, but whoever
practices and teaches these commands
will be called great in the kingdom of
heaven.

paulGrundy:
“Heli” and “Jacob” are two names for the same person.

By the standards of the day, skipping a few generations in a geneology for narrative effect was perfectly acceptable. Thus, to pick an example that ties in with another example, Zechariah the son of Berekiah the son of Iddo is sometimes just called Zechariah son of Iddo…Ezra calls him this for example.

As such, it is conceivable that Matthew skipped Heli on his way from Joseph to Matthat/Matthan, but Luke skipped Jacob.

Jesus' genealogy is patchwork at best and people use it to justify just about anything.

But look at this, an error like Matthat to Matthan is possible to overlook (although the bible is said to be perfect) but Jacob is NOT another name for Heli.

Also, on your other point, why would they skip the father of Jesus' father? That would be borderline reta.rded.

Things get really shady in that last part if you ask me.

paulGrundy:
This response is very comedic

May I retraite again that Josephus is a trained Jewish historian, who does not believe in Jesus as the messiah, hence he has no MOTIVE to invent a "mysterious figure" given the seriousness of his job.[size=17pt]but you on the other hand, have a reason/MOTIVE to deny the existence of Jesus, because you see his existence as a threat to the prejudice you have towards the christain faith[/size].

You claimed Josephus sensationalized Jesus? You didn't provide proof of that. Meanwhile while you are on that lemme give you more non-christain proof of Jesus' existence.

1. Reporting on Emperor Nero's decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt ... on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of ... Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome....

2.Another important source of evidence about Jesus and early Christianity can be found in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians.[8] Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.[9]

At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

3.There are only a few clear references to Jesus in the Babylonian Talmud, a collection of Jewish rabbinical writings compiled between approximately A.D. 70-500. Given this time frame, it is naturally supposed that earlier references to Jesus are more likely to be historically reliable than later ones. In the case of the Talmud, the earliest period of compilation occurred between A.D. 70-200.[20] The most significant reference to Jesus from this period states:

On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald ... cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."

*note Yeshu is how Jesus is pronounced in hebrew

For many more......
http://www.bethinking.org/jesus/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources

Your evidence seems good from afar but upon further inspection we'll see one big problem.

Why are they written after the man's supposed death? Everything was written decades after his death. No contemporary mentions.

There isn't evidence that Nazareth existed then.

PS: I never claimed that Josephus lied or anything, all I'm saying is that skeptics think that those lines may have been added later.

.

SirWere:
The prophecy crew has started again...........

Unfortunately, it's going to take 366 days for the joke to pay off.

paulGrundy:
Your assertion is very funny, considering the fact that Josephus himself, a jewish historian, highly critical of Jesus, acknowledged his existence in his writings.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Yeah, there are exactly TWO mentions of Jesus by Josephus and none of them have to do with Herod killing anyone for his sake.

Also, the two mentions of Jesus by Josephus seem to be sensationalized and embellished, making scholars very dubious about their authenticity. In fact, the second one is known as a forgery as the general consensus of scholars goes.

paulGrundy:
Lies!!! They NEVER conflicted, though they are different Matthew and Luke actually give two different genealogies. Matthew give the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph, the legal, though not the physical father of Jesus. Luke, on the other hand, gives the ancestry of Jesus through Mary from whom Jesus was descended physically as to his humanity. This is a beautiful fulfillment of prophecy and actually testifies to the accuracy of the Bible. Through Joseph, Jesus became the legal heir to the throne while at the same time bypassed the curse of Coniah as prophesied in Jeremiah 22:24-30. Both, of course, were in the line of David so that Jesus had a legal right to the throne as the adopted son of Joseph and was at the same time a physical descendent of David through Mary.

The Ryrie Study Bible gives an excellent summary of the issues here:

Although Coniah had seven sons (perhaps adopted; cf. 1 Chron. 3:17), none occupied the throne. So, as far as a continuing dynasty was concerned, Coniah was to be considered “childless.” Although his line of descendants retained the legal throne rights, no physical descendant (no man of his descendants) would ever prosperously reign on the Davidic throne. The genealogy of Matthew traces the descent of Jesus through Solomon and Jeconiah (Heb., Coniah; Matt. 1:12); this is the genealogy of Jesus’ legal father, Joseph. Luke traces Jesus’ physical descent back through Mary and Nathan to David, bypassing Jeconiah’s line and showing accurately the fulfillment of this prophecy of Jeremiah. If Jesus had been born only in the line of Joseph (and thus of Jeconiah), He would not have been qualified to reign on the throne of David in the Millennium. See note on Matt. 1:11.

Really, so is Joseph's father Jacob or Heli?

malvisguy212:
you have a wrong view of biblical omniscient ,just because God knows everything does not mean He will acts in a way that will contradicte His purpose and plan.

But if you know the outcome of every decision that a person is making, that means he's still acting to a loose script. And that isn't freewill.

Unless you're saying that God doesn't know, then he isn't omniscient.

danidee10:
This is a late late late reply....but i feel the reason nigerians don't listen to rock is because they don't just get it (the slow rhythms and lyrics or the fast tempo and aggressive beat)....i listen to rock and i transitioned from hard, metal rock to slow, alternative rock, i did so because when i'm having problems in life.....i usually calm down and get advice listening to some of those songs cuz of the lyrics (they make a lot of sense). i discovered there is a song for all situations that's why i love rock...compare that with nigerian mainstream music of today.....na only kiyamasa kiyamasa kiyamasa i dey hear nothing again

some bands i listen to
coldplay
keane
switchfoot
green day
semisonic
one republic etc etc

^ This! This!! THIS!!!
You sir, you have superb taste in music.

lexiconkabir:
when you don't understand Arabic, dont rely one translation, it will be erroneous for you to do that.

let's see several translations.

Until when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he perceived it setting in a miry spring... [Abdul Majid
Daryabadi].

Until, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he saw it setting in a spring of hot and black muddy water... [Ali Unal]

After looking at a few translations(including yours) of the verse it becomes clear what the verse is saying. The verse clearly says Dhul-Qarnayn travelled to the end of the land (i.e. until he reached the sea), as far west as he could travel. When he travelled west and reached the coast, there was no more land in this direction(on his route to travel westward), there was only the ocean, and the sun was setting. And as he looked across the murky body of water he saw the sun setting at the horizon.

for you to understand what I'm saying, look at the photo and tell me what you see, whatever you see is the same thing Dhul-Qarnayn saw, and that is what the Quran described! so my friend its your misunderstanding that about the alleged mistake.

It doesn't answer the question as to where the sun sets, which is admittedly an erroneous.

Besides it would be stretch to say that the man had never seen a sunset before.

People haven't answered this question because they can't.
If God knows what we'll do next then freewill is a lie.
If he doesn't, then he isn't omniscient.

The Bible is like 'no sex outside marriage'.
Most people hit puberty between 13 and 16.
Sex shortens women's periods and alleviates pain.
Studies show that it reduces blood pressure.
Studies show that it reduces the chances of prostate cancer in men.
Why are you denying us all these benefits?

Qu'ran 18:86 Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness.


Don't make it look like it's scientifically accurate.