₦airaland Forum

Weah96:
Christians believe that god speaks to human beings. The Bible is a compilation of those speeches. If the Bible can betray flaws of its human origins, such as making an error, then it's not divinely commissioned.

As a Christian who never spoke to god myself, the Bible served as the proof of his conversations with human beings. Once I realised that it contained errors, there was only one outcome available. Skepticism. I began to question everything. That was when I discovered that I was not alone, the god wasn't talking to anyone. It was all an elaborate fabrication.

My experience on NL has reinforced that discovery. When confronted with my accusation of telling lies, Christians here ask me to prove that they are NOT speaking to god. That's all the edvdence I need.

1. How old are you, if you do not mind my asking. I ask for a reason, please - and not to offend you please.

2. Your argument is still centred around the the flaws in the bible, the fact that its a human work (obviously) etc. You need to expand your view.

As far as I am concerned, and from what I can see, you do not even yet have a basic idea of the meaning of words such as "God" - "Creationist" - "Theist" - "Atheist"

Or, there has been nothing in your posts to indicate that you do. Everything in your posts strongly suggests that either you do not know the meaning of any of these words at all, or you have never really given any serious thought to the subject you are attempting to address yourself to.

To convince us otherwise, please can you attempt a rebuttal of the basic creationist worldview - without referring to the bible or its flaws at all. Let that be a starting point at least.

Weah96:
I was a believer. The story was an indication that the book couldn't be inerrant. If the Bible is not inerrant, then there's no point to it. After all, It was written by the infinity infinity boss of all knowledge.

What does biblical innerancy have to do with Theism as opposed to Atheism? ? ?

Are there not a great many theists of religions all over the world (including so called pagans) who do not source their theism from the Bible?
Are there not even ardent Christians who do not believe in biblical inerrancy?

I am not a religious person, I was once Christian - and yet I do not believe in biblical innerancy.
It appears that the reasons you have given for your atheism so far do not even scratch the surface of the meaning of the word "atheism"

You are basically saying that the fact that one book - the Bible - contains flaws - shows that the creationist worldview is irrational and the atheistic worldview is rational. Now, how rational does such an argument sound to you?

plaetton:
First of all, people are not converted to atheism, because, secondly, it not a belief system.

We are colonized by religion long before we can even articulate our own thoughts.

Let's just say that for some people, it's easier to unchain the shackles of religious colonization more than it is for others.

It's simply a battle of of the rational side of your brain against the irrational side.
That is essentially what religiosity and atheism represent, irrational worldview vs rational worldview.

How is being religious irrational and how is being atheist rational?

Can you show the specific thought development that leads one to atheism such that you can sustain the claim that atheism represents rationality?

Is religion limited to imported religion?

Weah96:
The Mary and Joseph story had a big part in it. The more I read, the more I felt like the authors were testing my Intelligence. Imagine a wife telling her husband that god impregnated her.

Is the creationist view unique to or exclusively derived from stories from the bible?

In particular, what does the story of the virgin birth have to do with the Creationist view as against an atheistic view?

Lilbrown007:
WE ARE ALL ATHIEST TILL SOMEONE STARTED TELLING US LIES!!!

Speaking with History and Global Culture in mind, is it really the default natural inclination of mankind not to believe in a creator, originator or supreme being?

scarred9jan:
Once I found out that the creationist version of the beginning of life started to get comma, na so I start to dey doubt.

What is the comma in "the creationist version"?

Secondly, is the creationist worldview limited to the Bible?

Thirdly, what is the credible alternative to the creationist worldview?

menesheh:
The bolded is fundamentally a wrong representation of atheism. There is no particular believe system induced by atheism.

Basically, I had been a skeptic even when i was a theist. I can't remotely say what changed my mind but i remember going through a Facebook post that was specifically talking about how to challenge your beliefs to know whether it worth holding let alone believing it very strongly.

Since there are millions, if not billions of spurious believes people being hold around the world and possibly, my own maybe one of them. The article further said that the best way to know what's true is to start searching for ideas, evident and logical syllogism that will disprove such belief rather than looking for stuffs that will prove it.

My rejection of theistic claims didn't took a gradual process but an instantaneous one because i had been doubting stuffs despite hugely being indoctrinated from my childhood. I later on got grip of Richard Dawkins book "the god delusion", there was this immediate bye bye to religious incoherency and bogus claims.

Finally am a happy hardcore atheist and it still amazes me how I could ever break away from religious mind control dependency. Living my life very happily and gaining more knowledge about reality rather fantasies.

So Dawkins was the Pope for you?

justcool:
. I said thoughts are material, fine gross matter, not physical. Thanks, again.

Yes, yes, yes. . . I recall. That was the discussion. Pardon my mis-use of words. . . its been a long time.

justcool:
@ Deepsight. Thanks for your concern. I gave the guy a brief idea of what the Grail message is about, and advised him to pick a copy and read himself. I mentiioned concepts he was already familiar with, as I perceive he is a Christian. Hence there was no need mentioning the son of man. If he reads the Grail message as I advised him or if he goes through my writings here on nairaland he will come across the Grail message's explanation about the son of man, who indeed is distinct from the son of God, Jesus. There is no way I could introduce all the knowledge in the Grail message to him at first writing, I only gave him a gist. . . . . I have never doubted any knowledge mediated in the Grail message as your post seemed to suggest. The Grail message has long ago become a living conviction in me. The depth of this conviction is limitless/ infinite, and this I can't explain or mediate to you. Sometimes I retire in prayer to the Almighty God, to gain further clarifications about certain issues, especially on things going on in the world today, this has nothing to do with rethinking the Grail message. Thanks and remain blessed.

Oh great, well understood. You are right indeed, its not possible to begin to discuss that with one who has not read the message. Where would one start from?

How is your book coming along?
I didn't come round to purchasing a copy.

I hope it is still available.
I miss our many discussions on the nature of truth, life, religion, history, science and philosophy.

I'd never forget one in particular. . . "Linear Chance"!
And many others.

When we had a divergence of views on the nature of thoughts (you said they were physical, I said no) - I now see with some of my own deeper experiences how thoughts are rather more tangible than may be thought - no pun intended.

Hello Justcool.

How are you? Long time.

Analice clearly has no knowledge of the Grail message whatever, has not read it, would not read it and I doubt would really be a person that reads anything anyway. Therefore ignore him/her.

However in this -

The Grail message is simply a book that explains life, spirituality, God, and the son of God Jesus; [GAP] and also how we humans should live in order to be able to return to Paradise.

You know how I have always found it curious whenever any adherent is silent on it's expositions on the Son of Man as distinct from the Son of God. Is the Son of Man not to be mentioned in that GAP in red I have interpolated above in your quote, if we are to be really giving a full and honest disclosure of its teachings especially as may be distinct from general Christian doctrine? Not that that really matters though.

Sometime ago I recall that you said you were having some deep internal re-thinking on issues as taught as per your personal convictions. Did that lead to any significant change in your worldview?

Great read. Contains some inaccuracies and assumptions though.
Nevertheless should be food for thought for dogmatic christian religionists, particularly those who subscribe to the divinity of Jesus and Biblical innerrancy.

^^^ How dare you?

^^^ Kids.

herald9:
The first thing is to tackle our educational sector, review the curriculum and make philosophy and logic a compulsory course, irrespective of the field of study. Also, the history of Nigeria could be made compulsory to all students for at least a session.

Students could also be made to study African traditional religions- all of them. This will help put the Abrahamic religions on the same scale as our traditional religions.

Etc.

Now here is good sense!
However not everyone can or should be forced to study a particular subject. Such as philosophy. Clearly not everyone has the capacity to do so...

plaetton:
I see it first hand while discussing oxygen and how plants produce oxygen during photosynthesis. My young teen quickly asserted that god created oxygen. I asked how, she could not explain.
I tried to refresh her mind on how plants produce oxygen. Again She still insisted that god did it.
.

I have to say that your young teen is very wise. Good night.

Oxygen is a Gas. God is Life.

plaetton:
Well said.

The reason it is so imperative to engage, mock and degrade silly posts

Mock? Oh dear. Do not mock anybody. Atheist, Theist, Pagan, whatever. I advise you not to do so. All humans are humans.

hahn:
Toothfarians? Lol.


Belief in god is what keeps most people sane in this insane society we live in.

If this is the case then whats wrong with a belief in God?

Atheism and theism are not opposites.

Really?
I really dont know how you can suppose to be taken seriously with this sort of statement.

Unless of course you are joking which i guess is the case. It must be, since you are still on about tooth fairies. Grow up.

What is atheism? What is Theism?

winner01:
Actually If he didnt, you wouldnt be here arguing. I cant be brain-dead disproving the existence of santa simply cos it dosent exist, I cant even devote 5 minutes talking about it and thats it.

I have not hugged the transformer. Dont wish evil on me. The fact that you were raised with evil dosent mean you should wish evil on others. Learn to be positive.

Stoo being foolish. There is God. Have a nice day.

Remilekun101:
Lets take a look at our environment.. Is the world moving upward or downward in terms of morality etc?

Debatable. I don't see witch burnings, holocausts, atlantic slave trades, twin killings and much of the like being as easily permitted in todays world as once occurred: even when we grant that there are modern less barbaric forms of many such evils.

The question as to whether the moral fibre of the world has improved or is improving is debatable. many would say it has indeed improved and is improving.

Remilekun101:
the back brain is meant for connection with anything that is beyond the physical world(what can be seen with the naked eye either with aid or without aid)

Thank you. That is part of my impression aside from perhaps being the seat of other non physical attributes of the being.
However, having said that - why do you suppose that the frontal brain os over developed as opposed to the back-brain?

Remilekun101:
stick around the thread to know it..... But you can do your research

My dear, I am neither interested in research for this thread on that question (for this is a well worn subject already for me) nor in "sticking around the thread.
Can you give me your answer?
If no, no wahala.

@Remilekun - (1) What do you think is the function of the back-brain?

plaetton:
My dear friend
You are right.
I do find myself getting much more irritated by religion, especially Christianity, and especially Pentecostal Christianity, the worse and most pernicious form of Christianity.
And yes, true to my nature, I do some self- auditing , from time to time.

My reasons are very simple. Pentecostal Christianity is taking Nigeria back to the dark ages.
It is a poison that poisons everything that is moral, ethical and decent in our society.

Now, if you don't see and recognize this, then I think people like you are either infected or just part of the problem.

I would be shocked to my bone if after all these years you would imagine that I perhaps have some toward or salutary opinion of Pentecostal Christianity - particularly the Nigerian breed.

Is your memory so short or you just make unnecessary assumptions.

This is the thing about you - you remind me about a gentleman who I had never chatted with on this Forum before. I merely affirmed that I believe in God. From this statement alone this man went to town condemning me as a brainwashed Christian.

How he jumped from a theistic statement to the fact that I am Christian, is just amazing.
He didnt say Muslim, he just assumed - Christian!
You do the exact same thing.

I have watched you for a while as you make your assumptions.
Painful to watch, for a man of such depth.

I am still non-religious.
I reminded some here that I recently gave a short speech disavowing the importation of religions and saying firmly that there should be nothing wrong with African Traditional Religion. I clearly informed my audience that both Islam and Christianity have elements of what is called paganism, and that there is no reason to call African Traditional Religion Pagan. Not many online atheists here would do that - particularly considering the audience I was speaking to.

I even doubt if you would have the balls.
So please watch your assumptions.

Even my own teen, a brilliant science student , tries to use the garbage of Sunday school to mock and discredit the scientific principles that she is being taught in school.
I am alarmed, because our religiously suffused minds are the reasons for our chronic underdevelopment and underachievement in all facets of 21st century life.

As an African, I am ashamed, and very very angry.

I can entirely understand. As the father, why don't you gently and slowly show your views to the still growing mind. Do not be too forceful though. I am sure you understand how not to confuse an impressionable mind.

And by the way, your reasons for believing in God are sundayschoolish.

Fair enough, you are free to your talk. But talk is talk. We have been through the philosophy and logic and even science underpinning the glaring existence of God too many times to start again. At least I dont have the strength now.

All I can inform you of is that your reasons for disbelieving are quite worse.
Also 99 per cent of your arguments are against the existence of God as conceived in Religions. That's sad.

I have told you to pit yourself against the logic and philosophy of the matter too many times.

N:B

You would be very naive to underestimate the power of mockery in degrading lethal stone-age mythologies.
That's what I do here.
No apologies.

You are very well aware that I did that for many years. Just go see my old threads. Full of venom against the religionists.
I simply grew up. It's childish. And in reality, it makes many more of them retreat more forcefully into their beliefs.

It simply Doesn't work.
One off the reasons is simple: it betrays an attitude that does not show the inner moral fibre, sensitivity and maturity of say, a Catholic Priest at his best. Humans Judge many things on inner vibe. The inner vibe of a good Catholic Priest is gentility, compassion, maturity and never given to loud mockery. No matter how logically you argue, if you go about mocking people, they will never regard your message as being as deep and as worthy the message of a man with calm and sensitivity. They simply see the real him and see the real you, and choose the real him.

I don't know if you understand this. If you don't try and remember that most human beings are more interested in finding meaning within themselves than they are in all the scientific puzzles dreamable.
And there will always be scientific puzzles enough to last eternity.
So what should a rational human focus on?

This is not to displace the role of the scientist in anyway though.

plaetton:
" God is factual ".

Even the greatest of dummies don't go that far.

God is factual.
And not just factual, but even glaringly self-evident.

I have watched your temper rise gradually over the last few years to the point where you deliver such angry ad hominems against any person that asserts firmly the existence of God.

I have wondered how you are unable to see yourself in the very same religious fanatics who act the same way against atheists and persons of religions other than theirs.

The quiet and gentle truth is that you have become a serious fanatic on the question atheism. You have become a fundamentalist.

If god is factual, then I wonder why we are arguing about his existence everyday, and why you have pondered and even doubted his existence in recent past.

Many factual things have been debated for years in History. Only to later be discovered as factual. Indeed, self-evident things have been debated vehemently, with people taking diametrically opposed dogmatic stances in the trenches.

The truth is that some are blind and some do see. However when you tell a blind man a factual thing, he may need to use one of his other senses to touch, smell, hear or taste it before he believes it. This is normal with mankind.

~

Now, remember that there is also the mild matter perspective. Different perspectives do not necessarily change a factual thing. The old adage about the blind men and the elephant refers. The existence of the Elephant is factual but the blind men would argue about its nature based on the little part of it they can touch.

Therefore, your very bizzare argument that IF something is factual, there would NOT even be an argument on it - falls flat on its face.

My dear, this is the sort of unthinkable thing that fanaticism makes otherwise sane people say.

^^^ My thoughts exactly. I wonder why anybody would think space age mineral extraction will require large workforces of slaves. Intellectual labour, yes. But not slave labour. As said, machines will do most work. The generality of intellectual labour will be sat sipping juice before computers right here on Earth...

Teempakguy:
nice joke . . . try this in real life, and you won't be having sex for three months.

You mean three years

MadCow1:
There is no such thing as a WHITE NIGERIAN..


You are either black or Albino..

Ignoramus.

@Antiparticle.
There is talent in your writing. Use it NOW.
However, you need to reflect again on the question of God.

I am shocked that you say that you don't understand the word "spiritual"

Whats the problem kind sir?

keenn:
Would that be much to ask?

If jesus could appear to thomas, after witnessing -first hand the biblical narration of Jesus miracles and wonders could doubt his resurrection, I mean!!! How much more him, me, we, us.

Take responsibility.
What if Jesus Never existed?
What if its a tall tale?

What then would you make of your existence?

Do you believe that you are a random product of a random existence that comes from no where and leads no where - OR - Do you believe that there is purpose in your life?

^^^ Someone like you would probably require God to physically appear as a human being and give you a handshake before you believe it exists.
Funny Guy.
Have a nice life.