₦airaland Forum

So you’ve decided to become a moral relativist. Good for you! What could be better than doing whatever feels right? What could be worse than letting someone tell you what you should and shouldn’t do? Plus, it’s one of the easiest worldviews to adopt: Just leave everyone else alone and demand that they do the same for you, and you’ll never have to worry again about whether your actions are right or wrong. In fact, there are really only seven things that you can’t do as a moral relativist. Simply follow the rules below, and you’ll be free from absolutes forever!

Richirich713:
Newton words have still not been refuted - the only response these guys got is "who created god"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKKIvmcO5LQ

LOL

hopefulLandlord:
so its impossible for the supreme being to have made a designer who designed the universe? I hope you're see your fallacy of special pleading

Anything created by the Supreme Being must have begun to exist, and thus must be a part of the universe(creation) which the Supreme Being made.

A proper definition of the universe precludes the existence of any other Creator apart from the Supreme Being.

hopefulLandlord:
nope, I'm still on Newton

answer me this, does the designer of the universe have to be the supreme being?

let's see how open minded you are

The Designer of the universe has to be the Supreme Being, if the universe is properly defined.

Sapiosexuality:
Newton was too smart for atheism. Same with Einstein.

These guys may not believe in God but to become Atheistic because of a lack of evidence can only be rational if their is presence of evidence.

Where is the evidence? How can any thinking man call self Atheist? While the theist may not provide a really palpable evidence how does the atheist logically become atheist?

"Atheists are not freethinkers; they are free from thinking."

hopefulLandlord:
another special pleading

the designer of the universe doesn't necessarily have to be god; I've already shown the possibility up there

god may have designed the designer who in turn designed the universe


mind you, I'm not in anyway admitting that there's definitely a designer, I'm just playing along instead while poking holes

The last line of the post you quoted answers you. GOD, by definition, cannot be caused. He is the Cause of all that exists.

COULD GOD HAVE BEEN CAUSED?

It is a known fact that no effect can be greater that its cause. The cause has all it takes to produce the effect, and without the cause, the effect would not exist.

GOD caused the universe; therefore GOD is greater than the universe. Now, to suggest that GOD is an effect is to suggest a cause greater than GOD, which suggests a cause greater than the cause of GOD, which suggests a cause greater than the cause greater than the cause of GOD, etc.

This will lead to an endless regress of causes, which is not conceivable. Therefore GOD must necessarily be the first, eternal, uncaused Cause.

IS GOD INTERESTED IN OUR LIVES?

It is impossible to conceive that life was not designed by an Intelligent Creator. The intricacy of the structure of the simplest bacterium could not have been achieved by mere blind, disinterested chance.

What about human life, and conscience? Materialism cannot account for the existence of human conscience, nor can it account for the existence of moral obligations. Conscience could only have been put in man by a GOD who wants man to differentiate between right and wrong. And only a GOD who is interested in the lives of His creatures can establish moral obligations, which are not as a result of human opinion.

jmichlins:
you have just made my day complete. Now you can continue with your joke. Good morning



So you believe the designer came out of nothing but what you can see and feel can't.

I know that the logic flew over your head. That was why it sounded like a joke.

jmichlins:
Hmmm. Good quotes that begs the question, who created the perfect designer that designed all these cause him too isn't a product of chance too

GOD must necessarily not be caused, because an infinite regress of "GODs" is not possible.

"Atheism is so senseless & odious to mankind that it never had many professors. Can it be by accident that all birds beasts & men have their right side & left side alike shaped (except in their bowels) & just two eyes & no more on either side the face & just two ears on either side the head & a nose with two holes & no more between the eyes & one mouth under the nose & either two fore legs or two wings or two arms on the shoulders & two legs on the hips one on either side & no more?" -Isaac Newton

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance." -Isaac Newton

Surely you're not proud of the bloody history of the Catholic church, neither can you be proud of the content of the link below:

www.nairaland.com/3555177/shocking-jesuit-oath

Moreover, Petra1,

If we can agree that Paul kept the Sabbath day holy all through his life, and never kept Sunday, or any other day apart from the Sabbath day holy(as he confirmed in Acts 28:17), what do you think the Corinthian church was doing, since Paul, on two occassions(1 Cor.4:16; 11:1) urged them to imitate him, stating on one of the occassions, that he imitates Christ?

If Paul was keeping the Sabbath day holy and was imitating Christ, what do you think that means?

petra1:
I gave you more than enough. The early church started to worship on Sunday . It wasn't a roman idea . I believe we both agree that the first day of the week is Sunday

1 Corinthians 16:2
2 On the first day of each week, you should each put aside a portion of the money you have earned . . .

Mark the embolded "EACH WEEK"

Acts 20:7 (KJV)
7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

All these things are properly addressed in the link I gave to you up there. I know you have not opened the link. By the way, I hope you know you're the only one who cites 1 Cor. 16:2 as evidence of Sunday worship in the early church?

Please do open the link and read the truth. Thank you.

Petra1,

We cite the great apostle’s personal testimony that he never kept one Sunday holy in his whole life. Just before his death, Paul made this emphatic statement to the Jewish leaders, “Men and brethren, though I have committed nothing against the people, or customs of our fathers, yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans” (Acts 28:17).

Think for a moment! If Paul had ever deliberately broken the Sabbath, or kept another day than the seventh, he could not have declared truthfully that he had done nothing against Jewish custom. On the strength of this unqualified declaration by a man of unimpeachable integrity, we close the search for Sunday keeping authority in the Bible. It just is not there.

People,

I implore you all to follow the link below to find out the truth about Sunday worship. Thank you.

www.amazingfacts.org/media-library/book/e/37/t/is-sunday-really-sacred

Based on these words, we must quietly pass over that embarrassing Sunday afternoon meeting in the closed room. It was not an occasion of unrestrained joy over the resurrection, as some have portrayed it. In fact, there was not even any recognition on the part of the disciples that a miracle had taken place. They were fearful, depressed, and unbelieving. When Jesus appeared to them He spoke words of strong rebuke because of their lack of faith and because they had rejected the testimony of their own companions. How misleading it is to make this a happy memorial service honoring the resurrection!

The fact is that they did not believe Christ had been resurrected from the dead. Mark’s account reveals that they totally rejected the testimony of Mary and the other disciples who brought word of actually seeing the resurrected Lord. “And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen” (Mark 16:10–14).

John mentions the “first day” again in the same chapter, and this has often been misinterpreted as a reference to Sunday worship. “Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you” (John 20:19).

Even though this gathering behind locked doors took place on the same day as the resurrection, was it a special commemoration of that event? The circumstances make it impossible for such to be the case. The text plainly states that they were gathered there “for fear of the Jews.” The frightened disciples had already learned that the tomb was empty, and they expected shortly to be charged with stealing away the body of Jesus. They huddled together in the locked room for protection and reassurance.

Good work brother Splinz! May GOD reward your efforts to spread His truth bountifully.

Petra1,

It is not true that the early church worshipped on Sundays. In fact, all the apostles and the early Christians worshipped on the Sabbath day.(See Acts 17:2; 16:13)

See Isa. 58:13 to see the day which the Lord calls His own, not the dictionary definition of "the Lord's day." John received his revelation on the Sabbath day.

Why don't you stop reading Roman Catholic corrupted "bibles"? Use the KJV. It's the best version of the Bible there is. All other ones have their messages altered.

akintom:
Elijah and Enoch were given birth to, they claimed to have met and received messages from Yahweh. At the end, they both were ferried to heaven.

Jesus was given birth to and claimed all that Elijah and Enoch claimed. He was ferried to heaven too.

* what is the difference between the three of them?

* did Jesus descend from heaven? Noooo

Another name for crap is contradiction.

You are one of the most unintelligent "freethinkers" I've met on this forum. The magnitude of the stupidity of the questions you ask is staggering. I mean, to think that you claim that you once had anything to do with Christians is currently impossible for me.

Please, go and work on your comprehension before you quote me. Unintelligent questions are not meant to be answered.

This explanation is for the benefit of those who are looking for the truth, and not for those looking for an occasion to cavil

If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. Jn. 3:12-13 KJV

Jesus was explaining to Nicodemus, a leader of Israel, that he must be born of water and the Spirit to enter the Kingdom of GOD. He made it clear to Nicodemus that He had only told him earthly things, and yet it was hard for him to believe. Jesus was then wondering how Nicodemus will be able to believe it if He told him of heavenly things, seeing that it was only Him who was privy to the heavenly tidings.

Jesus surely made an allusion to Deut. 30:12-14, which Nicodemus was familiar with in Jn. 3:13. He explained to Nicodemus that only the Son of GOD in Heaven came down with the Heavenly message for this world of sinners.

Peacefullove:
But before this Saviour came and die for their sins, they make heaven without him right ?

Save Moses, Elijah and Enoch, nobody is in Heaven now. We all, starting from Adam, through Abraham, to David and to Mary, and then to the righteous people who died today, will resurrect to immortal life when Christ comes back in the clouds of glory to end this wicked system of things. (See 1 Thess. 4:16-17)

As the holy people of GOD throughout the ages faithfully performed sacrifices, their sins were simply covered. When Christ obtained forgiveness through His blood, their sins were imputed on Christ, and His blood obtained their pardon, because they had faith in Him, and showed that faith by faithfully performing the sacrifices which was commanded to them, till the Seed should come. (See Heb. 10:4; Gal. 3:19)

The patriarchs, through sacrifices with animals, expressed faith in the Lamb of GOD to come, Jesus Christ. The ancients, right from Adam, all knew that one day, a Saviour would come and die the death they deserved as transgressors of the Holy Law of GOD. They also knew that the sacrifices they performed pointed to that Lamb, the Seed of the woman to come. (See Gen. 22:8; Job 19:25).

onetrack:
Lol. This is a garden variety argument from ignorance, i.e., we don't know where we came from and we cannot comprehend God, therefore he must exist.

Straight to the rubbish bin.

What an unintelligent comment to make about this post. I'm not even sure you read it.

Freethinkers indeed.

Mary had no part whatsoever to play in the salvation of man. In fact, she needed salvation too, for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of GOD. GOD chose to introduce His only begotten Son as a man through Mary, and she yielded. Finish!

Mary is not Co-Anything. GOD says that He will not share His glory with any man. The Bible says that Jesus is able to save to the uttermost those that come to GOD through Him(Heb. 7:25). So, Mary has no part to play in that salvation. She got saved by the grace of GOD. Jesus is able to save to the uttermost.

Ubenedictus:
Please don't lie about catholic just because you want to make a point. abeg, na sin.
*

men wrote scripture and that is true but catholic are very quick to add that they wrote it under the inspiration of the holy spirit. Scripture is spirit breathed and so it is inerrant and a primary source of Divine revelation.

Even so scripture doesnt claim to be the ONLY source of revelation, it contains objective truth but it doesn't claim to sufficiently expound all truths that God has revealed.

That isnt deception it is fact.

Stop lying! The Bible says that it is able to make one wise unto salvation(2 Tim. 3:15). If so, then it is enough for the Christian, since the end is salvation.

The fables and lies which Roman Catholic theologians cook up are not Scripture, neither are they able to make one wise unto salvation.

Ubenedictus:
This is what the Apostle says (Romans 8:3-4): "What the Law could not do . . . God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh . . . hath condemned sin in the flesh, that the justification of the Law might be fulfilled in us." And in this respect, the New Law gives what the Old Law promised.

So Jesus fulfill the law by giving us the new law of grace, the law of the spirit who pours love in our heart and giving us what the old law promised but couldnt do, i.e salvation.

You have no reason to break GOD's moral Law(the 10 Commandments), or to teach others to do so, except you want to lead them into eternal destruction.

"Fear GOD and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." Eccl. 12:13

"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of GOD." 1 Cor.7:19

See also Matt. 5:17-19. There Jesus condemned teaching others to disobey GOD's holy Law, the 10 Commandments.

Earth2Metahuman:
yeah.. This is exactly what I was talking about.. Someone went out of their way to show you how rainbows work and taught instead of just holding on to the idea that its a mystery that god doesn't want u to know.

Many africans still believed rainbow is just a mysterious covenant by some jewish god or that rains come from heaven and no man can know the depth of the sea cos god has made them mystery and we should not bother to know.

Isn't not looking for answers outside religion boko haram all about?

It's either you did not read my post or you have a problem with comprehension.

Earth2Metahuman:
lmao @miracle

those men became great because they go against their religious mumbo jumbo which african man will never do.

Ask a black the formation of rainbow, the answer would be god did it. Not that he doesn't have brain to think or make reseaches like those great men, but religious dogma has made him so scared of asking question.

Yes, GOD put in place the mechanism for the formation of the rainbow.

I, as a little boy, and before I was taught in class, noticed that droplets of water between my eyelashes(maybe after a bath or something like that) produced a spectrum of colors ranging from red through blue to violet when I'm in the sun. That is enough to teach me that the mechanism of the formation of rainbow is the dispersion of light by water in the atmosphere, while I glorify GOD who made such a wonder, because it is too foolish to think, as you do, that such a wondrous phenomenon was created by nothing.