₦airaland Forum

Another inconsistency occurs when atheists attempt to be rational. Rationality involves the use of laws of logic. Laws of logic prescribe the correct chain of reasoning between truth claims. For example, consider the argument: “If it is snowing outside, then it must be cold out. It is snowing. Therefore, it is cold out.” This argument is correct because it uses a law of logic called modus ponens. Laws of logic, like modus ponens, are immaterial, universal, invariant, abstract entities. They are immaterial because you can’t touch them or stub your toe on one. They are universal and invariant because they apply in all places and at all times (modus ponens works just as well in Africa as it does in the United States, and just as well on Friday as it does on Monday). And they are abstract because they deal with concepts.

emssecca:
Brother, "hu-to-m", I do not understand. Please explain. As per your "I know my GOD too" quote, no wahala. Enjoy. I am not here to make you "disbelieve" your GOD via your chosen religion , xtianity. I am here to separate "truth" from "hollywood". And it is a known fact that abraham, isaac, jacob, jesus, mary, joseph, david, solomon etc are all hollywood. They are works of fiction. Used successfully and really successfully to control the world especially the Black Man and Black Woman. We can arrange for a respectful debate where we can maturedly trash the evidences out!

Peace and African Power!!!

Go and read about Biblical Names mentioned in extrabiblical sources. I'm sure you didn't even read the link on the OP.

Anyway, do you know that there is evidence that the Codex Sinaiticus was forged around the 19th century? The parchments are so new, going by parchment dating methods.

It's also suspicious that apocryphal books are in the Codex Sinaiticus.

emssecca:
Brother, so if someone finds proofs that all 4 Abrahamic religions are fiction so automatically it disqualifies the existence of "God"? The root meaning of the word "God" is a german word that means "to invoke". So automatically it disqualifies what you mean. I know what you mean but I am trying to make you to separate reality from fiction. I just put up a post that says certain bibles are contradictory for eg. "Codex Sinaiticus" has no mention of the name "jesus christ" in it and the best response you can come up with is your post above. C'mon man, we are dealing with the most serious aspect of peoples lifes here: Spirituality!!!

I am an Igbo man and I do not "believe" in God. I KNOW my CHI. "Belief" is defined as accepting without any evidence. "Know" is defined as accepting with evidence.

The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European "hu-to-m" likely(not definitely) means "to call".

I know my GOD too.

Now, some atheists might respond, “That’s right! Morality is subjective. We each have the right to create our own moral code. And therefore, you cannot impose your personal morality on other people!” But of course, this statement is self-refuting, because when they say, “you cannot impose your personal morality on other people” they are imposing their personal moral code on other people. When push comes to shove, no one really believes that morality is merely a subjective, personal choice.

Many atheists behave morally and expect others to behave morally as well. But absolute morality simply does not comport with atheism. Why should there be an absolute, objective standard of behavior that all people should obey if the universe and the people within it are simply accidents of nature? Of course, people can assert that there is a moral code. But who is to say what that moral code should be? Some people think it is okay to be racist; others think it is okay to kill babies, and others think we should kill people of other religions or ethnicities, etc. Who is to say which position should be followed? Any standard of our own creation would necessarily be subjective and arbitrary.

Consider the atheist who is outraged at seeing a violent murder on the ten o’clock news. He is very upset and hopes that the murderer will be punished for his wicked actions. But in his view of the world, why should he be angry? In an atheistic, evolutionary universe where people are just animals, murder is no different than a lion killing an antelope. But we don’t punish the lion! If people are just chemical accidents, then why punish one for killing another? We wouldn’t get upset at baking soda for reacting with vinegar; that’s just what chemicals do. The concepts that human beings are valuable, are not simply animals, are not simply chemicals, have genuine freedom to make choices, are responsible for their actions, and are bound by a universal objective moral code all stem from a Christian worldview. Such things simply do not make sense in an atheistic view of life.

Because an atheist does believe in God, but does not believe that he believes in God, he is simply a walking bundle of inconsistencies. One type to watch for is abehavioral inconsistency; this is where a person’s behavior does not comport with what he claims to believe. For example, consider the atheist university professor who teaches that human beings are simply chemical accidents —the end result of a long and purposeless chain of biological evolution. But then he goes home and kisses his wife and hugs his children, as if they were not simply chemical accidents, but valuable, irreplaceable persons deserving of respect and worthy of love.

What is the best argument for the existence of GOD? Follow the link below to find out.

https://answersingenesis.org/is-god-real/what-is-the-best-argument-for-the-existence-of-god/

emssecca:
All Abrahamic religions sublimely or directly have made us or are making us worship the whiteman!..while we keep hating ourselves.

Is that what you believe? You know that deep down in your heart you know that there is a GOD. Why do you keep pretending?

From Genesis to Revelation, Jesus is revealed in His various forms. In the Pentateuch (the first five books), Jesus is revealed. In Genesis, Christ is our Creator. In Exodus, Christ is our Sanctuary, our Haven, and our Deliverer. In Leviticus, Christ is our Sacrifice and Judge. In Numbers, Christ is our Guide. And in Deuteronomy, Christ is revealed as our Reward. In the books of Revelation and Daniel, we see Christ as our Judge. And we find these aspects of Christ revealed throughout the Bible.

Psalm 119:160 says, "Thy word is true from the beginning." In John 17:17 we read, "thy word is truth."

The greatest evidence of the Bible's inspiration is evidenced in the Christ it reveals and the changes in those who study it (John 5:39; Acts 4:12; Matthew 11:26-28).

But what does the Bible have to say about its inspiration?

From where does it say it gets its revelation? 2 Peter 1:21 says, "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

In fact, the Bible states emphatically that, "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16). When this was written, it was primarily referring to the Old Testament. Those that say that the Old Testament, or the Gospels, or other parts of the Bible are no longer applicable to us, are incorrect. The entire Bible exists for our edification. The Scriptures point to Jesus and His solution for our sin problem.

Unity of Scripture

Another evidence of the Bible's inspiration is found in its cohesive unity. In more than 3000 places, the Bible declares itself inspired. It does not contradict itself. The prophecies of the Bible in cases such as Babylon, Tyre, Petra, and Egypt, as well as the Messianic prophecies, prove the Bible's authenticity. The Bible has survived centuries and even millenia. Despite all the attempts of Satan to hide it, destroy it, and make it inaccessible to the common person, the Bible has been preserved by God.

"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever" (Psalm 12:6-7).

Jesus also promises that "heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away" (Matthew 24:35).

The Lachish Letters, discovered in 1932-1938, 24 miles north of Beersheba, described the attack of Nebuchadnezzar on Jerusalem in 586 BC.

Archeological Excavations The Bible's authenticity is also evidenced by archeological excavations that prove the existence of names of people and cities found in the Bible. The discovery of the city of Petra, for example, helped confirm the authenticity of the Bible's record.

In addition, many of the Bible's prophecies have already come true. Prophecies concerning Babylon (Isaiah 13:19-22), Tyre (Ezekiel 26:3-5), Sidon (Ezekiel 28:21-23), Cyrus (Ezra 4:3; 5:13-14; Isaiah 44:28; 45:1), Medo Persia (Daniel 8:20-21), Greece (Daniel 8:20-21), and Jesus' birthplace Bethlehem (Micah 5:2) have all been fulfilled exactly as predicted. These fulfilled prophecies are an extremely strong argument for the trustworthiness of the Bible. They signify that we can trust the prophecies concerning the Antichrist and other end- time prophecies.

AlPeter:
time is a component of the Universe. Time exist because of the Universe not the other way round

What is time?

randomperson:
So, Adam and Eve ate apple, therefore, some kids in Africa should starve to death... God is good...

What is evil about some kids starving to death in Africa?

sonmvayina:
who is James?....and how did he become an authority in these matters..? And where did he get the information from and why should i believe him/her?

James was a Jew who lived in Palestine in the first century A.D. Who is an authority in these matters? Where did that person get the information from?

dalaman:
Just paste it here.

I'm not obliged to do so.

dalaman:
Where is the archaeological evidence that supports the exodus?

Open the link.

Paul only mentions Peter in one of his epistles. In Galatians 1:18-19 he says that he went to Jerusalem to see Peter and James. In Galatians 2:8 Paul says that he preached to the gentiles and Peter preached to the Jews (the "circumcision" ). In Galatians 2:11-21, Paul recounts how he publicly corrected and rebuked Peter because Peter became so intimidated by the Judaizers that he "walked not uprightly".

Evidently Paul's public rebuke of Peter did not cause a problem between them. Peter loved and respected Paul as a brother, and exhorted the Church to heed Paul's wisdom.

"Account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you" (2 Peter 3:15)

The Bible contains 66 books written over a 1500-year period of time by 44 different authors. The authenticity of its stories and of the people that lived in its history has been authenticated by the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1948. The scrolls date back to 150-170 BC and contain all or parts of the Old Testament books except the book of Esther. Many other discoveries have helped prove many details of the Bible that had been scoffed at by higher critics:

The Cyrus Cylinder, discovered in 1879, records Cyrus' overthrow of Babylon and his subsequent deliverance of the Jewish captives.

The Rosetta Stone, discovered in 1799 in Egypt by Napoleon's scientists, was written in three languages: hieroglyphics, demotic, and Greek. It unlocked the mystery of the hieroglyphics which have helped confirm the authenticity of the Bible.

The Moabite Stone discovered in 1868 at Dibon, Jordan, confirmed Moabite attacks on Israel as recorded in 2 Kings 1 and 3.

Can the Bible be trusted to provide answers to our questions? Does it contain truth? Learn about the archeological evidence that proves the Bible's authenticity in the link below:

[url]amazingdiscoveries.org/C-deception_archaeology_Bible_Cyrus[/url]

Florblu:
You even lack a good sense of defending your belief.You sound dumb to me #No offence #

pesty100:
atheism is a non prophet organisation Richards Dawkins don't symbolise or represent what atheism is.

LOL

Richard Dawkins, possibly the most famous atheist in the world, immediately went on a tear on Twitter, blaming victims for their own rapes if they were drinking. “Officer, it’s not my fault I was drunk driving. You see, somebody got me drunk,” he tweeted, comparing being forced to have sex with the choice to drive drunk.

When called out on it, he doubled down by suggesting that rape victims are the real predators, out to get men put in jail: “If you want to be in a position to testify & jail a man, don’t get drunk.”

For someone who is a supposed rationalist, Dawkins refused to even acknowledge the basic difference between making the choice to break the law and being the victim of a crime. But only for rape, of course. It’s unlikely Dawkins would think it’s your fault if you are standing there minding your own business, while drunk, and someone hits you for no reason. But if the assault occurs with a pen.s instead of a fist, in Dawkins’ mind, suddenly the victim is the person at fault.

While Oppenheimer focused on a number of prominent sexists in atheism, such as Penn Jillette and now-deceased Christopher Hitchens (who also was a fan of the “women are humorless” trope), he focused most of piece on accusations against prominent skeptic writer Michael Shermer. Oppenheimer quoted two named women accusing Shermer of sexually harassing them. A third named women had a more alarming accusation: That Shermer had taken her to his room while she was too drunk to consent to sex and had sex with her anyway.

The reaction to Oppenheimer’s story was swift and did much to support the claim that the atheist community protects sexual predators, much like the Catholic Church did during the priest pedophilia scandal.

randomperson:
U are painting atheism as sexist or misogynist but u fail to realize that women are not allowed to become catholic priests or until very recently in some countries, Anglican bishops....
There are many verses in the bible demeaning and degrading women and that includes new testament verses... Some are mentioned in this thread https://www.nairaland.com/3563053/how-bible-demeans-women/2#52666648
In fact studies have shown that married Christian women are more prone to domestic violence or abuse than atheist married women... And the church still expects these women to submit to their husbands

Seun, this person is derailing the thread. This violates rule no.1

randomperson:
U are objective... And u have common sense...

Are you going to throw your god Richard Dawkins under the bus now?

Putting women on a pedestal is better than treating them like equals. (“I tend to respect women more than men.”) Women who don’t defer to men are bitchy. (“However, I don’t think I’ll ever forget the mixture of contempt and pity my words elicited from this young woman.”) Needless to say, for women who reject religion because it so frequently portrays women as mentally inferior helpmeets who exist to serve men’s needs, Sam Harris is not offering any hope that atheism will give them a meaningful alternative.

It would be nice to dismiss Harris as an outlier, but sadly, pompous sexism followed up by defensive posturing is the order of the day for the dominant male leadership of the loosely organized world of atheism. In a lengthy investigative piece for Buzzfeed, Mark Oppenheimer demonstrated that the problem extends beyond sexist condescension. Instead, the bros-before-h.s attitude of much of atheist leadership is quite likely serving to protect actual sexual predators.

Sarassin:
Having read the article, I am not sure one can take the perhaps misogynistic views of one or two atheists and then equate that to an inherent misogyny and sexism in atheism in general. Unlike most religions where there are clearly defined rules and roles for women that are obviously sexist and misogynist, there are no institutes of atheism defining such roles for women. I see the article as little more than a “red herring”. And to be sure, I am not an atheist.

Quite, quite.....thank you.

Harris replied to his criticswith a hyper-defensive and tediously long blog post titled, “I’m Not The Sexist Pig You’re Looking For.” His strategy for disproving accusations of sexism was to engage in more sexist declarations, in the time-honored bigot strategy of saying it’s not bigotry if it’s true.

First, he warmed up with the “women are humorless” gambit, declaring his “estrogen vibe” comment a joke that simply flew over female heads. He then moved on to produce an awesome cornucopia of sexist blather: Women’s value is their service to men. (“I was raised by a single mother. I have two daughters. Most of my editors have been women, and my first, last, and best editor is always my wife.”) Women’s inherent desire to serve rather than lead explains their second-class status. (“For instance, only 5 percent of Fortune 500 companies are run by women… How much is due to the disproportionate (and heroic) sacrifices women make in their 20s or 30s to have families?”)

Washington Post religion reporter Michelle Boorstein interviewed Harris, and during the interview she asked him why most atheists are male. “There’s something about that critical posture that is to some degree instrinsically male and more attractive to guys than to women.” He added, “The atheist variable just has this— it doesn’t obviously have this nurturing, coherence- building extra estrogen vibe that you would want by default if you wanted to attract as many women as men.”

There was an immediate uproar among female atheists, and understandably so, as Harris didn’t even consider that it could be atheism that has a problem, instead immediately assuming that the problem is women themselves. His reaction to the criticism, which was immediate and probably a bit overwhelming was not, however, a demonstration of the tough “critical posture” he characterized as “instrinsically male.”

Mementoes:
DoctorAlien, thanks a lot for your responses. You can't understand how much it means to me. I'll appreciate it if you remember me in your prayers though I prefer to remain anonymous. Thanks.

You're welcome bro. I'll surely remember you in my prayers.

The Lord Jesus Christ is coming back very soon--sooner than most people think--to take His people away from this wicked world, and to permanently end this wicked system of things. Don't let the devil deceive you. Hold fast to GOD.

And He will lead you safely to the Heavenly shore.