₦airaland Forum

Truvelisback:
We are not talking abt right here, we are talking abt faith or foolishness.

Truvelisback:
If u are talking abt right that means those whose commits suiside and suiside bombs has the same right.

Workch:
The claim is true.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster created the Christian god.

We don’t know because our understanding is limited

Workch:
According to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, he claims to be the supreme god and the creator of all other gods including the Christian god.

Workch:
If we shift the goalpost even farther by claiming that this is true

Workch:
but the current level of understanding we have as humans has limitations hence it’s impossible for us to figure that the Christian god was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster with the current tool at our disposal.

How would you disprove this without special pleading for the existence of your god?

Truvelisback:
Good day, fellas. Some years ago, a Female Jehovah witness member i knew died prematurely after she delibrately rejected blood transfusion. Now, is her action faith or foolishness? Faculties, Judges, can we hear ur comments?

Nothingserious:
Again ask believers in flying spaghetti to help you out.

Our God discussions doesn’t need the help of arguments from spaghetti to stand.
What is your obsession with the spaghetti? You bring it up in every of our engagements even though it’s unrelated to our discussions.
May I know why?

OloshoMan:
Hahahaha keep deceiving yourself. Rapture ko. You go still dey dis earth, grow old and die without witnessing any rapture. Admit it your God is a fool, and he keeps fooling you.

Nothingserious:
Interesting!

The personal experiences are subjective.
There is no empirical evidence for God as science has no tool yet ( I doubt it will ever have) to test for God. Science only says “ we don’t know yet”. But some unscrupulous scientists (humans) would want to speak for science as though science had said anything.

God is argued in philosophy and logic. There are no tools to empirically test logic, maths or consciousness. Yet we believe by our experiences that these things are real and have direct effects on us.

You could go back and continue reading up your points and counter points or you could take your decision based on your worldview and end it up there. It’s after all a personal decision to say evidences indicated are SUFFICIENT OR NOT SUFFICIENT, rather than saying no evidences were presented at all.

I say those points you listed first aren’t sufficient enough to conclude there is no God. They aren’t. Maybe until a day you empirically show there is no God, I will agree with you on your strict empiricism and materialism stance.

“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”

~Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers


“One can't prove that God doesn't exist. But science makes God unnecessary. … The laws of physics can explain the universe without the need for a creator.”
- Stephen Hawkings


“I finally gave up on God when I was 15,” Richard Dawkins writes ... But failure to disprove something is not a good reason to believe it.”- Richard Dawkins.

He couldn’t empirically show there is no God. He keeps talking about low probabilities of the existence of God, but was never certain.

“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
[Billions and Billions of Demons - JANUARY 9, 1997 ISSUE]

~Richard C. Lewontin

Iyaebe:
Eagerly waiting for someone to come counter this lol. If so,where did all these unfounded stories emanates from? Its actually weird to me sha

juri:
All these things are simply unfounded rumours. In fact, some of us where so concerned with these rumours that we would have ended up not studying law. They are not true. And for the person who quoted the bible passage pronouncing curse on lawyers, pls note that that passage was not referring to lawyers as we know today but rather the Pharisees/Saduces and the rest who at that time were the custodians of the laws, statutes etc. of the children of is real.

For those who wish to study law, pls go ahead, it is a very noble profession. Do not be disturbed.

OloshoMan:
Growing up, I've had people telling me how perfect heaven is and how horrible hell fire is (if they exist). So i I keep asking myself, has anybody actually been to either of them? Who can even confirm this assertion?

By most descriptions, Heaven is a place where God dwells and surrounded by beautiful creatures singing praises to him, exalting him, feeding his ego.(Seems pretty boring to me) I can't even sit through a two minutes family prayer session talk more of doing this boring thing for eternity. (What would i even want to be doing forever 'eternity'. When I'm dead I'd rather stay Dead)

Hell has always been categorized as a place of horror/terror (a place where people who have been condemned by this loving God would be for eternity). Imagine going to hell for telling just a lie, and your neighbor in hell is Adolf Hitler (who caused the death of millions of Jews during the second world war) or Ted Bundy (an American serial killer who raped and murdered women in his van and kept their dead bodies as a souvenir). Where is the Justice??

In heaven, the scripture claimed that only the righteous would make it there. Who are they? The radical "Deeper Life/Chosen" women who never wears perfume or any deodorant cos it's against their beliefs and can even fast for 24 hrs without brushing their teeth or even taking a bath. I hate anything that stinks, if this is the scenario in heaven, I'd rather not go (that's even if it exists)

In hell, the scripture made us understand that only those who succumbed to the devil are going to be there. Who are they? The hot girls who everyone would love to have a personal Time with? The world's greatest scientists?, The G.O.A.T.s of the entertainment industry (talk about Bob Nesta Marley, The Notorious BIG, 2PAC Shakur The G.O.A.T. himself Michael Jackson, Steve Jobs, etc. Let me stop here, I wanna retire to bed.

Heaven is where the boring people are, while hell is where the real hot girls are. Choose Wisely.

Workch:
Subjective arguments
Anecdotal evidence
Similar to the subjective arguments for the existence of God, subjective arguments against the supernatural mainly rely on the testimony or experience of witnesses, or the propositions of a revealed religion in general.

Workch:
Inductive arguments
Inductive arguments argue their conclusions through inductive reasoning.

The atheist-existential argument for the non-existence of a perfect sentient being states that if ...

Workch:
Deductive arguments
Deductive arguments attempt to prove their conclusions by deductive reasoning from true premises.

The Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit is a counter-argument to the argument from design. The argument from design claims that a complex or ordered structure must be designed. However, a god that is responsible for the creation of a universe would be at least as complicated as the universe that it creates. Therefore, it too must require a designer. And its designer would require a designer also, ad infinitum.

Workch:
Empirical arguments
Empirical arguments depend on knowledge acquired by means of observation or experimentation to prove their conclusions.

The argument from inconsistent revelations contests the existence of the deity called God as described in scriptures—such as the Hindu Vedas, the Jewish Tanakh, the Christian Bible, the Muslim Qur’an, the Book of Mormon or the Baha’i Aqdas—by identifying apparent contradictions between different scriptures, within a single scripture, or between scripture and known facts.

The problem of evil contests the existence of a god who is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent by arguing that such a god should not permit the existence of evil or suffering. The theist responses are called theodicies.

The destiny of the unevangelized, by which persons who have never even heard of a particular revelation might be harshly punished for not following its dictates.

The argument from poor design contests the idea that God created life on the basis that lifeforms, including humans, seem to exhibit poor design.

The argument from nonbelief contests the existence of an omnipotent God who wants humans to believe in him by arguing that such a god would do a better job of gathering believers.

The argument from parsimony (using Occam’s razor) contends that since natural (non-supernatural) theories adequately explain the development of religion and belief in God's, the actual existence of such supernatural agents is superfluous and may be dismissed unless otherwise proven to be required to explain the phenomenon.

The analogy of Russell’s teapot argues that the burden of proof for the existence of God lies with the theist rather than the atheist. The Russell’s teapot analogy can be considered an extension of Occam’s Razor.

Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow state in their book the Grand Design that it is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe, but if the answer is God, then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God. Both authors claim that it is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, and without invoking any divine beings. Some Christian philosophers disagree.

Workch:
Please note that this thread is for people that are well grounded in philosophy and any fallacy shouldn't be made [/b]while making your points. [b]Each of the arguments below aims to show that a particular set of gods does not exist—

A001:
A perfect analogy.

LordReed:
It's like playing chess with a pigeon. It scatters the chess pieces, shits on the board and declares itself the winner.

Workch:
Lol, he’s interested in just winning and not more.
Just ignore him

As if you all have not been trying for days and days and months and months TO DEFEAT ME!

BUT THROUGH THE LORD, CREATOR AND OWNER OF ALL, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

YOU SHALL ALL FAIL AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN.

HENCE THE VALUE OF THE SONG
"JESUS Is,
A Winner Man, A Winner Man, A winner Man.

JESUS IS,
A Winner Man, A Winner Man ALL THE TIME!

A001:
Lols. He's not worthy of getting a reply from me any longer. It's a waste of time engaging such a blockhead.

Bishopkingsley:
1 John 3:15 ►
Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

New Living Translation
Anyone who hates another brother or sister is really a murderer at heart. And you know that murderers don’t have eternal life within them.

Matthew 5:22
nd whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall. say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.


Is because you don't know the Bible that why you don't know that Jesus equate hate to murderer..... When you abuse someone and hate someone you already killed them in your heart

But because you don't know Jesus that why you don't follow the Bible

You abuse some one you are in danger of going to hell

You don't know God who you use his name to disobey his word

Workch:
Shey u see why people stay away from him now?
He's a pandemic of ignorance and scientific illiteracy.

The worst of all is that he says these nonsense with confidence

Bishopkingsley:
As for you Dtruthspeaker: you don't follow the commandment of Jesus as long as you go about with your sinful mindset thinking you can abuse people for God and kill people for God you don't know what you are even doing

You need to repent and ask Jesus to come into your life

A001:
Lols. Microbes, viruses aren't things? They're not living things microscopic in nature?

Bishopkingsley:
This is not my teaching it the word of God

Luke.8.13

This place is not talking about those saved

Pick the place Jesus said the sower sow the seed on fertile ground and see what the word did after Jesus sow the seed by himself

You always mix scriptures and become confused you can believe what you want

Those of us who are saved know we can never lose our salvation

I can even bet you don't speak in tongues you are growing with time you will get to our level then you will understand

advanceDNA:
Some used Jerimiah 1v5 to explain that God knows everyone...u said he sued that verse out of context..because God was speaking and referring to Jerimiah specifically......so I asked u a simple question: is it only Jerimiah God new before he was formed??

U ddnt answer the question...
There’s no crime in saying you don’t know..
But all u did I find fault in my question...and run away from answering it

A001:
Can you observe all things in nature with the naked eye?

Can you see microbes, viruses, crystalline structures of some atoms, and tons of others with your naked eyes? Or aren't all this natural things?

A001:
You're nothing but a scientific illiterate.

A001:
Some of them are natural things that can be observed with the right tools.

sonmvayina:
Dtruthspeaker..a lady has noticed too..please you really need help..

I will pay for it..send me your account let me credit you to buy card at the hospital...please stop doing this to your self. If you are not ashamed..I am for you..

Please.

A001:
There are a number of such: entangled spins, the rest masses of unstable particles, the position of a particle that’s passed through a double slit, and so on.

Check this thread: https://www.nairaland.com/6690123/all-science-key-facts-researches/1#107300391

IMAliyu:
I never made such claims.

I pointed out the absurdity in your equivalence. With my Steve Jobs example.

(2/4)

IMAliyu:
That's your reasoning?
I consider those people irrational.