₦airaland Forum

cococandy:
You have no idea who you're talking to huh?

I know he is a child of God. What else do I need to know?

cococandy: You don't understand the angle I'm coming from with the accident example.
If it can be explained by luck or the dynamics of that particular vehicle/road/or crash itself,then it doesn't prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was miraculous.

Not saying I wouldn't be thankful if it happened to be me who was saved.
I just want examples that leave no doubt.

Okay about your illness,what was it?
Was it incurable? Life threatening doesn't necessarily mean incurable.
If it was really an incurable disease you thought you had,are you ABSOLUTELY sure that there wasn't some misdiagnosis?
Did you get a second and third opinion from different specialists what the disease really was?


10million?
I happy well well for you o.
Why haven't I got such free money?

Is like you are not sure if there is God. But look at it like this; if there is God, wouldn't Luck be under his dominion? So it is not correct to say that being lucky means that God did not have a hand in it.

And why should vehicle design/dynamics favour only me, if not luck, and thus God.

My life threatening disease was curable. But remember that it was not treated, it went away on its own. All the symptoms disappeared. Is the distinction between curable/incurable important?

I hope you know that miracles don't allow detailed analysis, since they involve breaking rules that we barely understand. Just take it on faith, so to speak.

Apatheist: Hallelujah!

Amen brah! You will come across another miracle very soon!

dorox: Who credited your account with 10 million naira, and why?

Wetin be your own inside?

Kendzyma: god wasted d lifes of d people in d bus just to heal and give u money..smh..its realy nt different frm money rituals.
Bt ur post sounds too heartless to b real.i smell sarcasm.

You only think I am being sarcastic because you do not understand the ways of the Almighty. God did not waste the lives on the bus (he has every right to, mind you), rather he saved me from certain death. Twice. In one fell swoop. He saved me for a purpose, which I am now achieving with the financial blessing given to me, to the glory of God.

Like I explained earlier, the mistake you are making is that you are expecting God to save everybody, because he saved one person. That will defeat the whole purpose of miracles.

God is Good

Poster, but why do you dismiss miracles that involve saving of lives from terrible motor accident? I assure you, it is a mistake to do so. The principle of miracles is that the odds must be against you and you must be given preferential treatment to help you overcome the odds. So in accident or ill health, it is the same principle. It doesn't matter whether the odds are 1 in 10, or 1 in infinity.

In my own case, I was diagnosed with life threatening disease 3 years ago and on my way to the hospital for treatment session I was involved in a ghastly motor accident that claimed the life of everybody in the bus, except me. Then on getting to the hospital I was discovered to be free from my disease. Immediately I also got bank alert that I have been credited with 10 million naira.

God is Good.

jayseehe: according to the bible, only human beings and serpents were cursed, so why do other animals suffer too?
what did they do wrong?

Nothing. They did nothing wrong. As to whether they are suffering, it depends on how you look at it. If you look at it with your eyes closed, they are not suffering.

Who has wondered what the food chain was like before the fall, anyway? The food chain is a major cause of suffering today. What did the ebola virus live off of in the garden? Or S. Typhii? Or maggots?

torchwave: It is like asking why God should bring those who will make heaven into the world since they are destined to make heaven. Why not create them in heaven rather than bring them into the world to suffer?

Equal opportunity and risk.

He is a just God. He is impartial. If He brought the righteous into the world He will also bring the wicked or sinner.

However, God gives both equal opportunity to accept Him and the same warning of punishment if they refuse and die in their sins.

Choice separates the righteous from the sinner and the fairness of God makes the both of us come into existence.

How can a man be righteous before coming into existence? Can a man even be anything at all when he does not exist? Why am I referring to something that does not exist as 'he' or 'something'? I think you jumped the gun here, and further butressed the OP's point in the process, since if a man is made a certain way, it can't be his fault for acting that way.

Also, if the goal is righteousness, then somebody that is born righteous has an advantage over a born sinner, right? Infact, you can say the game has been rigged in his favour. Is that what fairness is to you? Equal opportunity but to accept God but not equal ability to?

If God is omnipresent, then he must be in hell. No big deal there. I suppose God does not feel pain anyway, cos he, like, doesn't have a body. No nervous system. But then again the people in hell don't have bodies either. Satan too. Satan in particular, in fact, since hell was made for him. And he is made of nearly the same stuff as God. God is all powerful tho, so he must have switched off his pain button. Or he is omnipainless. I don't suppose he can smell either, so no big deal about being in, like, biological waste. What does he need a sense of smell for, anyway?

http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2014/07/god-not-the-idf-not-the-iron-dome-is-saving-israel-from-hamas-rockets-haredi-columnist-says-234.html

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/07/economist-explains-12

The veracity of that claim is doubtful, as the CNN interview in which the Hamas representative allegedly charged God with deflecting their missiles has not been found. It is non existent. See the first link above.

Even at that, saying that God 'deflects' the missiles raises a few issues, such as; why did God allow about 13 percent of the over 1000 missiles fired - that's over 130 hits, mind you - to find their way through? (see the second link). 87/100 is the kind of success rate you would expect Iron Dome to have, not God.

And also, to where did God 'deflect' the missiles? Egypt? Back to Hamas? Syria? A deflected missile has to go somewhere, and it cannot fly forever. Given that missiles have not been turning up unannounced in Isreal's neighbours or elsewhere, I think it is safe to say that no missile was deflected.

Further, since the Iron Dome operates by tracking missiles by radar - it can see them as soon as they are airbone - and shooting them down, (second link) and the Iron Dome has till date tracked about a thousand missiles, shooting down 87 percent in the process and not dealing with the remainder, where do we get the missiles that God deflected? All the missiles fired are accounted for, by Iron Dome.

Lastly, it might also interest you to note that the Iron Dome is rigged to protect urban areas and other important stuff, so some rural areas are unprotected. It is these rural areas that suffer the greater number of hits. Don't you think it strange that the areas God protects less somehow coincide with the areas where Iron Dome is absent?

In my humble opinion, any just God will not protect Israel, given the massacre they are carrying out in Gaza. How do you justify bombing a school, or a hospital? They say Hamas uses human targets, but still. By Isreal's reasoning, Sambisa Forest would have been nuked a long time ago, along with the abducted girls. Has Israel suffered so much damage as to justify killing civilians along with military targets?

Shame on Israel.

BraveGuy: N.B
Due to the nature of my business, I may not be as active as I would have like to be in the next coming months. All the best for now, it's been wonderful knowing you all, Seun, KAY17, TheBigUrban2, Weah96, gstar, finofaya, dapo777, plaetton, mazaje, Alchemist13, Apatheist, Papacypaul, and others who I may not be able to remember now, but you will be in my prayers.

The TRUTH of the matter is that God or the Bible doesn't need defending. How many people have challenged either or both over the centuries and have returned to ashes and dust? How many from the last century is here today to mount up the same defense? All these, that we do - debates, arguments, exchange of information - are for our own benefits, it doesn't add to God and neither does it remove from Him. As He said in one place, "He that has an ear let him hear". Everyone will get his reward for good or bad. Yes, it may sound like a cliche, that is because it is a truth that has been rehashed over the centuries, and no matter how beaten or battered truth may be, it will always remain, standing the test of time.

I wish everyone well.

I love you all.

God Bless!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvSN3dnmBw0

Okay o. Best wishes.

BraveGuy: In other words there are three levels of understanding in the comprehension of the Word of God; and if you have it at the back of your mind that there are three levels of understanding to the Scriptures, which is patterned according to the design of the temple, then you will do well.
#1. Intellectual Understanding
#2. Spiritual Understanding
#3. Fullness Understanding

"If you are not born again, you will never attain to the 2nd and 3rd levels. It doesn't matter if you are a professor of theology or preacher in a mega-church."

To truly understand the bible one has to accept a character from the bible (Jesus Christ) as one's personal lord and saviour?

Once you accept Jesus as your saviour, do you still need to understand the bible?

You know, if you make up your mind to do so, you can accept pretty much anything. Am I to take it that before you knew what the bible really meant, you had accepted it's authenticity?

Why the special treatment? Or is that just how you generally direct your affairs? Belief first, questions later. Or never.

BraveGuy: Sometimes, I like your comments, because they make laugh much (I love that emoticon - Facebook pales because of this emoticon ).

Atheists and Muslims are always saying that the verse was wrong and that it proves that the Bible was faulty and unscientific. Besides, we have been taught to believe that the Sun was stationary and it was the Earth that was moving. But the Bible says the Sun rises and goes down - moving.

Finofaya, my friend, I studied Geology, most of the theories they taught me had holes in them, this one doesn't.

If the bible had just said that the sun moves, we may given it some consideration. But the bible went ahead to specify how the sun moves i.e up and down. Where in this your proof did you see any mention of up and down movement by the sun? What the bible spoke of is merely sunrise and sunset, which is accounted for by the earth spinning on its axis, not the geocentric model proposed by the bible. You can't possibly construe the sun's orbit around the galaxy and the general movement of everything due to expansion to mean 'rising up and going down'. I'd like to see you try tho. Lol. With God all things are possible. Anyway, are you sure you want to assert that the bible understood space at a galactic level?

This is ridiculous.

Are you trying to find out how gullible christians are?

There is nothing new about heliocentrism. It has been around for centuries. Apparently you fell for the title of the articles you linked. All that the articles say is that the earth's orbit is 3 dimensional, not 2D. But who didn't know that already?

There is absolutely no new information in any of those articles. What is the new development that you based your claim on? The articles are directed at people who may have had the wrong picture of the earth's orbit, and they distorted the headline to make sure they got an audience. Didn't you notice that there is no mention of 'bible' in the two articles?

BraveGuy, you should not have fallen for this.

What is the relevance of that bible verse you quoted, anyway?

Joel3: this topic is not for critics or for religious bigot. on this topic we will be looking at the universe. I am not talking of the solar system. But the universe and the things found in the universe.


Looking at the universe its an empty space. unlimited space that is so big with no ending. Its very clear that universe will have to be the oldest thing that created every other things.

while still looking at it There are trillions of bigger planets, the stars that's even bigger than the earth they are still on this universe. and its very likely to be possible that there might even be another solar system where people live that is far away. Which is beyond the powers of travel ship to embank on.

Now the space is without limit. Empty and Darkness which housing planet. God cannot create the space. The space must have created God and the planet over time.

Now what do you guys think.

For intelligent mind only.

I guess God could not have created space. To do otherwise, he would have had to find the space to stand or sit and create space. Forget that he is alleged to be incorporeal; a spirit still needs a medium in which to be a spirit.

So he either came together with space, or after it. If he came after it, I don't suppose he is the most important thing in the universe afterall. It also means that he is subject to the physical laws. This does not bode well for some species of God that we have discovered. (What or who do you mean by God, anyway?) But I still can't say that space created him, since that confers agency on space, and explaining how space acquired agency is above my pay grade. The alternative would be that he came about by chance, and somehow became tremendously powerful. But if that were possible, why should it happen only once? I don't know. I don't see why it should.

If he came with space, then either could be said to be a property of the other ( saying God is a property of space sounds a bit off key, admittedly, but we are lacking a clear defintion of God) or neither is a property of the other and they fortuitously (especially for God) just came about at the same time. Either way, since they have both come about at the same time, the question would then become; where did they come from?

Of course, all of this is based on the assumption that the universe is not eternal, and that 'God', whatever that is, exists.

My wild guess.

Wait. Wait. The bible tells us that we will be unfastened from all our worldly desires when we make heaven. What is this you are saying about there being temptation in heaven? You must be wrong. The bible says so.

Proverbs 981.2:7; "You must be wrong".

Take that.

BraveGuy, you are tired. Go and rest.

Personally, I like how you engaged so many people for so long in such a serious discussion. I don't think you get the gist of what atheism is though. But just know this; God cannot hurt you when you stop believing in him.

Let go of your fear.

BraveGuy, let me also add; now that you agree that we can go outside the bible to justify Yahweh, what arguments do you have to justify his existence? Not just anecdotal evidence o. Adjusting for that anyway, an argument should present evidence and analyze it to reach a conclusion. Its not to be asking us to explain the evidence for you i.e. God of the gaps feint.

BraveGuy,

I referred you to those two sites for brevity's sake. It won't be convenient to list all the contradictions here; they are too many. And as they are listed elsewhere already, why embrace redundancy?

You equally referred me to the books of Job and Ezekiel. Should I adopt your line of reasoning and plead staleness? Or should I go and check?

The first time I told you about theologians going outside the bible to justify God, you said that is their own kettle of fish. The bible was sufficient for you. Now you have swerved. Even at that, Akiane's case is not as important as you make out, if at all. Firstly, that she is a gifted artist is not proof of Yahweh. Not minding the fact she comes from a family of artists. Secondly, she was not entirely homeschooled, and even if she was, that is not the same as being under lock and key at home. She did leave the house, so you can't sustain the argument that she could not have known about God because she was homeschooled and her parents were atheists.

The Job 38: 31; Orion is visible from Earth. Job 26: 7, the Northen Sky is visible from Earth, from its name you can tell that. Does the universe have a northern direction? Ezekiel 1:22, a crystal dome is precisely what the night shy looks like.

You should let our arguments sink in.

BraveGuy, you are still brandishing the bible at us. How many contradictions do you want to see in the bible before you discard it? These things are all over the Internet. Try these two sites for example.

http://infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_consistency_of_the_Bible

It's surprising that you still don't see the circularity in pointing to the bible as proof of God. Is the Qur'an proof of Allah? I told you how theologians who respect reason have tried to go outside the bible to explain why there should be God, but you insist that the bible is all you need. By such standards, every book is the proof of its contents. But we know that's not true
God must exist outside of the bible. If you agree, then show me where or how he exists. If not, well...

You know the bible doesn't contain the creation story of the universe. All it mentions is how the earth, sun, moon and stars in the night sky were created, which is what you would expect if the writer was earth based. No mention of anything that could not be observed from earth. Is Omnipresent God based on earth? If all that matters to you is how the earth, sun, moon etc were created, then there are better explanations, put forward by science, and irreconcilable with Le bible. Why pass over them? Oh yeah, the bible.

BraveGuy: @ Kay17 or whoever thinks like and wants to help him....

Does it not impress you that you just suddenly appeared in a world that suddenly appeared?

Tell me or show me a better account than the one recorded in the Bible. Please, be aware that you are dealing with someone who knows a few things about Geological sciences such as geophysics and paleontology.

I am waiting to hear how you came into existence and also that of the world around you, wait.... you can start with the BIG BANG theory!

Brother,

From the way you put out this challenge, I guess you view the fact that anything exists at all as enough reason to conclude that God exists.

I agree with you, to the extent that our existence is utterly amazing. I would also pass the buck of explaining our being here to God, but, considerate man that I am, I decided to help God explain his own existence.

In the process, I discovered that God cannot bear the burden of being the reason for our existence.

As you put it, our sudden appearance is impressive, and it requires explanation. Sudden appearances require explanation then. If the explanation for God is another sudden appearance, then we are back at square one.

I have been told severally to just accept that 'God' (in the sense of a proposition). Ask no further questions. But since the reason we have the concept of God is that we are looking for sufficient reason for our being, (sudden appearance was deemed insufficient) why should we accept sudden appearance of another being as sufficient reason? We might have as well not bothered with the question, right?

This is what I mean when I say the bible cannot be the centre of the discussion, because the bible just says that 'God'. Nothing more. No explanation. That is not enough. No other text has provided the explanation. So we move away from all the texts and try to reason out the explanation.

While reasoning has led us to the big bang theory, that theory is not the explanation for our being here. It has never been touted as being one. All it does is try to explain how the universe got to its present state. It does not say what caused the big bang, and what there was before the bang.

We don't have the answer to the question of the existence of the world, but to say it is a being that brought it about is to beg the question.

If you want to convince me to follow you, you must explain how God came into being, and why he is a christian. Your reason must be one which is unattainable without God. Not stuff like sudden appearance, which favours a Godless universe just a much as one with a God, and probably even more.

New Atheism is the same as the atheism we have always known, except that it encourages the active and open criticism and countering (by rational argument) of religion, with the aim of bringing religious ideas to the same state of sacredness as other ideas, (eg political, economic, dietary,) and possibly doing away with religion entirely.

See http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_atheism

BraveGuy: The only person that has made sense so far as I can see on this thread is finofaya, maybe you should go and learn from him.

Nice try, but you should face rationalmind squarely. This comment is purely a distraction. I remember you also stating that I speak out of ignorance.

One can have such a degree of conviction in one's cause that one becomes impervious to reason and persuasion. I think that is the case with you. You are simply not ready to consider any alternatives to your position. I guess what we sound like to you now is what T. B. Joshua sounds like to us all the time. Confusing, at best. Otherwise there are so many sensible contributions on here.

BraveGuy: God knew we would sin or are capable of sin, hence His provision for the redemption or purification that Man needs.

The bible says we are made in the image and likeness of God. Is God capable of sin? If not, is he onmipotent?

BraveGuy: Think of it this way, a complete acknowledgement that there is no God would leave Man in a debased state and irreverent of the human life. It will make him feel no sense of value for others because it will be ruled by the maxim, "Do what thou wilt".

Your God, Jehovah, is not necessary for morality. Are you, Brave Guy, inherently evil? Do you look at your fellow man and wish that he were not? Is it God that is keeping you in check? It is unfortunate to wait for God to tell you to be nice to people. There are close to a billion people who do not believe in God. With such a significant number, if the proposition 'do what thou wilt' were true, don't you think you would be seeing its effects?

BraveGuy: What you also fail to realize is that all religions have a sense of spirituality in them, and that in itself should inform you that in some tiny part of the whole someone somewhere is right about spirituality. If there is a spiritual world (and there is), then it should suffice to seek the best place to learn about it. There is no better place than the Bible.

There are people who engage in religious practices while not believing in God. Examples are certain sects of Hinduism and Buddhism, some adherents of Judaism, and even some Christians. A belief in God is not necessary for this.

You just trust your bible, without wanting to know why.

BraveGuy: It might suffice for you to know that God's punishment for humanity is not because Adam and Eve sinned, it is because they choose to reject Him.

The bible says that God is all merciful and all benevolent. Why then is he punishing all of the humans he created for the 'sins' of two persons? Why did he not forgive those two if his mercy is limitless? Even if his mercy has a limit, why did he not wait to be offended 70 x 7 times before reacting, as he has exhorted us to do? According to the bible, human intelligence is laughably frail and the universe is prodigiously complex. Why does God take it so personally when frail human intelligence fails to recognise him for what he is, and rejects him? People have rejected their earthly fathers and lived to tell the tale. Why does an all merciful heavenly father condemn his child to an eternity of excruciating torture for the same offence? How did an all merciful, all good God concieve of torture? You call it punishment, and punishment might be justified on the grounds that it can bring about reformation. But is it punishment when reformation is not the goal? Once you make up your mind not to ever forgive, is that not malice?

Once you don't agree that the bible is not central to a discussion about God's existence, there isn't much I can say to you. Feel free to label me depraved, and imagine me in Hell. At least God will be there with me, for he is omnipresent.

Whenever you are ready, explain to yourself why your answer to the question 'why is the bible sufficient proof?' Is 'everyone to his own choice of weapon, mine is the bible'. Wonder why your bible raises so may questions, like the ones above, or in the religion section of this forum, when it is a book that claims to have all the answers.

BraveGuy: Before an event took place, a Person comes along and make precise and accurate prediction and then you come along and declare that such a Person is non-existent, why has no other book or some other atheist tried the same as proof that God is not existent if it is that easy?

When you say Yahweh made a prediction, you are saying that he exercised his omniscience. You are refefring to his omniscience. Obviously you did not see reason with my earlier comment about Isaiah and Amos' predictions, but leave the small fry behind and let's deal with the big fish, whch is omniscience. Have you seen the arguments for or against Yahweh's omniscience? Google it. His omniscience is shaky at best. It does not sit well with freewill, or omni benevolence, for example. And you know all it takes to falsify anything 'omni' is one instance of failure.

While you are charging atheists with ignorance, you fail to acknowledge that any meaningful discussion about the existence of God must necessarily be had from outside the confines of the bible and all other religions. Did you know that the truth value of any religion is virtually zero? See the argument from inconsistent revelations. The odds of christianity being the right religion are almost zero.

Notable christian theologians, such as St. Aquinas and Richard Swinburne have had to go outside the bible to proffer reasons for why and how there is a God. That is where all those arguments from first cause and what have you come from. You are still here brandishing a bible as proof of its God's existence. The notable theologians have unfortunately been unable to tell us why, if there is any God, he should be a christian.

If you are serious about understanding the why's of atheism, I suggest you put down that bible. Considers the number of religions out there. Consider the arguments against the existence of any God, not just Yahweh. That bible will only lead you to circularity. That's how if you ask any christian if the bible is true they say 'yes, cos it's God's word' and if you ask why it's God's word they say 'cos its the bible'. Stupendous acrobatics.

BraveGuy: Please show me from your silly book called "Things Fall Apart" where before things happened, they were declared or prophesied.
In the Bible, God declared things before they happened.
Typical example, and this one is for those claiming God is non-existent.... God prophesied (predicted) that Israel would become a nation in ONE day!
Isaiah spoke of a Israel being reborn in one day
Bible passage: Isaiah 66:7-8
Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
Fulfilled: 1948
In Isaiah 66:7-8, the prophet foreshadowed the re-birth of Israel in 1948. Isaiah describes a woman giving birth before going into labor, and he speaks of a country being born in one day. This accurately describes what happened on May 14, 1948 - when the Jews declared independence for Israel as a united and sovereign nation for the first time in 2900 years.
This prophecy was confirmed again in Amos 9:14-15
I will bring back my exiled people Israel; they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them. They will plant vineyards and drink their wine; they will make gardens and eat their fruit. I will plant Israel in their own land, never again to be uprooted from the land I have given them,” says the Lord your God.
Written: about 750 BC
Fulfilled: Since 1948
Now Moses talked about this event, THOUSANDS of years before it happened, so did Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah and Amos!
Please show me ANY Book in the world where the destiny of a nation is predicted ACCURATELY!

Firstly, the bible is not proof of God's existence. I'm sure you are aware that every atheist, and many other persons, dispute that the bible is the word of God. If any. So, even assuming that the prediction you speak of is accurate, it still does not amount to evidence for God's existence.

Regarding the prediction. Keeping in mind that the bible is man made, and the book of Isaiah was written by a Jew, it is only likely that Mr. Isaiah was motivated to write that out of a desire to see the Jewish nation restored its former position. It is something any patriot would wish for. It is wishful thinking. I have to commend him for his tremendous optimism.

Mr. Isaiah was also optimistic that "Zion will not have to suffer long, before the nation is born". By your account it ended up taking 2900 years before it came to be. And as of today, Israel is still at war with its neighbours over the piece of land. What a promise, eh? Not to mention the persecution they suffered at the hands of the Nazis. Mr. Isaiah was anticipating a glorious return to nationhood, as astonishing as childbirth without labour. Israel came to be the same way Nigeria did; by a declaration, which only requires as much time as it takes to get the words out of one's mouth. A full day is too long.

Amos was similarly optimistic. He even promised that they will practice agriculture. Cool.

How did Israel end up back at the same place? You might want to read about the British Mandate for Palestine. The gist of it is that world leaders had recourse to history books in order to determine where Israel belonged on the face of this planet. Nothing magical about it. E.g. If you want to relocate a fulani nomad, you consider places where fulanis are known to originate from.

We don't have to show you any book that makes accurate predictions about nations, since the bible itself is not even 50% accurate and you cannot be holding others up to a standard that you have not met. However, consider books on science fiction, if you want to see ridiculously accurate predictions. Try H. G. Wells' The World Set Free.

So...someone who does not exist cannot make accurate predictions, because they DO NOT EXIST.

Ayomivic: It will be my pleasure to see an atheist physically face to face. I wanted to see the face of man that says there is no God. I want to see him, study him, how he looks like, his stature, how he behaves, how he walks, what he like, how he smile or frank, how he dressed. friends he keeps, what he fears or love most. And many more .Not only these, i stil want to see
the parent of atheist, i want to study them, i want to see if they are rich or poor, how they raise their atheist son. Their reactions after knowing their son to be an atheist.
God, my life and my death is for you. Without you, iam nothing. Glory be to your holy name.

My good man, you have most likely met one. They are not different from any other human being, in appearance. Just as impressive or unimpressive. In fact, there are well known atheists on TV, eg Bruce Lee, and you can study them all you want. You may also read the biography of some of them, eg Tai Solarin.

There is no special breeding ground for atheists, this one that you seem to be expecting them to walk or smile differently. Lol. If you eventually come across a live one, in the wild, and you satisfy yourself that they are indeed of normal behaviour, would you be willing to consider the merits of atheism?

OP. It would be nice if you could link to where you got your figures from. Also, what do you mean by unbeliever? Non Christian? non Muslim? Atheist/non religious? If you mean atheist/non religious, then given that they are outnumbered by more than 5 to 1 by believers, (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism), it is hardly likely that they form the majority of the wealthiest people.

Maybe you mean "why are unbelievers rich at all?".

Given that all of Mubarak's communications have been lucid, there are good grounds for believing that he is sane. The man was able to rally support for his case from a hospital bed where mind altering drugs were being administered to him. He should have been given the benefit of doubt by some people. His case is definitely interesting. But some people, having learnt that he denounced God, feel his plight should be ignored. Fortunately there are people that truly care about their fellow man, irrespective of creed.

God should exist on his own, as a matter of right, and not in the gaps in human knowledge.

The argument from design cannot account for God himself. If God must have created the universe, because the universe is so complex, then God himself must be even more complex than the universe, and then you have to explain how he came about.

If you say he just is, he is a brute fact, then a less complex universe has a higher chance of just being, because a complex universe is easier to explain than a complex universe coupled with an even more complex God.

And it is a huge leap to go from saying there is God to saying that the God is the one in the bible, who is a very weird character for a God.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars

The cars with the 2 highest top speeds (according to certain criteria, not just raw speed) are the Bugatti Veryon Supersport at 431km/h and the Henessy Venom GT at 435km/h.

For the list of fastest accelerating cars, see the list below.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars_by_acceleration

The top 4 are the Ariel Atom V8, Porsche 918 Spyder, Nissan GT-R and Bugatti Veyron Supersport with 0 - 100km/h times of 2.3 secs, 2.4 secs, 2.4 secs, and 2.46 secs, respectively.

Which God are you speaking of? Satan is 'God' to the Satanist. The atheist has grave concerns about the existence of any 'God', howsoever called. I hope you don't think that your 'Satan' is the cause of atheism. Cos that would be a self defeating move on his part, if any.

Lordabas:
I find this odd like atheists are pro-satan but anti-God.
Has any of you noticed that?
WHy don't they bash Satan ever?
But they bash God daily?