₦airaland Forum

My bad, I didnt see this earlier.

finofaya:
If "god" has many meanings, most of which are unrelated to atheism, we can only engage in meaningful discussion by dismissing the unrelated meanings.

Atheism; a greek word 'a+theos' means rejection of god. We both know what god is and its essentially meaningful to all those that belief in their own conception of it.

Every conception of god is related to atheism until after god is defined to mean a particular being. Heck, disbelieve in a particular god isnt atheism. Christians do not believe in muslim allah, they do not believe in many other distinctive gods/deities in other religion or spirituality. This doesnt make them an atheist but non-believer in those particular gods.

This quote from Stephen F. Roberts sums up the situation very nicely: "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

It been elaborated to say the theist has dismissed all other "gods" and has chosen to believe in one particular God, but the atheist has simply gone one step further and renounced all gods.

A beam on the quote reveal Stephen mean to say "You and I share a disbelief in MANY gods. You are just one disbelief SHORT of being an Atheist. Hence atheist disbelieve in ALL gods." http://godisimaginary.com/i28.htm

This analogy explain better. . .

If there are 1,000 gods that other religions believe in, and you believe in one, that means you are disbelieving in the other 999. Theist disbelieve in 999 while atheist disbelieve in 1000 i.e ALL.

Therefore, ALL conception of god is related to atheism.

So sir, if you choose to relate with a particual god, you are not an atheist but non-believer of the god you choose to disbelieve in.

So you better dont hesitate to run from all conception of god.

finofaya:
I'm not here to quarrel with the dictionary. Do I believe that an influential person may be called a "god"? Yes.

You buttress my point.

This is kind of christian believing in Yahweh and disbelieving in Allah.

You believe influecial person is god and exist.

finofaya:
The wiki definition of deva includes supernatural attributes. Which definition are you using?

You right.

I just want you to fall in.

Is buddhism atheistic religion?

This is kind of what Sam Harris practice and claim to be atheist.

finofaya:
A "god" whose existence I would dispute may either be supernatural or natural, must have a mind/capacity to act with purpose, and must be responsible for all of existence or directly/indirectly this universe or human existence. These are the basic attributes. Anything else is not a "god" for the purposes of my atheism.

For the purpose of your atheism. You didnt deny there are gods outside your definition.

A christian would say anything else is not for the purpose of his faith. Even when knowing that god exist outside his faith.

Sir, I see around non-believe in the particular god you defined. This is not atheism.

Existence of god outside the purpose of your atheism is very constant.

finofaya:
So you're happy to adopt one definition of "god" when it comes to your own version of atheism.

There is no one definition in my stance. The word but gives room to thousands of definitions of god.

finofaya:
Lol. Please extend the courtesy to the rest of us.

Sam Harris and Platteon will get that.

finofaya:
You cannot pray to Fela, a dead man, under the honest belief that he can hear and answer your prayer, and claim that Fela is merely an influential person called "god".

Fela is a god as

1. Influencial person

2. Apotheosis.

Prayer and ritual directed to him is spirtual underground game.

finofaya:
If you're not sure about who can be described as an atheist because you see people who you say believe in a "god" (conscious creator type, not Fela) describe themselves as atheists, you should take the issue up with them. At least you have an idea what kind of "god" atheism is about, otherwise you would not have been able to make this distinction.

This have been trashed. Choosing to disbelieve in one particualr god doesnt make you an atheist. It just a way of things even among christians. Believe only god in one faith and disbelieve in other.

finofaya:
@bolded, you've defined atheism then. Can we safely provide a different definition while remaining atheists?

Of course

And I am free to put knife into it

finofaya:
Dude, as far as this topic is concerned, I've concluded that you're trolling. I dey go watch europa league.

Hope you enjoy watching the match?

Weah96:
Your name is God, do something. Or should I address the ori apesin in your person?

Troll. . . .

Leave me

Weah96:
It stopped being about atheism when you decided to pretend that you were a dullard. I'm never having a serious discussion with you again. It's all personal jibes and jokes from now on. So get used to it. It's my style of trolling. I can't go 100% r)etard like you can on a whim. You remind me of the Tugg Speedman character from Tropic Thunder.

wiegraf:
I might as well have taught my dog how to perform brain surgery...

When atheists are put into a dark corner where they cant see Jesus/Mohamed, they only blab with their disturbing noise.


Agentofallah, finfayo, platteon, ya comrades cannot get a way through this:

FOLYKAZE:
Going by your deduction, do you mean you guys believe in Spinoza god? I dont seem to know any supernatural attribute attached to it.
What about the supernatural powerful roya touch of england and french kings who are deified? Do you disbelieve in their existence?
I dont know where you get that trash that god in atheism mean a supernatural being. You are nothing different from christians and muslims except that you create your own fantasy which you choose to disbelieve in.
Atheism has a greek origin which is 'a+theos'. 'A' mean negation or rejection while 'theos' mean god. Definition of theos from wikitionary does not have anything to do with supernatural attribute.
Not withstanding, we both know that Abrahamic concept of god and some polytheistic concept of god is centred round a supernatural being. What happens to god in other religion concepts? What happens to those worshipping the planetary bodies as god? Do you mean to say planets do not exist? What happens to those that deified natural entities, does this mean that nature doesnt exist? Does this stop them from been a god? What happens to god in naturalistic pantheism? Do you disbelieve in god in spiritual naturalism?
In a concept of god, god is supernatural being. Do you believe in god of non-supernatural attributes?
Atheism is about existence of god. Disbelieving in a particular god is non-belief. If a buddhist does not believe in christian superbeing, this does not make him/her an atheist. Non belief in supernatural being remains as it is and not atheism.
Would you tell me you disbelieve in the existence of living-goddess called Kumari been worship by hindus and buddhists?
Humans are in history raised to the status of deity though apotheosis. Do you disbelieve in the existence of these heros, kings and emperors been recognised as god?
These are stuff begging for answers.

koice:
(This topic wasn't intended to offend, so please try not to take offence)

1. Why did God create the world in 6 days? Why not just instantly do it all in one day if he was all powerful?

2. If God has a plan for us then why pray at all?

3. Why did God punish Adam and Eve for doing wrong if they did not know the difference between right and wrong?

4. Where did God come from?

5. How does a virgin get pregnant?

6. Did God create sin?

7. Why are there so many religion with each one claiming to be the only true one?

8. Between Isaac and Ismael, which one was the legitimate son of Abraham?

9. Why are there no chairs in mosques?

10. What status does Jesus hold in Islam. And what status does Mohammed hold in Christianity?

You don't need to answer all, just attempt one that you know.

OP, this question is for Abrahamist and not theist.

Weah96:
I don't think Folly God is stu.pid. I think he's trolling for some reason unknown. Gotta give him credit though. He has no sense of pride, or shame, whatsoever. That can be an advantage in life if used correctly. Hahaha.

The thread is all about Atheism and religion.

What ya got to add than attacking my person?

wiegraf:
After all that's been said to you, repeatedly, I ask you: are you too dumb to recognize that atheists refer to supernatural deities when they speak of God?

Going by your deduction, do you mean you guys believe in Spinoza god? I dont seem to know any supernatural attribute attached to it.

What about the supernatural powerful roya touch of england and french kings who are deified? Do you disbelieve in their existence?


I dont know where you get that trash that god in atheism mean a supernatural being. You are nothing different from christians and muslims except that you create your own fantasy which you choose to disbelieve in.

Atheism has a greek origin which is 'a+theos'. 'A' mean negation or rejection while 'theos' mean god. Definition of theos from wikitionary does not have anything to do with supernatural attribute.

Not withstanding, we both know that Abrahamic concept of god and some polytheistic concept of god is centred round a supernatural being. What happens to god in other religion concepts? What happens to those worshipping the planetary bodies as god? Do you mean to say planets do not exist? What happens to those that deified natural entities, does this mean that nature doesnt exist? Does this stop them from been a god? What happens to god in naturalistic pantheism? Do you disbelieve in god in spiritual naturalism?


In a concept of god, god is supernatural being. Do you believe in god of non-supernatural attributes?

Atheism is about existence of god. Disbelieving in a particular god is non-belief. If a buddhist does not believe in christian superbeing, this does not make him/her an atheist. Non belief in supernatural being remains as it is and not atheism.

Would you tell me you disbelieve in the existence of living-goddess called Kumari been worship by hindus and buddhists?

Humans are in history raised to the status of deity though apotheosis. Do you disbelieve in the existence of these heros, kings and emperors been recognised as god?

These are stuff begging for answers.

Barcanista

Did you not remember when GEJ and late president Yaradua admit the election that brought them into office were rigged?

How can in your daftness compare a rigged election to free and fair poll?

How can I get my own copy?

wiegraf:
Ah, folly, in your universe I suppose that counts as a 'rant'. And I have face to save there as well!

Before anyone else answers you for the gzilliontthrirollionthseesaee time, allow me to ask Your Denseness a simple question.

You state;



You also (ra.pe the term and) refer to yourself as an atheist, correct? Going as far as to describe your 'spiritual atheism' as



Goot. So now, a simple question good ser; as you're an atheist, does that mean you're a clown as well?

A simple answer would suffice.

Thank you kind ser

You acknowledge I am an atheist now?

And you too dumb to know the spiritual gives a new dimension to my stance?

Weah96:
You ARE God. A lot of people seem to be influenced by your foolishness. But I'm still an atheist.

That aside, there is common saying To err is human, to forgive, divine". Do you know what divinity is here? Does it sound like a mystical attribution? Divine basically means relating to, coming from, or like God or a god.

I forgive people. I am divine.



I am a god.

You acknowledge I am a god and also believe I exist and you are an atheist?

Confusion breake bone hey wepa!

Weah96:
I don't acknowledge your divinity, Folly. But if you prefer to use the word God to refer to yourself, instead of using more precise nouns and adjectives, then God it is.

I'm still an atheist though, notwithstanding your arbitrary choice of nomenclature. Got it, God?

But you acknowledge I exist and I am a god.

Do you disbelieve in my existence?


That aside, there is common saying To err is human, to forgive is divine". Do you know what divinity is here? Does it sound like a mystical attribution? Divine basically means relating to, coming from, or like God or a god.

I forgive people. I am divine

wiegraf:
[s]

It's like you're itching to make one look like a bully....

When I think it can't get worse, I read the next sentence and a new nadir is reached

It took me from facepalm, to despair, to cringing, to giggling. By the end, when you had reached Harris and the blatant copy/paste paragraph you borderline plagiarized, I was close to tears.

It's a stunning piece of work good ser. 10/10. I concede you might be a god. A god level troll, that is, provided this is all deliberate on your part.

Oh, and here I was thinking you stopped calling yourself an atheist. Now I'm the one giving you too much credit.

An atheist that prays...

Next you'll be claiming to be a vegetarian that eats meat too

I'll just quote the whole thing for posterity's sake. It's truly brilliant. Long may it continue?[/s]

Get for yourslef a bucket and fill it up with your tears.

I asked a simple question begging for answer and not childish tantrum of yours.

Well I shouldnt expect anything serious from some that cannot define nourishment.

Common call your brothers to define what god is. They could help you save a face.

What is god?

Weah96:
LOL. See who's been providing meaningful contribution. Folly, you are truly one hell of a case.

This is all you can resort to?

I am a god.

I exist.

You hateist can go fvck yourself.

DProDG:
Lmao, the kid's getting pissed off. At least he replied differently this time. I'll give him credit for that.

Disbeliever in the existence of god but do note understand what god is within and outside conventional religion are. . . . .?

Weah96:
Really? Don't you have any shame left in your ori apesin, sir?

Ori Apesin one who is worthy of worship by many. Lot of people gather to venerate and revile.


What does this have to do with definition of god?

If you dont have anything meaning to add to this thread, you can as well join praise singers.

DProDG:
AgentOfAllah

Why waste your time teaching him English? Or Norwegian? Or Greek? Just don't bother with the troll. His reply will be the same, this time I bet my right eye...

Another loser that choose to run away when greeted with fatual and logical point.

I know ya all. You trend on ignorance. How could you call yourself an atheist when you dont know basic concept of God?

Do you want me to take someone that takes Sacred kings as a synonyms of god, Someone that doesnt know what apotheosis is and running around with sentence construction and insults or you that doesnt know what simple religion serious?

You can as well run into exile like you do before

AgentOfAllah:
For the umpteenth time, I don't care about the word 'god' or any other word for that matter, I care about ideas for which words are placeholders. No atheist (that I know of) denies the existence of influential persons, I couldn't care less if you or the dictionary calls them Sango, amadioha, Zeus, orisha, god or zebrudaya, that's your problem. Defining influential persons as god merely makes 'god' synonymous with 'influential persons'. This is not invalid, but it is superfluous. Yet, this definition of god is utterly independent of the more conventional meaning, which is a 'supernatural being'.

A fantastic sentence construction filled with loads of illogical fallacy. I have been trying all along to drill into your intelligence but found out that you are just a bitter, confused, unintelligent and empty soul.

Starting with, it is a common ideology and conceptual view of many cultures, tradition and religion of ancient time and present age recognising MAN as god. The kings, ruler and emperors across the world are been considered as deity in many cultures today. We have records of sacred kings, divine leaders and apotheosis (like fela) which recognise man as a divinity and deity in it idea. Choice to romance with monetheistic conceptions especially that of abrahamic concept among hundreds of concept expose insincerity and foolishness of atheists like you.

Apotheosis, Animism, pantheism, spinozism Euhemerism Panpsychism are common concept of god which hold the idea that natural entities are divine, sacred and considered as deity.

One would think you are wise but your foolery creep out when you claim to disbelieve in only one idea of god, supernatural being. What happens to other ideas that have no supernatural attributes? Are they not god?

You could have make sense if you create a word for disbelieve in supernatural. Your romanticing of an idea reveal your atheistic stance is lie and deceit. . .you dont have problem with god but supernaturals.

Atheism (a+theos) has a deal with GENERAL conception and idea of god, not just supernatural gods.


On that supernatural god, I know of a historical sacred kings of england with supernatural attribute. The supernatural power of royal touch. Are these apotheosis king of england not existing?

And to clear your ignorance, considering a MAN as deity is not synonyms but apotheosis. Meanwhile, deified kings are been worship, rituals made for them and many other religious ceremonies. Do you disbelieve in the existence of roman god Quirinus who historical live and exist as Romulus?

Answer my questions or you continue enjoying your foolery.

AgentOfAllah:
If you want to be extremely pedantic, you may argue that the word 'atheist' is derived from the Greek root words 'ἀ-' (prefix for without) 'θεός' (Theos), which translates to 'without god' (godless) in English. Hence, in the broadest sense of the word 'god' in English, atheist is a misnomer. Consequently, an atheist cannot exist literally (this is, I think, where your dissonance lies). But before you fall deeper into that trap, take note that in Greek, the idea of referring to influential persons as 'theos' does NOT at all exist. Theos is strictly used to define a supreme being with supernatural attributes. So when a Greek person uses that word, they know exactly what it describes, which is a person without belief in a supernatural being. The word was brought into the English language, carrying the same meaning and it continues to do so, even with the ambiguity associated with the English word 'god'. As a result, you cannot say atheists don't exist, or that the word is a misnomer, for that matter.

Another incoherent and hiding the head ostrich tactics.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_(word)

http://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%B8%CE%B5%CF%8C%CF%82

Where did you get your crap from in the link above?

Did you not see king and ruler meaning attached to the wikidictionary?

Even on wikipedia;

Germanic etymology
The Proto-Germanic meaning of*ǥuđánand its etymology is uncertain. It is generally agreed that it derives from a Proto- Indo-Europeanneuter passive perfect participle*ǵʰu-tó-m. This form within (late) Proto-Indo-European itself was possibly ambiguous, and thought to derive from a root*ǵʰeu̯-"to pour, libate" (Sanskrithuta, see hotṛ), or from a root*ǵʰau̯-(*ǵʰeu̯h2-) "to call, to invoke" (Sanskrithūta). Sanskrithutá= "having been sacrificed", from the verb roothu= "sacrifice", but a slight shift in translation gives the meaning "one to whom sacrifices are made."

where is supernatural attribute here?

Does Ra, the sun, has supernatural attributes when it been worshipped? Does this stop Ra from been a god? Does this to you as an atheist mean Ra doesnt exist or you dont believe in the existence of Ra. . . .the sun?

Atheists are indeed bunch of clowns.

Is Gaia not existing?

Answer those questions man.

finofaya:
You're so dogged.

Seem so but not actually.

finofaya:
It's a rather trivial point you're insisting on. "God" has several meanings, you know this. In a sentence, you usually only refer to one of its meanings or the other when you use the word. You rarely refer to all the meanings at once in a sentence.

You getting me wrong bro.

You agree with me that god has different meaning but like other atheists, you want to hold unto a meaning while others are dismissed.

I understand that atheists like I am do not believe in any supernatural being living in the sky. But we do understand that man is also a deity. Different culture in the world acknowledge this. Many religion concept acknowledge this. And note, this men are not just considered as god but they are worshipped as god. So will an atheist disbelieve in this god (define as influencial person)? This is the question ya all fail to answer.

finofaya:
If you ask for clarification and a person tells you which meaning of a word they are referring to, any further misunderstanding about the meaning of the word is your own problem.

Ya. Agentofallah defined god as a supernatural being. I asked, does he believe in deva, there is a no supernatural attributes to this buddhism deity. Yet, it is mythical. I ask you too, if god is supernatural being, do you believe in deva?

finofaya:
For example, if I say "there are spirits in the kitchen" and after query from you I indicate that I'm referring to liquor, it is not my problem that you go on to claim that I'm also referring to a demon. Go and compute what is being said on your own.

You have actually not define what god is.

What is god?

What concept do you disbelieve in?

Do you believe in other concepts?

finofaya:
Another example. Fela (PBUH), an influential person who used to exist, is a god to you. I agree. Note how I'm not going on to ask you if Fela is the gallery in your theatre, or insisting that he must also be the gallery in a theatre to you.

I will provide you with basic answer. Fela is an influencial person. . . .and not gallery in a theatre.

You guys have refused to provide answer to my questions.

As an atheist, do you disbelieve in the existence of god (defined as influencial person)?

finofaya:
Why do you call yourself a spiritual atheist when you think that it's nonsensical to deny the existence of "god"?

Spiritual Atheism is the absence of belief in the existence of "God", defined as an entity external to the universe that created and rules the universe; but the presence of belief in the existence of "God", defined as the personification of the universe itself and everything therein.

I dont have problem with god until when you define what you mean by god. I respect every individual view of things and choose to disbelieve in any of those definition that cannot be proven.

There is a shrine dedicated for Fela, he is been idolized. Rituals are perform in this shrine. Prayers are been said. And from him comes an ideology and philosophy. Will an atheist disbelieve in existence of fela (a deity)? This is the question you guys should provide answer to.

Imperial cult is very common in ancient days and still exist in some tradition. Persons are been worship as a deity. Will an atheist disbelieve in the existence of these deities (personalities)?

Nuclearboy here defined god as anything/anyone that has dominion and been worship. We all know about celebrity worship and worshipping of country and money. Does this mean atheists are practical religious person?

Plaetton is an atheist that believe energy is the eternal conscious creator. He believes in veneration of sun and the planets (I dont know if he practice this). He leans to spiritualism like Sam Harris but throwns out the idea of religion dogmatism. Meanwhile Sam and Plaetton are atheists.

My "spirituality" means feeling a connectedness with something outside of oneself, or feeling an appreciation and/or sense of awe for something outside of oneself. Note that traditional atheism does not make any attempt to define exactly what is meant by the term "God" or "Deity"; while spiritual atheism is very specific about it, making it a specialized and discretionary type of atheism. This reflects the different underlying philosophies — atheism actively rejects belief in all possible definitions of the term "God"; while spiritual atheism actively rejects belief in only one very specific definition of the term "God" which is super-personal being.

So the burden is on you guys to tell us which god or concept of god you disbelieve in.

Do you disbelieve in definition of god as influencial person?

Do you disbelieve god in pantheist concept?

Do you disbelieve god in spinoza concept?

These are the question begging for answer.

AgentOfAllah:
"Should be LIMITED to English"

If you wish to limit any discussion to English, you should probably limit your usage to its linguistic rules first, and stop behaving like an ignorant slob. A good starting point would be the Wikipedia page on POLYSEMY! I hope the 'Orisha' in you saves you from your supernatural nincompoopery.

Oh, and while you're at that, maybe also read on the FALLACY OF EQUIVOCATION

Orisha in english is god.

Yoruba spiritualist is a naturalistic pantheist. And an existence of god is very much present in the system.

You are very dodgy and have problem with comprehension.

In english definition of god, is an influencial man not a god?

Do you as an athiest disbelieve in the existence of god defined as influencial person?

finofaya:
There is an invisible pink unicorn, and it created us. Prove that there is no invisible pink unicorn without attacking my assertion that there is such a being.

IPU is your own mental creation.


God does exist.

When I say God, I mean an influecial persons. Fela is one. . . .he is my god. He does exist.

Oh goodness. This does not appear in my mention.

AgentOfAllah:
Your whole argument is predicated on an informal fallacy known as shifting the goalpost, and I'll show you how.

To begin, let's take a random subset of letters from the English alphabet. For the sake of this discourse, I'm using the first letters of my moniker, yours and Davien's. A, F and D. Now, we may string these letters into any abstract arrangement to form a word, with the only criterion being that the new word is pronounceable.

I choose DAF. I wish now, to make a claim about DAF's material attribute, and my claim is that DAF exists.

I need to halt this fallacy here.

I wasnt the one that create the word 'god' and attach it to an existing influencial person. The word 'god' from time has it meaning as an adored, admired and influencial person. This is there in your dictionary.

AgentOfAllah:
Naturally, you must be befuddled by now. "Has AgentOfAllah gone mad?", you may begin to ask. But of course not, silly. All rats are DAF, thus DAF exists.
What have I done? I have merely created a synonym for rats; a superfluous, pointless word. No doubt, easy to pronounce, but an ugly sounding coinage whose only practical application is to demonstrate the pointlessness of your argument to you. Yet, for all its pointlessness, DAF now exists as an abstract placeholder for a material entity (rats).

You are only trying to hide in your word creation fantasy.

God is not synonym of a man but it is defined as a person.

AgentOfAllah:
How then does this relate to your argument? Your Yoruba spiritualist friends, by defining the abstract arrangement of three letters (god) in such a way that it can only be seen as a synonym for mankind/human makes it a superfluous coinage that serves no additional purpose but to add more redundancy to a concept that already has an uncountable number of representations in the vast sea of existing words.

Are you serious at all?

What is Orisha in english?

Are human not Orisha?

AgentOfAllah:
Of course, if you define 'god' so that it becomes just another synonym for man, nobody can reject the existence of god according to such a definition.

In many culture and conception of God, Man is a divine being.

This is matter of concept and no synonyms.

AgentOfAllah:
I wrote everything above to make the following point, so let's string things up into a nice coherent conclusion:

Atheism, is not a rejection of a specific abstract arrangement of letters or any of its attendant definitions, wishful or real, rather, it is the rejection of a specific concept or idea, which is the existence of a supernatural being, often abstractised using the colloquial placeholder; god.

Many religion in the world today do not believe in supernatural beings but hold a believe in a deity/god. Maybe they just do away with supernatural. E.g buddhism. Is this your definition applicable to devas, spinoza concept of god and pantheist concept of god?

AgentOfAllah:
If it makes you feel any better, I took the liberty to search if the same word exists in other languages and as it turns out, in Norwegian, good = god. Now, it will take an extremely persuasive argument to convince even the most pertinacious atheist that dogs can't be god!! I hope you feel god now?

Atheism and god here is a english word. I think our discussion should be limit to english.

This discussion is not about creating a word and bringing a meaning into it from foreign language. It is about atheism and meaning of god.

The dictionary agrees man is god. An influencial, admired and adored person is a god. It is just like saying a person that drives a car is a driver. Calling this synonyms is illogical. We have there a direct meaning of what god is.

Many culture (Yoruba and egypt) and religion ( christianity) have record of where man is been recognised as a god. There are list of person recognised as deities in ancient egypt and modern day Yoruba tradition. In christianity, judges and mere men were called god not because the word was created to fit them but because they fit into the concept of god which sees man as god.

So tell me sir, when you defined god as a supernatural being,

Deva is a buddhist god but not a supernatural being. Do atheist believes in deva?

Admired personalities are defined as God. In imperial cults and many cultures, they are been worship as god. Do atheists believe in these gods?

Have read in many books that titan are gods but also mean powerful person, if you dont believe in titan as mythical gods, do you believe titan is a powerful person and exist?

AgentOfAllah:
I'm very sorry you think I'm insulting you. I made what I believed -still believe - to be a very fair assessment of your argument. It's stupid because you clearly mistook atheism for pantheism even when I gave you the exact definition of atheism from which your argument should proceed.

You aint mature enough pls if you cant do away with vulgar words and been abusive esp when you disagree with others.

1. Did I tell you I dont know what atheism is?

2. Can you show me how I mistook atheism as pantheism?

3. Atheism is a disbelieve in the existnce of god.

To a Yoruba spiritualist, a conscious being is a god.

A case that is noticeable in many world religion, man is considered severally to be a deity.

So an atheist telling those religion practitioner that god does not exist is equivalently saying man does not exist. The flaws on atheism here lies on definition of god. When god is defined as a conscious being or man, it is then not possible to deny the existence of man.

Atheists disbelieve in the existence of God/gods but the question is how do they define god?

God is super being, atheist could disbelieve in this god.

God is an influencial person, atheist, atheist disbelieving in the exist of this God is quite insane. How could someone disbelieve in the existence of god (defined as influencial person)?

So my point remain that atheism makes sense until god is defined as something which existential evidence cannot be dismissed. Ex, in a culture where snake is deified, would an atheist disbelieve in existence of deity (snake)?


I have explained myself enough

AgentOfAllah:
This is without doubt, up there with the most idiotic arguments - if it can be called that - I have seen in my entire life. Can you define atheism?

I am sorry, since you cant do without insult I will have to get my hand doing something better.

Cheers

AgentOfAllah:
His dim wittedness is uncannily analogous to that of a troll.

If all you could do is call me name and address me in an insultive manner, I will have no option than to ignore your tantrum. We might disagree on things but that does not call for insults pls

AgentOfAllah:
Okay, let me bring it down a notch, hoping you might get it this time.

Answer me this, why is the opinion of the Yoruba spiritualist relevant to the atheist argument?

Before you proceed, you may assume that the atheist argument is that there is no evidence for god's existence. So what I really need you to do is to show me why this argument is flawed because some Yoruba spiritualist believes everybody is god.

For your argument to be sound, you must first show that the Yoruba spiritualist's definition of god is, in fact, THE acceptable definition of god.

Thanks and good luck.

Why didnt you come with thus early before? You were just insulting. . . .too bad.

Atheism is all aboutexistence of god. However, god in atheism is not definitive with regard to a/some specific religion or spirituality. So we can assume that God in atheism cut across all religion and spirituality which Yoruba spirituality is not excluded because it does recognise existence of god too. So I very much think Yoruba spirituality is relevant in this dicussion.

So here is the flaw. A Yoruba man would call on his Eleda (creator) which is Ori, an orisha which is a god in english. Ori is a metaphysical concept important to Yoruba spirituality and way of life. It is the reflective spark of human consciousness embedded into the human essence, and therefore is often personified as an Orisha in its own right. So in Yoruba, a living being is a god.

And when atheist says god is not existing, in Yoruba perspective, this mean atheism is holding the believe that Man is not existing.

I hope you get this?

davien:
AgentOfAllah, analyze FOLYKAZE's comments and you'll notice he's trolling....he's been trolling from the start....take a good look
He "doesn't get it", and yet considers your rebuttal an "irrelevant opinion"?

Yawn.

AgentOfAllah:
FOLYKAZE Logic 101

Formal statement: Irrelevant opinions may be resorted to when establishing a logical truth.

Structure: {insert irrelevant opinion}, {insert consequential logical truth}

EXAMPLE 1: {To the Yoruba spiritualists, every individual is a god}, {so this creates flaws in the atheist arguments}.
EXAMPLE 2: {To me, FOLYKAZE is a pathological mo.ron}, {so this creates flaws in whatever defence he may invoke to proved me wrong}

I'm sure you can think of other examples.

Lol

I still dont get it.

Irrelevant opinion; I suppose not take it on with you any longer.

Is every individual not a god in yoruba spirituality?

@ Ghostofsparta.

My encounter with Osanyin is the story I shared with you. It wasnt speaking about future but only that of past secret event I was in the middle of. I have back down on this.

How far with you and dalaman? Any progress so far?

AgentOfAllah:
WTF??

To me, and probably every sane person who reads the above, FOLYKAZE is a pathological Mo.ron. As such, no matter how sound his arguments may be, any attempt to disprove his inanity should land on deaf ears because such arguments are naturally flawed by the definitive, sacrosanct and divine nature of the opinion I have expressed about his person.

There, I just proved atheists worship a god!

Seriously apart from the insults, I dont understand your point.

dalaman:
I just gave the statistical model as an example others lime Nate Silver use to make accurate predictions. I just want the priest to simply tell us which party will win the elections in the 12 states I listed as well as the presidential elections. Something that is very convincing and can not be attributed to luck or fluke.

Ya I agree to take this but the stand is not and very shaky. Electoral prediction can be done without employing any spiritual process. Shifting the post to statistical model, each state result and general electoral outcome is giving the issue a resounding ground. And when results are out, it cant convince you cuz you and I know that I could do this without employing any Osanyin.

I dont know who you are. I dont know anything about you except this moniker. So come with issue that can outrightly convince you. Provide a very crucial issue which you personally say speak of and make judgement. Actually people would ask you if it is truth, and the answer is yours.

Electoral result can be easily dismissed. When you affirm the issue you brought if personal and convincing enough, you can speak for it and would be difficult to doubt.

What ya say?

dalaman:
Why March 28 alone please? Humans are using statistical model to accurately predict the election results of 36 out of 37 states in the USA, why can't the Osanyi do same with just 12 states in Nigeria? I want us to be as accurate as possible. The presidential elections alone will not do because it is just one election. The margin of error is very low. Hope you understand what I am saying? I am an open minded skeptic that is only interested in the truth of the matter.

From a possible winner to statistical model from 12 states again?

I am not sure I can do that. What is statistical model in yoruba? How am I going to express myself when this is suppose to be done in Yoruba language? You mean I should tell the consultant that I want statistical model from 12 states for this election. And you want an illierate priest to understand me or embarrass myself?

No no. It is winner or nothing on presidential election. Or we agree on something else. A very cruical and personal issue with which you would judge the outcome by yourself.

Yoruba spirituality is mostly importantly about inner self.

I did something like this with a self acclaimed Olokun priest. I provided my informations and asked him to tell me something. The self acclaimed priest bears Highpriest here on nairaland. People who are constant here knows him. And at the end, I flood him risking my identity. Thanks to the tsunami that hit nairaland, my info was flushed away. I am referring to make you know that I have risked it too.

What ya say?

dalaman:
Ok, Thank you

Ghostofsparta, you have been given a challenge, take it up or allow FOLYKAZE to take it up. You should do this, lets end this he said she said once and for all. This isn't a difficult task.

Na pen.is I get bros. Lol.

Ghostofsparta pls let me do this. We need to put all this lot of talk and talk to a walk. At this we can arrive at something.

OP, I will do this at my convinent time cuz I wouldnt want it to conflict with my work. So I will choose between wed and sat days.

Also, this only has to do with mar 28 presidential result. Nothing more, nothing less.

Deal?

@ Ghost, you have the rest.