₦airaland Forum

crafteck:
If money is not everything she would have died.its not the primary job of money to keep you alive, it's there to make life comfortable

Everyone dies eventually after all

Homophobia is a real problem in Nigeria and goes to show our level of civility.

If a man decides to sacrifice his nyash wetin consign me?

Martinez19:
Lol. As I said in my OP, NDEs are the last hope of believers that the spiritual and afterlife exist. It hurts for their last hope to be shattered hence their desperate effort to spiritualise it and feign ignorance.

When you approach issues like this with the mentality of shattering hope and what not, it exposes you as a dogmatic atheist.

You like the tell believers here about the scientific method but go on to speak in absolutes.

A more scientific statement will say that it appears to be that NDEs are hallucinations. But you continue to claim that this cases has been done and dusted when it clearly isnt true.

I find this attitude very common in some atheists, including myself when I was one. Same as in Sam Harris and Hitchens , the dogmatism is beyond belief.

Am I asking you to believe in a God? No. If for example man actually has a consciousness that is not physical, do that prove God? NO!

But most atheists are by default unwilling to look into anything that may challenge their worldview. This is exactly what many Christians and theists do.

Here is a study that suggests consciousness may exist outside of the brain.

AWARE—AWAreness during REsuscitation—A prospective study.

So there is definitely good resources that make good cases on both sides. Saying it is definitive is just choosing research that supports your worldview

Martinez19:
The evidence is conclusive that NDEs are purely chemical and psychological in nature.

Can you please show me this evidence?

Martinez19:
I plan on demystifying and educating people on the matter of near death experiences.

The evidence is not conclusive either side of NDE. In fact the direct seat of consciousness has not been established. So have fun say all NDE has been shown to be physically explained

This is why no one takes the bible seriously!

We now borrow from India? This is disgraceful, once upon a time Nigeria and India were ranked as developing countries!

Myth121:
Most non-religious I’ve come across credit their existence to luck (or if you prefer— ‘chance’. But quite frankly you’d have to be in an privileged position to be posting here). Where as the religious credit their existence to some sort of divine plan.

Curious if there’s other views and if atheists see any benefit to viewing their existence as designed?

This horse has been beaten to death, what's the point of this thread?

Anyway my 2 cents, Atheism is a worldview that posits that there is no God. Most say it is because there is no objective proof of any God.

Atheists reject the notion of intelligent design , some say that they dont know and frankly dont care about things came to be. Others claim everything got here by chance.

However any atheist who believes in intelligent design is by definition a theist cos accepting intelligent design is acknowledgement of God or Gods.

alphaNomega:
The god concept is something created by religion. It beats me how one would believe in a god yet claim he follows no religion.

It's like saying I know trigonometry exists but dispute the application/existence of Mathematics

Religion tries to put God in a box, when God is by definition bigger than what we can imagine.

It is thus fundamental error that has caused many religions to ascribe human features to God.

I believe in God but I don't know his nature yet

superhumanist:
Stop changing topic abeg. You claimed that atheists don't question atheism. I gave you clear reasons why that is nonsense. For one atheists generally move along the -deist-agnostic-humanist-atheist spectrum. They question themselves too

Deists are by definition not atheists!

It is easy to assume that if the laws of conservation of energy is true. Then there must something, someone, a phenomenon that was created that cause everything to be.

Now we can argue about the nature of this first cause but based on our human logic and philosophy there is a first cause that was not caused . Otherwise , we will not be here , no big bang no universe no nothing.

I choose to call this uncause cause God and I choose to worship this God. Now you do not have to worship this first cause as it/she/he or whatever it is may indeed not need worship.

However, denying this uncaused first cause is the mother of all illogicalities. That is the deist position

ElidaxZiel:
Answer it ! Let see how quality your dead brain is

In as much as he did not articulate his thoughts properly . Some things are still unknown , for example the exact mechanism for consciousness is still a keen research area in neuroscience.

Waterlrd:
well! I think you simply made a point.
Permit me to recall to you that God in his infinite nature does not play dice with gamblers of knowledge.Those who are best at thinking outside the box(atheist) does it not to puff themselves up but to see how ignorant they really are at the long run. I came to understand that nobody talks so constantly about God as those who insist that there is no God. Atheist as l know are weak minded people and when the world becomes too hard for their survival, they simply drift to a seashore to vent their frustration.

This is very broad stereotypical statement. I used to be an atheist and a lot of atheists that I know are really people who just want to know.

Those who are appalled by the before of the religious. People who see people that claim they love God, kill their fellow human just because they are gay. Those who kill their fellow human beings for believing in a different God that the one they believe in.

The atrocities committed by people who are meant to walk in the image of christ is enough to turn anyone atheist

When I read threads like this , I see the reason most atheists do not believe in God. Thread after thread it is obvious that many believers believe out of ignorance.

Scientifically, most of these questions are unanswered. Science does not presume to know until it knows. Scientific positions are always subject to change when a more logical answer is demonstrated.

I am a believer by faith and a very personal experience that convinced me that there is a God and there is an afterlife.

Every evidence for God or an afterlife is subjective and therefore cannot be subjected to rigorous scientific studies. It then becomes futile trying to convince someone else of the existence of God.

LordReed:
None of this is confirmed science but still interesting to think about.

Every confirmed science started as a postulation, the problem is proving the concept using the scientific method.

HellVictorinho:
The Universe wasn't like this billions of years ago-FACT.
The Big Bang happened-THEORY.
Cosmic Systems Occur and this also involves cosmic explosions-FACT.
Matter is life and life is matter-FACT.
God exists-BELIEF.
In-Existence is impossible-FACT.
The Forming Of Existence doesn't involve first/last events-FACT.

What do you mean by this?

BeansAndBread:
But this isn't observable and cannot be proved using the scientific method. This is what we call speculative science and it is blind belief something y'all accuse theists of.

Let me start by saying that I am a Christian but I also know that the big bang is a fact. There are many ways to come to a definite scientific conclusion without an experiment.

There is something called inference. It allows humans to come to definitive conclusion without having to run any experiments.

The universe is currently expanding every second, and the microwave background noise keeps getting fainter this suggests that the universe was once dense. This is by no means the only evidence of the big bang theory.

However, the big bang does not dispel God, because it still begs the question of where did the original dense energy point that caused the universe come from?

Why the dense point? Why could have been nothingness instead of something? By Fermi's paradox, if truly that live is not special we should have come in contact with evidence of extraterrestrial life.

By the way evolution does not claim to explain the origin of the first simple organism that started life, let alone the universe. So I don't see how these scientific theories threaten your faith.

Lastly, our forefathers all believed in God why have you believed that the white man's view of God is the correct view?

Originakalokalo:
Pls permit me to say this. It is very important..

Christians, after interacting with atheists, forget that the only visible evidence of God is the creation.

The sun, the moon and the stars are the evidence of the creator, who is the almighty God.

The universe itself is his work...

The sea, animals and humans are his works.

These are enough evidence for them to believe.

Miracles are also other evidence.


Christians, whenever they ask for evidence, do not forget to show them the creation ...

Not believing it doesn't stop it as being your evidence.


Our national anthem says.... Oh God of Creation... Direct our noble cause.

Henceforth, if any atheist ask me for evidence, I will show you mountains, oceans, planets, etc.

The question for me at least isn't if God exists, the question is how do you that the God as described in christianity is the God that made heaven and earth.

There are many reasons to believe God but threatening people with hell wont do it.

Originakalokalo:
All atheists are sinners.

All atheists, regardless of their number, are going to HELL.

I HAVE THAT IN GOOD AUTHORITY.

Answer me,

What are you going to do in the kingdom of a God you never believed?

This where a lot of people begin questioning christianity. Simply, because it makes no sense that an atheist who has lived his life walking upright will go to hell and a criminal whi repents at the last minute enjoys eternal peace.

Logically, it doesn't make sense at all

I personally believe in God through jesus christ but I believe that Christianity has been so corrupted by the powerful as a control mechanism

I agree with you but where I strongly disagree with atheists is when they proclaim anyone who isn't an atheist as delusional.

There are other rational worldviews that are not atheistic.

tintingz:
Delusion does not mean dumb, what I meant in my context is people who fantasize things and thinks it's kind of the truth.

delusion
/dɪˈluːʒ(ə)n/
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.
"the delusion of being watched"

I have not heard any argument that renders a first cause illogical

tintingz:
Just live and give your life a meaning, purpose, aim, you don't need someone to tell you why you're living.

Lol, I never said this tho.

There are illiterate atheist.

Some people and their delusions. This suggests that my arguments are so ludicrous and dumb.


I guess the word I was looking for is implying that anyone who isn't an atheist is DUMB.

tintingz:
Why did you personally think the creator need to be worship?

It is not based on any objective basis for this decision and neither have I tried to convince or anyone to worship God.

My only strong argument is that there exists an uncaused first cause and logic supports this proposition.

Fun fact, my post history will show you that I am always will to change my views. I am not dogmatic.

tintingz:
To live.

What is the aim? Why do we have to live?

Going by our solar system (I have not made a claim for the whole observable universe) , it can be said that we are unique as no other life form has been discovered yet in anywhere other than earth .

One of the many reasons , I asked that question is that as per our knowledge now there seems to be no apparent reason for our consciousness.

We could have as well been efficient calculating intellogent beings without being conscious.

So as far as science is concerned for now, we are indeed rare. Fermi's paradox postulates that if indeed there were other intelligent beings out there , they should have made contact by now.

It is safe to conclude that we are special and if tomorrow new knowledge comes out to prove we are not special, I will accept this new piece of knowledge.

And please drop this attitude that everyone who doesn't hold an atheistic worldview must be an illiterate .

tintingz:
Lol, the dude even said the first demand a worship, did he assume this or he knows.

Some people and their delusion.

I never said the creator demands worship. Are you arguing against what I never said?

My decision to worship this creator is personal! I did not claim to have any divine knowledge of this creator.

LordReed:
Its illogical to assume that the cause is a somebody. Its illogical to assume the cause was eternal. How have you eliminated the possibility that the cause expired in bringing forth the universe? How have you eliminated the possibility that other possibilities that indicate that it was not something eternal that caused the universe?

Again you're free to worship universe creating pixies if you wish.

I said something/someone or a phenomenon. I didn't make a claim about the nature of this creator, my choice to worship this creator is personal (and my use of personal pronouns is a personal choice)

It is not illogocal to assume that this creator is illogical, it is however illogical to assume that a cause that is technically outside of time is not eternal.

The universe is strict terms cannot die as energy cannot be created or destroyed. But it is a scientific fact that there was a beginning at time t=0.

And it makes logical sense that something that exists outside time caused the universe. Now if you argue that this creator became the universe itself, then I cannot say it is illogical. It is a perfectly valid possibility.


The current nature of God, I do not claim to understand but the existence of an uncaused first cause is a logically solid position .

Lastly, I do not expect you to change your worldview and I respect your position. Live and let live.

May God bless you

LordReed:
First off intuitive thoughts are not facts. Facts are demonstrated truths not simply logical thoughts. There are many logical thoughts that are not necessarily true. It needs to be demonstrated before it can be established as fact.

Which atheist claim the origin of the universe is a trivial question talk less of most. What most atheist would say is the origin of the universe will only impact the question of the existence of a god or gods if it can be demonstrated that a god or gods did it, until then it is mostly irrelevant to the question. Why? Because possibly a god or gods was/were formed at the same time the universe was or sometime later. Our major concern is for a god or gods existence to be demonstrated unequivocally.

You are welcome to your beliefs, as long you acknowledge that it has nothing substantial backing it.

Are you suggesting that it is illogical to conclude that if the universe is not eternal that there must be something, someone or a phenomenon that caused the universe?

I fail to see the illogicality in this, the only bone of contention is demonstrating that this first cause demands worship or at least if it is conscious .

The mother of illogicality is denying that there must be an eternal source from which everything came from

As per my beliefs in WORSHIPPING the creator, they are very personal and subjective. That is a separate argument on its own

LordReed:
You are making an illogical leap from something caused the universe to that thing is an eternal uncaused thing and you claim it is fact. Fact? You observed it? In what way have you established that it is fact? It revealed itself to you? It created another universe as you observed?

Atheist don't claim the universe is an accident. The atheist position is very simple, no belief in gods of any kind. Says nothing about how the universe formed or what caused it.

The atheist claim is that there is no evidence for god or gods. Furthermore when questioned on the origin of the universe most atheists say they don't know which is true. I respect that as I use to be an atheist.



However, if you have given a tiny thought to the possibility of the origin of the universe. You would see that it is not a trivial question as most atheists claim it to be.

Furthermore, the probability that science would determine what existed before the big bang is really low and again something must have caused the universe.

This can be assumed from the laws applicable within our universe that energy cannot be created or destroyed. And it is an established scientific fact that the universe in itself is not eternal.

So what ever got the first ball rolling which is uncaused is what I refer to as God.

If you disregard the notion of a god or gods until we have further knowledge that is a fair point of view.

I choose to believe

TOSIN116:
Are Atheist able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there is no spiritual force and religions such as Christianity are made up?

The burden of proof unfortunately is not on the atheist.

Personally, I believe that the atheist position is flawed, at best a deistic worldview is more appropriate if you really think about the vastness and the wonders that abound in the universe.

In spite of that, I have personally chosen to worship a personal God through the lens of christianity by faith!

johnydon22:
The first question should be to substantiate the actuality of design.

And yes there can be design without designer.

Common sense will say that an infinite regression is impossible and it is impossible for something to come out of nothing.

Furthermore, we agree that the big bang was the start of spacetime. Therefore we can also agree that whatever cause the big bang is eternal or was made by something that is eternal.

That final first cause that was not caused is who I consider God. You can choose to call it a flying spaghetti monster it is all semantics. You may also choose to worship this phenomenon or not. I choose to worship this being

Vrengkat:
Sure, we have a new generation of scientist who say they are Christians(Christian scientist)... But these people will never make any advancement in science if they rely on Biblical Dogma's, they have to rely on groundworks of people who never believed... Imagine a Christians astrophysicist making his calculation based on the Bible teachings that the stars are small enough for millions of them to fall into the earth, or a biologist making his hypothesis that humankind started 10,000 years ago, and that we all came from one man, or a historian claiming jesus was killed by the Romans without documents from the romance(who keeps record of everything)...

Science and religion are antagonist, science is based on facts, religion is based on gullibility...you can't be rational and gullible, and staying in between won't make you advance in any...

Therefore i don't believe any Christian scientist made any contribution to science and technology, if they did, they dumped there religion and embraced science...

Until Galileo, the church believe the sun was revolving round the earth, Galileo cleared that... His contributions to science had nothing to do with his belief, he established a clear cut between his religion and science.

Benjamin Franklin who contributed immensely to electricity, rewrote the whole Bible, but removed all the miracles, and said this is all that matters to him, and all that should matter to anyone...

I assure you, check all the scientist who claimed to be Christian, and contributed to science, you could see that they are somewhat skeptics

There are many scientists who were and are theists. A believe or not in a god or gods is not a prerequisite in science.

A few notable mentions is of course Isaac Newton.

Then there is Ard Louis, John Lennox. There are also hindu scientists, Muslim scientists etc.

Does religion sometimes limit honest scientific research? Probably as any form of bias is detrimental to science.

Finally, some things are simply unknowable. I am 100% certain that there is an uncaused prime mover that was and is and will forever be. Who that person or thing is ? I hope to find out in my personal journey to self discovery.