₦airaland Forum

felixomor:
I will rather stick with my nobel winners than one tabloid article, put together by some desperate atheists.
And even legends like Isaac Newton, etc
Even top schools like Harvard, Yale, etc were all founded on Christianity,
Bros abeg leave that matter......


But Zuckerberg why.....

dalaman:
You are busy telling lies to explain absurdity away. Jesus said he will be seen coming from the clouds because magical thinking was their way of life then. Many of the things he said are clearly false. He told his desciples he'll return during their life time. Told the chief priest that he'll see him return from the clouds among other lies. The Jewish hippe is dead and all you are left with is to try to spin ancient mythology and fiction into today's reality by saying that Jesus will be seen on TV. You guys are very hilarious.

An2elect2:
Sigh, just another stupid thread with a good title

felixomor:
Studies upon studies ke,
Please remind us the lions percentage of nobel winners are believers in God....... Mscheww

By the way,
You just made me remember the tears that flowed from you people and Seun the day Zuckerberg publicly denied atheism.........

Lmao

felixomor:
Atheism isnt even qualified to be called fraud.
Its foolishness.

TLuzzie:
I think you're the one making a fool of yourself, bruh. Deism and panentheism can be CONTRASTED with your PARTICULAR type of theism, so my point still remains.

felixomor:
^^^^
IIIIII

Someone finally has landed at Otem's level
LMAO

hopefulLandlord:
FSM remains the one true god, cannot also be disproved, Kalam works for it too, its also first cause

lol, has everyone noticed why Christians find it damn near impossible to counter OtemAtum? its because he claims the regress doesn't stop at Yahweh and it goes further, he wipes the floor with every Christian that's unfortunate enough debate him, why? cuz they're usually thrown into a dilemma

I ain't saying I believe in his "God Almighty" though, FSM is the only true God and others are fake and manmade

felixomor:
Hehehehe,
The guy opened a thread that confirmed atheism is dead.
Own goal.

KingEbukasBlog:
The first page exposed your ignorance for all to see .I'm glad you didn't notice at all . We will keep talking we talk and you will still remain defensive and trying to catch up .

Cheers mate . You are the victim of our own subterfuge .

KingEbukasBlog:
True. More intelligent people are now against it .

Atheists are now the ones being mocked and tossed aside on social media

felixomor:
Coming from someone who we used a Whole thread to teach English.
On How to differentiate between "nature" and "existence"........

Yinmu

felixomor:

LightandDarkness:
.

The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system can only increase over time. It can remain constant in ideal cases where the system is in a steady state (equilibrium). If the universes begin with a series of blackholes which draws in matter and light and a white hole which releases matter and light, entropy would remain constant. Furthermore each universe would not be an isolated system and therefore the law would not apply.

KingEbukasBlog:
Lolz .., you no well at all jack

Instead of using that to understand the message being passed , you think it's a reason to mock the concept .

I just dey look you

hopefulLandlord:
actually I used to watch him a lot, although I find ALL his arguments easy for me to counter except the cosmological argument speaking of which my longest post on this thread actually addresses it as it doesn't show anything about this so-called first cause

where I actually found his dishonesty too Much to bear are 2 incidences

1. he claims his evidence for Christianity being true is that Jesus rose from the dead

Mark Smith (atheist) then asked:

Dr. Craig, for the sake of argument let’s pretend that a time machine gets built. You and I hop in it, and travel back to the day before Easter We park it outside the tomb of Jesus. We wait. Easter morning rolls around, and nothing happens. We continue to wait. After several weeks of waiting, still nothing happens. There is no resurrection- Jesus is quietly rotting away in the tomb.


Craig told him he would still believe in the resurrection of Jesus, due to the “self-authenticating witness of the Holy Spirit.”


at that point, I actually stopped taking him seriously, infact I now see him as more of a joke

KingEbukasBlog:
It simply means that God is like the soul of the universe . The same way you have a soul and your body is its material manifestation but it is still separate from your material body making it possible for the soul to exist without your body .

hopefulLandlord:
I even had to google that term and the mental gymnastics required to defend that stand was huge!

KingEbukasBlog:
A we talking of Christianity or theism? What concerns the scripture now because it does not even say the universe came from nothing.

Created out of the being of God is somewhat like panentheism, whereby the universe is the material manifestation and it interprenates in it but the immaterial being is yet distinct and greater than its material manifestation.

Ephesians 4:6 King James Version (KJV)
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

I think this verse gives the greatest hint that everything was created from the being of God .

TLuzzie:
I no be TLuvie o..... . And I'm a HE, sir.

hopefulLandlord:
"Creation out of being of god" how meaningless can a sentence get?

spacetacular:
So now it's science fiction and no longer pure scientific proof?

Jack oh Jack!

And there was Mr Dalaman talking to me about physical perception. I think he also needs to talk to you about it Jack or is science fiction also physical perception or felt by the senses.

KingEbukasBlog:
The theory of the cyclic universe has been debunked by science . I'm on a mobile device now , I would have explained in details.



There are three concepts of creation

1. Creatio ex deo - creation out of the being of God which I subscribe to

2. Creatio ex materia - eternal universe coexisting with God from past infinitude.

3. Creatio ex nihilo - creation out of nothing

Not everyone subscribes to creation out of nothing . And there are theists who object creatio ex nihilo

Apparently, you are mocking in ignorance which is just a pitiful thing to see .

spacetacular:
You do not even understand what you responded to. Let me post an extract To Help you out with.

"Now, this is what qualifies as the "first cause" or "set of first causes" I termed NECESSARY. If the physical universe itself isn't eternal, then it must depend on something. It's like some energy from the origin being transformed into physicality, and physicality eventually returning to that non-physical origin, like a wave continuously rising and collapsing, like the musical waves of Orpheus. The key point here is that the origin, the foundation is not NOTHING or NONEXISTENCE since neither can give rise to SOMETHING nor EXISTENCE. It's only transformation of the universal fundamental basis taking place endlessly."


He is simply saying that the universe has a creator but he is struggling to understand how this creator achieved this feat. Which is understandable due to his limited perception.

So do you believe the universe was CREATED or it EXPANDED FROM A SINGULARITY?

spacetacular:
Do you have a scientific mind? You do not even possess what you seek.

The first cause you know Is it a scientific fact?

TLuzzie:
I also accept a cyclical universe. Each age starting with a big bang and ending in a big crunch. Well, something like that. The idea is that the origin of that big bang and where it eventually returns to are the foundations of the universe. Now, this is what qualifies as the "first cause" or "set of first causes" I termed NECESSARY. If the physical universe itself isn't eternal, then it must depend on something. It's like some energy from the origin being transformed into physicality, and physicality eventually returning to that non-physical origin, like a wave continuously rising and collapsing, like the musical waves of Orpheus. The key point here is that the origin, the foundation is not NOTHING or NONEXISTENCE since neither can give rise to SOMETHING nor EXISTENCE. It's only transformation of the universal fundamental basis taking place endlessly.

This is why I mock the theists and deists for denying the possibility of creation from nothing, and then turning around to claim that some creator God or supreme being created the universe out of pure nothingness, bringing it into existence out of NONEXISTENCE destroying their earlier argument. It's ridiculous.

KingEbukasBlog:
Please stop embarrassing yourself . It is called the first cause and the first cause is immutable .

hopefulLandlord:
the dumbness astounds you

they can't even see the paradox in the argument from complexity, imagine some guys up there saying what they say created the universe is not as complex as the universe it created, damn! I'd rather stab myself than go round arguing against arguments that fails on its own accord