₦airaland Forum

Everyday247:
This is kinda true in a sense. There are intelligent theists and there are dumb theists. Also there are intelligent atheists and there are dumb atheists. Most of the time it's usually intelligent atheists arguing against dumb theists, thats why these debates always appear to lean in favour of atheists.
Many theists are not properly prepared for debates. And just tend to dive in recklessly hence making them easy pickings. FXmasterz has the right idea to prepare before hand. One should always prepare before coming for a debate.
BTW, you know I'm one of them, right?

Then point us to those intelligent theists. This dress on Nairaland are just misfits

FxMasterz:
Come on go and sit down. We were arguing about purposeful designs and the existence of a Creator before you ran away as everyone who goes through the thread can see. Why do you love lying and dishonesty this much? You can't speak a single truth in your life ? Should I bring screenshots to disprove you?

Please bring screenshot I beg you

SIRTee15:
If he's willing to follow me to my home town, I will prove it to him. Simple as ABC.

'There has to be' mean it's impossible for an alternative to exist.
That's the point.
That we cannot prove it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
It only shows we have not developed the technology/innovation to discover it.
There was a time people didn't know about the existence of virus. Will U then say virus didn't exist at the time of their ignorance from people.

Again read more about metaphysical. All these weak arguments have been dealt with by philosophers as far back as the time of Aristotle and Plato. They all came down with the same conclusion- there must be an intelligent design for existence to make sense.

Nothing comes from nothing, and the chain of creation cannot be infinity, otherwise there will be no 1st cause. And without a first cause, there can't be an existence.
Everything that exists has a cause. If there is no first cause, then the chain of causes would go back infinitely, and there would be no explanation for why anything exists
There has to be an ultimate intelligent design for the universe, metaverse or whatever verse to make sense.

Yeah, there was a time folks didn’t believe in viruses. So how did u come to the conclusion a creator exists? What empirical evidence exists?

kingxsamz:
Seems like you have memory loss.

He does this all the time. He'll say something stupid, then when you point it out, he denies it. Did it in the same thread he claimed he floored me

FxMasterz:
Can you show me where I said you should believe in a Creator?

Is this thread about proof of what the Creator is? We're talking about the existence of a Creator only. If you have nothing to say, shouldn't you sit back and read what others have to say?

My friend, we're here to discuss the bolded above. Put the long talks aside. Now face the topic since you have now admitted you do not believe in the existence of a Creator. I can't tell you who the Creator is until you first believe there's a Creator

The above is your quote.
You're a very dishonest man. You used this antics on me. Kept denying something you said

FxMasterz:
Thanks for the heads-up. I understand the situation about you rejecting my invite.

I'll be very much at alert against her antics since I'm now aware of them. The Spirit of God would raise a higher standard against her.

I have challenged AI before challenging Atheists here. Even AI gave in. Screenshot posted below. Atheism is just lies upon lies upon lies. The more you're able to quickly spot the lies and deceits, the quicker atheism falls.

Thanks again.

Jesus the son of Andromeda!
Is that how you challenged and won an AI?
lol 😆
Please show us a screenshot of the debate.
That is how you ranted that you floored me

a

SIRTee15:
Even if there's no god, there has to be a creator.
Law of infinite regress makes lack of a creator impossible.
Nothing comes from nothing, and the chain of creation cannot be infinity, otherwise there will be no 1st cause. And without a first cause, there can't be an existence.
Everything that exists has a cause. If there is no first cause, then the chain of causes would go back infinitely, and there would be no explanation for why anything exists
There has to be an ultimate intelligent design for the universe, metaverse or whatever verse to make sense.

The argument of existence happening by chance or random makes no sense. Its a theory that has no example in our world or universe or existence.
I'm yet to see any complex creation coming by chance or random- None.
Instead there are thousands of evidence purposeful creation and generation of complex creations including the eye.
And that's what Fxmasterz just proved.

And if there's actually a creator and he generates living souls, why do U think this intelligent design do not want us to be grateful to him.
A non living soul cannot create a living soul. So that intelligent design must have a soul. If he has a soul, why do U think he doesnt want to communicate with us?

Some may argue the intelligent designer doesn't need to have a soul but the dark powers in our world is evidence of existence of a soul.

If any atheist is denying existence of dark powers, he should allow me take him to my village and witness things. At least I can prove to any atheist existence of dark powers.

I would have been an agnostic myself if not for things I saw and witnessed while growing up in my home town.

So who created this very complex and powerful entity that created all those?

StillDtruth:
DeepSight a lawyer? is a Lie!

Lawyers are trained to be impartial that is why we are Judges

The partisan nature of a lawyer is because the opponent already has a lawyer on his side and boh sides will be going to a Judge himself a lawyer, who suppports no side.

That is why you must have seen lawyers representing the 2 sides because in that moment he is an Arbitrator as you see ADR.

And with this yardstick you just created, can you be said those be a lawyer?

StillDtruth:
I can't and will not always be here at the material time to point out any infraction she may make before you respond. And i'm about signing off now to do somethings things and will only come in when i.want to play here.

And you have a very big weakness going against her, she is not the ordinary people you argue with, she knows how to argue and decitfull arguments which sound reasonable but are all invalid arguments because they break many rules of debates which she knows including ones she does not know.

Then you have a second problem. She does not fight fair, she always, always fights dirty and Lies when she sees she is going to lose.

And atheism is built on Lies, so if you cannot spot or prediict the lie in advance, you would walk into trap for she guarantees that she will Lie and throw every dirty trick and misrepresentation and distortion of facts and natural Truth, so the debate will never ever be fair as you have already seen she did even from the beggining.

I recommend you do not engage her for she is not the normal people you engage.

Lol. Its obvious you don't even know your onions as a lawyer. Which arguments have you laid forth, apart from casting unconfirmed claims here

FxMasterz:
You're a lawyer. You can join the debate and be our referee. I'll try my best to spot infractions as they come.

Thanks in advance.

He doesn't know anything about fallacies, unfortunately

JessicaRabbit:
You do realize that most atheists have better things to do than to sit on their ass all day to engage in eternal rounds of "prove the existence of God" bingo? We have lives, we have careers, and we have Netflix shows to binge. Me personally, I have a work calendar that's more crowded than a wedding reception in Lagos. In past debates, I've taken up to a month to respond to my opponent, not because I was "floored" or "ran away," but because I have priorities. Nevertheless, if you want to dance, we'll dance, but under the following conditions. Logic will be our guide: No logical fallacies, no emotional appeals, no straw men. Also, and this is very important: we must stick to the rules of reason and evidence. Empirical evidence and scientific consensus will be our benchmarks for truth claims. No sentimental arguments, and no unprovoked personal attacks that don't contribute to the discussion in any way, shape or form.

For the sake of fairness and to prevent butthurt or dishonest narratives from being peddled, I would propose that we enlist at least 3 mature, intellectual and objective monikers as our referee and judge. Someone with no stakes in this argument and who can call out fallacies, ensure we stick to the rules, and declare a winner (or a stalemate, if that's where the evidence leads). So, if you're ready to put your argument through the wringer, I'm game. But don't expect any free passes or special treatment. I'm as strict as they come when it comes to upholding the rules of logic and the scientific method.

Please respond accordingly to this post, accepting the aforementioned conditions. If you accept, then give me a mention and I'll proceed to respond to the arguments presented in your OP. Thanks.

Unfortunately getting someone grounded in fallacies and with no stakes, would be difficult. I don't qualify. For some reasons, these theists don't know what fallacies are

FxMasterz:
Cha!!!

Lying atheist, I'll pull out the thread now.

This is the thread where you were floored. Very, very dishonest fellow:

https://www.nairaland.com/8177501/experience-graveyard/3#131416294

Your questions are irrelevant. Except you can't read, you would have noticed that I covered details regarding your questions in my first post. Telling me to go read is the hight of empty pride and hypocrisy. You'll teach me what I already taught you? Or you can't see my talk about natural selection and incremental adaptive changes?

This thread is about establishing the fact that there's a Creator. I'm not here to tell you who the Creator is. Yes, I believe in Evolution but I don't believe that evolution itself was not set in motion by a Creator.

So a thread where I explained how deja vu works is where you floored me? Lol 😆
Ahahahahahahahaha
Did you learn that word 'floored' today and maybe want to use it in a sentence? Cos the only thing I saw in that thread was me schooling you on how the brain works.
Please how did u floor me? Hahahahahaha
And please what did you teach me? Be specific

FxMasterz:
How many times would I have to tell you that imperfection does not in anyway disprove the existence of a Creator? If a car has some defects, would that mean the car has no manufacturer?

You said an 'intelligent design'. And I just showed you those 'designs' aren't intelligent at all. So whats your point?

StillDtruth:
You people don't think before talking, You people are so deluded that you forget that. "Action speaks louder than words"

So why don't you engage every atheist here every time? Did you land on your head? Please beg your gf to cum back and stop disturbing us

StillDtruth:
Even your statement here proves you are permanently Mad!

Ok. Whatever 'permanent madness' means 🤦🏾‍♂️

StillDtruth:
Boo hoo! Lady, You're fleeing because you now see and know that i will spot every invalid and fallacious argument you ever make and your Lies and deflections and twistings won't ever work on me

What the good lady is tryna say is get some psyche management

FxMasterz:
Please you need to cover yourself in shame.

Openly denying what atheists are known for? Atheists argue delay in favour of evolution against Creationism with a tone that suggests that since there's no Creator, then there's no God. Who doesn't know this?

Our argument today is that there's a Creator. Atheists believe that there's no Creator. Do you believe there's a Creator? I'm asking you this question for the umpteenth time tonight.

Evolution doesn't explain how we got here. It simply says we moved from Point A to Point B.And evolution is a proven fact in science. There are even evolutionary biologists. Science is yet to prove anything beyond the Big Bang

FxMasterz:
No matter what you agree. It's not my concern.

Do you believe in the existence of a Creator?

I don't know if there is a creator. Science is yet to prove it. And you cannot prove it. So rest

kingxsamz:
I agree. The spaghetti monster made all of this possible. 👏🏾

Ramen. All praise to His Noodly Limbs

FxMasterz:
I have used the Eye as an example in my argument above. There are many examples of other complex and purposeful designs in the earth and universe that support the argument for Creationism. Here are a few:

1. DNA and Genetic Code: The intricate structure and function of DNA, as well as the genetic code that dictates protein synthesis, demonstrate remarkable complexity and purposefulness.

2. Cellular Machinery: The inner workings of cells, including molecular motors, pumps, and factories, exhibit remarkable complexity and functional design.

3. Planetary Fine-Tuning: The precise calibration of physical constants and planetary conditions that allow for life on Earth, such as the distance from the Sun and atmospheric composition.

4. The Brain and Nervous System: The human brain's intricate structure, functionality, and ability to process information and generate consciousness.

5. The Immune System: The complex and highly specialized defense mechanisms that protect living organisms from pathogens and diseases.

6. The Water Cycle: The intricate process by which water circulates through the environment, sustaining life and regulating Earth's climate.

7. The Earth's Magnetic Field: The protective shield that deflects harmful solar and cosmic radiation, allowing life to thrive.

8. The Universe's Large-Scale Structure: The organized distribution of galaxies, galaxy clusters, and superclusters, suggesting a purposeful design.

These examples above and several other such examples that we see in the universe further destroy atheism and support the existence of a Creator.

There are so many individual complex and well organized systems working together for a common purpose - to make the world livable for living organisms.

Ok. So those structures and phenomena are interesting…
If you suggest they were designed, then you have a problem. The problem is they were poorly designed. The immune system for example attacks some body organs, and there are no fail-safe mechanisms to curtail such attacks. So we end up with autoimmune diseases caused by the body itself. Then you have cellular diseases due to inborn error in metabolism, carcinogenic processes etc. These were products of this 'intelligent design'. Also human birth is a messy process. You have an anus sited about 10cm from the vagina, thus you see a baby popping out and covered with feces. Even the DNA is easily corrupted to code diseases like sickle cell, thalassemia etc.
I can go on and on about the errors in this very 'intelligent design' but my point is there is no intelligence in all these

FxMasterz:
The Existence of a Creator: A Challenge to Atheists

I had an argument with Jaephoenix a few days ago. He was completely floored and ran away from the discussion. I observed that unlike what used to be the norm, none of his fellow atheists came to his rescue. I have presented the argument in a more organized way and hereby table it as an open challenge to all atheists worldwide.

Now, let's begin:

Atheism posits that complex designs and functionality in the natural world can be explained without the need for a Creator. However, I argue that certain features of the natural world demonstrate intelligent design, purposefulness, and complexity, necessitating the existence of a Creator.

Key Points:

1. Intelligent Design: Complex structures like the eye exhibit intelligent design, with multiple components working together to achieve a specific purpose (sight).

2. Purposefulness: The eye's design serves a clear purpose, unlike natural processes that may create complex but purposeless structures.

3. Complexity: The eye's complexity and functionality cannot be explained by random natural processes alone.

4. Universality: The eye is a common feature across many living organisms, suggesting a deliberate design rather than a random occurrence.

5. Variety: The existence of different types of eyes (e.g., human, insect, octopus) implies a Creator who adapted designs for specific purposes.

6. Creator vs. Intelligent: The argument focuses on the existence of a Creator, not necessarily an intelligent or supernatural one.

7. Natural Processes: While natural processes can create complex structures, they lack purposefulness and intentionality, unlike the eye's design.

8. Emergence: Complex systems can exhibit emergent properties, but these do not necessarily explain the eye's purposeful design.

9. Evolutionary Explanations: Incremental adaptive changes may contribute to the eye's development, but they do not fully account for its complexity and purposefulness.

Conclusion:

The existence of complex, purposeful designs like the eye necessitates the existence of a Creator. This challenges atheistic views that rely solely on natural processes to explain the natural world. While the nature and identity of this Creator are open to discussion, the evidence from intelligent design, purposefulness, and complexity demands consideration of a Creator's role in shaping the world around us.

I know being a theist makes one to be dishonest but you, my friend, have taken this dishonesty to a whole new level.
Please can you post the thread you floored me? The last thread we collided was this
https://www.nairaland.com/8183255/check-it-98-atheists-poor

And it was on Elon Musk's religion(or non -religion), where we didn't agree which it was. And I didn't run. And no, atheists don't just rush into arguments cos another atheist is there. There are some debates here I just don't fancy, or I'm not interested in, or its too boring. I won't just jump into it cos another atheist is there(especially now I want to start limiting my 'social media out-time')
So where did the flooring come into this?

Back to the topic, I wanna ask some questions before I commence. Do you believe in evolution?
I highlighted the question so you won't say you didn't see it.

Do you believe a fetus is a complex design? If you do, then who created it?

You talked about the eye. Are you aware it was a simple structure before it gradually evolved into the complex structure we are now using? If you don't know, please read up. I can't teach you everything. Same with many structures in the body. In fact some structures like pineal body, appendix, coccyx have evolved into completely useless structures.
Now there exists different types of eyes due to adaptation or evolution, like I pointed above. Example, the dominant preserved group among the early Cambrian arthropods, however, was the trilobites, which were well equipped with compound eyes from their very beginning. Humans didn’t have complex eyes at first.
Also can you point out those purposeless designs stemming natural processes ?
Also while we are at it, please can you tell us who created such an intelligent, purposeful creator? I mean such complex and powerful creature can't be a product of purposeless natural design(according to your logic)

triplechoice:
I will gladly stay off your mention since I don't enjoy engaging those who derive pleasure in being dishonest by pretending not to remember the question they reframed and asked in the page before this one.

Good, ignorant dolt. Since you're so brain dead you cannot remember this question I asked that is fungating in your brain.
Take care

deolumike:
https://x.com/cjohnsonn0311/status/1826432319990693935

What manner of bullshitry is this?

Wilgrea7:
I wouldn't recommend any agnostic or atheist, or anyone else with a "controversial" opinion on religion, having public discussions in an environment like Nigeria.

Even if the debating theist is civil, there are more than enough nutjobs who are itching to murder in the name of their non-existent god.

It reminds me of the atheist association of Nigeria and how they got relentlessly attacked till they all went into hiding.

It's just sad. Online would be the best

Yeah, even your own family would attack you. If you are broke, then your won don finish. I'm only relevant in my family cos I'm well to do, they remember me when there's a family contribution, or one of my siblings is broke. If I was the one asking,…
In the general society, being an atheist is a taboo. I remember when my former boss said in the hospital whatsapp group that atheists aren't welcome. They didn't know I was one. Folks would go out of their way to mistreat and harm you.
So yeah, online would be fine

[quote author=Desusi post=131639668][/quote]Please send the particular video. I don't go for wild goose chase

triplechoice:
I'm not Aemmmyjah whom you asked "several questions". The initial question you asked, which I even screenshot , and posted here has been read by you .


And just yesterday on the previous page, you reframed it and I have answered again,yet you want to pretend. You're deceiving yourself, not me.

Being evasive is dishonesty.

I'm not being evasive. I have told you I don't know the particular question youre referring to. Please if you have nothing else to say concerning the question , stay off my mention. Thank you

Wilgrea7:
Atheism started flirting with me.. i merely flirted back

Nah but seriously.. I've become more comfortable with being called an atheist, as long as people understand what it means.

A lot of people still think atheism claims that a god/gods cannot exist.. which isn't really the case.. so as long as people understand the definition... I'm game

Right. So i officially welcome you to the hellfire club

MaxInDHouse:
The highlighted is what you need to ask that's a better way to present the matter.
Bad reports will not make most people think straight but just say a "friendly neighbor" and leave religion out of it.

If the same should go with Atheists, Agnostics, Judaists, Hindus, Buddhists, Traditionalists, Muslims and others most people will say "NO" because of bad reports.

Oga, whether friendly or not, folks don't welcome strangers knocking on their doors

triplechoice:
You asked it and so should know it.

Bro, this thread is like 7 pages. And I asked several questions here to Aemmyjah(which he ignored, btw), so which one is it?

Desusi:
God bless you my brother. If the dead goitre Carrier and hunchback persons can received instantaneous healing, tell me what else? Jesus is on the throne and alive,still doing wonders

Please where is the videos of the goiter and hunchbacks

Wilgrea7:
I would genuinely be interested in seeing how a debate between atheists and theists would look like in Nigeria.. especially online.

If you guys fix something please mention me

The guy was saying I should do it offline. Told him in my line of work, religion weighs in heavily. I may lose patients. So I'd rather do an anonymous online thingy, probably Twitter Spaces, where folks or guest can chip in questions

Wilgrea7:
None of the things you said here makes any sense.. so i will ignore it and focus on other things.



Words vs actions was not the point here and you know it. I gave the definition of the word atheism, which describes the lack of belief in a god.

What people say vs what people do was not the point. Stop shifting the goalpost.



If you make a claim and are unwilling to provide more information or clarifications.. then I'm not obliged to take you seriously.




Great work Einstein. Was that the only one of my threads you could find?

What about the one regarding holy books.. or questioning gods.. or the ones involving theists defending their god? You're just cherry picking what suits your narrative.

Also.. if you want to know why i sometimes raise topics about the Abrahamic god, then do yourself a favor and re-read my "why i as an atheist debate religion" thread.

Or you can just keep being dishonest and I'll humor you till I get bored of your antics as usual

Btw, Willy, I thought u r agnostic. Why are you flirting with atheism, my guy?