₦airaland Forum

Guys let us not discuss to win 'it's a childish idea' we discuss to reach an approximation of what is right..

lordnicklaus:
It is important to note that some of the children might have become adults as at then and knew their right from wrong. The Sodomites were same sexers and you are right by saying that Lot offered his daughter but who the men of Sodom wanted were the two visitors and that shows that the men of Sodom were not interested in women but men as them.

All of us at some point were children now we are grown but there are still children around.

Now the question was

since there must be children around, don't they also count? because surely enough no infant can be accused of anything yet therefore they are innocent

Misogynist2014:
Oh most wise! I believe that the first paragraph indeed is your opinion and nothing more. Yes, there are indeed two ideas, the spiritualist and materialist. One ascribing spiritual to stone and spaghetti and other materialistic view to stone and spaghetti, what indeed makes you think you are right? According to Wikipedia, Fallibilism (from Medieval Latin: fallibilis , "liable to err" is the
philosophical principle that human beings could be wrong about their
beliefs, expectations, or their understanding of the world, and yet still
be justified in holding their incorrect beliefs.

Now continue reading your own reply until it makes sense to you and click.. this reply can actually help you

KingEbukasBlog:
God has the supreme power . The devil and his angels will fight as long it will preclude many people from witnessing the true power of God .

Christ warned us of false prophets who will do signs and wonders . How did they get that power since they are not true .

You are still quoting your own religious book to invalidate other claims and dub them false prophecies ..

Same way Judaism rejects your own Messianic belief in Jesus also using their own book as a basis.

The point remains 'Your own religious book is not a hallmark for determining which is true or not same way you don't consider the Judaic Talmud a hallmark for it'

So you see, the claims of your own religion is still not any more weighty than others around..

The same way you think others are false is exactly how they consider yours false.

urahara:
You see i so that post . the post was so foolish that it caused my phone to release a poisonous gas called obnoxygen.

ROTFLMAO

orunto27:
Sodom & Gomorrah didn't have children. They were all Gays, Sodomites and Lesbians. And God couldn't find 10 Righteous humans there. Satan was living full time with them and didn't need further instructions to destroy them.

and somehow a human with a brain thinks there is a City with a vibrant society that didn't have children but somehow continued to exist

if there was no children the city would not exist at all since all would die out and there won't be any continuity.

Our righteous Lot even offered his daughter

The length people will go to pull out nonsensical petty defence for outright absurdity.

The problem is, you need to conjure up even bigger absurdities in order to hold a defence for another absurdity

KingEbukasBlog:
Jesus claimed ? The same Jesus that even in this modern time people call on and they received their healings and he appeared to some and even speaks to his prophets . There are a myriad of reasons why people believe Jesus is a deity not the because the bible said so but they have seen his good works in their lives . People in other religions experiencing similar mystical events means other "compelling powers" exist there .

I seem to also remember that many Christian sects also reject this your belief

This oga thinks mentioning Messi saved his asss too https://www.nairaland.com/2413419/mentioning-messi-saved-life-says Just same way this shows messi is also a deity and there is power in the name of Messi ..

So people claiming of experiencing mystical events makes their claims true? hahahahaha.. nawa oo.

I wonder why James Randi challenge have not been claimed yet ..

Or why none have actually shown us an amputated limb grow back... laying out claims of personal experience is just a complete bogus without empirical back-up..

Laying claims to mystical events does not validate your claim...

hehehe bolded since claims of miracles makes you assert a deity jesus doesn't it also show that claims of miracle also compels the adherents of cross and star to believe olumba as a deity.

You see, your claim is still not anymore weighty than theirs and still doesn't make yours true..

KingEbukasBlog:
And you are believing your own assumptions too . Atheism is a tentative position for the belief in God . There are atheists who believe in spirits , reincarnation , karma , maledictions etc but not in God - a spirit too . Because you dont does not mean they are delusional . Stop falsely making up crap to validate your unbelief . For someone who believes his cognition as a human being is not an evidence of design but random chemical and biological processes as ludicrous as it is , you are not in any position to discredit someone's beliefs .

Let me reiterate , there are powers in different religions that compel adherents to believe they are actually true .

Hahahahaha this doesn't still answer my question.. Aren't you the person guilty of the bolded avowing other beliefs of Human-deity claims are just false prophecies as your religious book said.

-then i used the Judaic texts now to also show you they outrightly discredit your own belief in a deity-messiah-jesus as a false claim.

i thought the post was quite coherent enough ..

Judaism rejects the Jesus Messiah claim from basis derived from their own
religious books.

But you believe it none the less..

So you see thinking others are false prophecies doesn't make yours any
better..

it's all a matter of "belief"

everyone believe theirs the same way you believe yours, none is either
proven or better than the other.

You cannot ask me to leave these other claims behind because all of them
are similar instances and therefore if you can assert yours is true because
your book said so and others also say so.

Shows this is a game of everyone believing their own doctrinal
assumptions...

You cannot use a claim as a proof to a claim.. (Jesus is a deity because the
bible said so)
it's just as laughable as a muslim saying Muhammed rode a flying horse
because the Quran said so.

Misogynist2014:
You have to acknowledge that the more you praise Olumba, the more you argue against your belief as an atheist, unless you want to agree that Olumba indeed exits, which indeed is problematic.

I wonder where you guys drop your brains when coming to drag me down some nonsensical arguments.

-Olumba Olumba Obu claims he is a deity
-Jesus claimed so
-Chinese emperors claimed same and even Akenaton of egypt.

A believer would would believe any of the above an atheist would simply say they are all freaking humans with fables centered around them

A believer would even claim a stone is God or spaghetti, atheism means it's just a stone and a spaghetti..

-Believing that Jesus is a deity is not any better than also believing Olumba obu is also..

KingEbukasBlog:
'Back and forth' . I have already answered this . You can have whatever opinion or deduce whatever you wish of it , if its what makes you sleep bro .

Nope you didn't answer it ...you only said

You dont get it . I am not saying its not true . I just adjured you to ask a muslim if its true . It might even be metaphorical for rise to power or anything .

I am using those similar instances to show you just how ridiculous it is to claim your belief is true because your religious book said so.

Saying Jesus is a deity because he is a historical figure is exactly as ridiculous as saying Muhammed rode baruq because he is a historical figure or Neil Degress met superman because Neil actually exists right now..

KingEbukasBlog:
Well , the "religious book" made it clear that false christs would come after the lifetime of Christ and they did bro .

And Stop bringing other religions here , I can't answer for them . I have told you that there are powers in other religions that compel them to accept that they are actually the "true religion" .

A straw man is creating a false stance of your opinion's view on something so it can be refuted by you . I never made any claims here . You are falsely interpreting my views so you can be able to refute them - that's a straw man .

Your own religious book which is not a hallmark of truthful deduction.

Judaism rejects the Jesus Messiah claim from basis derived from their own religious books.

But you believe it none the less..

So you see thinking others are false prophecies doesn't make yours any better..

it's all a matter of "belief"

everyone believe theirs the same way you believe yours, none is either proven or better than the other.

You cannot ask me to leave these other claims behind because all of them are similar instances and therefore if you can assert yours is true because your book said so and others also say so.

Shows this is a game of everyone believing their own doctrinal assumptions...

You cannot use a claim as a proof to a claim.. (Jesus is a deity because the bible said so)
it's just as laughable as a muslim saying Muhammed rode a flying horse because the Quran said so.

KingEbukasBlog:
You dont get it . I am not saying its not true . I just adjured you to ask a muslim if its true . It might even be metaphorical for rise to power or anything .

LMAO.. No we are not asking you whether it is true or not...

-You said Jesus is a historical figure therefore proves he's God.

-Now the question is: since muhammed also is a historical figure does it prove he also rode baruq?

Marvel comics also had a story where Neil Degress tyson met superman, since Neil is actually a living human now does this prove he actually met Superman?

If no then it shows fables also are centered around actual figures but it doesn't still make the fable true.

KingEbukasBlog:
You asked for it bro .

This didn't really answer the question but a classical case of apologetic work for a particular belief system..

the question remains

-Islam was founded on the teachings of Muhammed who also lays claims
to
outstanding Miracles and presence of God too.
(Somehow ended up having a very different concept from yours even though
both allegedly got a first hand presence feel of the 'God')

-Confucianism is founded on the teachings of Confucius

-Buddhism founded on the teachings of Buddha..

So how does this make yours any better ? Now this still does not answer
the question which is

-Tell us how religions perceived this being in order to assert it actually
existed at all

-So how can religious even tender any understanding of an inscrutable
entity which turns out to be different with every religion..
(Isn't these characters then works of assumptions? )

Try and understand it...

KingEbukasBlog:
I never said Muhammed was a myth . Muhammed was a historical figure .

Exactly the point .. So since Muhammed is a historical figure does this prove he actually rode a flying horse?

KingEbukasBlog:
The logic didn't break down .

1. Muhammed is not deity
2. There are mystical events in every religion . There are powers in every religion that compel its adherents to believe its actually true E.g That's why Elijah challenged the prophets of Baal - to prove the superior power .
3. It could be an allegorical or metaphorical
Stop making false accusations and straw man bro . I didn't say the story is not true , I adjured you to ask a Muslim

Hahahahahaha this still is not the point i do not know if you know what straw man is..

-You think Jesus is a deity because the bible said so

then following that line of thought... One can also rightly say

-Muhammed rode a flying horse since the Quran said so..

-Olumba Olumba Obu still claims to be a deity just like Jesus

It was a very clear road..

Simply used to show you that Because your religious book said something doesn't make it true..

That you believe one particular fable over the other doesn't make yours true because others also believe theirs to be true.

So you see?

Do you still think since the bible said something then that thing must be true meaning your hallmark for determining what is, is based on your personal beliefs.

KingEbukasBlog:
That thread perfectly answers your questions bro . I can't indite a verbiage now when a thread has done the job

Lmao.. ... Common i thought you could try and at least attempt them...

we are not in that thread are we? this is another different thread and my questions are here which was an express reply to a post you made here

KingEbukasBlog:
My "religion" was founded on the teachings of CHrist . Paul and Christ's disciples were astonished by the miracles and His prescience . They witnessed the death and resurrection of Christ . And were rest assured that he was God indeed
I don't how other religions did it

-Islam was founded on the teachings of Muhammed who also lays claims
to
outstanding Miracles and presence of God too.
(Somehow ended up having a very different concept from yours even though
both allegedly got a first hand presence feel of the 'God')

-Confucianism is founded on the teachings of Confucius

-Buddhism founded on the teachings of Buddha..

So how does this make yours any better ? Now this still does not answer
the question which is

-Tell us how religions perceived this being in order to assert it actually
existed at all

-So how can religious even tender any understanding of an inscrutable
entity which turns out to be different with every religion..
(Isn't these characters then works of assumptions? )

KingEbukasBlog:
I am not a muslim . Go ask a muslim that question bro .

Lmao aren't you the same person that thinks that because the bible recorded the alleged words of Jesus then it proves Jesus was a deity?

So how come when faced with the same situation as in the case of Muhammed that logic breaks down?..

Since biblical accounts in your own idea proves a deity Jesus doesn't the Quranic accounts also prove Muhammad flew on a flying horse then?

KingEbukasBlog:
Jesus is a historical figure not a myth . Jesus's prescience of false Christs who would come after His existence was documented in the bible as seen in the aforementioned verse . Outlandish , weak and blatant claims that Christ is a myth is nothing more than a cavil . Why are you resorting to a back and forth

hahahaha we still on the same page brother..

Does Olumba Olumba Obu's existence prove he is actually God?

so if anyone claims to be a deity and turns out that person was a historical figure, this automatically proves he was a deity?

Muhammed also claimed to have ridden a flying horse and muhammed was a historical figure, does this prove Muhammad actually rode Buraq?

KingEbukasBlog:
Stop talking nonsense . You dont tell me what to do . The bible gave an infallible account of Christ which includes his words on earth .

so since the Quran as Urahara pointed out also mentioned Muhammed and his words, does this prove Muhammed actually rode a flying horse named Buraq?

KingEbukasBlog:
https://www.nairaland.com/2845259/all-different-religions-how-know

Hahahaha common this should be a discussion... The questions are still hanging..

-Islam was founded on the teachings of Muhammed who also lays claims to
outstanding Miracles and presence of God too.
(Somehow ended up having a very different concept from yours even though
both allegedly got a first hand presence feel of the 'God')

-Confucianism is founded on the teachings of Confucius

-Buddhism founded on the teachings of Buddha..

So how does this make yours any better ? Now this still does not answer
the question which is

-Tell us how religions perceived this being in order to assert it actually
existed at all

-So how can religious even tender any understanding of an inscrutable entity which turns out to be different with every religion..
(Isn't these characters then works of assumptions? )

KingEbukasBlog:
Jewish mythology ? Jesus is God . Jesus is a historical figure . His prescience has been proven to be true with various claims of people who think they are reincarnations of Him .
Written clearly in the bible .

Hahahahaha clearly written in the bible? how does the bible writing anything make it true

Olumba Olumba Obu actually is a very much existential figure in fact he's still alive by the way.

You see the point? So we are still waiting how Jesus's claim proves your
own God anymore than Olumba olumba Obu's claim does?

we are still waiting though

Yes Jewish Mythology just like we also have Greek mythologies and legends.

KingEbukasBlog:
My "religion" was founded on the teachings of CHrist . Paul and Christ's disciples were astonished by the miracles and His prescience . They witnessed the death and resurrection of Christ . And were rest assured that he was God indeed
I don't how other religions did it

hahahahahaha getting interesting-

-Islam was founded on the teachings of Muhammed who also lays claims to outstanding Miracles and presence of God too.
(Somehow ended up having a very different concept from yours even though both allegedly got a first hand presence feel of the 'God')

-Confucianism is founded on the teachings of Confucius

-Buddhism founded on the teachings of Buddha..

So how does this make yours any better ? Now this still does not answer the question which is

-Tell us how religions perceived this being in order to assert it actually
existed at all
-So how can religious even tender any understanding of an inscrutable entity
(Isn't these characters then works of assumptions? )

KingEbukasBlog:
All these were claims . The Bible taught us clearly to be watchful of false Christs and false prophets .


Zeus and co are Greek Mythology

And so the one you believe cannot be anymore than just a claim as others?
Don't you think the same way you think yours is legitimate others also think theirs is.
so you see?

So do you think Olumba Olumba Obu who claim to be God cannot be God but Jesus is because you believe his own claim right?

You see the point? So we are still waiting how Jesus's claim proves your own God anymore than Olumba olumba Obu's claim does?

And Yahweh and Co cannot be Jewish mythology? ?

KingEbukasBlog:
Religion did not assert anything or assume . Ummm lets look at a computer system . To make it possible for students to understand the intricate workings of the computer system , a course called Computer Architecture that explains this is being in the University .

We also have Nature : Biology , Physics , Philosophy all these are being used to understand Nature much better .Does it mean Nature does not exist ?

But actually when all these Courses are sure nature is and they base their teachings on this .

E.G: astronomy studies the stars and before one assert there are stars it is very very clear for all to see so nobody asks how they got to know about Stars before studying them.

So now the question is

-Tell us how religions perceived this being in order to assert it actually
existed at all

-So how can religious even tender any understanding of an inscrutable entity
(Isn't these characters then works of assumptions? )

Nature can be scrutinized and understood as we are doing hence ^^^^^^^^^^

KingEbukasBlog:
He claims to be God in human flesh ?

1 John 4:1-6

Hahahahaha so you doubt Olumba Olumba Obu cannot be God in human flesh also as Jesus were?

I am still waiting for the question to be answered though Don't you think Olumba Olumba Obu is also proof of God since he also claims to be God in human
flesh?

KingEbukasBlog:
Errmmmm ...

Still on the matter

Hong Xiuquan claimed to be Son of God, is this proof for God also? Mount Olympus was the abode Zeus, is the existence of mount Olympus evidence of God (zeus) too?

KingEbukasBlog:
Something inscrutable is difficult to understand . Religion was made by man to at least have an exiguous understanding of this being .

Still on the matter.

-Tell us how religions perceived this being in order to assert it actually existed at all.

-So how can religious even tender any understanding of an inscrutable entity (Isn't these characters then works of assumptions? )

KingEbukasBlog:
Achilles is not a historical figure . Nice try bro

Now the point is actually dawning on you

KingEbukasBlog:
God's existence is inscrutable so man made Religion to understand him better . The Logic of God and Everything gives a lucid explanation though.

So how can you even know that something whose existence you agree is inscrutable even exist at all?

-How can you assert something exist then say it is inscrutable?
- How then did you get to know in the first place?

So how is it that religion is trying to understand something inscrutable, isn't that another way of understanding nothing?

urahara:
Plz lets find a way 2 stop dis guy from ridiculing his self.for a xtian this arguments reek

Hahahahahahahaha...

KingEbukasBlog:
But wait ... do you have proofs that these outlandish claims were ever made ?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brotherhood_of_the_Cross_and_Star

So now lets not skip the question brother which is Don't you think Olumba Olumba Obu is also proof of God since he also claims to be God in human flesh?

KingEbukasBlog:
Are you not proof of your dad's existence

Take another scenario...

Achilles was supposedly birthed by a human father and a Nymph mother and Achilles was practically invincible.

So now since Achilles is a historical figure, does this also prove his mother was a Nymph therefore Nymphs existed and ultimately Zeus.

Can we then say Achilles is a proof of his mother (the Nymph) or Heracles is proof of his father (Zeus) just same way you think a historical Jesus is proof of his father (Yahweh)?

Is that how we should take legends then?