Johnydon22's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Johnydon22's Profile › Johnydon22's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 (of 489 pages)
dmandy:That one believe you have a tooth ache is because your tooth is you, so employing such psychological perception to an entity that supposed to exist is like telling me God is merely but a feeling of yours, with that i can then agree... If God is not you just like your tooth is you then God needs more than a claim of personal relationship. So you see; A tooth ache is a feeling God on the other hand is not but supposed to be an independent existential entity so is not a feeling so there is nothing like personal conviction, that is against reason. Unless God is in your head (A feeling) then we agree.... |
dmandy:Now you have arrived ![]() Telling me you are having a tooth ache is the same thing as telling me you are feeling yourself because your teeth is you.... A tooth ache is a feeling (Pain) An apple is not you but rather an external thing introduced into your body so it is impossible to be eating an apple when your mouth is empty unless of course you imagined you are eating one.. An existent deity is not you so there is no way you can claim a personal experience for a existent entity unless of course such unfounded entity is in your head. If i ask you to prove your mother to me, you can always take me and show me your mum, you cannot tell me your mum is invisible that you have a personal relationship with her so that is how you know she exists... So you see, you don't need a personal experience to know your mum exists, you are certain of it and others around you are... |
dmandy:So i can be in front of you while you keep moving your mouth claiming to be the eating an apple while i see no apple in your hands or inside your mouth? If in fact that you are eating an apple it conforms to logic that there must be some in your mouth while you chew but if there isn't and still claim you are eating an apple one can not only disbelieve that you are eating an apple but tag the personal experience claim to be a psychological condition... |
nickz:Lmao. . . The Pythagorean/Pythagoras theorem i know is a mathematical theorem that states that the quare of the hypotenuse (the side opposite the right angle) is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides. So i wonder where you got this theory and how it has been demonstrated to be true? |
dmandy:A hypothetical postulation is not believed it is just a hypothesis and that exactly is my position, i don't believe the existence of any deity because there is no evidence what so ever to support it just unfounded claims. So now if the existence of a deity is treated with some kind of agnosticism (that is treating it as an unknown postulation until proven) then i won't have a problem with that. But when you make an unfounded postulation without evidence then expect any reasonable human to believe it by Faith, is that not the worst form of dishonesty? I lack such a thing as "Faith" in uncertain concepts. on another news evidence is personal, U don't have to continue to wait for eternity for a universal evidence.Even a mad man is experiencing madness as a personal experience, so madness is a mental state. That you assert a personal experience for that which you allege to be a universal existent entity shows that such notions is in fact a psychological position and not a certain one, because you cannot tell me you are eating an apple but there is neither an apple fruit in your hand or in your mouth that i can see then claim it is a personal experience |
dmandy:Good so we have concluded that the existence of any deity is still hypothetical, ok then that is decent. . . Let's wait for some facts and evidences to be presented because last i checked any scientific hypothesis is not believed by faith or even asserted to be true but rather treated as just a hypothesis that it is until facts and discoveries proves it to be right then it becomes a proven scientific postulation. and once evidence against that hypothesis is presented, the hypothesis is discarded, nobody still clings to it and believe it by faith ... That is science |
nickz:Mind if we ask how you got to know this? |
dmandy:That in fact is a character disorder unless God was married when he revealed himself to the Canaanites and then when he manifested to the jews he was divorced... |
dmandy:If by assumption you mean hypothesis then yes, so now by employing this analogy are you now agreeing that the existence of deity is in fact assumptive or let me be fair "Hypothetical?" |
dmandy:Lmao. . is this another way of telling me that "God has a character disorder? |
dmandy:That i have a revelation that a blue diamond pig exists doesn't make it true. And again last time i checked the theism belief still revolves around "faith" First the so called revelation need to be believed by "faith" and then the deity itself also needs to be believed by "faith" Again why is it that for something as obvious as earth nobody needs faith but when it comes to a deity, faith is needed... |
dmandy:That today is monday is a lingual expression, an igbo may call it Eke or Afor. . . So Monday, tuesday is in fact a lingual representation, a deity is a supposed existential entity.. So i ask again.... "Why then do you need "FAITH" to believe a deity exist but you don't need "faith" to know that earth exist"? |
dmandy:The thing is; You cannot say your Father is a Caucasian and your brother on the other hand propose your father is a negroid. How can you both have drastically opposite descriptions of your father when both of you have met your father? it's either one of you (you or your brother) is lying or none you have actually ever met your father. If all these concepts depicts the same entity, for that simple fact that they are opposite characters shows that each in fact is the cultural construct of the people that concept is found. So just like your father cannot be Caucasian at the same time negro, God cannot have a wife at the same time not have a wife. So it is either all these religions are lying or none of them actually has any idea of what God is and if this is true it means that everything you believing is the assumptive concept of the people who brought it out |
dmandy:Good, this shows "FAITH" is only applied for things that are not evidential and so needs to be a conviction on it whether it is true or not. Now tell me; Why then do you need "FAITH" to believe a deity exists? |
dmandy:Lmao according to Igbo terminology Chukwu reveals nothing to anybody, in fact Chukwu is too big and can never be comprehended and so has no priest and so this very position leans it towards the position of Deism So for the simple fact that these concepts differ in Characteristics shows that they are in fact distinct characters... Zeus is the creator according to the greek but osiris is according to Egyptians... So tell me; Is Zeus, Yahweh, Baal, Osiris the same God? |
AikayDaWrapper: Ironically if you ask worshippers of Baal they will tell you that worshippers of Yahweh are the evil one. So it obvious you are basing your judgement based on the position of the worshippers of yahweh |
dmandy:Nope totally wrong Faith means believing something regardless of evidence. . Now it is a known evidential fact that the earth is round which in fact is observable to a lay person from the earth, So tell me again. . My question was: Do you need faith to believe Earth is real or are you certain for sure that earth is real.. (Please forget the earth being round part it is irrelevant in my question and secondly "Faith" is "believing" "Know" is "certainty" stop mixing them up) |
dmandy:Oh my bad. . . i thought i was addressing the Op who i quoted initailly Actually God concepts differ, each may connote a deity but every concept differ in characteristics. The Jewish yahweh has no son neither did it impregnant a virgin girl The christian yahweh has a son and is three in one and impregnated a virgin girl Islamic Allah has no son Greek Zeus has many wives and sons Egptian Osiris has a wife and a son . Igbo chukwu in fact in impossible to know or comprehend... These dieties in fact are distinct characters... |
. |
JMAN05:actually i do |
dmandy:First you asserted they didn't worship God, now you have agreed that they did but in a different way. Actually the last i checked there are up to 2,900 different God concepts found in different religions and cultures. The fore fathers had their own God concept and religion, you may choose to subscribe to the Jewish concept but i see no reason why you should subject them to such bizarre judgement from your perspective of the jewish concept. I may as well tell you that you are going to hell for not serving God the way our forefathers did... |
dmandy:Define Faith... |
dmandy:Just a fast question: "Do you believe with faith that earth is real or do you know certainly that earth is real? " |
AikayDaWrapper: I wonder what you mean exactly. Our forefathers had their own God, they had their own religion and culture. It's too bad you are here subjecting them to some cruel judgement from your own perspective as a worshipper of a foreign God concept. The last time i checked they worshipped their own God, so i wonder what you mean by they didn't worship God... That is a clearly a wrong assertion..!!! |
PastorAIO:First of all you never chose to exist, that the particular spermatozoa carrying your biological nfo fertilized the egg was in fact a slim chance of 1:2,000,000, if another sperm out of the 2,000,000 did the result would have been totally different. . . When there is no existence there is no choice, there can only be choice when there is perception. You can choose to either keep on living now or to die immediately by killing yourself. |
JMAN05:For every postulation, empirical back up determines the certainty of such postulations |
PastorAIO:I think the misrepresentation of my assertion lies with your own cognitive ability. First they must be a choice to wear a cloth or not before choosing what to wear.. You can not predetermine one must wear a cloth taking out entirely the option of not wearing it and term that freewill. My assertion was based on what he postulated by "predetermining that one must wear a cloth" By taking out the option of not wearing a cloth, you have taken out that person's choice of choosing not to wear a cloth, In that premise; Do you call that a free choice? |
mustymatic:[b]Sometimes silence is complicity, the fact remains that these terrorist groups have the ideology that they are working for Allah and they will be getting a reward.... I am in no way stereotyping all Muslims but we all know the activities of these terror quran quoting groups speak ill of islam in entirety. Until Islam evolve and take on a nature of tolerance and accommodation of other humans and employ disagreement objectively such groups as ISIS, Boko Haram, Al quada, Al shabab and other will always emerge from Islam. Shia and Suni muslims will always call for each others blood, and until Islam move ahead and walk with the time, when this terrorist groups enter into extinction, when they stop quoting the Quran to justify beheading people, when apostates stop being endangered, when little girls stopped being maimed after getting raped, when honour killings stop. i can go on forever. After all this, The world will have a different perception of Islam because sadly now Islam is another word for terrorism in the world today!!![/b] |
chalantmike:Freewill is deciding if to get dressed or not to.... One can decide to get wear a cloth or decide not to wear a cloth, that is freewill, freedom of will....Now you are talking about freewill when you have presupposed an end point that must be reached, have never seen someone naively murder his own analogy any more than this. But in your naive analogy you have predetermined that the person must wear a cloth without putting into mind if he decides to stay naked, why take out that option? Taking out that option is same as killing the concept of freewill.. I repeat again, there is no predetermined end point on freewill, it only means doing what you want, once an end point that must be reached is added to it then where is the freewill. If everything has been predetermined and one can do nothing to change it then it is not freewill, if there is freewill then nothing is predetermined but rather everything happens in relation to the choice of what the subject choose.. |
mustymatic:[b]Trying to smart? Hahahahahahaha another assertion by the Genius The violence of Christianity was predominant through out the medieval ages, it doesn't take much for anyone to see christianity has evolved past that now. We are all in this planet and we all see what goes around. I can only say the truth of what is; Boko Haram is not vying for a Christian Caliphate neither is ISIS and Al queda or Al shabab or a thousand and one others. I don't see Christians shooting down a cartoon artist because he drew Jesus neither do i see them taking to the street demanding the blood of people who insult Jesus..... This is the obvious truth. Both religions had their own share of blood shed of which i will call out Christianity on that when ever it is raised but in the world today we all know the Religion that is synonymous to violence, intolerance and terrorism. why should i start calling out Christianity when the topic here is Islam... You really need to go get a grip and learn a little bit of constructiveness ... You need it. [/b] |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 (of 489 pages)
