₦airaland Forum

tintingz:
Is this designer a perfect one?

tintingz:
I perfectly understand this intelligent design is not perfect, you said something in your thread about a designer designed something and leave it to evolve itself, can you explain?

tintingz:
Ok, can you give some examples. Thank you.

KingEbukasBlog:
The mind(The non-physical part of you ) can exist without the brain .

I think I understand what you are doing : You are using "intelligence" in lieu of "mind"

That's okay then .

KingEbukasBlog:
God's nature provides a reference point for moral values and duties.

Moral goodness like love , peace , patience , harmony etc are of His nature.

Murdering someone isn't an act of love or of peace and harmony but of hate , violence , wickedness - these are incongruous with the nature of God .

So as an atheist , why is murder right or wrong and on what basis did you make your judgement ?

They are good because they are in accordance to God's nature as the epitome of moral goodness . I tried circumventing the euthyphro dilemma but you still brought it up anyway . The third option is that God's nature is the standard - His laws stem from His nature as the paragon of moral goodness .

As an atheist , why is something morally good ?

tintingz:
Yes you're right but deist are best in position of using evolution as a tool of design but problematic when it comes to many Personal Gods.

urahara:
I swear


I can vividly remember that Ebuka wasn't always in support of evolution

Thewesterner:
I don't know what to believe

Mjsod:
Yes, there are atheists in Nigeria, wonderful people I must confess. The thing is majority of Nigerian atheists are actually a confused set who just happen to see a group to follow.

And that is why I identify as a humanist. Still have researches and facts to unravel in my quest/thirst for knowledge.

KingEbukasBlog:
Exactly !!

OLAADEGBU:
Thanks for the compliments.

KingEbukasBlog:
Yeah . It is independent of a person's views or opinions and would be true no matter the situation

Example
Murder is morally bad

If it is in accordance to God's morally good nature and His moral laws . Remember , it is moral goodness not just good .

KingEbukasBlog:
Religious skepticism is open to all - Deist , Christian , Muslim , Hindu , etc . Most of my ideas were reformed because of the works of Christian intellectuals past and present which I came across . It has nothing to do with atheists (Religious skepticism has absolutely nothing to do with atheism and Atheism is not against religion ) . I just use the atheists to access how far I've come from time to time though .

Daviddson:
I reject it for him in Jesus' name. Amen.

But on a serious note, Kingebukasblog, too much sophistication and learning (in order to match atheists) is trying to knock you off somehow.
Check Luke 22:32

urahara:
Loooool


Cc johnnydon22

KingEbukasBlog:
About evolution, same thing with my view of Hell . It's not definitive, I accept that it is rational that God allowed for the gradual formation of life for a long period of time . The creation story has myriads of interpretations and there is no reason to stick with a literal interpretation.

KingEbukasBlog:
Well then

+ dalaman

Morality is concerned with our senses or beliefs about what is right or wrong behaviour.

Then for objective morality : What is morally wrong or right does not depend on our personal views of right or wrong behaviour . More like universal moral truths .

Subjective morality : What is morally wrong or right depends on our personal views and we can agree or not agree personally on what is right or wrong .

Martinez19:
There are no arguments for the existence of yahweh and other religious gods. However for any creator god, apart from religious god, the fine tuning argument comes close. Why do I say the fine tuning argument doesn't make a cut for religious gods? that's because an omnipotent and omniscient god can't be restricted by the constraints of the physical constant to make life. According to holy books, God and angels are living being and I don't think mighty heaven, angles and God are living by the fine tuning of some constants. If they did god is no god since he is limited by constant.

Johnydon22 and HopefulLandord, what are your takes on the fine tuning argument?

KingEbukasBlog:
Well then

+ dalaman

Morality is concerned with our senses or beliefs about what is right or wrong behaviour.

Then for objective morality : What is morally wrong or right does not depend on our personal views of right or wrong behaviour . More like universal moral truths .

Subjective morality : What is morally wrong or right depends on our personal views and we can agree or not agree personally on what is right or wrong .

KingEbukasBlog:
I don't have a fixed or definitive view of Hell . But I lean towards it being a state or condition of human experience whereby He is not in line with the will of God or being completely obliterated and not given the opportunity to resurrect after death . Burning fire ? I don't think I agree with that. Pagan influence in the Catholic Church may have affected our view of Hell. Because Judaism didn't even address such things at all . The view of burning fire and eternal torment is consistent with paganism .

hakeem4:
sorry, if incest is a sin in Israel but it isn’t a sin in India are you telling thar people who commit incest will go to hell fire ?

frosbel2:
A believer in the ONE True GOD which should be THEIST.

Sorry, I am a THEIST, not DEIST.

Mztarstrechy:
A Lord's Chosen Church member in action.One word for him!

cc; Lalasticlala, mynd44

Source: http://www.trezzyhelm.com/2018/01/see-what-lord-chosen-church-member-was.html?m=1

irynterri:
Happy New Year to every one. The discussion today is the story of the rich man and Lazarus, let us read the Bible verse before the discussion. Luke 16:19-31New International Version (NIV)
The Rich Man and Lazarus
19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

danvon:
yep separately they are different, but they are never separate.

okay let me use a different similar angle talk about Time it's made up of what? the past, present and future, now you're trying to say that the past singularly isn't part of time it's something separate, you can't take the past out of time

GraGra247:
All nairaland atheists na fake.

Atheist wey go mock Christians from morning till night on every thread... that one na atheist?

Real atheist no dey make noise. He even goes to church with Christian family members.

uzoclinton:
In Oblivion

MrRhymes101:
Inside belle na!!!... funny MC

danvon:
no you're trying to say a proton isn't part of the Atom if it's part then it's an atom too.

you're trying to find pointless contradictions here

i gave the op a perfect description if you believe three particles can coexist as one tiny particle why can't you believe the Trinity, I have other descriptions if you like