₦airaland Forum

And when they do evangelise, they are tagged religious!

See, tenacity in holding beliefs doesn't matter, the truth is the real value. One could be wrong and must always be able to recover.

Ihedinobi: Could you please define self-sufficiency?

"Self-sufficiency is the state of not requiring any aid, support, or interaction, for survival"

OLAADEGBU: "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit prophecy" (2 Peter 1:21).

Josh McDowell put it like this:

"The idea conveyed is that just as the wind controls the sails of a boat, so also the breath of God controlled the writers of the Bible. The end result was exactly what God intended."

So you can see that it was God using men as instruments to write His letter to humanity. It is His-Story. Proof that the Bible is supernatural can be seen with a quick study of its prophecies.

That's still men pretending to speak for God, as the evidence leads to; men wrote the Bible.

Ihedinobi: Hehehe....... So you insist that God is that which is supernatural. And you insist on that so that those who choose to attribute Godhood to things found in nature can be called atheists. Lol Like, seriously?

Just refer to the definitions that I copy-pasted for wiegraf up there, will you. God is that which sufficiently explains existence (yet another definition that I give without cost to you guys, but which still is expressed in the compound, "self-sufficient). And there is no worldview that does not possess something of that element.

Supernatural popped up in one of the definition, and as I said before, self sufficiency is inadequate, cos it does address a conscious being, or attach any role of a Creator, or an object of worship or morality.

@anony

I'm badly disappointed at you. How is asking what God was doing before he created everything, during his infinite lifetime silly?! O_o oR is God unquestionable?

^^
The authorship of the Bible is earthly, men limited to knowledge of their time. The bible can't therefore be scientifically accurate.

A materialist's dream?

That doesn't say much, neither does it answer the purpose for creation.

However, Supernatural counts more because it purports distinguishes God from his creation, by promoting an absurdity that an entity can act beyond its character, outside its identity.

@ihedinobi

The most significant attribute: Supernatural.

Ihedinobi: You do understand what it means for anything to be self-sufficient, right? That quality of self-sufficiency is what makes a thing God.

BUT that's just one attribute of the total att. of the Judeo Christian God. If I was to use such definition to seek God, it will be inadequate.

1supremo: Go back to the post it was originally addressed to. If you want to sustain a conversation here, ask a different question.

You didn't make any sense. None of that post addresses the atheist.

Tgirl4real: @ Macdaddy,

The fact that u were born of a woman, alive and kicking is evidence there is God whether u believe or not.

You HAVE to prove that such a phenomenon only has a supernatural explanation.

1supremo: Since you are not willing to define your position yourself, I will get you a definition of my idea of who you are from a sage:

"…the New Rebel is a skeptic, and will not entirely trust anything. He has no loyalty; therefore he can never be really a revolutionist. And the fact that he doubts everything really gets in his way when he wants to denounce anything. For all denunciation implies a moral doctrine of some kind; and the modern revolutionist doubts not only the institution he denounces, but the doctrine by which he denounces it. Thus he writes one book complaining that imperial impression insults the purity of women, and then he writes another book (about the sex problem) in which he insults it himself. He curses the Sultan because Christian girls lose their virginity, and then curses Mrs. Grundy because they keep it. As a politician, he will cry out that war is a waste of life, and then, as a philosopher that all life is a waste of time. A Russian pessimist will denounce a police man for killing a peasant, and then prove by the highest philosophical principles that the peasant ought to have killed himself...." - G. K. CHESTERTON

How does this affect the atheists??

Ihedinobi: There is no worldview that lacks an element or entity that exhibits self-sufficiency.

But God is self sufficient, right?

Also, your introduction is very poor. You haven't been able to define God and connect a necessary belief to him.

benodic: @ kay 17


my personal experience is my ultimate proof and authority that a truth is real or not. i will never just accept whatever is written in any book as truth without
experiencing it for myself. reasoning can only take you as far as the mental plane beyond that in the worlds of pure spirit the mind ceases to operate. those are the worlds of knowingness and beingness where you exist as pure soul.

BUT if one goes against reason, the irrational is unavoidable. I can't claim number one and number two are the same number. Reason is essential or else even your personal experiences must be interpreted meaningfully.

As far as I see it, science reduces all phenonema

Imagined just like the infinite points in a line, we picture the Universe as a sphere that holds all that exists. More of a concept we put in our heads. A perception mechanism.

If we break down all that exists into fundamental indestructible bits, we wouldn't have nothing, but bits (like the atoms concept). So the principle of causality is relatable, simple >> complex.

^^ as I mentioned earlier that there was always something, and the role of the universe is that of an imaginary box/container of existence, upto which something stands on.

Thanks so much wiegraf! Well said.

benodic: @ kay 17

the basic truths are universal indeed but the funny thing is that not many people are even ready to accept the most basic truths talk less of more advanced ones.

Talking about truth will never take you anywhere. You have to experience it to realize it in order to make it part and parcel of your life whereby you become the living truth. That step is what scares a lot of people.
Anyway there is no problem at all. Each soul will come into spiritual maturity when it is ready. It is just a matter of time.

You are still using your personal experience as the ultimate authority for knowledge, rather than Reason. No one can say they don't exist, that's a fundamental truth. Likewise the strength of Reason.

DeeTeeMan: Life is an experience of our contribution in existence. If we can commit our existence to the goodness of our experience in living with others, then we can improve the goodness of our world.

I actually thought recently about difference between good and evil as not necessarily the outcome of an event but the intention of the person. The natural judgement of an individual may not just be the outcome of what he/she has done but his/her intention before, during and after doing it with all due respect and love for others around him/her. We usually know the truth about our original intention when we do things, whether we are prepared to tell this truth or not is another matter.

Will your view still be the same if you were aware of your death day and the date the human race will vanish?

The uncaused God is a contradiction to the principle of causality. Except if God exists initially as a super complex being and breaks down to constitute the Universe, other than simplicity flows to complexity. We will always seek causes for complexities. To arbitrarily assume God is an obvious absurdity

If deepsight accepts God as a primordial energy, will he accept God's physical energy? Or that such energy is conscious?

seyibrown: @ everyone: The bolded is quite interesting. Why have all not then come to accept that God IS and was not created? Are they waiting for a scientific experiment by a group of men somewhere to confirm that God exists and can neither be created nor destroyed?

Svience can't prove that.

@mr anony

Being God and doing what?!

Deep Sight: Not only have I always said begin, but I have corrected made this same clarification to several people many times ever since Prizm reminded me about three years ago in a discussion. Besides, I did not formulate the cosmological argument: and that is what it says. It says "begin".



Infinite Space

Infinite Time

Just two examples.

If there is a library with infinite number of books and I take out half of it, what quantity will be left?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]God did not just appear, He is eternal, He has no beginning and no end. He just is[/quote]What was he doing before he created everything?

My sincere view of God is a cultural ill defined hype

In my view, existence is unavoidable, cos by definition is the necessary state of reality/moment, which is perpetual. Even if there is nothingness, that qualifies as reality.

On to the next question: why is there something rather than nothing. Given that nothing is unproductive and lacks a causal principle, and taking the present into consideration, our past couldn't have been nothingness, so something must have always existed.

Following from the above, is a law that out of nothing comes nothing. Whatever was in the past is the total sum of what in the present and future. The matter and energy we have now, must be accountable in the past. In other words, the Universe (a platform) had always existed.

God is as such a subject, because he exists.

Tbaba you didn't respond to my post.

I have my own justifications already.

^^
As I mentioned earlier, I seek for a rational justification for existence. Its either we are here or not. We can well imagine nothing.

Your attempt in trying to equate a being with its distinct personality with a state of "is" is unsuccessful.

I simply exist, you exist, God exists. Existence is a background from which other things, knowledge, awareness, experience stand. I can't experience existence as an event or a condition, rather a precondition. A pre requisite for everything. It is impossible to separate/isolate existence as an event.

LOOL!

Why is the first question absurd?