₦airaland Forum

Other reasons: namely being a sentient being

@mr anony

Just watched the video, and I saw the parallel drawn btw Christianity and humanism, but note that John Gray is a nihilist and just stating his view.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lol, no I wasn't but then, based on my worldview at the time, there was no reason why not


Hey, have you watched the video in the Op yet?[/quote]Nope

Ihedinobi: If the Being is omnipotent, breaking physical laws should be nothing to it and what's absurd is considering it absurd that it does. However, I stand on the fact that God cannot be judged by man's limitations. He knows enough about those laws, having made them Himself, to know which ones nullify which and under what conditions.

And, really, I think you're just fishing for something to say.

Like creating the Universe from nothing??

Ihedinobi: What does it matter? Are you just fishing for something to say?

Most purported former atheists happen to be the head priest of the Devil's lounge or they were drunks or rapists etc.

Ihedinobi: And I'll bet you think you know all the laws of physics, right? Mankind has discovered all of them, bar none, hey?

Of course we don't know all, but Christians especially actually BELIEvE miracles violate physcial laws rather obey obscure laws.

@Davidlyan

Maybe the essence of Christianity is the relationship with, but it portrays an omnipotent being who breaks physical laws to the point of absurdity.

davidylan: the sun appeared by random chance and those seeds just appeared out of nowhere? So sand exists because that is what it always does? Somehow this chance has ONLY found expression on this tiny portion of the universe?

Function is a better word. Purpose presumes an anticipated outcome and primordial person.

adoniza: Black Africans wake up.

Muhammed had a lot of Black-African slaves. And if that was not enough, he married a six year old girl and then bleeped her when she was nine. (And he, 56).

Imagin such a man inventing a religion. What baffles me most is how a sane human being could submit to his bufoonic preaching. Geezz

Maybe it's because they never cared to know more about how he spent his life. They just believe what they are told, (No questions asked)

Don't judge a man beyond his times.

The essence of the Supernatural is doin the impossible. For example a man walking on water, thereby violating the laws of physics.

Humanism comes with a fresh and better outlook, morality for men; unity, progress and happiness for all peoples. Humanitarian consciousness, awareness of a sort of natural justice.

davidylan: God's purpose is not to use magical tricks to prove Himself to those who have made up their minds NEVER to believe anyway. Jesus is as real to those who seek Him with ALL SINCERITY not those who only seek Him for money, fame and recognition. I doubt you've ever read the bible before... if you had you might have realized that God Himself said in the book of James that we ask and recieve not because we do so... not out of His will but of our own selfish desires. What would be the purpose of praying to God to deal with you?



I agree with you... but isnt it strange that you park yourself DAILY and for HOURS at a stretch on threads solely discussing this same christian God you despise and claim exists only in our imagination? I cant imagine spending a fraction of an hour talking about the validity of Sango's existence.

Isn't that the essence of Supernatural?! Waking magical wands!

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Yes I was..........and God saved me.[/quote]The drunk and murderer type of atheist?

ID is not an alternative to evolution.

davidylan: Evolution fails on all 4 levels as well. So what is your point?

I strongly doubt if this is an answer

seedord247: Can i cal you a punk or a dumb a$s?

Women have the same rights (in relation to their husbands) as are expected in all decency from them, while men stand a step above them." [Noble Quran 2:228]

There is no restriction in Islamic law that says a woman cannot work or have a profession, that her only place is in the home. In fact, by definition, in a truly Islamic society, there must be women physicians, women nurses, women teachers, because it's preferable also to separate teenagers in the volatile years in high school education. And if she chooses to work, or if she's married with the consent of her husband, she's entitled to equal pay, not for equal work, but for work of equal worth.

So Mr Failed Education. Always get your fact right before streaming your stupidity online.

In an islamic society a woman is below a man and must seek the man's permission to work?! Isn't that a restriction?

^^

Since things have Creators, who is the Creator for the creator of the Universe?!

Also from what did he create the Universe?

Uyi Iredia: Nonsense ! How can purpose arise from something that has no purpose; because it is clear that humans are purposeful. Purpose can only arise where there was a previous purpose because purpose itself is not a physical thing that can be tied to brains. Otherwise, the argument would be made that animals like lions and chimpanzees reminisce on the concept of purpose. Note that purpose is an abstract quality and it is simply stupid to say our genes gave us purpose especially when those genes are patently physical and not abstract as the concept of purpose. I generally find such explanations unacceptable because they are a subtle way of beggging the question of purpose seen in human existence. The ID argument best explains the presence of purpose.

ID doesn't explain why viruses flourish and mutate to be more deadly.

ID doesn't explain how organisms readapt to climate changes

ID doesn't explain the complexity of the Originator

ID doesn't explain general purpose of Life.

davidylan: this is ridiculously false. I dont agree with evolution so how can i claim it is empirical? It seems to me that you are just another empty cavern just posting without thinking. Look at your statement and ask yourself if it makes sense. My question has always been that you folks never provide empirical evidence for your belief in evolution. How does that square with the nonsense above?

I'm so sorry, I meant to say NOT empirical.

davidylan: and i suppose its your place no?
Another empty vessel just cackling like a toothless old woman. What is your take on the subject? all you've done is just come here and insult. Go on and answer now... empty head.

Cos you have claimed many times without number that Science and the theory of evolution are empirical!! And you try to mismatch Science with your Faith.

That is a foundational problem!

davidylan: they cant answer you. they dont know and they will avoid this thread like the plague.

Davidlyan has been discredited on this forum so many times, its nt his place to discuss questions on Science

davidylan: That was Jepthah's vow... he wasnt forced into it. the bible is replete with direct commands not to engage in such - Deut 18:10, 2 Kings 21:6, Jer 7:31 e.t.c

If you bothered to read the story of Jephthah, it is very easy to note that what occured there was not a burnt offering as much as it was a sacrificing of his daughter to God as a temple nun for life.

Temple nun indeed.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]The point John Gray was trying to make was not that people cannot have a sense of right and wrong or that Christ is the only way for knowing right and wrong, what he was saying is that it doesn't logically follow to condemn religion yet hold onto all its values minus God. You may as well promote the religion since you support it's values anyway.

As for the highlighted,
If Christ is the only way to the true God, it follows that all other gods are false and only one exists.
If he nature of this true God is the basis for morality, then it follows that one cannot not be good without God.
If one cannot be good without God and Christ is the only way to Him, then it follows that Christ is the only way to morality.

unless, you say that the basis for morality is found outside the true God then you now have to tell us on what morality is based other than a perfect God.

John Gray recognizes this and that's and that's why he holds that morality is an illusion and he suggests that if secular humanism denies God, then it must not go on to talk about morality. In fact he calls Dawkins et al soft atheists. I find John Gray to be quite brutally honest.

What Michael Ramsden does is to show how morality is not an merely illusion but refers to something beyond us.[/quote]Probably Gray is nihilist and doesn't accept humanist understanding of morality as basic rules which a self conscious, right thinking man will instinctively think of. To credit morality as a sole property of religion is false.

Pastor AIO: What we know is Knowledge. Yes. It might derail this thread to go into it.

It would require looking into epistemology.

What we know is not necessarily what is! that is the matter.

Knowledge is not necessarily equal to truth.

could categorically say our knowledge is false?

Enigma: This is similar to something I said on this forum fairly recently and is a position I had held for some time independently of Gray's work; much of the so-called "values" or "morality" that "secular" humanism seeks to espouse is borrowed (and/or adapted) from the very same much vilified Christianity specifically and religion in general.

As John Gray said (and see my current signature): "To insist that religion is peculiarly malignant is fanaticism, or mere stupidity."

To place Religion on a partisan stand is risky and untruthful.

Islam was meant for one person only >>>> Prophet Muhammed.

ashson: Women are best respected in islam, it doesnt allow any hardship for the women. all her responsibilities ar 4 d care of her parents as a child, husband as a wife, children as a mother. women are treated with best care and affection in islam.

The worst disrespect, is to deny a person the right/power to decide for he or herself.

Pastor AIO: I think we put too much Faith in Knowledge.

Bad comment.

Which isn't convincing

Enigma: ^^^ Is it not relevant?

I think I made myself clear there.

Enigma: Did you not basically equate that with "innate conscientious belief", "conscience" etc recently in order to claim that atheism should be "rightfully" classified as a religion under the American Constitution?

Reminder https://www.nairaland.com/966459/arming-faithful-against-logic/5#11187547

Still on that?

davidylan: Not all of them. Darwin said your tail bone was a vestigial organ. 200 yrs later we proved he was wrong.

Beauty of a self corrective system. Science isn't omniscient or else it would be irrelevant.

davidlyan: Depends. Cosmology, as an alternative to the creationist viewpoint, is a religion.

Just because it offers an opposing view?! The word religion is not holy water that you can sprinkle on anything.

only if you view evangelism as the SOLE qualifier.

That would lead to unsatisfactory conclusion.

Maybe we aren't simple animals.