₦airaland Forum

tbaba12345: Your whole essay prove my point... Also you are incorrect in one area, there is enough food on the planet to feed everyone on it. The problem is not lack of food, the problem is its distribution. This video explains it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGra85DWWNA#t=108

But it is becoming repetitive. Let's move to another topic, consciousness

I appreciate the fact that you are willing to engage and have civil discussions, some of your friends here are really not worth the trouble.

I introduce you to the hard problem of consciousness. There are areas of consciousness that lie outside the scientific method, e.g the inner subjective experience.

What does it mean to be RayMcBlue eating a sandwich?

Professor Koch explains:

Well, let’s first forget about the real difficult aspects, like subjective feelings, because they may not have a scientific solution. The subjective state of play, of pain, of pleasure, of seeing blue, of smelling a rose--there seems to be a huge jump between the materialistic level, of explaining molecules and neurons, and the subjective level.

http://discovermagazine.com/1992/nov/whatisconsciousn149

This subjective experience can not be explained via a materialistic approach. Even when we have images of the brain etc. The Subjective feeling of what it means to be you can not be explained by the scientific method.

Professor David Chalmers says:

I argue that neuroscience alone isn't enough to explain consciousness, but I think it will be a major part of an eventual theory. We just need to add something else, some new fundamental principles, to bridge the gap between neuroscience and subjective experience.

http://www.ditext.com/chalmers/chalm.html

Another quote:

There are a lot of hard problems in the world, but only one gets to call itself “the hard problem”. That is the problem of consciousness – how 1300 grams or so of nerve cells conjures up the seamless kaleidoscope of sensations, thoughts, memories and emotions that occupy every waking moment… The hard problem remains unresolved.”

New Scientist: The Collection. The Big Questions. Volume I, Issue I, p. 51.

The problem is there is no materialistic solution to this. It does not conform with the scientific method and therefore lies outside the scope of science.

Materialist attempts have failed to comprehensively explain our subjective personal experiences.

I argue that God is the best explanation to explain this and the reasons are as follows:

1. Where does consciousness come from? Theism best explains this.

2. Theism answers how consciousness entered the physical world.

3. Theism has greater explanatory power. It is something deeply rooted in the very essence of reality.

The materialist view point is a thing of miracles as it fails to explain how consciousness popped into existence through just physical processes.

4. Theism explains the gap between nonphysical mental and physical brain states and how they interact.

5. Theism explains why we have an awareness of what it means to be you

Now, the jump between materialistic naturalistic explanation and the subjective experience is too much. There has to be something that bridges that gap. This is where i feel a theistic explanation is the best explanation and makes perfect sense.

This is not new on this forum, both deepsight and uyiredia are the forebearers of this potbellied thought. The inherent problem with consciousness lies in its subjectivity, therefore making it a bad candidate for a typical scientific study. The fact that it is a mental state does not exclude it from the realm of science.

tbaba12345: Irrational.

An atheist can not make this claim because he has no concept of God. As a muslim, i understand that God has full knowledge that is not contingent on time and he understands our natures completely. Therefore, His judgements are made on complete knowledge not constantly changing social systems.

Here is another loophole, the so called moral facts are not binding on God as the source of the commands. If they were truly objective, they would be binding on God.

tbaba12345: It isn't complex.

You are reaffirming my position. What you have presented is not objective, a atheist can not present an objective basis for morality. Hence, his values of morality are based on his societal influences and prejudices which changes over time.

There is only one concept that transcends that human subjectivity.

You talk about human nature, this is an interesting concept because the best explanation for our consciousness and nature is God. As a muslim, i do believe all humans have inherent good (called the fitrah in Islam) but its manifestation is affected on environmental factors.

For you, there are no objective good because you need an anchor that is not based on human subjectivity.

I can expand on the concept that human consciousness is best explained by God if you want.

Let me help you out. Moral facts that are commandments are subjective projections of the maker, they are creations in the mind of the maker. By that its nature, it subjective.

On the other hand, object moral facts such as categorical imperative are unwritten and most importantly uncreated. They are facts, because they exist ex debit justitae. So whenever you talk about objective moral facts, think of Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative.

tbaba12345: Yet societies have deemed it ok to murder others, How is that an objective value? Societies deemed it ok to burn people on stakes or kill a certain race. It is subject to societal conventions.

What I mean by objective is something that is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts, and not dependent on the mind for existence.

God is the only concept that transcends that subjectivity. With God, these values remain constant and does not depend on human prejudices.

And if you asked 100 muslims about God, there is a very Good chance that you will get the same answers in over 90% of cases as God is defined clearly in the Quran.

Rayblue was merely highlighting his view, my concern is how objective moral facts stand on their own. Regardless of what societies do and what names/labels they use for their action.

The problem with your argument is that God is your moral agent, hence the veil of objectivity is removed.

EMILO2STAY: yea there are variations but it doesn't stop them from being humans.

Yes homo sapiens however neaderthals are humanoid but not considered humans.

A brown bear is of different species from the polar bear but they are bears.

Jackeeh: And your point is?

The OP has no problem.

@tbaba1234

Again I disagree with your view of the purpose of man. Man is reduced to a work tool with an end for servitude, whereas the worship of God is the ultimate good, is actually a product of selfishness. God's selfishness is good whilst our selflessness (as tools) is good. This in my view is a contradiction of principles.

@tb1234

^^

How was it possible for you to say there are no objective moral facts in the absence of an agent -- God?! The idea of objectivity is that the moral facts ought to stand on their own. If not, they lose their nature of objectivity.

Jackeeh: Begin by asking yourself these questions : have I "genuinely" surrendered my life to Jesus? Is He my Savior? Is He my Lord?

Pastor Uche of Omega Gospel Network wrote and I quote,"It is important to know that salvation is a two packed experience. A lot of people focus on one throughout their lives. No wonder they live in struggles continually.

The first experience is having Jesus as your Savior while the second is having Jesus as your Lord. Many have given their lives to Christ and taken it back by not making Him their Lord.

What does it mean to give your life to Christ? It means to hand your life totally over to Him such that the life you now live is in and of Christ.

The beginning of an ever winning and overcoming life is in making Jesus your Lord. Jesus can be your Savior and not your Lord but He cannot be your Lord without being your Savior.

Saving you was His responsibility while Lording you is your responsibility". How? Carrying with you the consciousness of Jesus everywhere, just like Joseph did. When the feeling to commit that sinful act comes,ask yourself, will it please my Lord if I give in to this temptation? Use the Word just like your Lord did when he was tempted by satan. You have a part to play too.

"Until Jesus becomes your Lord sin will still have dominion over you. Sin is either your master or Jesus your master. No wonder many Christians lie,deceive,cheat and masturbate. Jesus is the only Lord that can discipline your flesh permanently. You are too small to deal with sin. Let Jesus who conquered sin be your Lord and He will dominate sin in you". Is Jesus truly your Lord? If not, make a decision today.

Christianity creates an imaginary problem: sin and then proffers an imaginary solution: redemption which is just like snake oil. And through sin, Christianity captivates us and exploits our weakness and presents itself as a benefactor and a lover.

^^

People who live in tiny little boxes, do live in the darkness.

tbaba12345: This is nonsense.

In the first 500 years of Islam, Muslims were technologically, militarily and economically the most advanced in the world – innovating many new technologies and expanding the boundaries of human knowledge.

Christianity was never the reason for the European dark ages, but rather the fall of the Roman Empire and the rise of barbarian tribes is the most glaringly obvious reason. Historians are generally agreed that the last great ancient, or classical period philosopher before the fall into the dark ages was the Christian thinker St Augustine!

For most of the last 500 years, technological advancement in the West started, and has mostly occurred, under highly religious non-democratic european monarchies and empires.

The vast majority of pioneering Western scientists were not Atheists, nor did they live under Secularism, but rather they were devout Catholics and even clergy (e.g. Roger Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Copernicus, Descartes, Pascal, Boyle and even the recent George Lemaitre, discoverer of the ‘big bang theory’…) or protestant Church (e.g. Newton) – and much scientific literature and almost ALL institutes of higher education and research were under patronage by the Catholic [and later Anglican] Church!

https://www.nairaland.com/1794405/islam-muslims-side-talk-station/20#26144328

It is deceitful to paint Islam or Christianity as a single indivisible denomination. It is true that at a point, the Turks and Arabs with Islam as their religion were technologically advanced and also sophisticated in literature etc. But a liberal Islam helped promote such growth. A Islam that promotes new thoughts and ideas will definitely be prosperous and a conservative Islam closes down doors and minds.

Same with christianity, the Galileo affair was a tragedy because of the dominance of closed minds.

@emilo2stay

You have not made a real argument against evolution, but I agree with you that evolution conflicts with the Bible.

EMILO2STAY: more than 500 yrs of living in the bush should have produced some speciation traits in these people if evolution is true. The sentineles people of andaman island india have been isolated from civilzation for about 60,000 years but still show no signs of evolution.

as for the eve matter, we have the europeans, chineess. whom most of them are products of interbreeding living among us today. So ur statement is not true.

But you close your eyes to the huge variations within homo sapiens. Africans, Chinese (and other southeast Asians), Caucasians, South Americans, Eskimos etc have varying physical features and skin colours. To evolutionists, that's a proof of evolution otherwise all humans would be alike.

amdman: I have to disagree with you. I will rather explain to my team members the rationale behind decisions taken, or involve them in the decision making process, than take a unilateral decision and tell them to carry it out.

The 21st century workplace has greatly evolved. Nowadays, the best managers are leaders, those that take the pain to develop their team members. The head of the team is no longer the boss, but the team leader, hence most good to great organisations emphasise working in teams.

I love this picture.

Nonetheless the leader solely has to be the source of inspiration, his/her vulnerabilities and thought process must not be exposed to the inferiors. Also, the leader must be able to bear on the employees pressure sufficient to direct their efforts at work.

torchwave: That is where you err because you never read the Bible yet you criticise it endlessly.

Jesus died to give us eternal life, life with God. He did not die to grant us long life on earth even though He grants it to many.

In fact, He said those who lose their lives for His sake will find it.

Yet the prayer warrior died despite all those false promises. It only proves Christianity is a lie and a scam.

Bad leaders without confidence explain themselves. A leader is like a silverback, the employees have to trust his competence. Making decisions is tough, everything about leadership is tough, one has to have a sharpened ruthless side.

torchwave: I tell you, the ways of God are mysterious. He permitted her death for reasons best known to Him.

God is able to keep all His children from harm even without the need of their praying to Him like He kept the Israelites from the all the plagues He brought on the Egyptians through Moses, but He permits the death of some of His saints through various means for reasons best known to Him.

Know this, if the number of her days was not up in God's calendar, then the evd that took her life would have been unable to touch her.

Precious in the sight of God is the death of His saints. This means He already has a better plan for His children whose lives are cut short by evil in addition to the fact that He permitted their deaths so that they can come home to be with Him according to His good pleasure and what a glorious homecoming whether it be death by decapitation, burning on the stake, wild animals, cancer, hunger, disease, war, natural disasters, fatal accident, natural death etc etc....

It doesn't matter the means by which death takes a true child of God. He or she has been given the great grace to come and be with the Father forever and ever.

Note, like other evils that plague the world, God has permitted evd to take the lives of the just and the unjust as He makes His rain to fall on both and His sun to shine on both.

If the tragedies and evils of this world equally consume the followers of Christianity, then what protection does the death of Jesus offer?! Nothing! Jesus promised according to the scribblings in thee.bible that with Faith the mustard seed shall grow to the sturdy tree, that mountains shall move. That was jesus' promise. Now if we pagans, atheists see that Christians are as much as vulnerable as we are, don't you think Christianity has failed?!

torchwave: She preached the Word in the face of danger, she prayed for the sick, her life was a testimony because a dreaded disease like evd did not stop her from serving God - She fought the good fight of faith and died like a brave soldier of Christ.

Therefore is laid for her the crown of life which she shall receive for a life well spent and a glorious exit.

An exercise as futile as Jesus on a Roman cross. Her story is a failed testimony of the "power" of the Christian God. There was nothing glorius, but plain ignorance. God is dead and Science killed him.

seunlayi: life after death or No life after death;

I have decided to follow Jesus... x3
No turning back, No turning back

Aka Comfort Zone.

Gombs: The bible has all these facts and knowledge, clinical proof is not even needed!

You have a very small mind

RikoduoSennin: The proper question should be, What has man done to stop all these.eg
WHo hates. Who kills, Who suffer due to injustice/oppression/poverty, who is wicked, who pollute/ruin the earth ? - Man is the answer, so man should fix their problems if they can.

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people"- Arms dealer rationale.

At least you see it as a collective responsibility. Man is not properly understood if he was, the problem of evil will be reconcilable.

Liekiller: Organisms as a whole don't mutate. Their DNA does by means of substitution, insertion, deletion of amino acids. This is referred to as mutation. I'm just pointing this out because the term "mutation" will certainly be misinterpreted in this context otherwise. Apart from that I agree very much that understanding this is fundamental in order to understand evolution. Unfortunately it's almost impossible to get this message across to people who were not fortunate to receive even a minimum of quality education in biology.
By the way mutation is by no means only well proven in microorganisms. It's not some exotic new thing but is very well established and studied in humans too.

Thanks for the clarification, however it is important to begin a persuasion from common grounds of understanding. Since most ID proponets are reluctant to accept mutations in humans it would be hopeless to reach an understanding from that stage.

@anony1

But when you add up all the Gods of this world and their functions as sources of authority, they dwarf your God. And as along as atheism can provide a justifiable cause for religion, it remains valid.

MrAnony1: Lol....you are really a funny lady. Go and look up what it means to argue from silence

Yimu.

I think the pivotal point of evolution is mutation. As long as mutation is accepted, the remainder of evolution follows and is easier to understand.

Mutation is well proven in microorganisms. Viruses such as ebola have being known to mutate into other strains. Same with tuberculosis. Once an organism mutates, it becomes a different from its parent organism. The uniqueness I believe is a consequence of additional information.

A godfearing man/woman is a necessary hypocrite.

MrAnony1: 1. Atheism is supposed to be the lack of a belief in deity (God) rather it is the convenient denial of God so as to go against conscience commit as many crimes one can get away with.

2. Atheism has no moral code or guidelines i.e. does not define good and evil hence serial rapists, serial killers, pedophiles, fraudsters are all justified as atheists.

3. The world's most hideous mass murderers were atheists namely Hitler and Stalin

4. For a group of people who don't believe in God, they go a long way to try and force this non-belief on others who don't share it and will even resort to name-calling and violence in some cases. It seems to me that they do this so as to constantly convince themselves that there is no God even though their consciences and their souls protest (heck they even deny the soul)

5. Atheists will always misuse science by quoting so called "scientific facts" as if they were some infallible creed (deliberately forgetting that fallibility is in fact the nature of science)

6. Atheists simply do not have any morals and they are quite comfortable attacking those with morals by calling them intolerant brainwashed fanatic bigots because it gives them some sort of a superiority complex.

7. Though they often claim to be logical, they mostly fail to provide logical arguments rather they resort to over-simplistic lines, quoting theists out of context and plain old mockery.



8. My question to Atheists; Justify your belief. Can you prove to me with 100% certainty that there is no God?





This is in response to similar posts by logicboy and other militant evangelist atheists on Nairaland.

MrAnony1: Now all you have to do is provide evidence that would suggest that what you've said is true because I am quite sure that I do not think that atheism is necessarily the same as anti-Jehovah. . . .or perhaps you are telling one of your lies again.

Where did you hide the remainder of the Gods atheists deny?!

Bible stories you mean?

It would be sad for the Pastor Chris to be a hypocrite and for him to be a less perfect Christian.

@engrsoma

Hanging over every letter in your OP is the assumption that order is a creation of the mind, a creation of intelligence. However the creation of the mind is itself a manifestation of order. It is a tricky affair

Anony1 confuses atheism with antipathy for the incomprehensible Christian God. There is a layer of deceit at pretending that atheism is solely against Christianity, it is a denial of a whole category of existence -- supernatural.

Also, atheism treats all Gods to be of an equal disposition and to have a common cause.

chrisviral: Now that is where many get it wrong! Like I will always say God is everything, in as much as he does good, he also do evil, and Yes he said it himself in the bible, not just once but twice.

The only difference is that God mets out evil to those who deserve it, say a punishment for disobedience and the devil is just busy sharing out evil to both good people and bad people, he is just in the business of doing evil...

You are not making sense, because if the Devil and God switch roles, they would still remain the same to you! As long God commits evil, he abdicates his God of Good throne.

chrisviral: t's not absurd to believe that a God of Good can do evil, because he said so himself, it's in the bible.
What do you think is to do evil, do you know that just allowing a crime to go on is the same as doing that crime, A thief (s) friend is also a thief.
Just like I leant in Geography, when earthquake happens the earth is only try to re-adjust itself, the crust has a way of reformation and structuring thus earthquakes happen.

And yes Humans are the cause of their problems or whatever evil we face, we very much caused it.
I'm not a popular fan of spiritual stuff but from the physical I know, I tell it.

But what makes him the God of Good is because his actions are good while the Devil is Evil because his actions are evil, now once these characters swap roles, God whilst perpetuating Evil is akin to the Devil. So it either your God is one of Good or the Devil.