HellVictorinho:


I shouldn't answer stupid questions.
Nobody exposed me and I don't have to defend anything.
It is you that has to defend your decision to quote me.
R.I.P

budaatum:


Which you find incompatible with your own understanding, you mean.

But I'm sure you would not claim your understanding is the only correct one I hope.

budaatum:


But isn't the issue here that Christianity, or let's say, the Bible, is subject to interpretations which differ?

For example, some say to be a Christian one must believe and they quote numerous verses to support their position. But is understanding not more important that mere belief which demons also do? The Priest and the Levite so believed that they refused to do the work to the point that Jesus said the pagan non-believing Samaritan should be emulated and not them.

Atheism is even more inconsistent because there is no unifying equivalent to the Bible, and while some believe there are no Gods, some see such people as weak atheist because they merely believe instead of know there are no Gods.

I guess my point is in the assumptions about the contents of the head of another. It results in strawmaning whereby one is arguing against one's own position that one has imposed on some other person as often happens on here.

LordReed:


Still wrong. Atheism is not the opposite of Christianity. There were atheists before Christianity. Also who says God or no god needs to also answer how the universe was created? That is a nonsequitur.

LordReed:


This why I told you to ditch your assumptions when talking to me. Where have I told you I am an idealist?

Did I not tell you that my worldview is not atheistic so why are surprised that my presuppositions are not based on disbelief?

1. We don't know.

2. We are a result of natural processes.

HellVictorinho:


You should be dead.

budaatum:

Worldview is not necessarily a form of belief system or perspective! One may have a worldview of disbelief too.

Study Adam and Eve in the Bible to see what I mean. Adam believed and did not bother to test his beliefs and would have remained a slave for God only knows how long, while smart Eve disbelieved and tested with her own senses what she was told to believe and freed them both from slavery.


And now have you hit the head of the nail. You fail to recognise that the morality that even theists learn originated from the subjective humans simply because you received you morals as an object in a book without knowing their subjective human origin. And you are equating "worldview" with objective reality, which it clearly is not since a worldview is precisely a view of a subjective human being, and in this instance, seen through respective theistic or atheistic lens. Either ways, they'll both be best served saying please and thank you, and not killing each other.


For your own selfish survival advantage perhaps, be you a theist or an atheist, as history shows, which is why we humans, in our wisdom, have devised the Holy Bible and such other texts to teach you to be humanistic, the meaning of which is "love your neighbours and your enemies moreso", for the common good of all humans.

You just need to do a little bit of research to find how universal that law is.

LordReed:


I presuppose that reality is real and not a dream or a simulation or any other form that essentially indicates that it is not real. I presuppose that my mind can experience this reality with a fair degree of confidence. I presuppose that other human beings that I encounter also have minds with a similar fair degree of confidence in their experience of our shared reality. I presuppose that our shared reality is fairly stable and will not be subject to topsy turvy or arbitrary occurrences.

There may be more but I think these are the most foundational.

LordReed:


It does not. You assume that because an atheist is answering questions it means it his atheism that is answering. That is a wrong perspective because atheism speaks to one question, god belief or no god belief. How can such a position answer every other question?

keppler:


Now, I have maintained that I used concepts as derived from atheistic literature, and not my making. And I explained that though there may be branches or offshoots, the broad concept would still exist; whether Christianity or Atheism. So, it is not my issue if one cannot be consistent with belief system.
Let me even make little note here. If one starts with the antithesis of concept of God, i.e. there is no God, then answering questions such as
1. How is the universe formed
2. How did we get here,
3. Why was the universe formed, or why are we here? etc
must be answered without the notion of no God.

budaatum:


This is like saying "one must not kill", yet we all know murderers exist. Or love your enemies, yet there are lots of Christians who can't even love their neighbours.

There is no reason that fallible humans must be consistent with their beliefs, and the fact that we are humans makes it virtually impossible for us to be.


Then admit you do not know instead of filling what you do not know with untruths and unverified facts, why don't you?

I was an atheist from birth. And not a "don't believe Gods exist" atheist, but a "know Gods don't exist" atheist. So welcome to meeting one, albeit a somewhat ex one since I am more theistic now, though atheistic in the original sense of the word which actually means "Not believing in n the Gods of Athens", since I do not helieve, period.

My point is, even one's definition of the word depends on the knowledge of it that one has, which is why one should seek a definition instead of imposing one on others as I am alleging you are doing here.


Perhaps you have not been here long enough. When you have, you might understand that just as you have here lots of Christians who have not read their Bible do you also have some very ignorant atheists who have not consumed any literature at all, along with the opposites of both, which might make you realise the error of generalising on imposing definitions and assumptions on others.

LordReed:


Belief system? What makes you think I have one? I don't find beliefs to be satisfactory and in some cases I think they are useless and only have utility to help us maintain certain biases we all seem to have.

budaatum:


But this is not true! First, as Lordreed told you, "There is no such thing as Atheist worldview. There are worldviews that accommodate atheism not the other way around".

And how much more logical or objective grounds do you need than if you slap an atheist it might hurt so they might reason that slapping you might hurt you too, ergo, don't slap?

I mean, you are aware that even atheists say please and thank you, right, and do not particularly go about murdering people?

budaatum:


No, stop wiggling to get out of this because it just screams of dishonesty!

Your concepts are neither generic nor orthodox nor unorthodox. They are just plain false, as false as claiming all Christians believe there's hell or that Jesus Christ is God!

Just as Christians don't all believe the same thing do atheists not believe or disbelieve the same things.

budaatum:


Sorry, but I can't myself see how you can know this especially because its untrue.

I'm sure atheists know that stealing is not good since they'd obviously resent being stolen from or be thrown in jail if they steal, and there are atheist doctors who specifically earn a living from selling human well being.

Are you not imposing your own worldview here keppler then claiming it belongs to someone else, like an atheist for instance?

LordReed:


First off you started with false premises. There is no such thing as Atheist worldview. There are worldviews that accommodate atheism not the other way around. Also you are under a misapprehension to say atheism means there is no purpose or meaning, not all atheists are nihilists. Finally reorient yourself when discussing with me, do not use blanket statements to address me, if you require my view on a matter ask me I will tell you. Do not assume my position on issues simply because I bear the label atheist.

With that said I'll wait for you to restructure your post accordingly or else we can stop discussing. Thanks.

Dtruthspeaker:


He is one of the reasons why I joined Nairaland for I prefer face to face engagement so I did not know about nairaland till I saw my colleagues using it for their cars and other problems, only for me to go round up to Religion Section then I saw his damage and slaughter there.

And I saw people who had earlier resisted him, Fall!

So I jumped in and I live to spoil all his wicked works and prevent him from swallowing up any unwatchful soul!

He is Satan in the flesh. If a person wants to see Satan, all they need is to see him and read his posts!

LordReed:


I already answered this by saying:



Every conscious and intelligent being, at least at level of human consciousness, is the determinant of their morality. Communal morality is determined by consensus, directly or indirectly by all that are involved in that community.

I have already laid out succinctly how I arrive at my moral framework and it is consistent with my worldview which includes my lack of belief in a god or gods.

AntiChristian:


I don't need to read the Bible. No one has answers to these questions.

Na just faith.

JaffyJoe:



There were Christians in Ethiopia and Semitic countries before Constantine or the Greeks. Why then didn’t those one’s scriptures change in disparity with the account of today’s Bible? See there were so many witnesses when Christ was here. Unlike in Islam where someone woke up someday & started saying he got a vision from God via the angel whom revealed the Quran to him without any shred of evidence. If what we have learned today didn’t happen, there would have been stiff counter claims from oral & written history. The only thing with Bible is the translation metamorphosis and this is quite understandable as even the Brits don’t speak or write like they used to in Shakespearean time of yester years not to talk of thousand of years ago. This does not invalidate the genuineness of the Bible. If you took Synoptic Gospels course in the university, I believe you’d have a better understanding as all variables have been academically resolved.

Qathafi:
For the OP, who obviously has comprehension problems...

"The authority said these words differ slightly from other Bible versions, shedding a rare light on how biblical text changed over time from its earliest form."

budaatum:


I think we humans, both atheists and theists, "use pseudo-intellectual argument to back ourselves up", just that we always see the pseudo in other people's arguments and only see intellectual in our own, which is the reason you should not
so easily wave your hand in dismissal, because you never know what you might learn from your own words.

HellVictorinho:

This doesn't matter.

budaatum:


Keppler, I don't think you should wave your hand in dismissal by blaming atheism for whatever it is you blame him for.

How about questioning him to fully diagnose his ailment instead of jumping to conclusion? You never know, but you might be the angel that saves him if you but tried to let God use you.

Shalom.

HellVictorinho:


This means nothing.

HellVictorinho:


Physics is a wide subject that deals with the relationship between matter and energy.

I think the development of deifying tendencies in the first set of religious humans or the first set of humans that deified objects(imaginary or real) happened by chance.
Since that development occurred,some other humans have been exposed to their deifying practices or works.
Since that development occurred,these deifying practices/works have been
addressed by other humans in different ways.
So, I also got exposed to bla bla bla concerning different Gods after I was born without faith in any God.
Owing to the superiority of the effect of my exposure to a particular God over that of other Gods,I developed faith in that particular God instead of the other ones.
I once wrote a letter towards that God expressing my thoughts concerning the identity and abilities of the God.
Later,I disposed the letter because there wasn't any response.
After disposing the letter,my curiosity about life increased.
Then,my curiosity about events within and outside the universe increased.
The faith disappeared when my brain couldn't accommodate it anymore.
An accidental sequence of several thoughts pushed it out of my head.
Look!
Humans just exist.
The increase/decrease in population just happens.
There's no reason why there's competition for bla bla bla.
There's no reason why there are people with bla bla bla.
Life is absurd.
There are infinite ageless indivisible objects.
The arrangements of these objects are structures/patterns to an observer.
There is no reason why an observer gets exposed to these things.

Xioxing:


Break your English down and then read what you wrote up there total gibberish man!!

You just ended up writing a lot of dead end English with no meaning just to prove a non existent point.

I don't waste my time on a wannabe Albeit and a copy paste Anachronistic wannabe scientist you really have a long way to go on earth and hopefully you will learn cause as I said life is self explanatory!!

Modified: Avoid Quoting me next time with your Childish Science words so you don't end up getting yourself Embarrassed please do that shit with sec kids like yourself

Xbee007:

I rightly contrasted science with faith because they are inherently different. Pull that wool off your eyes! Science is an attempt to understand the world based on evidence.
Religion is an attempt to understand the world based on faith.

A talking snake managed to convince Eve to eat an apple. Science will say "sounds like bullsh*t." Religion will say, "sounds interesting, pray, do tell me more."


"Operational Science" is a pseudonym made up by creationists to bellitle science and bolster their stance. Science attempts to understand the world from the beginning of time, the big bang, or what you called the "unobserved past." Why does NASA, for example, send a man to the moon?


When Galileo observed that the earth wasn't flat and wasn't at the center of the universe, he was summarily locked up by the church who had preached for centuries that the earth was at the center of the universe. Also, when some scientists began dissecting human cadavers in order to understand human anatomy and advance modern medicine, the church stopped them calling the human cadavers, "temples of the lord that should never be descecrated." Religion, literally placed a choke hold on modern medicine!

Btw, everyone, even scientists, were religious at the time because the consequences for atheism was dire. Self-proclaimed atheists were jailed till they recanted and even burnt alive.


Atheism should never be lumped up with other religions because "absence of belief is not belief." Baldness is not an hairstyle, lol! Modern science isn't found on Christian presuppositions. Modern science is founded on evidence and facts which is mutually exclusive with Christianity. I wonder how virgin Mary contributed to science or tower of Babel rationally explained the differences in human languages.


The only reason USA constitution categorises atheism as a religion is because of human rights. To ensure every American enjoy equal rights regardless of their beliefs.

LaEvilIMiss:
International Scene

1. Some of the things that happened in 2020 will spill over into 2021. Any compound simpleton already knows that - even debts are not cancelled with 2020.. oga mathematician use your skull (I wish you were more careful with your rebuttal. This is a very general statement "some of the things..." were billion things happened last year; so which of them? You just rushed to allow (what?) take over logic with this rebuttal)

2. The world as a whole can only come out of the wounds when they admit the following;

1) That it is the Most High that rules in the affairs of men not science. Daniel 4:25. Absolutely.. [b]God has no relevance in both as he did not turn-up for covid19 and neither did he contribute anything to science duh[/b]
(This again is a non sequitur as the statement and others listed are tied to the parent statement before it. To explain, it could be argued that God did not turn up for covid because the points have not been admitted. A very good way to fault those points is to admit them and see if the condition would be satisfied. God does not directly contribute to science but you may read up multiple sources on history of MODERN SCIENCE. The media only promotes what they want folks to hear)

2) That it is God that gives wisdom to the wise. Daniel 2:20-21. Magically like eating the apple or by learning and discovery or by old-age
(This again is non sequitor. I felt rebuttals should be well grounded in logic, else anyone can rebut anything weather it make sense or not. You could start by reading the passage first to understand why he referenced it. Also, it is good to have a good knowledge of what one is refuting so as not to attack strawman and misrepresent argument and become a laughing stock in the eyes of the informed (gullible ones will definitely buy into it, after all; "enemy of my enemy is my friend". Folks easily agree with what they want)

3) That God can reduce the so called wisdom of man to foolishness. 1 Corinthians 1:19-20. 4) Like the Chinese virus escaping the labs yes - it is normal bruh

(Unfortunately again, this does not follow. The context is still tied to the parent statement)
4) That for every vaccine discovered, there is already a variant in the making. This will continue until the high and mighty admit that safety is of the Lord. Proverbs 21:31. **Face-Palm** sebi you sef dey wear mask upon all your vaunted powers of anointing and healing
(Non sequitur! Non sequitur!! He has to wear mask not necessarily because he is afraid of being infected (after all, mask does protect you from getting infected) but to obey the rules of the land. It is a Christian thing to be subject to and obey government (an example is the famous Jesus' quote which is usually used out of context "give unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar...". Folks still attribute healing from covid to God (an understanding of the design of the immune system could support it anyway)

5) God says He will begin to deal with nations on individual basis so that in any nation, if God’s people will humble themselves and pray, He will heal their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14 Omo.. Nigeria should be first na with the number of preachers we have globally - no be God!

(Of course you are right. He specifically always attribute the almost non effectiveness of the virus in Nigeria and Africa at large to mercy of God. 'Experts' were worried that Africa may turn to grave yard since the most advance countries were recording deaths in their thousands daily with state of the art medicine whereas we all know that Africa have nothing to offer in such situation. But the reverse happened that many started having the feeling that it is scam. I still need explanation as the various hypothesis put out by experts are contradictory and even confusing sef)
Nigeria

1. God wants us in Nigeria to know that only God can lift a siege. 2 Kings 7:1-end Like he sent Dubai prostitutes to poison Abacha with an apple - that was pure Gold![/color
][color=#006600] (How this follow again is what I don't know. At least, how it follows with the referenced passage is likely a mystery to my (simple) brain )

2. The humble who put their trust in God will see the end of the siege. James 4:6 Las-las na suffer till sun shine again - we have been doing it for the past 50+ years

3. The erstwhile ignored will become vessels unto honour in God’s hands. 1 Corinthians 1:27 - Illiterates with connections to men of god will be elevated beyond their competence.. just like Buhari
(Honestly, this is another non sequitur. It does not just follow. It is definitely not a rebuttal)

4. God says there will be sounds from heaven. Adeboye is like Chris Oyaks and has been watching too many UFO and Endtime videos on youtube - oga mathematician it is called resonance from solar and/or earth magnetic activity inducing sounds.
(This is another very general statement. One could ask; "is it a literal sound from the space? (as you implied) or "could it be metaphorical?" Jesus spoke in parables and we reading the charges of his detractors now can only laugh at their ignorance and hasty conclusion - "I will destroy this temple and build it in three days"

Individuals

1. Your very survival and restoration will be in your own hands. Psalm 91 Now that is a good one, before nko? you dey wait for God to wipe your arse?
(Thank God you are not in an Islamic nation to say this to Allah or in China to say this to Presido )

Covid-19 has just shown these professional charlatans and frauds for who they actually are

IMAliyu:

Didn't intend it to be like that.

But my knowledge of the young earth view isn't that deep, so I kept it short to only what I knew (at the time of reply).

As for personal beliefs, I do in fact have a bias to the secular scientific approach.

As for the young earth hypothesis, it is highly predicated on the idea that the Bible possesses literal/factual accounts of history and prehistory. Which is subjective and debatable depending on a person's religious inclination.

IMAliyu:

Well, according to young earth creationists, based on some literal interpretations of the Bible. the world is only around 10,000-6,000 years old.

The geological and scientific consensus is that the earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old.

This age of the earth represent the age of the Earth's core formation, or of the material from which the Earth formed. This dating is based on evidence from radiometric age-dating of meteorite material, which is consistent with the radiometric ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.

Remix10:



Radiography was used, carbon dating to be precised, it can tell the age of ancient fossils