₦airaland Forum

DeepSight:
Just a note: This sort of mockery of the conversation is disrespectful - not to me - but to the very ideas being discussed.
PS: I saw you mention somewhere "scientific" investigations or so, of the multiverse. There is no such thing because science is based on observation and no one has, and no one can, observe any such "multiverse."

Words like "multiverse" sit well with you - as unobservable as any such thing is, as purely hypothetical as it is. And yet you get furious when someone says there must be a timeline

and space outside this universe. Weird.

Ironic that whenever one uses the arguments of the religious, it’s always “stop making a mockery”.

I said they have hypotheses that are being discussed using the same methods they use to make predictions and describe the theories. They work with the “standard model” and calculations they have and multiverse is one of their predictions.
However, McMickie fits the description of the probable cause. A “purely philosophical” description because she probably exists in a realm in which space, time, or spacetime do not exist.

DeepSight:
I am sorry but the expansion of the universe is a real thing

How do you know this?
Please don’t say it’s the same astronomers you are accusing of voodoo.

DeepSight:
They simply say that it’s expanding in itself and not necessarily into anything! With respect, thats pure bunkum. Voodoo at its worst. You guys accuse religious people of believing in voodoo and then come up with worse voodoo

Oh yeah? Maybe the expansion is voodoo too and the universe unfolds in what you refer to as “real time” and “infinite space”.

As for the rest of what you wrote and your position; they are just unfounded claims.

Your claim goes that there has to be a “cause” that is “necessary” and not contingent. This cause can’t be the universe itself because it is “physical” and therefore mutable.

You claim that physical things can’t “self exist” because they change so your cause is “intangible” and “immutable”.

So your god is a necessary cause of the universe and it is intangible and immutable.

I mean, there is nothing there that isn’t the same old religious argument.

If asked why it is necessary, the answer is that it is necessary for your position. You will claim it is the “philosophy of necessary and contingent things” but if asked for an example of a necessary thing apart from your god, you will draw a blank.

It is intangible because it can’t be physical.

But I wonder, how does it cause anything if it’s immutable.

Yea, I wrote god because a deity is exactly what you are talking about despite calling it anything but.


McMickie is spaceless, timeless, and immaterial………but he is mutable, so he probably caused the multiverse. Mutability is his nature and that’s probably why he gave this attribute to the universe and all other realities. I call him he but that doesn’t mean she has a gender, just calling her that for convenience. He is also not a deity.

DeepSight:
The rotation of the Earth as it receives the light of the sun is the cause of the effect of night and day.

The CAUSES of day and night are the the rotation of the earth on its axis, the eccentricity of the earths orbit around the sun and the obliquiity of the earth contribute to the length of daylight, the composition of the atmosphere that gives the earth its hue and blocks out other stars, and photons from the sun.

DeepSight:
I hope you understand that an infinite regress of causes would render the inescapable result that no universe would exist. If you do not grasp this, happy to expatiate. Dwell on it a little though.

That infinite regress is your problem actually because there is no need to regress. The universe itself could be uncaused and the infinite regress problem is for people who want to arbitrarily terminate the regress at the notion of god. Their particular god. There is this particular Jew in my neck of the woods who uses the same “there can be no infinite regress” argument except he terminates the regress at the Hebrew god. Oh, what a surprise!!

DeepSight:
It could actually be the millionth or zillionth cause. This will take nothing away from the basic point that there must needs be an origin or source of all things - save those things which are self-existent.

The problem with your “self existent” things is that there is none you can point to. If “self existence” means independent function and existence then the universe fits the bill. If it means something different, give an example other than saying it’s “intangible and immutable”, which describes NOTHING.

DeepSight:
It very well could be unknowable. There are many things even within the universe which will forever remain unknowable.

There are many things within the universe that are unknowable yet some people claim to Know that it was “created” and they know the “creator” and that its “necessary”.

DeepSight:
What rests beyond our given reality is great and unfathomable.

What’s our “given reality”? Is our “given reality” the earth, the solar system, the galaxy, the cluster, the supercluster, the voids, the universe?

DeepSight:
To use a loose analogy, imagine yourself as a character in a book - let's say Mario Puzo's "The God Father." Now, much exists outside that book. People, places, planets, universes, worlds, realms, creatures - and even other books and their own characters.

This analogy does not make sense.

DeepSight:
If you stop to consider that this reality is likely a simulation, then this will resonate even deeper.

I have no reason to think this reality is likely a simulation. I mean, what is it simulating?

DeepSight:
So no, it’s not just the source or origin that exists beyond this reality. An infinity of imponderable dimensions exist beyond this reality.

Again, what reality?

DeepSight:
No it is not arbitrary or unfounded to say that things exist beyond the universe. One simple question you can ask which demonstrates this is this: Into what is the Universe expanding?

It is unfounded when you mean to create an argument for god. When astronomical discussions about what is beyond the universe occur, astronomers are careful to call the multiverse an hypothesis and try to support it with the scientific method not arbitrary speculation.
The expansion of the universe doesn’t mean that it is expanding into a container (that you call “real time”) but that spacetime itself is expanding. However, I understand what you mean because colloquially expansion requires space. But this “expansion” is different than what we are used to. Since we are just second hand users of this knowledge, let’s try to get an explanation from the people who brought it to our attention.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PiyUjVxukI

MaxInDHouse:
Go and make use of your sack or python, as for God's people we are making the best use of God's word Bible to form a global family of peace loving worshipers just as God's word foretold! Isaiah 2:2-4

The python is currently in Warwick communing with his fellow serpents.

Leiylau:
black Apes and Ignorance 😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁🙄🙄

Then there are yellow apes and yellow monkeys full of ignorance and violence.
White Apes are the epitome of violence. You claim to be a yellow ape, so why are you slinging your shit over here? 😊 😃

MaxInDHouse:
The Bible is 100% real life events but if you're not convinced it's OK God's people are making the best use of the documents today! Isaiah 2:2-4

McMickie said that is untrue and absolutely absurd. The Tower in Dilmum kept all the records going back to the eon of the Dual Headed Lugalbanda and the Bible is questionable.

Actually, one thing in the Bible is true. Yesterday I threw my staff on the ground and it became a python. Now I’m carrying a sack with a snake in it like Jake Roberts.

OgaNightmare:
That text is spurious, and is being disputed by reputable scholars and textual critics
Nothing like that happened
A lot of myths interwovened into the Torah

You don’t need to be a “reputable scholar” or “textual critic” to trash the tall tales.
A Greek shows up and tells you about the Greek pantheon. You don’t need scholars or textual critics to dismiss them as tall tales.
A Yoruba shows up and regales you with tales of Olorun and the orishas. You don’t need scholars or textual critics to dismiss them as tall tales.
A Syrian shows up and regales you with tales about Sumeria and Assyria with all their gods s’ actions. You don’t need scholars or textual critics to dismiss them as tall tales.
A Hebrew shows up and regales you with tales about his psycho god and the magic space tower. You don’t need scholars or textual critics to dismiss them as tall tales.

AbdulMagaji:
He looks like an igboman

That is not a real picture talkless of it being picture of a mythological character.

It’s a computer generated picture based on what some European think a homely Jew living Palestine 2000 years ago would have looked like.

Just like the popular depiction of Jesus is nothing but an example of Europeans presenting themselves as biblical characters.

This reminds me of the picture of the old man pointing his finger at a younger naked man. People who have been brainwashed with Eurocentric superstitions and other nonsense call it “God creating Adam”. I call it the randy old man playing pull my finger with his naked boy toy.

Leiylau:
Apes of Africa read and be free

Which ape bore you and didn’t teach you manners? What beast of no nation shat you out into this world?

DeepSight:
I appreciate your point of view. Even as I wrote what I did, I understood how it would be viewed as contradictory. Let me try to explain a bit. But just to remove a few points, let me make it clear that the force and necessity of language is all that compels me to use words such as God, god, it/he/she and the like. In truth all I am saying is that I believe that it can be logically deduced that there is a first cause of this reality and from that, I also believe it can further be logically deduced that -

If causes and effects were straightforward and not a complex set of factors acting simultaneously, the first cause argument could stand. But nature can’t be said to be simple “cause and effect”. Take daylight for example?
What is the “cause” of daylight? Think about it carefully and see if its a simple case of “cause and effect”

DeepSight:
1. That first cause can not at the same time be its own effect. In short, it must stand beyond it in some sense.

Since this first cause has no support and can’t be logically deduced, it can have whatever attribut you want. It wholly depends on simplifying existence to a series of causes. If you do that, there is no reason to terminate this chain of cause at the “first cause”

This first cause or god you speak of, why should it be the first cause. Why not the 10th cause?
Maybe there is a first cause that caused the effect that became the second cause that caused the effect that became the third cause………became the ninth cause that caused the effect that became the tenth cause that caused the universe.

If I accept your first cause that is “unknowable”, can I go a bit further and ask about the second cause? Maybe it is knowable. Yes?

DeepSight:
Hence we say that it must be transcendent simply beyond this reality or universe.

What does it mean to be beyond this reality or universe. Is the first cause the only thing that is beyond this reality or are there other…….causes.
Frankly, the deist’s claim is just as arbitrary and unfounded as the theist’s. These are just claims that really do not mean anything. “Transcendence”. “Beyond the universe” ………..”to infinity and beyond”

DeepSight:
This is actually not a description of its nature anymore than saying that DeepSight is in outerspace describes Deepsights nature.

I agree that it isn’t a description but at least “Deepsight in outer space”’make sense unlike “Deepsight is transcendent and beyond outer space”.

DeepSight:
It just describes DeepSights location. I understand that it is hard to speak of a location with regard to God, so please equally understand that I dont mean the example in a literal sense.

It’s not hard to speak about God. It’s just impossible to make sense when you speak about God. God remains an idea that is shaped by whoever is espousing it. That includes attributes and location. I even created a God the other day called McMickie the Leprechaun. It will drown you in Guinness if you offend. Of course, McMickie is timeless, spaceless, immaterial…………..and He just told me that He is also Maximally Great. And yes, he sits on my shoulder.

DeepSight:
2. I can further logically deduce that it must be self-existent.

We can say the universe (including humans. An error in thinking caused by most religions and philosophy is regarding humans as separate from the universe as if we aren’t inherently a part of the universe) is self existent. The universe exists and there is does seem to be direction. The universe is continuously morphing “self existently”.


Why can’t the universe be the self existent principle. The universe exists and its fundamental nature is unknowable and its functioning is beyond human understanding. You don’t have to go “beyond” the universe to find “god”.
And before you say it, let me say that the Big Bang is not the beginning of the universe but the expansion for universe. So, the universe can be as “eternal” as god is claimed to be because it has no beginning and the expansion gave rise to space time or the “first cause” of time.

DeepSight:
Now this arises from the fact that if it is indeed the cause of all other causes, it must itself be uncaused.

This statement is just a wild claim and is not factual. It doesn’t even say anything.
Now this arises from the fact that if it is indeed the beginning of all other beginnings, it must itself be unbegun. Why? Because I said so.

DeepSight:
In this regard, I am stepping things up to refer to whatever is the trigger or cause of all realities/ dimensions/ universes.

What if these realities and dimensions you speak of have their own uncaused first cause. Why should your first cause of reality A be the first cause of reality B and C? Simple, because you say so.

DeepSight:
To put it in simple terms, In short, it must be a necessary as opposed to contingent thing. It must be a thing that exists of itself. Its very nature could only be an existent nature. I realize that this is indeed an attribute. However it is so necessary and so fundamental an attribute that I see it as the one thing we cannot avoid. It is thus why I rather called it a principle. The self existent principle.

Your whole argument is god exists because it is the nature of god to exist. Maybe it’s the nature of gods to exist? There is no reason to stop making claims at one, you can multiple this “self existent” thing indefinitely. Their nature is necessary and fundamental and not contingent on anything.

DeepSight:
There are different bands of agnostics. So perhaps this is my peculiar brand of agnosticism. I have never really called myself an agnostic per se. Most people on this forum remember me as a Deist. So far, and no further. And I really dont think I can be called a pure agnostic to be frank. Because a pure agnostic will tell you that we simply cannot know anything whatsoever on this matter.

A “pure agnostic” is a tad bit dishonest or cowardly in my opinion. But whatever.

DeepSight:
I would rather say that beyond the minimum that can be logically inferred, God is unknowable.

Theirs is nothing that can be logically inferred without an avalanche of fallacies.

DeepSight:
In this I mean His nature - viz - Is He invested in Creation or not.

Now we know the gender. I’m guessing “Creation” means he “created” the universe. How does he and did he create?

DeepSight:
What is His moral compass like (I cant imagine such at all). What is His desire and goal for creation. What is His purpose in creating? Things like these and more. God remains unknowable for me. And frankly, I think, too remote to be known in any proper sense by anyone. Except perhaps at a light and intuitive level. And even at that. Hmmm.

He sounds very human. Just give it whatever morals and purpose you want, after all you already know the gender.

justcool:
The vastness of existence haunts mankind; we know so little about the universe whose vastness overwhelms our imagination.
Some people doubt that the human mind is capable of knowing all that exists; therefore, the knowledge of whether the universe has a creator or not is out of the question. Hence, agnosticism! The Agnostic proposes that the human mind is incapable of knowing whether God exists or not.
Is the agnostic right? Do you think that we can know whether the universe has a creator or not?
Join us as we examine the interesting viewpoint of agnosticism.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxIqkwRE5m8

Why not creators? Why should it be one?

“The Agnostic proposes that the human mind is incapable of knowing whether God exists”

So we ask the agnostic, what is god?
If it’s a “creator”, where is the evidence of this god creating anything?

Why should it be one?
What’s the nature of this “god” thing that it has to create by its lonesome?

What is in the nature or character of this “god”’ that precludes the existence of other “gods”

Why one god? Why not two gods? Why not three gods? Why note π gods? Yes, pi gods as in 3.1415926535……… gods?

DeepSight:
Great man, great friend, I salute this work. More grease sir!
Brilliant one.

PS: Personally, I propose that the fact that a self-existent principle must perforce exist can be logically and intuitively inferred, but its nature cannot be known by mankind, being too remote and transcendental an element.

You and/or agnostics love to say that god is “unknowable” or “cannot be known by mankind” yet you and/or agnostics simultaneously suggest a singular entity you call “god” or “self existent principle”.
Aren’t you describing an attribute of this “unknowable” god by describing it as singular?
I mean, why do you claim it’s unknownable while simultaneously describing it as a “self existent principle”?

Why not “self existent principles”?
Why must it be “it” instead of “they” or truly “indescribable”?

It seems people who were reared in the monotheist tradition hold on to the dogma of a singular god when they make claims about their agnostic ”unknowable”.

I’m agnostic about Zogdon Tien IV and claim it’s unknowable. Are you agnostic about Zogdon Tien IV? Probably, because you truly do not know what Zogdon Tien IV is or are and if I claim it/they is “transcendence” and beyond human understanding then you can assert that whatever it is, or they are, is unknowable.
But then you have to ask how I know that Zogdon Tien IV is an “it” not ”they” when ZT IV is supposedly “unknowable”

I always wonder………..how can people wear white outfits in these areas with all that dirt?!!

dazzlingd:
How do you teach your children that the children of Israel are the chosen ones?

Why will you teach your children to become inferior at a young age.

The world is global, so your little child goes to class, he has an israelite in his class and he begins to see the Israelite kid as a chosen one and he even prays to the God of Israel. And you want the same child to have self confidence in his heritage and be proud of his skin colour?

Too late for most of them.

LordReed:
Those pesky devils, McMickey is going to smite them real good!

McMickey will drown them in Guinness.

Dtruthspeaker:
The very definition and classification of you devils who call yourselves atheists

Devils? What are those? Are they similar to leprechauns or gnomes? McMickey my timeless, spaceless, and immaterial Leprechaun says gnomes are devils.

HappyPagan:
One white man they crucified years ago will come back, the whole world will see him ( I dont know how he will do this, maybe screens in the sky or something).

He is coming back to save You. Yes You. Lol.

Forget about it... You know why Jesus never come back since?


The beat wey dem beat am last time ehn, literally nailed him like new year calendar.

Happy new year from here, may the year be as this post made you feel. Ramen.

Lies. They lie as easily as they breathe. It’s nothing new because gods are the oldest type of scam so anyone promoting gods has to lie. It helps when they have convinced themselves that their god is the source of morality so and partial to them so anything they say to promote the god would be forgiven.

"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church ... a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." Martin Luther, founder of Protestant Christianity.

e.g. The son of the person who made millions of dollars off the Left Behind series is following in the footsteps of his father and telling lies. His father scared and scarred them with tales of the rapture that will never happen while the son is telling lies about the jew Demi-god and the so called gospels. The show is called “The Chosen” including lies such as making the disciples note takers implying the gospel are eyewitness accounts.

The producer’s father is Jerry B. Jenkins, a Christian novelist best known for the Left Behind series, one of the highest selling book series of all time, selling over 60 million copies. I bet Mr.Jenkins is hoping the rapture doesn’t happen with millions of dollars to spend.



Also, people remain fearful, gullible, and indoctrinated with the most absurd premises so it’s easy to keep lying to them. All of them also have distinct personal views of what they call god despite claiming they believe in the same god so it follows that they have various ideas about rapture.

Regardless, people believe comfortable lies and will do anything to avoid the truth.

DesChyko:
Owen, Wilshire, Saha, Pato, Carzola, Reus, Eduardo,.. We can practically make a textbook from players who injury cut short their potential. It is what it is. They just didn't and that's it.

None of them can be talked about in the same breath as Ronaldo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PruGUsOwof4

Dtruthspeaker:
You obviously have one bullet of sanity before you go mad!

Lol. At least I have one. You are out of bullets.

DesChyko:
It's a pity we have to go back to when he was 20 to get the noteworthy part of his career. What about his peak years?

Ronaldo De Lima may have been all the rave when he was 19-20 but we won't disrespect those who did so consistently from their 20s down to their 30s.

If Cristiano or Messi had gotten injured at his age and at similar stage in their careers, would they be talked about?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpLTfMpHvoo

Regardless, Pele is still the gold standard.

Abdulgaffar22:
But if the entire fish tank (universe) was actually created by His will at first instance, then He did not need to jump into it before doing anything with the fish tank.

The omnipotence of God is over what God has created by His will and this include the world of space and time. That is to say, God is omnipotent i:e all powerful over all what He has created by His will ; not over something that God did not create by His will (like God's own nature). God's own nature need not to be created since His nature has no beginning of existence.

There are a bunch of gods with fish tanks in this realm and some of them do like to jump into their fish tanks. Also, their nature is created by Xid who also looks into their realm as if They are looking into a fish tank. They usually exist for 100 million years before quenching.

LordReed:
Argument from the poisoned well that shoots itself in the foot. We shouldn't trust our brains except its the same brain you use to suppose a god so how do you trust there is a god? Useless argument.

They trot out C.S. Lewis as if he said anything sensible.
My favorite is the “trillemma” that could easily be a “quadlemma”.
Jesus: Lunatic, liar, or lord.
Jesus: Lunatic, liar, lord, or lore.

LordReed:
In essence the god is not omnipotent or you won't add omnipotent to his description?

Also how is this god outside space time able to affect anything inside space time? Would it not require a change in nature which you say the god is unable to do?

Just think of the god as a man and the universe as a fish tank. The god recites an incantation to reduce his size similar to what Antman � does. He then jumps into the fish tank universe and does his thing.

DesChyko:
It's a pity we have to go back to when he was 20 to get the noteworthy part of his career. What about his peak years?

Ronaldo De Lima may have been all the rave when he was 19-20 but we won't disrespect those who did so consistently from their 20s down to their 30s.

That is not the noteworthy part of his career. Go read or watch videos about him to find out. E.g. go see what he did in the 2002 world after multiple surgery and while playing injured.

DesChyko:
35 Goals

Those are league goals. Ronaldo scored 47 goals in 49 games in all competitions playing as a lone striker. He was 20 years old.

Kobojunkie:
1. I beg to differ! Religion is instead a man-made system of doctrines and traditions, theories and ideas put forward by men around the identity of a specific deity as a tool with which to pursue power and control over the minds of lives of their fellow men.

Righthussle:
Salvation from what exactly ?

Kobojunkie:
Not trying to hold brief for the other but salvation is from God's curse in the beginning detailed in Genesis 3 vs 16 - 22, a curse which keeps all forsaken and removed from the presence of God. You see, Jesus Christ is part of God's plan to make a Kingdom of priests of His Israel - Exodus 19 vs 6 - and since Priests need to have direct access to God, He is the way God has fashioned for exactly that purpose.

Lol.
Salvation: The cure in search of a disease.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2XicDhTftI&t=255s

LilMissRobbie:
What exactly are we supposed to do with this information

Learn

NNTR:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rgGvSZa54Y

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhhOU5FUPBE

NNTR:
Absolutely, the Spirit says, WTF is this. Where's The Faith

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

Faith went straight to hell when she read your gibberish saying “Christ f#cking Jesus, what utter nonsense!!”

NNTR:
God is praised for being mysterious, but the glory of kings to investigate them and are praised for explaining mysteries.

Now, watch this, flesh and blood cannot let you read the word of God with comprehension.

Both flesh and blood cannot comprehend what you wrote. Even the spirit says “WTF is this” lol