₦airaland Forum

MSN1:
As the world continue to evolve, a lot of people who claim to be knowledgable keep propounding various unrealistic theories and assumptions about our creator.
The MAJOR reason the world keeps failing is because we have used God's given wisdom to propound distruptible ideas for ourselves and this keeps getting worst daily.
In the dictionary of God, there is no questioning! You just have to be 100% obedient.
It is 100% impossible to see/hear of ANY obedient follower of Christ that God led astray. I wonder how funny it would seem when the flock decides to underestimate the leadership qualities of its master and decide to lead themselves. Even with the properly documented book he gave us and the holy spirit in us directing us 24/7; people are still doubting/disobeying and questioning the potency of God, What a pity!.
The BEST thing anyone can do for God is TOTAL OBEDIENCE!.
God is loving,
God is caring,
God is patient,
God is all knowing,
God is the Greatest!
The kind of inner peace that comes when we obey God is unimaginable.

Ok, thanks but no thank you. Keep your pity.

Joychinonyerem:
When I look back on my life, I see a time when doubt and disbelief held me captive. I was once an individual who did not believe in God. My heart was closed off to the idea of a higher power, and I believed that love was merely an emotion rooted in biology and human connection. The concept of a loving God seemed far-fetched, and I sought evidence in the tangible and the scientific.

My journey was one of skepticism and resistance, and I would often question believers, seeking to dismantle their faith with logic and reason. Yet, little did I know that this very journey would lead me to an unexpected encount

Friends read more 👇👇👇👇

https://www.walkingbyfaith.com.ng/how-can-someone-who-does-not-believe-in-god-experience-love-4-ways-to-discover-divine-love/

The only love I have seen is the reciprocating love between people and I. What is an unseen, untouchable god going to add aside from stories?

Workch:
I don't want to do the back and forth.
You disbelieve all gods, that's not scientific

LoLz. Where did I say that?

.

Workch:
I don't believe or disbelieve aliens either.
I don't believe or disbelieve wormholes or multiverses either.

It's strictly scientific, I will wait for the evidence for or against. No beliefs or disbelief.

Atheism is not scientific, we don't believe in science.

What is it about beliefs and disbeliefs that you guys choke on when you can just wait for evidence for or against?

Workch:
it's pure science, we don't believe or disbelieve. We don't choke on it.
Evidence decides. We strictly base all on it.
Atheism is not scientific. Sorry bro

Where in this have we disagreed?

Workch:
it's how science works. No beliefs, wait for evidence.
I don't believe or disbelieve aliens either.

LoLz. Reinforces why I no longer care so much about labels. Here is someone who agrees with my stance but because I use a different label from what he would like calls me confused. LMFAO!

Dude, learn to read beyond labels, you'd have an easier time of life

GoodIsGod:
Guy, stop glorifying yourself in gross foolishness.

You atheists are just a bunch of clowns who's stupidity sometimes seems unredeemable.

Though saying there is no God because you've never seen Him, heard Him or feel Him is total foolishness, saying there is nothing like witches, Juju and ghosts is way more foolish because even if you've not seen them or experience them, there are people who have seen such, felt such and even interacted with such.

Yet , you bunch of iddiaats like the other guy called you deny the existence of these things. Even when people who have witnessed them confirm their existence. Aren't you stupid?

Have you been to the moon?
Have you measured its size?
Have you been to space to know the earth is round?
Have you measured the dept of the sea to know the dept?
These and many more.

But scientists told you all these things and you believe them.

Why don't you wait to see them and witness them before you believe their existence like you must see a ghost before you believe the people who have seen them.
Or feel the effect of Juju before you believe those who have been under its influence?

You guys are just a bunch of arrogant fooools.

No Apology.

LMAO! Have you got it out of your system or you need to go on more rants? Bwahahahahaha!

Workch:
I don't believe or disbelieve it. In 100% skeptical

This is the same person that said I was confused when I said the same thing. Bwahahahaha!

Meanwhile...

Starting countdown.

4

Workch:
I do, I know the difference.
It's the opposite side of same coin If evidence does not exist either ways.

Atheism and Theism are both flawed

Abeg rest.

Workch:
lol, you are confuse

And you don't know the difference between non belief and disbelief. Go educate yourself.

Workch:
if you don't disbelieve the existence of a god then how are you any kind of atheist?

Because I do not believe.

Workch:
Does an agnostic atheist disbelieve the existence of a god?
Make it clear enough

No, I do not.

Workch:
Lol, LordReed. You just don't want to accept that we don't know if a god exist or not hence we should stop disbelieving it or believing it.

You are reading something that clearly tells you what I think but you choose to misrepresent for whatever reason, tells me my conversation with you is over.

Lemme add for clarity: I told you I am am an agnostic atheist. I show you a clear description of what an agnostic atheist is but you still say "You just don't want to accept that we don't know if a god exist or not hence we should stop disbelieving it or believing it.". What clearer way would it be put to you that I do not claim to believe or know if a god exists.

Workch:
So no one can truly be an agnostic because your picture says so?

Oga call yourself anything you want that's your business. You asked for my opinion and I have given it. Did I ask you to change the label you use for yourself?

Workch:
your opinion is that I'm lying that I'm a pure agnostics?

You asked for my opinion and I gave it. I am not calling you anything, you are free to use any label you choose as I am. I am only telling you the label I use for myself.

Workch:
What do you think is the difference between atheism and agnosticism?

Someone already pointed this out before IRC.

Workch:
never base your conclusions on believes or disbelieve. Always base it on evidence by knowledge, when evidence is not available, remain skeptical and neutral.

And how is this different from what I have said?

Workch:
It's not, atheists don't know, they just don't believe he exist.
Atheism is not based on knowledge, they are the opposite of theists.

Then why is this statement here: He found it puzzling that many people spoke with certainty about things which could not be verified by any known methodology (this is what atheists and theists do) . How are atheists being certain if they are not claiming knowledge?

Workch:
on what ground should you not believe it either?
You should be somewhere in the middle

What is the middle?

Workch:
Science involves disciplines that use the scientific method to determine the most probable explanation for what we observe in the physical universe, and this method involves observation of the available evidence, experimentation, presenting results, peer review, further observation and experimentation, etc. Scientists examine the evidence before arriving at a conclusion. If new evidence is presented, scientists consider it and revise their views if warranted.

Thomas H. Huxley, who coined the term agnostic, was a scientist. He found it puzzling that many people spoke with certainty about things which could not be verified by any known methodology (this is what atheists and theists do) . Huxley believed that to claim to have "knowledge" (in Greek, gnosis) that a belief or claim is true or lie, one must have verifiable evidence to support to disprove the claim. To Huxley, to present a claim as certain without evidence was ethically wrong and intellectually dishonest. He stated that claims of certainty in any matter, whether science or religion, should be backed by evidence, and proposed the agnostic method to examine claims based on evidence. If there was no justifiable evidence, one was "without knowledge" of the certainty of the claim or belief, or agnostic. He called practice of using such a method agnosticism

Agnosticism is not about belief, it is about using a method to verify the probability that a claim is true or factual by examining the evidence. A person is free to believe or not believe the claim, and may choose to believe a claim without evidence, based on philosophical reasons or personal preference.

So, according to Huxley's definition of agnostic and agnosticism, those who practice the scientific method are indeed agnostic in the sense that they use a method to examine the evidence for a claim before determining the probability that the claim is true or factual.

In Huxley's words:
“Agnosticism is not a… creed of any kind, but the validity of a principle, which is as much ethical as intellectual. This principle may be stated in various ways, but they all amount to this: it is wrong for a man to say that he is certain of the objective truth of any proposition unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty.”
T. H. Huxley. Essays, Volume V, IX

LordReed KnownUnknown

How does lack of belief equal knowing that a god doesn't exist?

Workch:
yes, you can't. On what ground would you do that?

Lemme ask you the reverse. On what ground should I believe in aliens or a god?

Workch:
So you cannot conclude that you don't believe in aliens and God

Huh?

Workch:
you don't know of aliens exist or not and you don't know if God exist or not bro.

Did I say otherwise?

Workch:
the claim God may exist is also based on equal fact. You don't utterly reject aliens because of lack of evidence

we don't know anything about before big bang

we don't even know everything about what happened after big bang, not to talk of a before big bang.

I don't think life and evolution are singular events. No one unless creationists think that.

therefore is also reasonable to speculate about the existence of a creator because we don't know how everything started.

That is an unfounded leap. You cannot go from I don't know how this happened to here is the explanation without any actual explanation.

jaephoenix:
Nice one. Why don't you go up North, say Borno, and proclaim you're a Christian, just like your fellow Chrissie Deborah did. Lets see how that turns out for you.
You expect atheists to be open about their belief? In my atheist infancy, I was open about it. Then I lost a girlfriend and now my family ostracized me(except when they need money for a project. Lol). My wife even told me my dead father would be rolling in his grave and I should have been killed. My own wife. And no we weren't quarreling when she said it. My previous hospital said it clearly they won't employ atheists and said they would prosecute any atheist found employed for lying on their CV. I get bad vibes from people just by telling them I don't believe their gods.
So its no use arguing with you theists about displaying my belief. I have received death threats on this forum. And I am sure those guys would carry them out if they know me. I used to have my own pic on my profile but after some threats from DTruthSpeaker and some other Christians, I used an NFT. So much for peaceful and loving christians

Just imagine and he wants us to publicly declare our lack of belief in any god.

Meanwhile, they who openly believe in an almighty god would barely take any risk to proclaim their all powerful god to violent extremists.

Workch:
is the existence of aliens and warmholes baseless then. Because such concept is not based on fact.

The claim aliens may exist is based on facts.

1. The are many billions of planets.

2. Some of those planets are capable of supporting life.

3. There is no reason to think life and evolution are singular events.

Therefore it is reasonable to speculate about there being aliens.

Wormholes are a prediction from theoretical physics, same way blackholes were also predicted.

Workch:
that they may exist

Then there is a basis for making the claim.

I am not the person calling it, I don't even believe that myself nor disbelieve it.
I'm just saying that you cannot disprove that claim because you don't have any evidence.. A claim is not baseless unless an evidence against it exist

That is not what baseless means.

lovediehatelive:
So I decided to spend the weekend at my uncle's place because it has been many years I went there.


In the midnight, around 1am, I heard the television was on and I thought he forget to put it off.


So I went to the living room only to see his son of about 4-5 years old watching cartoon. I was shocked and asked him to go and sleep, which he grudgingly agreed.


Now, early morning around 5am or so, same thing happened. I want to the living room and saw him there.


This time he refused to go to bed.


I later found out that's how he does. I wonder if he ever sleeps at night.

The parents are not even bothered, but I'm worried. When we were growing up, who are you to stay awake past 9pm watching TV? Not to talk about waking up at night. Even in the day time you better not be caught idling away on front of the TV when others are busy.

This one just comes to the living room anytime he likes and puts on the TV.

Is this how kids of nowadays behave?

The parents are spoiling that boy. It is not healthy behavior for 4-5year old and encouraging it is bad parenting.

Workch:
So aliens and warmholes are baseless?

What claim is being made about aliens and wormholes?

So the universe can not exist on its own is not a basis right? It doesn't bother you

I don't understand the question.

Why would you look for pink unicorns on Mars when you are yet to find life on Mars?

It's a faulty equivalence. You have to first find life on Mars before checking for a pink unicorn. And who says pink unicorns can't exist on Mars?

That is exactly the point, why would you be calling a god noninterventionist before you have found the god?

Workch:
no claim is baseless if it hasn't been disproven.

My undergraduate research work as a biochemist, I worked on finding evidence for or against traditional claims that cashew leaves have diuretic and laxative effect hence they are handy in the treatment of hypertension and bowel movement diseases.
Going by your definition, most traditional medicinal claims are baseless, they usually sound ridiculous. You will see one person selling gbogbonise that can cure all diseases on earth, is that not baseless but science still disprove them.

It's not baseless until proven baseless.

It is baseless if there was no evidence to make the claim in the first place.

The reason why traditional medicine needs to be investigated is because some of the claims do have a basis. We know that some plants have medicinal effect so it is worth it to see which do and what those effects are.

No scientist would be looking for pink unicorns on Mars because that would be a baseless claim in the first place.