₦airaland Forum

This question is for the theists who say everything has a cause and also believe they have free will. Can you explain how everything having a cause does not lead to determinism, a situation where everything is already determined by what came before it. As opposed to your belief that we have freewill. How can we have freewill if whatever we do had a cause and that cause also had a cause which also had a cause and so on?

Modifying the OP with some clarifications to help understand the question better:

So another way to put the question will be how do you know your will is not being affected by the chain of events that led to your existence?

You probably have particular foods you like eating and when faced with a choice would more likely pick them over other foods. To you you are freely making that choice however my question is asking, if your ability to choose is part of a causal chain you had no hand in bringing about how do you know you are freely choosing those foods? How do you know that your predilection for those foods is not a result of the causal chain? How do you know that your choice at any given moment was not influenced by the causal chain of events that brought about the situation in which you find yourself having to make a choice?

PoliteActivist:
Ok, below are our postings. Refresh your memory: YOU ARE SAYING EXACTLY THAT. Are you arguing just to be arguing?

You are the one arguing just to be arguing. Where in all of that do I say Jesus' teaching is summarised by do not be greedy?

MaxInDHouse:
Everything!
Because atheists have no reason to do so, but you can prove me wrong by presenting a group of atheists meeting together and deliberating on how to keep things cool!

The question again: what about atheism says we can meet together, be specific.

Look up FFRF, ACA and of course you most dreaded word the Church of SatanThe Satanic Temple.

MaxInDHouse:
Social gatherings is a common thing and in such gatherings 98% of the people only comes to display their means of life, what the human society needs is coming together to deliberate on how to keep things cool and settle whatever arises in our midst amicably instead of taking side and using weapons to exterminate one another.

Only faith in Jesus' teachings can do that!

I asked what in atheism precludes me from meeting with people and deliberating on how to keep things cool?

PoliteActivist:
So tell us, you know the bible: what is your summary of what Lord Jesus taught on greed?

What Jesus taught on greed is not the same as all of Jesus' teaching. Jesus spoke against greed, he spoke against hate yet you have Christians who still do these things which is my point. My point wasn't Jesus didn't teach against greed it was to counter your statement that anybody who who follows Jesus' teaches will automatically not do these things. You said you clarified with the adjective true, so only true followers would not be greedy and hateful. As a follow up I ask you for example and you say monks, nuns and those who have taken a vow of poverty to which I ask are in any of these category, you don't answer.

Just to be clear here is one of Jesus' teachings on greed:

Mark 7:21-23
Amplified Bible
21 For from within, [that is] out the heart of men, come base and malevolent thoughts and schemes, acts of sexual immorality, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22 acts of greed and covetousness, wickedness, deceit, unrestrained conduct, envy and jealousy, slander and profanity, arrogance and self-righteousness and foolishness (poor judgment). 23 All these evil things [schemes and desires] come from within and defile and dishonor the man.”

MaxInDHouse:
Atheism gives no room for interchange of encouragement or how to cope with life's anxieties so you'll only sit in a corner inside your room and continue criticizing whatever effort people put together to solve the problems affecting the human society.
So that's the sense in oneness of thought!

Says who? What in atheism restricts me from meeting with other atheists and having a nice time?

hupernikao:
Well, I won't dispute peoples action. All you wrote up is still premised on convictions.

Just the way I told you that many here aren't atheist because of my observations of their convictions.

Same way, some identify with Christianity out of no conviction. Some out of needs, some out of pressures, some out of looking for newthings. But we have a good number that hold their conviction in faith and are unwavering.

---

What you described about your secondary school is a case of mixed feelings. At that age, and also what may likely be communicated to them to form their reason of believing are central to their (in)stability and conviction.

So, it happened both ways and affect all belief and non belief systems. A man without conviction is unstable in all his ways.

---

Lastly, I believe that wrong teaching and doctrine in many places over the years is what is central to people's bad conviction and also made many to turn bad.

A doctrine of money, and get rich
A doctrine of self righteousness
A doctrine of threat and God's punishment
A doctrine of promising things that the scriptures never promised, hence wrong expectations.
And more...

Are central to many even here, about their failed convictions in the Bible.


It end up birthing confusion which led to many unanswered questions. And with the exposure of knowledge these days, it's very easy to find alternatives in varying non biblical knowledge.


In summary,
Even though convictions are personal, they can be seen and felt.

But truly, I have never seen a man who receives God's word in its true light and turn away from it because that Light, cast away all fears and darkness in men.

None of these things were a problem for me. My conviction in the past was based on the gospel of Jesus' salvation by his death and resurrection. I believed I was saved by faith and my righteousness was the righteousness given by faith in Jesus. So my atheism has nothing to do with disappointment or wrong teaching (according to you).

PoliteActivist:
I can't believe this. Sir, when I said a true follower of Jesus teachings cannot be greedy, didn't you say it was a claim, that I was wrong. Isn't that what this entire talk has been about??!!

So when did I say the summary of Jesus' teachings was don't be greedy?

Dtruthspeaker:
People think that The Truth can be hidden with a cover-ups and decorations. BUT AS TIME GOES BY, what is True is Revealed, and what is fake fades away. - Ismail Haniyeh

Oh the fùcking irony of Dtruthspeaker quoting a Hamas leader. LMFAO!

Gointo:
Hello, I know you believe in God, but you've been envelop by  bitterness about what is happening in your life and around you .
There is  a lot of things you are ignorant of.. But ye refuses to hear and believe the truth, but love and maketh a lie.
Now listen, THE WORD YOU REFUSE TO BELIEVE, THE SAME WORD WILL JUDGE YOU.

REPENT FROM YOUR INIQUITY NOW. AND SURRENDER YOUR LIFE TO HIM WHO LAY THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, SURRENDER NOW TO CHRIST.
IT IS WRITTEN, WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD, AND SERVE HIM ONLY.

The only thing I was bitter about is the time I wasted believing in imaginary god, devil, demons, Jesus, holy spirit, angels and all that nonsense. That is time I will never get back. But like my dear budaatum pointed out to me, I needed to forgive myself so now I am free from bitterness and all the other mumbo jumbo.

Whenever you come my way I will buy you your favorite drink and listen to all your fantastic tales of 7 headed monsters and talking donkeys (sounds like a Shrek movie LMAO!).

PoliteActivist:
Come on sir, you know "eschew worldly possessions" is synonymous with "do not be greedy" which summarizes Lord Jesus' teaching on worldly possessions. You said a person following that teaching can still be greedy. That's what this entire discussion has been about for crysake!

I never said anything of the sort. It was you who said all of that not me. You can screenshot anywhere I mentioned eschew worldly possessions or do not be greedy or that these are a summary of Jesus' teaching as part of my argument. Don't put words in my mouth.

elated177:
Why bother disciplining them at all? Is it not their life? Mtcheeew!

"Evolve their own morality?" What are you talking about?

Yes because they don't know anything yet. When they are older and can make their own choices I won't be policing their pussies.

Yes evolve their own morality just like your morality is different from those of your parents.

elated177:
When next your child misbehaves or engages in act harmful to her well-being, do nothing to discipline or correct her. I mean, after all, it's her life. Right, Reed?

I am not an irresponsible parent, I will discipline my children enough so that they grow to evolve their own morality. They won't forever rely on me for morality.

MightySparrow:
There is a problem here. I once asked on a thread, why are Christians only travellers to hell?
Again, all prophets that write the Bible needn't die before God will speak to them. When did this start?

Because hell requires very little detail to pull off in a story. Once talk of fire and suffering you don't need to add anything else. If you want to talk about heaven now you have to be way more creative. Check out someone like Kat Kerr who says there's sports in heaven, now there's a good creative storyteller for how heaven looks like.

triplechoice:
Religion really has nothing to do with why some countries are more corrupt than others. It may appear so to you, but it is not what it seems.

Poverty and the level of literacy is to be blamed. If religion is banned in Nigeria , it wouldn't result in less corruption or make people start to reason rationally

As long as poverty still remains and there is no access to good quality education, people will do anything to survive or behave the way they like. It is like a war situation where people will do anything to eat anything and drink anything to stay alive.

If poverty becomes endemic in those countries you mentioned, corruption will start to reign over there.

Eradicating religion is not the solution. I can't find anywhere in the Koran or Bible where adherents are advised to embrace corruption or behave irresponsibly.

It all boils down to the people practicing those religion.

I concur.

Yet their god is not the author of confusion, see them slinging invective at one another over their holy book. What a laugh.

The reaction varied. One cried, one shouted "you are going to hell!", another just shook their head and said "I still believe in god". But my favorite reaction was my sister who took time to discuss with me over a smashing breakfast, no condemnation just pure understanding.

So glad those girls are still alive. This woman has mental health challenges, I hope she gets help.

Reminds me I need to download the entire Wikipedia.

Edit: Done!

PoliteActivist:
You are welcome.

So what do you call these exchanges below. That's exactly what you were saying

Where in any of these did I write follower of do not be greedy?

PoliteActivist:
You should up your game. It is at the very beginning that an argument is won or lost. Just like here, you lost once you said that a true follower of the teaching "do not be greedy" can still be greedy. You couldn't quite recover after that no matter what you quoted - because your initial stand did you in.

Thanks for the advice I'll keep it mind for next time. Meanwhile I never said a true follower of the teaching "do not be greedy" can still be greedy, dunno where you got that from.

PoliteActivist:
Your OP means your original post (about the matter).

You were quoting the BIBLE not pastors. And you know the bible well, so you were intentionally being selective and deceptive to win an argument.

The pastors professed beliefs make them Christians. Their conducts disqualifies them being disciples.

You sure you don't wanna go to heaven?? Well to each his own.
By the way, I read that thread on nature of reality. That guy really trounced you
Take good care.

Oh you mean the Matrix guy? LMAO! Of course you'd prefer a believer in fairy tales, birds of a feather and all that. LMFAO!

hupernikao:
Actually that is what many of them think. "It's the new thing", let's join it (that's the mindset).

That's the mindset that has been displayed here by many. Few has the conviction of an atheist. I can confidently tell you that.

I am sure this will come open in few years as you see many of them disappear again or change ID after moving to another thing or return back to God. It's an unstable conviction.

LoL! I remember when people used to say this in my secondary school fellowship. I never really saw people prefer not believing, in fact even the party goers back in Uni believed in god. See them coming to fellowship in their final year like no man's business. If anything being born again is the fad. Some people even use it to gain fame. You hardly see a person who becomes an atheist suddenly becoming a reality TV star or running for political office while those who have public come to Jesus moments are the toast of the town.

PoliteActivist:
If you don't use it then it doesn't apply to you, so why worry about it?

You were selectively and deceptively quoting the bible TO PROVE THAT A FOLLOWER OF CHRIST TEACHING CAN BE GREEDY. It had nothing to do with quoting any pastor! You know the bible well and know the sum total of Christ's teachings on greed. You need not quote any pastor and you never said in the OP that you were quoting pastors.

Of course the pastors are Christians (their beliefs make them Christians - which is why an atheist can't at same time be a Christian).
But they are not DISCIPLES.

You have no argument left.

As a parting gift, I know you'll like the below

Not worried just want to know why you said it. You really prefer to dodge questions don't you.

Which OP? I am not the OP. In several of my comments to you I mentioned it and even now after you know I am quoting pastors you are still behaving like a lil kid.

The pastors are Christians but not truly following Jesus but somehow atheists can not be Christian and also not be truly following Jesus? Are you not confused? LMFAO!

Nah I am fine without longing for imaginary streets of gold.

PoliteActivist:
YOU the one said "true" does not apply to you.

Why didn't you post this before or indicate that's how you got your partial quote. Truth is you don't need to quote any pastor. You know your Bible well. You know fully well Christ's teachings on greed.

The answer to your question is so obvious it doesn't need answering. THE ANSWER IS AN EMPHATIC NO!

I said I don't use it. You who does use it set a parameter that doesn't apply to me yet you excluded me why?

I did tell you before that I was quoting preachers, I just decided you needed to see it for yourself.

So who's teachings are these preachers who are quoting Jesus' teachings following? Also are these preachers Christian or not?

hupernikao:
Well, it was a hypothesis. I am still observing that.

Also, not really policing but helping them see their issues. Most times we don't want to accept what happened to us and try to find the easiest way or follow what we think is in vogue. That is the plight of many who criticize the Bible here.

Do you think atheism is a fad or in vogue?

Well, he isn't an ex Christians, maybe a non Christian or likely a confused Christian who need help but feels he knows better. He will be fine soon.

Seems to be a she actually.

PoliteActivist:
Article is too long for me to read.

A true atheist is one who is not trying to be Christian at same time. A Christian must believe in God. See below.

I know you know your Bible. You carefully avoided all the places Christ addressed greed and instead quoted something in part, thinking I wouldn't know the full quotation.

Christians worship GOD. If u are worshipping nothing while going through Christian motions, you not a Christian.

If a true atheist is as you describe then why did you say I am not a true atheist?

Look at this one with his kurukere moves, I literarily just quoted a preacher and you are accusing me of avoiding something while complaining of the length of the article because you don't want to honestly engage. Projection at it's finest. Na so. LMFAO!

Question again in case you didn't see it: So can someone follow the teachings of Jesus and still be greedy?

fergie0o1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz36R6HH8g8&feature=youtu.be

SMH. The freaking irony, things are just working by itself he said and then the building collapses on him.

If you like name your building Jehovah Jireh or Allah Nagode, if it is shoddily built na fall e go still fall.

"Please send me recharge card."

PoliteActivist:
So, ok, now we know you are not a true atheist, just someone who says he is an atheist.

You deceptively and selectively gave verses to buttress your argument, and I corrected and debunked you. You never said anything about those being verses they themselves use.

So in "worship of" the word worship is a noun not a verb?? See why this discussion is ridiculous?

Even the definition of worship as a noun contradicts you (see below)

Difference from greedy pastors - I'm not greedy for one thing

Who is a true atheist?

Here is Gloria Copeland:

Seek God First
Gloria Copeland

Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Matthew 6:33

Whenever Ken and I talk about living by faith, I know there are some people who think, Oh, that's easy for you. You're preachers. You have it made! And, in some ways, we do. We have it made because our calling demands that we give God our attention, and giving God your attention always brings success.

But we haven't always lived that way. In fact, the first time I ever saw Kenneth Copeland, he was about as far from a preacher as I figured you could get. He flew planes and sang in nightclubs. As for me, I was a college girl who said she would never marry a preacher and who had never even heard about the new birth.

Right after we got married, Ken went into a business enterprise that we thought was going to make us rich. So I quit my job and went to work for this new company. Two weeks later it folded.

We ended up sleeping on a rented rollaway bed that sagged in the middle. We had a wrought-iron coffee table Ken made in high school and a black and white TV. Nothing else. No refrigerator. No stove. I cooked in my coffee pot and an electric skillet and used a cardboard box on the porch to keep our food cold.

We were flat broke. Unemployed. Deeply in debt. I had nowhere to go. No furniture. No nothing.

Then one day I picked up the Bible Ken's mother had given him for his birthday. In the front she'd written this verse, "Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." I turned and read Matthew 6. It said God cared for the birds. For the first time in my life it got into my heart that God cared where I was and what I was doing. I figured if He cared for birds, He cared for me! I knelt in that bare room and told Jesus that if He could do anything with my life, He could certainly have it. That's all I remember saying.

I had no idea I had just been born again. Two weeks later Ken found a new job. We moved to a new furnished apartment and bought a better car. In the midst of it all, something else happened—Ken got born again.

Don't worry if you don't "have it made." We certainly didn't when all this started. Just stick with God and let Him make you. He is a good God who is good to all (Psalms 145:9).

Make a decision in your heart to seek Him first. Then all the other things will be added.
https://www.kcm.org/read/faith-to-faith/12/10?language_content_entity=en-US

Pray tell how I selectively and deceptively quoted verses to support my argument when I am literarily quoting a preacher?

As for worship note the 2nd meaning in the screenshot below.

So can someone follow the teachings of Jesus and still be greedy?

PoliteActivist:
You did say greedy pastors are following the teachings of Christ and even selectively gave bible verses to buttress your argument.

YES I AM A TRUE FOLLOWER!!!
Now answer if you are a true atheist.

Per second definition, faith in what and worship of what? See hiw ludicrous?

I am an atheist. True is not an adjective I would use to describe myself or any atheist since I am not the gatekeeper of atheism. I only know about people what people express, if they tell me they are an atheist then I will take their word for it until they tell me otherwise or I get evidence to the contrary.

Yes I said greedy pastors are following the teachings of Jesus and showed you the verses they themselves use to justify their position which are teachings of Jesus.

Faith and worship used there are nouns not verbs. Faith as in the collection of doctrines of a particular religion eg Christian faith, Hindu faith, Worship as in the liturgical aspects like music and songs. These are things any one can participate in without belief in a deity. Singing a Christian or Hindu song doesn't mean I believe in the Christian or Hindu god(s).

Now, what are you doing that the greedy pastors are not doing that makes you a true follower while they aren't.

jamesid29:
Not at all sir. The "lack of belief" position is not a broader definition that encapsulates the standard one.
They are two distinct definitions.
"lack of belief" falls under a psychological state akin to agnostism, while "Gods do not exist" is a proposition & a claim. They don't fall under the same umbrella.

This is why even in text that mention both definitions, they are usually separate with an "or".
Namely: The belief that God(s) do not exist or a lack of belief in god(s)..

The original idea by Anthony Flew, was to have a definition that encompasses every ideology that doesn't fall under organized religion i.e atheist, agnostics, irreligious and everyone in-between(which can even include trees, cats or babies etc).
Problem was Flew's position actually excluded those who were atheist themselves and didn't achieve it's aim. You can't have a proposition and a state under the same umbrella.
It was critiqued by other philosopher and didn't gain acceptance.

You can look through the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy critique for a better explanation of the difference.
Or a very good resource written by a well respected atheist philosophers gives a more detailed delineation
Atheism and Agnosticism (Elements in the Philosophy of Religion) - Graham Oppy (https://www.amazon.com/Atheism-Agnosticism-Elements-Philosophy-Religion/dp/1108454720).
"Plus side is , Graham does give good arguments for atheism"

So to recap: The "lack of belief" definition is not an encapsulation of the position that "God(s) do not exist".
They are two distinct definitions

The position "god(s) do not exist" is in effect a statement that the holder lacks a belief in gods so I fail to see how it isn't a subset.