₦airaland Forum

Emmanystone:
What are you guys talking self.
You guys seems to be into something else other than this thread.

Male bonding things,
females aren't necessarily excluded and so welcomed too

hahn:
When you answered my first post by saying "I could but then you'd have to be dead" that was not taking it personal, right?

SMH. Are you the last person to know that you'd have to be dead for me to provide you with a dead witness you've asked to see?

hahn:
It is a serious question. If your heaven exists at least you should have a video of it. After all these years no Christian has been able to come up with video of the highest price of heaven?

Have you read heaven mentioned on this thread except by you?

hahn:
Is this turning into a circus or what? You said you have a witness and I asked how you got the testimony and you are busy making fun of yourself

Keep on making things up.
Reproduce here where I said I had a witness.
If you can't, then retract your remark, apologise or shut up

hahn:
No problem. Bring up the bible in your discussion again and I will quote Harry Potter/spiderman so at least I know we are on the same level

I would like the
Harry Potter/spiderman edition and page numbers for my references and cross checkings

hahn:
Boring.

Where is that PMB cartoon boxing a shadow

hahn:
We can do and exray or even smash your head with a baseball stick to see your brain which is unlike the self contradicting book of Jewish myths and it's god that cannot be proven by any means other than "belief"

You getting personal, doesnt change a thing

hahn:
Do you have a video of heaven?

Straw man.

hahn:
So how were you able to obtain the testimony from this "witness" of yours?

What testimony?
Whose witness?
Which ""witness" of yours"?

hahn:
Seriously, bringing up a bible verse during an argument is simply ridiculous

When did the question spree turn and become an argument?

hahn:
What you mean to say is I have still refused to believe

You can read whatever you like into it

danvon:
Our life is like water if we have enough light and heat we vapourize upwards

Steam

danvon:
but if we lose the heat we condense downwards

Ice

hahn:
Then why are you supporting something you have no evidence of?

I can with the same way I support you have a brain without no evidence of it

hahn:
Explain please

I cant, until you explain what you mean by:
"DO you have video evidence of this? Have you witnessed it?"

hahn:
Who is your witness?

Dead

hahn:
More questions have risen

"The mocker seeks wisdom and finds none,
but knowledge comes easily to the discerning"
- Proverbs 14:6

Always asking more questions, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth

hahn:
DO you have video evidence of this?

No

hahn:
Have you witnessed it?

First answer, No
second answer, Yes

hahn:
Can you provide a witness?

Yes

hahn:
You didn't answer the question

I have, now

hahn:
That doesn't answer my question either.
Seems like there is no hope of getting an answer to that question
Good night to you too

SMH. Are you trying so hard being deliberately facetious?

hahn:
DO you have video evidence of this?
Have you witnessed it?

Arent you a tremendously ambitious character

hahn:
Can you provide a witness?

I could but then you'd have to be dead

Seun:
Pastor Bakare is trolling, just like the MFM pastor. What they are saying is essentially, “you don’t have to pay tithe if you don’t need the blessings of God in your life.
Christians who want to suffer in life are free to withhold their tithes. It’s not compulsory to be favored by God”

He didn't hit out against anything, but did talk out of both sides of his mouth

budaatum:
Buda's Perspective

So, you took your last breath. You don't exist as you did anymore. No more waking up to a beautiful new day, or seeing and talking to those who love you or those you hate.
No more posting on social media, no going to work or paying bills or enjoying food or having sex.
Unless someone knows you, we wouldn't even know you are dead for how many have you discoursed with on here but do so no more. We know nought of them, whether dead or alive.

Dust, basically, thou art, and dust you will become, food for worms and fertiliser at best, on the day you die, and nothing else.

Hard to take in, I'm absolutely certain.
So post a consolation, an alternate reality.

What would happen after you're dead?

Lose contact and consciousness to this part of the world, translated to a waiting area, later appear before a hearing that will sit to pass judgement on why and where you will finally end up at

budaatum:
You're most welcome.
We can have a return match someday.

As soon as I step back in
Was going to start another one before going out but will any moment from now then

budaatum
Chat was closed at end of it, so couldnt post a message
Nice one
You were a worthy opponent
I have to, right now, step out

sonmvayina:
No, no....there was no. Adam neither was there eve or a talking snake..
the genesis account of creation is not the only neither is it the first. The Enuma ELISH is/was the first as far as record goes and shows. It proceeds the genesis accounts by thousands of years...

You must have responded to a different post
because I am yet, on this thread, to read anything on or about a talking snake

sonmvayina:
It details how marduk created the universe from the remains of tiamat...
how he created humans by making moulds and calling other spirits to get in the moulds,
and him cutting his head and pouring his blood on the moulds so the humans can share in his divinity...

Gross
Stranger than fiction

sonmvayina:
It is from it that Ezra...got the information he used in writing the book of the law( genesis to deutromomy)
It also details how lucifer(inanna) rose herself to the pantheon..how she became marduks enemy...

What does this particular pantheon comprise of?
Give the membership names of the pantheon

sonmvayina:
It is quite interesting if you are spiritually inclined..

There should be a soft version on the Internet..

I travel any length to milk cow for cheddar

budaatum:
The question I posed was "What is God?"
And being the cautious one I sometimes am, it was biased, if at all, towards those to whose version of 'g' I used.
I could have used a small 'g' after all, as would be my tendency, but I chose a big G.

It was asking for people's views, so how can I not be minding their distinctions, which I am asking for?
The question is straightforward. It is not some test with only one answer, least not as far as I am concerned.
It is just to seek peoples opinions and views, after all, we do have Muslims, Christians, Jehovah Witnesses, Catholics, Atheists, Deists, Pagans, Pastafarians and all other sorts on here with diverse opinions and views about gods.

I think you putting legs on the stool introduced bias, and that the question was fair as initially put.
People would have legged their stool as they saw fit, but you have introduced a number of legs that may not describe everyone's stool.
The question, as initially posed, makes no assumptions and allows the individual to respond as they see fit,
putting as many legs on their stool as they understand it to have.

I think you already have alienated quite a few with your single line of enquiry question
Good luck with it

budaatum:
If you consider rum or cream cakes to be god, albeit to some, you are allowed to say so when you respond to the question.

It has nothing to do with me considering anything, if some have made their stomach or belly god
or have made god their money

sonmvayina:
The story of Abraham and Isaac is basically teaching you that God don't accept human sacrifice,
but only animals and other crops,.

The story of job teaches us that the devil is under the control of God and does only what God tells him to do, his duty is to obey the will of God.

The story of jonah teaches that the only sacrifice acceptable to God is Obedience...if you are truly sorry for your sin and you make effort to turn away from it, he forgives you and remembers it no more. No human sacrifice is necessary or required...

The revenge of the Amalikites...is talking about things that are important to us as humans..taking of the virgins (divine wisdom), gold (money) livestock (food) ...you need them even if your enemies has it

What about the story of Adam, Eve, the serpent and the outside influence, what completely is that teaching?
What is the significance of the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil?
Seems we are veering off the subject(s) of discussion though

sonmvayina:
Trying to interpret the content of the stories is a fools route, cos all are stories are not based on actual historical events..

They are spiritual stories.

a bit contradictory this is.
How come trying to get an interpretation of the contents are a fools route?
Was there not an Adam?
Wasn't there somewhat historical things and/or events that actually happened that got the world and its inhabitants to where it or they found themselves/itself?

sonmvayina:
The bible,enuma elish and all the written scripture are just parables, allegorical, esoteric stories....we are expected to read them and learn the spiritual message they contain...

Give me a couple of examples of the spiritual messages they contain that we are expected to learn

sonmvayina:
God is the totality of the consciousness of the universe...

Totally concur and why I liked this part

sonmvayina:
The letter killeth......yes it does.

How do you mean with this?

budaatum:
Please, question if you may! But note that no one is under obligation.......

On reflection, I am consider myself out of order for suggesting otherwise.

Emmanystone:
Meaning we are not having this conversation nau. If i ask a question which you feel are not obligated to answer, what then is the point of me getting into the convo. in the first place?

No shakes anyways.
I must not be part of your thread.

Bud, how do you mean by the red text?
What does it mean?

budaatum:
My stool is not for you to sit on!

You must be having a laugh

Emmanystone said:
"your question is flawed from all fronts and advised that you try again."
I concur with Emmanystone's statement that your question is flawed because it is unbalanced and on uneven grounds.

Recall I earlier said:
"What is God?" is an incomplete and isolated enquiry
The stool presented by OP ought have at least three legs
and not this a one-legged stool, that's doomed to topple whoever sits on it

Yeah, who wants to sit on a crooked and one legged stool

budaatum:
And claiming my stool does not have a proper numbers of legs is disingenuous

If any, is being disingenuous, it's you with you with your hand caught in the cookie jar and biscuit crumbs on your mouth
You asked an uneven question, knowing fully well that out there, for some, God and god(s) are quite distinct from each other

budaatum:
The question was not asking what others think god is, but what is god according to oneself.
And that is what each person is required to give, stable stool to sit on or not!

Have you a problem with being fair?
Your question, in the circumstance it is asked, reeks of favoritism, self-interest or bias
It is a one-sided question, not taking into account what others think god and God is,
and not taking into account what is god and God according to oneself plus to others

budaatum:
For a person who sees all gods as one and the same sort of thing, the assumed difference between god, gods and God does not exist.
This was plaetton's second point which he called a "mental projection". It is an assumed difference.
To a non-worshipper, god is the singular of gods, and God is just god with a capital letter 'g', used only to begin a sentence.

You've just proven my point about having uneven grounds
and you putting out a question without minding others' distinction of God and god(s), is you presenting a one-legged stool and blatantly asking for all to just as it is, sit on it

budaatum:
In reality, we do know that a believer would not refer to their god with a small letter 'g'.
But that is their stool, for them to describe.

That is why the subject of discussion requires a 3-legged stool of understanding,
which are:
1) "What is God",
2) "what is god(s)"
and 3) "compare & contrast God and god(s)"

On uneven grounds, a three legged stool will always be stable
a four legged stool wont, because it will always wobble
The three legged stool has considered that a believer would not refer to their god with a small letter 'g'

budaatum:
As Emmanystone pointed out, God is merely a title, like "Chief, Mr, King, Sir, and not the name of anyone's particular god.
The capital form is the norm only when referring to a particular chief, mr, king or sir, which I am not doing

God, is not a name or a title
God, is not God's name, as Ogun, is the name of Yoruba's the god of war and iron
nor as Sango and Amadioha, are the names of gods of lightning and thunder.

God is not a title, as Adonai is. Adonai is one of God's titles

Yahweh or YHWH actually isnt God's personal and definitive name
delving into talking about God's name is beyond the scope of this thread and its "What is God" question, so lets leave that bit be

budaatum:
The proper names for the gods I gave as my example are all properly capitalised

So what?
When I take or write about Ogun, the god of war and iron or Sango and Amadioha, the gods of lightning and thunder, I capitalise their names too

budaatum:
I am not aware that anyone limits their god's influence to any particular sphere.
In fact most people's god is the great big god with an unlimited sphere of influence, including creating the entire universe.
I don't think one's god can get a greater sphere of influence than that though,
I am sure many will claim their god's influence far exceeds even that limitation

What I wrote was that we live in a world of fantasy and reality, we have gods, that are human constructs,
Meanwhile other gods, are just as like, all God is about,
only that, these other gods, due to their essence(s), have their authority limited to each of the god(s)'s sphere of influence
God and every god have spheres of power, influence, jurisdiction and authority

budaatum:
It is my opinion that the "stomach or belly, and typical wacky-and-die glutton" has not deified "beer, spirits, rum, alcohol etcetera" in the same sense as that which people refer to as god is deified

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPnMAVZ0wUg
Do you remember watching the above Chris Rock's "Never Scared" standup?
Trust me, when for the sake of sheer having a Krispy Kreme doughnut,
it comes down to being prepared and ready to suck someone's else d`ick, then Krispy Kreme doughnut right at that moment, has just got deified

budaatum:
I believe that the claim for deification made of these things is made by others, in a rather derogatory manner.

No, my paddy mi, you're mistaken to perceive it as derogatory
Calling you a nigger, is derogatory.
but the claim for deification made of these things is not derogatory
It is underogatory, just as the saying: "The fool says in his heart: There is no God", is not derogatory.
The fool noun, in the preceded saying, is talking about lack of good judgement,
that the person has made an unwise decision in regards a non-existence of God
Nothing disrespectful in that, it is just an observational statement

budaatum:
No alcoholic I know would call a bottle of rum, god.

They actually are known to do
They actually are known to have made a god of it
To the extent would do anything it takes, just to have a sip of the bottle of rum
To the extent would do anything it takes, to come under the control and influence of the rum in the bottle
To the extent would do anything it takes, to come under the power of the rum in the bottle

budaatum:
We are back on.

Yeah, just woken up and so it seems
Apparently they were down because they had a power outage
Havent they got UPS? Tut tut tut
Layout has changed after coming back though

budaatum:
Gods are human constructs (entities, ideas) that people use to explain existence to themselves and others.

I make no distinction between small letter 'g' god and capital letter 'g' god, except that some, if not most, people elevate their god above everyone else's god and like to refer to it as a capital letter 'g' god.

I have posted a list of different gods here

You're right, because we live in a world of fantasy and reality, we have gods, that are human constructs,
Meanwhile other gods, are just as like, all God is about,
only that, these other gods, due to their essence(s), have their authority limited to each own's sphere of influence

Inanimate or not alive objects, deified and lying around at a shrine somwhere, obviously are in that list of yours
but doesnt the stomach or belly, the typical wacky-and-die glutton has deified make your list?
What of the beer, spirits, rum, alcohol etcetera, deified by drunks or alcoholics?
What of money deified by chrematistics?

In quest for their posts to make front page, throngs call out to the god of Nairaland
and/or try to invoke his angels, regularly sending prayer wishes to the heaven of Nairaland for all sort of favours?

You see, my friend, of all three, which will you accept as, the Good, the bad and the ugly

budaatum:
What do you mean by "why is your position that there aren't any....."

The question is "What is god?
There is no reason why plaetton must justify his or her position! Unless he or she wants to.

To start with, I am not comfortable sitting on your one-legged "What is god?" question
The ground is uneven, and in the absence of a plain level field, the three-legged stool was brought up
One leg is "What is God?"
Second leg is "What is god(s)?"
Third leg is "What is compare and contrast God with god(s)?"

Oh that?
I didnt mean anything by it. Thats just my curious side geting the better of me
I took on board his position that there aren't any difference between god, with capital first letter g and lowercase first letter g
but became interested to know why he said there arent any difference between god, with capital first letter g and lowercase first letter g

budaatum:
I lost connection too. Got an unusual timeout! It will be back soon.

Kk.
When I had same timeout on a different mobile figured maybe they are having a downtime for maintenance or something
Thanks.

budaatum:
Point of correction
The fact that one does not believe in a thing does not limit one from expressing an opinion about that thing, provided one knows about the thing.
It does not even have to exist before you can have an opinion about the thing.

Thanks ojaare.
I intimated a similar sentiment earlier too

Bud, is the site down?
I lost connection 10 mins or so ago
and haven't since been able to successfully load the Web page

plaetton:
Point of correction sir.
If you neither believe in the existence of the Toothfairy nor Santa Claus, then you can only write or express opinion about the IDEAS or beliefs being peddled about Santa Clause and the Toothfairy.
I don`t see how you can offer a definitive analysis of something whose existence is unproven

That is exactly what we want to know.
Want contributors to write these opinions, beliefs and/or perceptions peddled about God and the variants of gods plus comparing and contrasting God with the variants gods.
Example:
God is this and that
god1 is that and this
god2 is that, that and that

God is this that and that but god1 and god2 aren't this that and that etcetera

Something like that and/or in the line of that, instead of this grandstanding

plaetton:
If you keep trying to get a comparison of Capital letter god and small letter god, you are taking them from the realm of being mere Mental Projections, and projecting them as actual things that can be objectively observed, classified and analyzed ,.which they are not.

You've made it known you're agnostic to whatever God and god(s) means and/or represents. That's fine.

plaetton:
Probably for the same reasons you don't believe in the existence of the Toothfairy.

There is no difference between god, capital or small letter, and the Toothfairy.

It's all a matter of perspectives.
The mind`s perspective.
Most children are made into (more like conned) believing in the existence of the Toothfairy, Santa Claus, etc, in the same way they brainwashed, conned, blackmailed into believing in the existence of small letter and capital letter god or gods.

Of course, You know that there is ZERO scientific evidence that such belief are nothing other than glorified primitive myths and lores.

Now, let me reiterate that the fact we have countless religions, countless sects within these religions, all trying to weave their own concept of god, and the very fact that we are here, using 21st century scientific tools arguing and trying to define god is the strongest proof that god is an idea, an always evolving idea.

Therefore, any definition of god by anyone today would simply, just like in ancient times, be a projection of current perspective, just another idea.

With all due respect, the subject of discussion is God, variant of gods plus comparing and contrasting them with each other.

No one on the thread, has specified that the write up be done in relation to "religion"

Supposing I don't believe in tooth fairies, Santa Claus etcetera doesn't in the slightest, hinder me in writing all I know and understand about any of them

Your interesting take, that there is no difference between god, capital or small letter, and the Toothfairy has been taken on board but why is your position that there aren't any difference between god, with capital first letter g and lowercase first letter g?

plaetton:
I don't believe that any such thing as capital letter God or small letter god exists.

The fact that we are here trying to define it is evidence that it is merely an abstract idea

However, there are ideas about god or your GOD.
I therefore urge you to correct the question by rephrasing it and asking for people's ideas about god, rather than asking them to define what is yet in evidence.

Let's not get personal the subjects of the discussion.

This isn't a we or us against them,
but sheer curiosity to see what we will each put down when asked to write about God, gods plus comparing and contrasting God and the variants of gods that are.

It is those ideas, your understanding, how and/what you know about god(s) and "your God" that we want to pursue and explore

It is perfectly OK, if you don't believe that any such thing as capital letter God or small letter god exists.

You have an interesting point of view on God and god(s)

Why don't you believe capital first letter God and/or small first letter gods don't exist?

plaetton:
Its kind of funny that you are asking the question, answering the same question, while still asking the question.
By trying to show a difference between god with a small 'g' and god spelt with a capital 'g', you are directly propositioning that such entities absolutely exists and their differences do exist.

For example, I have no idea what in the universe you are talking about when you make repeated references to small letter 'g' and capital letter 'g' gods.
I don't find those in any science or astronomical journal

Haven't answered any questions, just placed three legs on the stool

plaetton:
Since you are absolutely sure of these convictions, the onus falls squarely on YOU to DEFINE these capital letter 'g ' and small letter 'g' entities

We are pursuing a line of enquiry on how each of us describes God, describes the variation of gods, plus how we compare and contrast them with each other

Just jump and dug in.
Give it a stab and stop nitpicking

butterflyl1on:
My man may I be permitted to be a referee, an observer, or something like that on this thread?

budaatum:
I like the fact you are all requiring a definition of the axiomatic question "what is god".
Goes to show that what may be self evident to some may not be self evident to others.

Please do not limit yourselves to any number of legs on the stool. Put as many on it as puts your response across as you wish.
There are no limits.

Referee do your work, as people are only sticking to or addressing only just God or god(s).
Make them adhere to the 3-legged stool's parameters

MuttleyLaff:
jerflakes has just sat on budaatum's one legged stool

jerflakes:

Put some meat on the three bones remark you posted
Dont forget to talk about god(s)
In addition compare and contrast God with an inexhaustible list of all the gods you've learned and/or somehow know about

butterflyl1on:
My man may I be permitted to be a referee, an observer, or something like that on this thread?

We'll referee each other
I have whistle and cards too

butterflyl1on:
I am fascinated by this your three legged stool
but wouldn't you think that a 4 legged stool would have been much better?

The three legged stool will fare better.
On uneven grounds, a three legged stool will always be stable
but a four legged stool wont, it will always wobble

butterflyl1on:
3. How is it possible that God came about?
Spontaneity or relevance?
Were gods created?

Ah-ha, that's why we need a stool with three legs to sit on to see

If the subject of discussion centres round each of the below stool's three legs of understanding:
1) "What is God",
2) "what is god(s)"
and 3) "compare & contrast God and god(s)"

then we'll have a reasonable chance, to know, how is it possible that God came about, were gods created, spontaneity or relevance etcetera

butterflyl1on:
https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
Buddatum and his one legged stool

jerflakes has just sat on budaatum's one legged stool