₦airaland Forum

KAG:
Secondly, and probably most importantly, the first postulate of the cosmological argument is wrong. [b]Not everything that begins to exist has a cause, nor does every occurrence necessarily need a tangible precedent. [/b]Sure in Aristotle's via Aquinas' via the "times" of many modern theistic apologists all that had been observed indicated that the first premise must be an axiom; however, with the onset of the likes of quantum physics and even studies of radioactivity it's known that things are different from human intuited arguments.

Any examples?

Finally, yes even virtual particles and radioactive decay. The argument is that everything has to be caused. They contravene the causality premise because, particularly in the case of virtual particles, the fluctuation isn't caused by the "veritable ‘sea’ of energy".

how does this help ur argument?

alimat 2:
@ noetic2

Pls this topic is not meant for derailing or names calling,Its just asking about what is not clear and a candid and reasonable answer is needed.


If u can observe my posts i usually add the please to let u know dat am not here for debate or whatever.

Supposing u want to convert me to ur religion how will u convince me that Jesus is all the above.


THANK U MA SIR, I JUST WANNA KNOW

I did not call u names.

u believe that Jesus can not be all that u stated in the OP. . . .but I dont see anything stopping Him from being all of it.

1. Jesus is part of the triune God (Elohim). . .He is God the Son.

2. Since the Elohim is ONE. . .Jesus is God.

3. Since God visited us in human form (Jesus) . . . . He is called the son of man.

4. By human parentage Jesus is of the lineage of David. . .He is as such the son of David.

5. As God in human form . . . .He is God incarnate.

6. As a member of the triune God, He is a member of the trinity.

7. He is NOT a prophet neither is He a messenger.

. . . . .That is who Jesus is.
why do u think He cannot be all of the above?

alimat 2:
These might actuallly make me really think that the book is that of confussion

are u not concerned that ur deduction is largely due to illetracy and lack of knowledge?

alimat 2:
Pls kindly explain how possible it is to avoid confussion

why dont u just state why it is imposible for Him to be all of the above?

are u afraid u reveal ur illiteracy? cos a even a 5 year old kid has no problem understanding the ontological nature of Jesus.

wirinet:
If you insist that numbers do exist, then define for us its nature. Also can numbers stand on its own, like what is 100. Does a number mean the same thing to all people or a certain class of people that has agreed to its exact meaning. If my account says $100, or N100, or Y100, do they mean the same thing to everybody at all times.

1.The nature of number can only be gasped from it uses and perceivable representation.
100 is universally the numerical addition/subtraction of other values to arrive at a figure. This figure is representable by anything as agreed upon by users. . . .but the VALUE remains 100/one hundred.

2. The £ or $ signs add a very different meaning to the number in question.
The value and significance of the number remains 100. . .  .but its meaning is redefined when annexed with other symbols.

3. The nature of a number is therefore defined as a value that is explicitly representable and acceptable to respondents. Number can also be represented using various symbols and notions. . . the symbols and notions are only relevant in the context of the numerical usage. For example. statements A,B and C carry different meanings but numerically have the same value

statement A: Ade wants to sell 100 apples.
statement B: Ade wants to convert 100 dollars.
statement C: by the injunctions of the sharia court, Ade was given 100 strokes of the kain.

4. Based on the above it is safe to state that number is explicitly different from any other value and significant or insignificant notion used with it in any expression. meaning that 100 is independent of dollars, when the expression $100 is written.
As such number (100) is an entity on its own.

5. being an independent entity, number therefore exists.

6. The representation of number, though divergent depending on the language and mode of communication. One thing is certain the numerical value of number is universal, regardless of the language.

7. Number as an entity, simply EXISTS.

Now which is the true representation of the number two? is it  2, ii,貳( ,二, ١, and hundreds of other symbolic representations. Also the pronunciation of the number two is as varied as its symbolic representation. I thinks God and Numbers have the same characteristic. It is a symbolic representation of nature unique to the particular group of persons doing the representing.

Numerical or pictorial representation of numbers do not dispute the value of this numbers.
pronunciation of a number is subject to the language in context. . .it has no connection to the VALUE of the number.

1. He is all of the above

2. why dont u tell us why it is imposible for one person to be all of the above?

huxley:
We know your hardness of comprehension is legendary - my question was; can those premises be justified? Rather than - what is the quality of those premises?

I believe that ur question was answered earlier.

1. is there any known "thing" that exists, which has no cause?

2. is there any reason to believe that God has a begining?

The premises on their are own self illustrating and explanatory.

so who replaces switD ?

Boli and epa

@ olabs

do u actually read this comments before u post them? lol  

huxley:
Yes, of course.  I was writing in response to the poster who thought that what you see in textbooks are numbers - they are not numbers, but representation of numbers or numerals.

Of course, numbers exist in pre-literate societies.  In fact, numbers exists ONLY in minds, in the minds of conscious (sentient) beings.

What do you think?   Do you think numbers existed 10 billion years ago, given our current knowledge about life in the universe?

I think u are going too far with ur premise in defining and using the term "existence" ?

What does it mean to exist? do u refer to been felt by the 5 human organs. . . if so u are far from reality.
Numbers do EXIST. they are symbolically represented by literate pictures/pigments. . .this representation does not mean they exist, but it reflects the basis of their existence.

The possibility of making mathematical,accounting and other calculations using numbers . . .and the acceptance of the figures (outcome) by several parties involved simply implies that numbers do EXIST.
why do u accept the account balance of ur bank statement as the true figures of ur account? u do simply because u believe/subsribe to the numerical representations presented on ur statement. That my friend is evidence for the existence of numbers.

whether u subscribe to the existence of this numbers is another thing. . . .but one thing is that numbers do EXIST.

wirinet:
That's why goats are more practical than Humans, goats do not concerned about who or what created them or how to get favours and from him, nor are they concerned with which creator is superior. they are more concerned with finding and eating good green grass and finding a suitable mate to leave their genes behind.

This is only an after thiought for which there is no basis.

1. How can u explain to a goat that the computer was designed by man and did not evolved?

olabowale:
@Sleek29: « #27 on: Today at 03:50:28 PM » Atleast you ask good question. Unlike the nonsensical Noetic2 with no ethics whatsoever. (play on words), lol.

Muhammad is Sunni based on the Fiqh of "Sunnah!" Muhammad (AS) or the 3 generations, the first is the companions, none of them is "Shia." Allah says, Laa Shia. Shia means break, separate, cut, etc. Like in engineering the shear force, or shear diagram.

I will not respond to noetic, anymore. He answers no question, but list a ton of his own, always. lol.

1. u did not ask me any question. . . . .please feel free to ask me questions related ONLY to this thread on this thread.

2. why are u fond of always turning all debates into muslim versus christians? what has bible sword got to do with islamic killings?

muhsin:
Can't you remember how it went after I did that promise? I simply rescind it. LOL

Am I causing you any trouble, man? Lets have a civil discussion. . .at least thats what we are here for, right?

Thanks for your understanding.

u actually repeated ur words for a second time. I would prefer u ignore my posts. . . .As I cannot have u insult me at ur pleasure.
If my posts dont make sense to u. . .just ignore it.

huxley:
1) Anything that begins to exist MUST have a cause.

2) God did NOT begin to exist.

Why are we supposed to accept these premises?

There has been no superior argument as of yet. . . . .or has there been?

huxley:
Why don't you try posting on the Has Atheism Taken Over NL thread?

sounds like u have some new information. . , the thread is dead. . . .open a new one.

what thread?. . , u probably were not making sense. . . .

toneyb:
The Elijah challenge will do. I have some meat we can try it when ever you are ready . Call down fire from the heavens like Elijah did and we will forever be quite

would u also call down fire from the delusive-god of atheism?

olabowale:
@Noetic: As to the killing by the sword, did Moses or David or Solomon died by the sword? I think not, so your statement is false. I gave you the example of Saddam Hussaine, you had a problem with it. I see that you lack foresight. Am not insulting you, but just stating the facts. If Saddam were to be alive today, those who loved him may actually escalates their effort by killing more people on a daily basis towards the effort of trying to free him from the clutches of the West and the Shia. That is a killing for the good of the society, because it at least saved some lives. How many we do not know!

Absolute Rubbish.

The death of saddam hussein has not in any way stopped evil. . . at least from the islamic angle. thighing, temporary marriage, underage marriages and honour killings and suicide bombings are still predominant in iraq. And morover saddam was not tried or killed islamically,  . . so u are yet to produce an example.

So give ONE example of an islamic killing that has helped to curb evil?

Before Islam of Muhammad, and during the almost Christianity alone in UK and US, were there no killings, and all the other evils? You ask childlike questions sometimes as if you are in a daze! You see I didnt say childish. And when we look at it, the crimes of amercan muslims, is like 1% compared to what american Christians commit, on a daily basis.

what a DISHONEST LIAR u are.

The truth is islamic extremists CANNOT curb or proclaim any evil in either the US or UK because they are in the far MINORITY. At least we all see the malady they display in saudi arabia et all.

You must have been asleep at wheel of reality. If an evil person is not put in check by a better person, his evil will increase and many may copy him and think it to be normal. The duly certified court of iraq is Islamic and not Christianity. Proof: Ambassador Brenner, the american adminstrator at the time of revealing the new flag of Iraq was shocked along with the rest of the world when Laa ilaha ilallah remained thinking that it will never survive the pressure from the West!  If Saddam was killed for the west, know that the Shia Iraqis and iher elites have worshipped the west. The last I saw of the case, at the trial was that they invoked Allah, right there from the pages of the Quran. Some younger friends who speak arabic were sent from the UN to help at least in the reporting of the Constitution to the UN. One of them is Muhibudeen, a yoruba boy I know very well. You sir, Noetic is the liar. No sorry the speaker of lies.

Whats the meaning of the RUBBISH above?

Even a new born baby knows that Saddam was tried in court of law and not a sharia court. . . . .and at no time was he charged for disturbing the peace of islam.

So sir olabs. . . .please state ONE EXAMPLE of an islamic killing that was done for the good of the society?
is it not amazing that u have none? islam is a FRAUD.

Do you make peace with a person when you are angry? Human nature dictates that we are not all of the same temperament. Some get upset quicker and some forgie a lot slower. America is still running against Taliban and Al Qaidah. America has not forgiven Manuel Noriega. And if America has her way, she will imprison Daniel Ortega for life! And this is a first cass Christian society. Oh, and we call England the lap dog of America. If america as a nation of Christianity for the most part, and she will not forgive a disbeliever like Osama or a believer like Manuel Noriega, even though America subscribes to "Turn the other Cheek, and the summarily forgive your enemies, pray for them and others in the Bible", why would you expect a muslim whose book allows for full revenge or take blood monney as compensation or forgive without either of the first two to do any better? You noetic will not forgive a fellow who comes to your house in the middle of the night, wanting to get your properties, by force with a knife against your jugular and you have a gun to preserve your life. Or will you allow him to cut you up and quitely leave with your properties, if not taking your wife along?

Are u educated at all? is america a religion?

why are muslims not peace makers? why are they war makers?

olabowale:
@Noetic: « #20 on: Today at 12:27:20 PM »   My opinion which is correct; all non muslims are disbelievers. The Christians worship gods and not God! These are facts.

  My speaking the truth becomes aimless shot. When I lie that 3 gods are 1, then I will telling the truth, according to noetic! Interesting man that dude is.

blah blah blah . . . . .

1. u love running round in circles and playing with words. what has trinity got to with islamic killing malady?

2. We have both agreed on numerous occasions on this forum that muslims and christians do not worship the same God. we can as such deduce from our agreement that mohammed proclaimed another god,  . , and not the bible God. mohammed proclaimed allah.
allah is a moon-god in arabia.

3. In lieu of 2 above, I agree that according to u all non-muslims notably christians are unbelievers. christians dont worship the moon-arabian idol called allah. They worship God.

Allah allows people to demand the life of an evil man who took  life in an unjust way. Thats retribution. Allah permits it, hence He wrote it. And this law is for mankind and mankind behaves humanly.

Thank u for making this statement. . . from the above, I can confirm that

a. allah is a blood thirsty demon, who permits and allows jungle justice.

b. allah wickedly refuses to encourage forgiveness.

c. allah gives no room for repentance. . . if a person sins, allah does not mind that they die.

d. Since the bible God gives room for repentance. . .He is definitely not the same as allah. . . .or is he? 

No. It does not remotely suggest that Allah is powerless, or that He is an idol! Your thinking is so warped that you need to get your head out of your split/crack. Think for yourself for a change, man. Funny that you will not know that people have the right to ask for revenge. Heck america is bent on revenge, doesnt she? Is Yahweh/Jehovah or the three parts of your god individually and collectively powerless? Yes?

u keep missing the point. . .what has america got to do with allah's powerlessness?

You did not answer my question. ,  . .at least not intelligently.
why cant allah fight for muslims? why cant he answer their prayers and defend them? why do muslims have to take the law into their own hands?

Muslims can be killed. Heck Saddam was killed. And just the other day, Muhammad Yusuf of Boko Haram was killed. Think, buddy. Think hard man. Kids ask the darndiest questions.

what has the above got to do with thread?

how is equilibrium maintained? and who measures equilibrium? is it allah or mohammed?

Again I do not know why people do what they do. Read the Quran, again and see that what you have those Muslims that you complain about do inone of them is in the Quran or ahadith! So your big deal and your bigger deal are for your own mind and not mine.

1. why dont u know why muslims kill shamelessly? did allah not command such? are u saying that they are bad muslims?
do u care to make clarifications? why EXACTLY would anyone leave the mosque on friday after praying to allah and then proceed to kill others?

2. Do u think the answer is in the koran?

This guy says person, following the tradition of the trinity of where God is three persons! Allah the Almighty Creator is not a person. Even His Angels are not persons. The genies are not persons. Only human beings are persons. Monkeys are not persons either! You get my drift? Is there an independent 4th option which will not fall under the 3 that islam gave already? Go read the Quran, where the issue of forgiveness is placed. It is immediately after talking about death, if the killer is not in the vicinity of the Holy Mosque; haram in Makka! Google it, please because I cant spoon feed you, all the time. Not even now that I am kinda busy.

what does the above have to do with the thread? why not just answer the questions. . . .here they are again. . .
why does allah have to give three options? why does allah not just tell muslims to forgive and forget it all? is it because allah is a blood-thirsty person? why is islam riddled in violence?

Prizm:
Here’s a concise formulation of the Cosmological Argument (for those who may not bother to do the necessary research):

1) Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2) The Universe began to exist.
3) Therefore, the Universe had a cause.

What this means quite plainly is that the universe along with space, time, matter and energy came into being. The universe is not a necessary entity; it is a contingent entity. It does not have an infinite past. The only necessary being/entities one can think of are  a) numbers b) an unembodied personal mind. This is the conception of God that theists work with—a personal, unembodied, spaceless, infinite, eternal mind. It goes without saying that numbers though necessary, do not have any creative ability. It follows that the cause of the universe is a mind greater than the universe—by which we mean something that is immaterial, boundless, spaceless and eternally pre-existent.

How is it then that when you present the Cosmological argument, an atheist’s response is “What Caused God?” That question simply shows a misunderstanding of the argument. Anyone asking this question should familiarize him/herself with what “necessary” and “contingent” entities are. That question is as laughable as asking “What makes a triangle have three sides whose angles add up to 180 degrees?”, or “Why should a triangle have three sides with angles that add up to 180 degrees?” The answer is as simple as saying “That is what a triangle is DEFINED as”. I have nothing to discuss with anyone who wants to argue with definitions. If you do not like the definition given, go ahead, define yours and see if we may agree or disagree.

Another argument an atheist may make when confronted with the Cosmological Argument is to suggest that “the universe is uncaused” which is a patently false idea given its finitude in the past. An atheist is left with the worst option of declaring that the “universe just popped out of nothing, from nothing and by nothing” and that I suggest is even worse than magic. Nothing pops out of nothing, from nothing, by nothing. To suggest otherwise is to be painfully irrational. Not even radioactive decay; or virtual particles which merely arise and disappear from fluctuations in the quantum vacuum—a veritable ‘sea’ of energy.

To refute the argument, you have to shoot down or falsify the premises. Otherwise, you'll arrive at the painful conclusion whether you want to or not.

There is none of this an atheist (Tudor, Maaje, Toneyb) does not know. . . . it is only convenient to live in delusion and walk round in circles.

welcome to nairaland religion forum. . . . .where debates with atheists run in endless circles.

where is tudor and huxley

toneyb:
He can't prove that your deity does not exist, any more than he can't prove that allah or zues do not exits.  It doesn't work that way the way it works is the claimant (you) has to prove or more correctly provide overwhelming evidence that your claim is true. If I say that I have a dog you can not prove that I don't have one unless after I have provided evidence to show that I truly have one or not. Base on the evidence that I have provided you can go ahead and show if I truly have a dog or not.

Now over to your where is your evidence to show that your god exist outside your imaginations.

what a RIDICULOUS assertion.

I have no basis for saying that u dont have a dog. . . .as such I would not make such a claim.
But If u open ur mouth to say that there is NO God. . . .then u should have an evidence to back up such a claim. . . , is that hard to do?

[quote author=Tudór link=topic=307136.msg4334949#msg4334949 date=1250006657]Hello.
It depends on what you call as "god".
If you're referring to the christian god then hell, i'm damn sure he doesn't exist.[/quote]Any evidence?

[quote author=Tudór link=topic=304431.msg4335008#msg4335008 date=1250007125]How many times do we have to tell you this. . . .ATHEISM isn't a RELIGION . .You sure you don't need psych evaluation yourself? [/quote]says who? how can the deluded admit his delusion?

Religion should be regulated, . . .especially ATHESIM.

All atheists should be subject to a psychiatrist test every 3 months to evaluate their mental competence. . . by law.

muhsin:
Noetic2,

I've been thinking why my constant questioner on this thread has had not been contributing here. You are welcome back.

Why should they?

can u please ignore my posts like u promised? is that a problem?

@ KAG

why did u run away with ur tails?

Ovamboland:
Are you saying nothing like this is possible again?

Just thought if anything as superlative as the bible creation account should happen again before the very eyes of Tudor or Mazaje this kind of see-saw debate will not occur again.
Am amaze you fail to realize that

I think u should be amazed at the level of irrelevance of ur postulation.
how EXACTLY does this thread attempt to offer Tudor or Mazaje a repetition of creationism? did u read the O at all? 

Ovamboland:
One way to quickly settle this is for Davidlyan or Noetic to tell us one supernatural thing that will happen tomorow or a particular date to upset the natural order.

Example like Elijah calling down fire from the skyto consume maybe a sacrifice or even Tudor,
or for us to see someone walking on water with our eyes(not skiing),
or let us witness a verified amputee's limb grow back after a prayer session
or a rope without end to suddenly appear between the earth and heaven
or Noetic calling on the sun(and moon?) to stand still for all the world to see(this happens in some parts of the earth for months)

. if anything like that can happen, i believe it will forever shut up Tudor, Mazaje, Tony and co.

This in my opinion will be the only incontovertible evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt

Ovamboland:
One way to quickly settle this is for Davidlyan or Noetic to tell us one supernatural thing that will happen tomorow or a particular date to upset the natural order.

Example like Elijah calling down fire from the skyto consume maybe a sacrifice or even Tudor,
or for us to see someone walking on water with our eyes(not skiing),
or let us witness a verified amputee's limb grow back after a prayer session
or a rope without end to suddenly appear between the earth and heaven
or Noetic calling on the sun(and moon?) to stand still for all the world to see(this happens in some parts of the earth for months)

. if anything like that can happen, i believe it will forever shut up Tudor, Mazaje, Tony and co.

This in my opinion will be the only incontovertible evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt

and what would the above achieve? how is it related to the thread?

Abuzola:
Wa'alaikum salam warahmatullahi wabarakatuh

From sahl ibn sa'd that the Messenger of Allah (P.B.U.H) said 'The people will be gathered on the Day of Resurrection on reddish white land like a loaf of bread, it will be devoid of any landmark'

Muslim, hadith number 1947

After gathering. . . .what happens?

They all go to hell? , . .too bad!!!!!!!!

olabowale:
All the conditions in the Quran. And watever the prophet (AS) says in his authentic ahadith. I do not follow anyone, and I am a slave of Allah and a keen follower of the Messenger (AS), gentle like Abu Bakr, Tough like Umar Khattab, wise like Uthman Affan and a warrior like Ali Abitalib (RA to all of them). Everything has its place. I will kill for Allah, if I come upon an evildoer who was trying to kill me, because I was stopping him from the evil he was doing on an old lady or man, or a one that he has a comparible advantage over. If I struggle with him and he wished to kill me,and I am able to take his gun away from him and he is still trying to come after me with a knife, I will pull the trigger!

Thats the truth. You may remain a yellow belly and let them kill you and kill those defenseless potential victims, I will act according to the dictate of my Lord which actually agrees with my conscience. You see an evil person will be eliminated, restoring calmness to all.

a. Are the above the ONLY conditions with which u will kill?