So those god worshipers now all claim that that their religion is not a religion but a way of life (both Muslims and Christians make this statement all around, all over the world), but now, they call atheism a religion.
Well that is OK with me, so long as I don't share the same tag with god worshipers.
I will accept atheism is a religion when all forms of religions and god worshipers are called something else, like dumb-sters or shiit-sters - whatever.

jayriginal:



Unsubstantiated, hasty generalization. I repeat, you would be hard pressed to find an atheist that believes there is no God. On this forum, I know only of one who says so and that is Ooman. There might be others but they will be very few. Most atheists simply do not believe. In fact, its like this, "I do not believe in God. You do so, not out of knowledge but out of faith. Give me proof." This is the stance of most atheists.

So easy to say. There is no god/God - Whatever. I am as certain that there is no god as I am that tortoises do not carry earth on their back.

Worshipping a God is not by force. Some of us don't just care about myths. Its as simple as that.
The prayer failed, because there is no God to answer.

Bonetoy:

You obviously do not understand what Omnipotent is, I have already explained why you're argument is invalid. Try reading it again.
And not once have I insulted atheist in any of my posts. Not once have I tried to persuade any one to believe in God. All I am doing is answering questions and correcting mistakes in flawed ideas and statements. If you can not handle an intellectual conversation on the forums I would recommend that you go somewhere else. You're only going to get more upset as time goes on.

None of you arguments are based on any facts or evidence. Its evident that your writing purely out of emotion. Until you give me something other than hate I will not respond to any more of your messages.

Religious irrationality is not alarming to me anyone .. This won't be the first time. So run away.

Bonetoy:

This is a huge argument used by many atheists and it is an invalid one. Lack of belief is the exact same thing as not believing. And if you continue to try to argue this case, then all you are saying is that; it’s not that you don’t believe in God, it’s that you refuse to acknowledge him. And if that’s the case then you must believe in God. The other option is that you're saying you don't care whether he exists or not, which would mean that you cannot make the claim that God does not exist.

I never stated that because more people believe in God it is a valid belief. I stated that it's not illogical. As far as your cosmetologist statement, they believed the universe was static because the stars did not change, this did not make it valid but it was logical at the time. And until God is proven not to exist it is still logical to believe that he exists.

Already hit the belief topic, And as far as your faith argument, all you did was validate my point.
Again science has not shown us God is not necessary to understand everything in nature. There are countless subjects and events that science cannot explain or even come close to explaining in nature. If we have not figured out how our planet works, as well as the universe, in its entirety, how can we claim that science disproves God? Science can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. If there was actualy ground breaking scientific evidence that God does not exist this would be spread across the world like wildfire.
Trying to compare the existence of God to an invisible flying pig on Mars or an invisible pink unicorn is another big argument atheist like to use. Let's talk about this. So you're claiming that if God exist then there has to be such a thing as an invisible (insert description) animal. My first argument would be that the animal is not omnipotent it is bound by laws and therefore cannot violate those laws. If you want to claim that that animal could be omnipotent, then you would be saying that it is a god, in which case you would believe in a god if not God.

All you're doing here is using semantics. Theory is a theory is a theory. Scientific theory is just a theory that is closer to being proven a law, but it still is not a fact. Hypothesis is just the first step of a theory. So when relating to God, my hypothesis would be the universe was created by something, my theory is that God created the universe. My experiments or evidence to further prove and advance my theories would be miracles in medicine, this just takes my theory closer to law, but still is not a fact.

Yes that is the Christian definition, but if you do your research all religions that deal with the belief of one God have similar definitions to God. Please forgive any errors I'm not an expert in the Quran and I believe that to fully understand it I would have to learn the language it was originally written in, but the Quran describes God as the one and only, absolute existence. This is very similar to the Christian religion, as well as all religions that believe in one God.

What exactly is your first point? Lack of belief does not equate belief in lack. So atheism is not a belief. So what exactly are you saying?

Secondly, I can also unreasonably conclude as you did that until fairies are proven, its logical to believe in them. Logic is not a concensus, so stop committing fallacies thinking its logical to believe something without evidence.
And its cosmologist, not cosmetologist, gush! And they had absolutely no evidence of a static universe. It was just a model, proposed in the 1500s by Giordano Bruno- a philosopher who was burned at the stake by the Catholic church for not believing in the same biblical rubbish you believe in right now. The same rubbish you believe is "logical". So do not mistake acceptance of a model as logic.

Thirdly, what is it about how the earth works that science hasn't figured out? And concerning the universe, that we do not know how it started is not an excuse to believe irrationally by faith in some improbable creator. Evolution already disproved creation. And it did spread like wild fire. That you people don't understand it is your headache.
And how do you know the flying pig is not omnipotent? And I do not have to believe in it, but its existence is on the same level as any god you propose. Disprove the flying pig, then you would have disproved whatever god you believe in.

Fourthly- A scientific theory is a well-substantiated
explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. A law is a statement of scientific truth.
You dont just go from hypothesis to theory without experimental and observational fact.
I would be alarmed at what you wrote but then, people of faith are not known to be reasonable neither are you known to seek evidence.
So you can turn your hypothesis to theory without evidence. After all, all you need to do is to have faith, so what do you need evidence for? And you dont go from hypothesis to theory to law. A theory is a broad explanation. A law is one of the statements of facts that makes a theory correct. Where did you get that wrong concept from?

Am sure the Muslims dont agree with your definition of god. That's why they started another religion in the first place.

Bonetoy:


You are confusing omnipresence with omnipotence. They are two completely different meanings.
Omnipresence - Being present everywhere at the same time
Omnipotence - Having full unlimited power And authority.
So being omnipotent means that you are not bound by any laws or regulations ever. So anything and everything is possible.

Its either he's present at everywhere, every time, and he's omniprescent or he's missing in some places and he's not omniprescent. Omnipotent or not.
Stop making irrational excuses for your irrational faith.

Rainess:
I grew out of the imaginary friend phase.

Pretty much the same for me.

Celebrimbor:
yes sir. how can it make it better?

for (;;; )
practice ();

Celebrimbor:
it still has a few bugs

You must be a beginner. A very recent one.

Thief.

Hacker book download free here

Bonetoy:
2 The paradox of omnipotence (COUNTER)

Omnipotence is not just the ability to do all things, it is having unlimited power. Not having any limitations or restrictions.

Your claim is that because God can do all things that it contradicts certain aspects of his being.

First you are trying to place God under the same laws and rules that we are bound by on this Earth. This type of thinking is invalid because if God were restricted to these same laws then he would not be God. (Refer to Omnipotence definition)

Next you claim that he does not have the ability to leave a certain place or to be absent. This is where you are wrong. If you have done any research about God or the Bible you would find out that there is such a place where God is not present. Hell is that place. This is not because God cannot be present in Hell, this is because he chooses not to be present there.

This argument is not very strong to disprove the existence of God. It’s only used to try and stump theist who have not done their research.

This post is as self contradictory as it is self destructive.

How can you be absent from a place when you are present in all places?

Need I remind you of the definition of omnipresence?

Bonetoy:
1. The fundamental atheist argument. (COUNTER)
Atheism – the DISBELIEF in the existence of God.
Within your own definition you are admitting that it’s just a belief and not a fact. You can claim the same think about people who do believe, but you also take care of that argument for me in the next paragraph when you claim that “The existence of God is taken on FAITH”. The term faith can only be used to show trust or belief in something or someone without any evidence to back up your belief. So if you claim to be atheist then you cannot have faith in anything. If you try to argue that you can have faith that an elevator will take you to the top floor safely and not crash you are wrong. You believe that you will be safe based on statistics and your own experiences with elevators.

Atheism is not a belief. It is a lack of it. Just like not swimming is not a belief, and not being straight is not a belief. You just don't do it.

Bonetoy:
You try to claim that there is no logical argument for God. Since when did it become illogical to believe in God? Even today there is a greater number of people in the world who believe in the existence of one God than those who do not believe. They range from the very poor to the very rich, highly intelligent to the simplest minds, gays and straights, old and young. Let’s put that aside though and focus on another part of that claim. You want to claim that believing in God is illogical if that is true then you are saying the same for disbelieving in God. Both sides are making a judgment based off of no “scientific” evidence proving either side. Then I refer you back to Faith for the theist belief.

The number of people who believe in a particular thing does not equate the validity of that thing. This logic of yours is highly flawed.
There was a time most cosmologists thought the universe was static without evidence, that didn't make the universe static. You people should stop using this illogical argument from number of proponents. It is an irritating logical fallacy.

Bonetoy:
Next, you try to state that science backs up the atheist belief that God does not exist. All you stated is that God cannot be proven by science. On that same note, as I stated above, science cannot prove that God does not exist.

Once again, atheism is not a belief, it is a lack of it. You cannot believe in a negative. You can only believe something is real. Having faith that something is not real is totally out of reason because you cannot believe anything about what you don't believe in the first place.

Science has shown us that no God is needed to explain and understand everything in nature. Science makes God unnecessary.
The possibility of the existence of a God exactly the same as the possibility of the existence of an invisible flying pig on Mars.

Bonetoy:
Your next statement is also very flawed, “There is no theory of God”. First, theory is defined as an idea that is intended to explain facts or events but has not been proven to be true. So your claim that there is no theory of God is completely false. When people believe in God it’s not called a theory even though it can be categorized as one.

Theory in scientific terms is different from theory in non-technical term. When something is backed by evidence, it becomes a scientific theory. God is not backed by evidence, so scientifically, it remains an hypothesis.

In non-technical terms, God is just a theory, he has not been proven true as you said. Still, people believe in this speculation without thought.

Bonetoy:

Your last point is that there is no comprehensive definition of God. I can simply put this to rest by quoting the Holy Bible. “I am Alpha and Omega,” first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. This means that he is our beginning and our end. Now I know that this means nothing to atheist, but that is the definition we have for God. I am just arguing your claim. The next part of your claim is that because there is no definition that we cannot judge if God exists or not. I can counter this by stating that we cannot understand God. It would be impossible for us to truly understand God as defined by the Holy Bible. If we could understand God then he would not be God. So your claim that not being able to understand God means he does not exist is flawed.

That is your definition according to the Christian religion. Need I remind you that there are thousands religions out there?

geezzzyy:
I and my team came up with an idea that has the potential to disrupt a big industry/sector in Nigeria.
We've done our market analysis, feasibility studies and all that 'serere'.. The potential is really huge.

But the problem is lack of funding.. I don't know why it's difficult for tech startups in Nigeria to access investments.. Sadly, great ideas are dying daily because of this..

If there's any venture capitalist in the house, hit me up..

Drop your mail. I will contact you.

French President Francois Hollande spoke with President-elect, Muhammadu Buhari, on the telephone on Thursday and invited him to Paris for discussions on the expansion of trade between France and Nigeria.

A statement by the French Embassy in Abuja said the French leader congratulated Buhari on his success and noted the peaceful and fair electoral process which had enhanced Nigeria’s democracy.

“The French head of state assured the President-elect of France’s wish to continue the close relationship that existed with his predecessor, Goodluck Jonathan, and reiterated France’s support for Nigeria and its neighbours in their efforts to combat the terrorist sect, Boko Haram,” the statement added.

Hollande also expressed his wish to expand trade between France and Nigeria and invited his Nigerian counterpart to Paris.

Meanwhile, more government officials on Thursday trooped to the Presidential Villa, Abuja, to solidarise with President Jonathan, two days after he lost his re-election bid.

Those who met the President in his office included ministers, heads of government agencies and Peoples Democratic Party chiefs.

Others were Governor Godswill Akpabio of Akwa Ibom State; Governor Gabriel Suswam of Benue State and Governor Sule Lamido of Jigawa State.

While Akpabio and Suswam met the President in his office, Lamido met Jonathan inside his official residence in the evening.

The governor arrived when the President was breaking his fast with some clergymen who were led by his Chaplain, Venerable Obioma Onwuzurumba.

In a related development, Akpabio, who is also the Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party Governors’ Forum, has commended President Jonathan for accepting the result of the March 28 presidential election.

A statement signed by the Commissioner of Information, Mr. Aniekan Umana, in Uyo on Thursday, hailed Jonathan for his statesman-like disposition in congratulating, in real time, the President-elect.

“With this, President Jonathan has destroyed the sit-tight syndrome associated with African leaders and placed Nigeria as a beacon of true democracy to the rest of African and indeed, the global community,” he said.

Akpabio also congratulated the President-elect and urged him to institute an inclusive government that would give a sense of belonging to all Nigerians, irrespective of gender, ethnicity or religion.

He asked all the PDP faithful to remain united and to display their strength by returning over 20 PDP governors into office in April 11.

Also, a former Petroleum Minister, Chief Don Etiebet, congratulated Buhari for his resilience.

He said Buhari’s resilience was an indication that he is a true patriot, a man who placed the love of his country above every other thing.

Etiebet also commended the sportsmanship attitude which President Jonathan displayed in accepting the defeat.

He added that Jonathan’s attitude had shown that there were leaders in the country who would not risk the unity of Nigeria for their personal interests.

“Kudos to President Jonathan for being such an exemplary statesman. Nigeria is proud of you,” he said.

He, however, stated that the actions of the two leaders demonstrated a new beginning in Nigeria. He said this was bound to take the country on new paths of democracy and development as the alternation of political leadership brings about true democracy and good governance based on the competitiveness of their performance.

According to him, Nigerians love Jonathan and that the new government will not forget the roles he played and the transformation agenda he put in place.

He noted that the action had also proven to the rest of the world that Nigeria is, indeed, the biggest democracy in Africa.

SOURCE

nejifresh:
www.blueraysystemsonline.com

I love your site. Its beautiful. Did you build that?

striktlymi:
'The wager' doesn't make much sense to me cause it assumes two extremes:


1) A disbelief in God, necessarily leads one to destruction.

2) A belief in God leads one to salvation.

It's not as clear-cut as that.

Good point.

Not all of my effort on you went to waste, apparently.

qbd2:

So this is ur so called better scientific explanation I thought ui were going to clear up on d gene matter and here u are talking about lengthening surgery as if after d surgery their children would be tall as well. Mtchew.

If what you want is hope, forget it. They are both short, they will procreate short children. Miracles do not happen.

So its either they dissolve the relation or solve the problem personally.

Oh my gush! This is just pathetic.

qbd2:

Of course I'm no biologist or scientist in any way. I just stated my own view based on observation. But if u have better knowledege regarding the matter, then feel free to share so d op knows.

I already did that.

Next time, you shouldn't give advice about what you do not know.

MoonCares:
Please I need advice from matured people.
There's this guy that am dating, he's so caring, lovely and humble. He is planning to marry me but he is short. Though I have not gathered the courage to tell him my fears. Am average 5ft, but am taller than him. So am afraid that our kids will be short.
Please my fellow NL, I need your advice, I don't want to make mistakes in marriage. Though I have been praying to God for the right man.

Please I need your prayers

If he's got the money ($US200, 000), tell him to come to America for limb lengthening surgery - Google that.

If he's not got the money and considering you are also short, do not produce generation of midgets.

Find a better-fit guy to procreate with.

qbd2:

Ur welcome. He's got family that's tall. So I guess things shud be ok.

You can't just conclude on genes like that. The probability that things will be ok is small.

alienvirus:
You are also one of them.

I dont believe in god, so I have no reason to terrorize.

ipleddge:
Dimples iyaf cause comotion i religion section oo

Common, its great to get laid. I get laid every now and then. Am not married so I explore.

You are all terrorists. Simple.

Dimples192:
I want to fvck Ipleddge

Whats stopping you? Get on with it. Its great. I love sex.

Ranchhoddas:
Your signature...Are you Ooman?

No, hes not me. He copied it from me.

johnydon22:


lol.. how many times u go answer ni

Na only u waka come?

No rule says I can only answer once.

My own answer: Kangaroo.

Right?

johnydon22:


lmao... both of you are wrong..

Gush! I un-seconded.

ROSSIKE:
Millions of people have reported near death experiences whereby they were clinically dead with no bodily functions in operation, and yet they experienced full life and consciousness in their spiritual bodies. This strongly suggests there is an afterlife to which we all transit.

If they were clinically dead, how come they could share their experience? Did they resurrect to tell us?

All accounts of claimed clinically dead NDES have been debunked.

If they had such experience, then they weren't clinically dead.

ChurchillStorm:
I was brought up in a Christian family (didn't buy into the Bible stories tho). Around 13yrs of age, I stopped going to church,turned atheist... But one day I just thought, "something must have caused the universe to be, but if I go according to the Bible then what created jehovah cos there is no effect without a cause. How can I believe God just springed from nowhere and had magical powers? It is illogical.
And if I run to science, the big bang doesn't make much sense too. What caused the first atom to be? It's brain wrecking. Since when did the universe start existing?
In fact, why do we exist? "

I think all these come tire... Say make my life motto become," live right". I no longer bother with these questions and thoughts. I just live right. Y'all should give it a try too. Bother no more with these thoughts and questions, people.

You dont just think and expect the answers to come to you. You have to do what is called research.

Science knows how atoms form, and the amount of energy needed for fussion. Ok?

Sugarpeaches:
Satyr

Seconded.