PoliteActivist:


((You and FRANCISTOWN, please help me forward this below to JessicaRabbit, whom I'm beginning to suspect could actually be Seun! I get banned each time I quote "her". If I don't get banned for posting this I'll post more))

*Politeness*
(Always remember, I'm playing devil's advocate for both sides. Each side thinks I'm against them!)

Thanks for your rather patronizing response.
Au contraire, religionists would say evolution is pure magic. Consider: in, say, a million years, kazam! Monkeys would have evolved to humans? Isnt that definition of pure magic? Never mind they've stayed exactly monkeys for as long as man can remember!

Soo, trial and error did it all, eh? Trial and error is what makes mathematics aligne so perfectly with nature? It is like saying that by trial and error the universe can produce a delicious meal served on a table! But, OK o, what do I know!
The thing is, you don't know the science that you have so much faith in. People who know science very well have told you that science knows almost nothing. You patronizingly dismiss Einstein as "charmingly inaccurate". Same Einstein that came up with ideas that revolutionized our perception of our universe, ideas most of us still can't quite grasp - just by sitting in his study and conducting thought experiments, with no equipments whatsoever. He himself described himself as knowing almost nothing. And not only him, Newton, Socrates, and others came to the same conclusion - that they know almost nothing. But to you science has all the answers, yet the very best of scientists say they know almost nothing. So, please explain to our religionist friends how you know them better than they know themselvs!

If you're quoting me and getting the boot, maybe the issue lies in how you're quoting and not the quotes themselves. Are you bombarding your post with too many links? Are you plagiarizing copious amounts of texts from other websites? You should look into these things. What I find totally ridiculous and absurd is your suggestion that my account belongs to Mr. Seun Osewa simply because you're having difficulties making a response to me, and I think this is a massive pointer to the possibility that you're NOT a critical thinker. And it already makes me wary of continuing this conversation with you because you could be having ulterior motives here. I've been banned on this website before, just so you know (look at my post history). Have you asked yourself what possible justification I would have for blocking your posts?

Also, and don't take this personally, but I find it weird how you keep alluding to "politeness" as if repeating the word will magically make all of your posts appear reasonable. You don't have to keep telling us you're polite. Your conduct in the discussion will tell us all we need to know about your composure in debate, as well as your intellectual honesty.

Now, coming to the main subject matter. While I might find it a bit ridiculous, I can somehow relate to your mischaracterization of evolution as "magic". It's understandable, as complex processes often appear magical to those unfamiliar with the details. But instead of magic, imagine evolution as a chef patiently refining a recipe over countless generations. Each iteration builds upon the last, slowly but surely leading to new and diverse forms, not monkeys suddenly poof-ing into humans overnight. Millions of years may seem like a long time, but in the grand scheme of the universe, it's merely a blink. You're right that trial and error doesn't sound very glamorous. But don't underestimate its power! It's the very foundation of natural selection, where countless variations arise, and only the most beneficial traits survive and propagate. This elegant process has sculpted not only the intricate mechanisms of life but also the fundamental laws that govern our universe, like the perfect alignment of math and nature. It's not a "delicious meal on a table," but a testament to the remarkable self-organizing power of the universe. For the avoidance of doubt, science doesn't claim to have all the answers. In fact, acknowledging the unknown is a core principle of the scientific method. That's why scientists like Einstein and Newton constantly pushed the boundaries of knowledge, always searching for deeper understanding. While their own humility is admirable, to say they knew "almost nothing" ignores the vast body of knowledge accumulated through centuries of scientific inquiry. We don't claim omniscience, but we do have a reliable method for uncovering the secrets of the universe, and that's the power of evidence-based exploration.

Playing devil's advocate is actually something I do once in a while as well, if you knew me well. I'm never rigid with my perspectives either. However, I do believe that in all things, it's important to remain grounded in evidence and avoid misrepresenting scientific concepts. I don't claim to know religionists better than they know themselves. But if they were genuinely curious about understanding the universe, they would explore reliable sources, and engage in respectful dialogue, instead of the mindless trolling and presuppositions many of them seem to engage in on this forum for example.

JessicaRabbit:

only the most beneficial traits survive and propagate.

Kudos on your responses. You are doing a bang-up job. Only a small pendantic addition to this, it is actually traits that don't hinder reproduction that carry forward that is why some detrimental traits still survive because though detrimental they do not hinder reproduction. Eg flat feet, baldness, bad eye sight, etc.

BBIA:

why the fvck did you quote my moniker?

* I just got banned again, hence my silence again - that'll make it 4 bans in 4 days (each time 24 hrs).

Mr. fvck I quoted your moniker because I don't want anybody to think I quit the thread. Also because, like MaxInDHouse, you posted something I wanted to respond to but couldn't because of all the bans.

Moniker JessicaRabbit I was just being facetious saying you could be Seun... but it was getting a bit ridiculous, all those bans. Maybe you have a point - I'd start posting a little at a time.

I'm not going anywhere. We must resolve this issue on this thread:
Who is more correct, atheists or religionists?
Honestly, I'd say so far atheists are winning. BUT, it's not over yet!

I'd be posting the rest of my responses below. I'd be posting a little bit at a time - to hopefully avoid ban (that is if I'm not banned for posting this!)

FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah TheSourcerer. Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack, Botragelad, isan Fourthpredator, seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman
Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn. SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2, kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn

PoliteActivist:


Moniker JessicaRabbit I was just being facetious saying you could be Seun... but it was getting a bit ridiculous, all those bans. Maybe you have a point - I'd start posting a little at a time.

No worries, dude. I just felt you were being overly dramatic with your assumptions.

Posting less might be helpful, or splitting your post into numerous parts. Either way, you have to be careful. I've had plenty frustrations with this site's anti spambot. In fact, it's one of the reasons I spawned with this new moniker.

JessicaRabbit:


No worries, dude. I just felt you were being overly dramatic with your assumptions.

Posting less might be helpful, or splitting your post into numerous parts. Either way, you have to be careful. I've had plenty frustrations with this site's anti spambot. In fact, it's one of the reasons I spawned with this new moniker.

You guessed it, I was banned again for 24 hrs! I'll now only post as short as possible, let's see what happens. See my posts below.

FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer,
Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, MaxInDHouse, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2,  kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn

*Continuing my response to moniker JessicaRabbit
(Always remember, I'm playing a TOTALLY unbiased umpire)

* I note your last response. Please note: I said you should tell religionists how come you know scientists better than scientists know themselves. You had it confused. Also tell them how trial and error led to the hymen, and the appendix, and the fact that things that taste good (fat, sugar, and salt) are not good for us!

Continuing (remember we are trying to determine which is better: being an atheist or being a religionist). Let's use something we are all sure doesn't exist: Father Christmas (FC)
I want you to honestly answer this question:
If a child were told (before he could reason logically) FC existed and he totally believed it. Then growing up he heard people always thank FC when something good happened, and always saying how great FC was, and he develops a deep faith that FC would grant his requests (which of course he does - power of belief), and he tries to be a decent person because he was taught that's what FC wants, plus it adds a whole new dimension to his social life.
Question: How does it benefit him to stop believing in FC? How is someone who never found FC better than him??
While at it also tell us how someone dying of cancer is better than someone with same cancer but whose cancer was being cured by a water pill (that he thought was a powerful cancer drug - power of the mind).
So, as you can see for yourself, no matter how you slice it, atheists are "poorer" than religionists no matter what.

PoliteActivist:
*Continuing my response to moniker JessicaRabbit
(Always remember, I'm playing a TOTALLY unbiased umpire)

* I note your last response. Please note: I said you should tell religionists how come you know scientists better than scientists know themselves. You had it confused. Also tell them how trial and error led to the hymen, and the appendix, and the fact that things that taste good (fat, sugar, and salt) are not good for us!

Continuing (remember we are trying to determine which is better: being an atheist or being a religionist). Let's use something we are all sure doesn't exist: Father Christmas (FC)
I want you to honestly answer this question:
If a child were told (before he could reason logically) FC existed and he totally believed it. Then growing up he heard people always thank FC when something good happened, and always saying how great FC was, and he develops a deep faith that FC would grant his requests (which of course he does - power of belief), and he tries to be a decent person because he was taught that's what FC wants, plus it adds a whole new dimension to his social life.
Question: How does it benefit him to stop believing in FC? How is someone who never found FC better than him??
While at it also tell us how someone dying of cancer is better than someone with same cancer but whose cancer was being cured by a water pill (that he thought was a powerful cancer drug - power of the mind).
So, as you can see for yourself, no matter how you slice it, atheists are "poorer" than religionists no matter what.

How much can u help me with?

PoliteActivist:


You guessed it, I was banned again for 24 hrs! I'll now only post as short as possible, let's see what happens. See my posts below.

Bros
Comot my name abeg

PoliteActivist:
*Continuing my response to moniker JessicaRabbit
(Always remember, I'm playing a TOTALLY unbiased umpire)

* I note your last response. Please note: I said you should tell religionists how come you know scientists better than scientists know themselves. You had it confused. Also tell them how trial and error led to the hymen, and the appendix, and the fact that things that taste good (fat, sugar, and salt) are not good for us!

Continuing (remember we are trying to determine which is better: being an atheist or being a religionist). Let's use something we are all sure doesn't exist: Father Christmas (FC)
I want you to honestly answer this question:
If a child were told (before he could reason logically) FC existed and he totally believed it. Then growing up he heard people always thank FC when something good happened, and always saying how great FC was, and he develops a deep faith that FC would grant his requests (which of course he does - power of belief), and he tries to be a decent person because he was taught that's what FC wants, plus it adds a whole new dimension to his social life.
Question: How does it benefit him to stop believing in FC? How is someone who never found FC better than him??
While at it also tell us how someone dying of cancer is better than someone with same cancer but whose cancer was being cured by a water pill (that he thought was a powerful cancer drug - power of the mind).
So, as you can see for yourself, no matter how you slice it, atheists are "poorer" than religionists no matter what.

Uhmm... are you really trying to compare Santa Claus to cancer treatment? 🤨 😂

The hypothetical child you described isn't experiencing genuine faith. He's experiencing indoctrination and confirmation bias. His positive experiences are solely attributed to a fictional being, hindering him from critically evaluating reality and exploring alternative explanations. True intellectual growth requires questioning, not blind acceptance. Regarding your claim that atheists are "poorer" than religious individuals, I find it so laughable that I'm not sure if it merits a proper response. There are countless examples of thriving atheists in every corner of the globe, leading fulfilling lives based on reason, compassion, and a deep appreciation for the natural world. Attributing moral character and personal fulfillment solely to religious belief is both simplistic and inaccurate. Your water pill analogy is a flawed attempt to equate the placebo effect with genuine medical treatment. While the placebo effect demonstrates the power of the mind, it doesn't magically cure illnesses. In contrast, science-based medicine provides actual treatments with verifiable efficacy, saving countless lives every day.

Aemmyjah:


Bros
Comot my name abeg

I appreciate the POLITENESS of your request instead of those people that use profanity.

Request denied.

Anybody who can reach Seun, please tell him to tell his "Antispam bot" (wink, wink) to stop banning me for absolutely no reason. Ought not there be a rhyme or reason to banning people? Or is it that the whole affair is child's play? Or is it because atheists are losing? I am just a disinterested, unbiased umpire presenting the FACTS!! Just the logical FACTS, nothing else!

FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer,
Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, MaxInDHouse, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2,  kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn

BBIA:

No I am not.

Like I said before. Destiny and Coincidence cannot coexist. there can be one and one only. that’s what I believe in.

Their definitions perfectly contradict each other.

“Destiny refers to the predetermined, inevitable course of events or the ultimate fate of an individual or thing. It suggests that certain events are bound to happen, often attributed to a higher power or cosmic order.”

while

”A coincidence is the occurrence of events that happen by chance and have no apparent causal connection. It's when things happen simultaneously or in close succession, creating a sense of unexpected correlation, but without a deliberate cause or design”.

If Destiny exists, then all events have already been predetermined to happen, even those in quantum physics.

If in turn it doesn’t not and it really happens randomly and events happen by chance, then destiny has no part in it.


I hope now you will see what I mean.

That's why I referenced quantum mechanics. In it, two contradicting elements (like destiny and coincidence) can exist simultaneously. Which further proves there are great limitations on human brain and reasoning - just because your brain tells you something is not possible does not mean it is not possible

PoliteActivist:


That's why I referenced quantum mechanics. In it, two contradicting elements (like destiny and coincidence) can exist simultaneously. Which further proves there are great limitations on human brain and reasoning - just because your brain tells you something is not possible does not mean it is not possible

E be like say na kpoto kpoto God pour for inside your head as brain.


Na Jehovah’s witness abi na Chosen you the go?

Aemmyjah:
Nonsense
How can energy be self-existing?
Scientists say that the universe is a billion years old and the world began as a big bang
Atheists rely on science especially unscientific facts such as evolution and big bang and spontaneous generation and abiogenesis

Logic tells me that nothing came from nothing
Logic tells me that life cannot produce non life
Logic tells me that order and organization cannot arise from chaos
Logic tells me that every design has a designer
Logic tells me that intelligence cannot come by chaos.
Logic tells me that laws have a lawgiver

You, MR OP are an atheist. One cannot claim to be Christian and Atheist or neither or neutral.
One who claims neutral is indecisive
One is talks favorably about religion and atheism is an atheist
Your supposition about the 7 year old is false

The biggest question is if life does not have a source and the order in the universe does not have a designer?
Faith is not gullible. Faith is not blind. One must make up his mind and be ready to defend his faith

I love science and proven scientific facts points more towards the Creator

So, atheists, what's your answers to the bolded?

But OP, if nothing can come from nothing, then where did the designer come from?
Also the 7 year old in my OP is false how? It just illustrates how easy it is - if, say, people get an electric shock anytime they do or think improperly, everyone will soon be behaving properly all the time.

EMPHATICALLY, I'm just playing a role of a TOTALLY unbiased umpire. My own personal beliefs don't come into play at all

DeepSight:


So you are a Christian, and in the very normal sense too.
Stop seeking to differentiate and distinguish yourself from other Christians - that is pride and ego and thus is of the Devil - Shaitan, also known as Iblis.

MaxInDHouse, study this comment

DeepSight:


God is probably sexless. Even if in my private sensing the "first" vibration of existence is a feminine one.
Now, it is true that one may infer certain things about God, but that does not mean that God is truly knowable. For example, we say that God is transcendental - and yet, knowing that, only emphasizes that IT is beyond us to know.

Atheists are asking, why won't God show or indicate himself directly and clearly? He can because he is omnipotent. So why won't he?
What answer do you have for them?

DeepSight:


This is the way Christians always shout - "Christianity is not a religion, it is a way of life!"
But a religion is indeed a way of life as well!

Nope. You got it wrong. Christians say Christianity is about following or trying to follow a person and having him as part of your life. Religion is following laws and rituals and commandments.

MaxInDHouse, you should also study this comment

Maynthemayn:

That's what made it Possible for your to "self exist".

I am using it the right way, it's you that should rewind.

Universe means everything that existence, so why is your god needed when its also part of everything that existence?

Good insight. I'll answer for religionists. They'll say that this existence is obviously DESIGNED. Evolution and natural selection do not even start to explain the design.

isan:
I believe God exists but he doesn't interfere with human lifes , God didn't create any religion and he has never sent any mvtherfvcker to earth .

So what led you to the belief that God exists? Or are we to just take your word for it?

Aemmyjah:


The blame is on false prophets for failed expectations but they keep grudge against God and foolishly subscribe to Atheism channel
Atheism that says life has no purpose or hope is what sounds meaningful to them in the false promise of critical thinking

One is saying time is self-existent. Imagine!
Scientifically or philosophically, time is not self-existent... They say it's a mystery to them but the creator of all things is what they dismiss based on things they don't understand

What is time to you? Define time without movement or space

PoliteActivist:


So, atheists, what's your answers to the bolded?

But OP, if nothing can come from nothing, then where did the designer come from?
Also the 7 year old in my OP is false how? It just illustrates how easy it is - if, say, people get an electric shock anytime they do or think improperly, everyone will soon be behaving properly all the time.

EMPHATICALLY, I'm just playing a role of a TOTALLY unbiased umpire. My own personal beliefs don't come into play at all

Nonsense
Typical of atheistic reasoning

PoliteActivist:
Anybody who can reach Seun, please tell him to tell his "Antispam bot" (wink, wink) to stop banning me for absolutely no reason. Ought not there be a rhyme or reason to banning people? Or is it that the whole affair is child's play? Or is it because atheists are losing? I am just a disinterested, unbiased umpire presenting the FACTS!! Just the logical FACTS, nothing else!

Just remove my name from your lists
You just want stupid arguments to mitigate your indecisiveness

MaxInDHouse post=12 I8585435:


Chai, see spiritual blindness o!

So what you hoped for will happen but how is that possible without those who will PARTICIPATE in achieving it?
Someone (Jesus) will teach some people in the true religion how to work towards what they're hoping for.
Ọmọ that's what FAITH means!

As for faith that's not by works Paul explained the type of WORKS he's talking about that it's not by practicing what the mosaic law teaches rather it's by acting on the orders given by Jesus who we can see nor have any written form of laws about him.

So when Paul says "GRACE" it simply means on your own you can't please God but you have the model from God set before you.
That is underserved kindness (grace) from God.

Faith doesn't have to be religious. I don't why you can't see that.
An atheist can have faith in the government or have faith that what he hopes for will occure.

St. Paul made clear that salvation is a gift you accept. It is NOT due to ANYTHING you did "so no one can boast". He left no room for you to twist or bend anything

PoliteActivist:


Faith doesn't have to be religious. I don't why you can't see that.
An atheist can have faith in the government or have faith that what he hopes for will occure.

St. Paul made clear that salvation is a gift you accept. It is NOT due to ANYTHING you did "so no one can boast". He left no room for you to twist or bend anything

Atheist do not believe in hope. They say hope is stupid and nonsense

Francistown, come and educate this son of yours cos you both are baby atheists

Aemmyjah:


Nonsense
Typical of atheistic reasoning

If you want people behaving a certain way, hasn't that always been the way to get them to behave that way?
Imagine if there were 100% guarantee you'd be caught if you robbed a bank, do you think anybody would be robbing banks?

Aemmyjah:

Atheist do not believe in hope. They say hope is stupid and nonsense

Francistown, come and educate this son of yours cos you both are baby atheists

Put another way. "An atheist can have faitb that what he wants to happen will happen"
If you have a problem with the word "hope"

PoliteActivist:


Put another way. "An atheist can have faitb that what he wants to happen will happen"
If you have a problem with the word "hope"

😂
Who mention faith and hope? Was it not you?
Both go hand in hand

PoliteActivist:


If you want people behaving a certain way, hasn't that always been the way to get them to behave that way?
Imagine if there were 100% guarantee you'd be caught if you robbed a bank, do you think anybody would be robbing banks?

Another faulty thinki
Try again

PoliteActivist:
Anybody who can reach Seun, please tell him to tell his "Antispam bot" (wink, wink) to stop banning me for absolutely no reason. Ought not there be a rhyme or reason to banning people? Or is it that the whole affair is child's play? Or is it because atheists are losing? I am just a disinterested, unbiased umpire presenting the FACTS!! Just the logical FACTS, nothing else!

Seun, kindly soften the ban intensity of your antispam bots from high to low. The bans can be sometimes annoying when one has done virtually nothing wrong. If you've customized your bots against Politeactivist, please free the man. If atheists are loosing, then their souls are gaining. We who have vivid spiritual experiences with God can already tell with 100% assurance the ultimate destination of a Godless soul.

Aemmyjah:

Atheist do not believe in hope. They say hope is stupid and nonsense

Francistown, come and educate this son of yours cos you both are baby atheists

PoliteActivist is not my son. She is a mature lady.

One thing you should know is that, Atheism is a personal thing.
I'm an atheist and I don't believe in God, people, and anything that I can't see, touch, feel, smell. The only thing I believe in is myself and my library(I love it so much).

There are atheists who believe people, governments, parents, pets, friends. As a matter of fact, there are atheists who believe there are ghosts and other paranormal phenomena.

Does that make them less of an atheist? Well! I don't know. I mean they do not believe there is a god because they've not encountered ha. Yet they believe in those things they've not encountered. Even if they were sure they've encountered those things that others might not have, don't they think others have encountered a god that they've not had?

Anyways that's not the point.

Atheists have faith but we don't have hope.
And it's the force of faith that drives atheists.

Atheists have faith first, then act.
Theists act, then they hope.

Faith and hope are the same in theism.
In atheism they are entirely different.

This is deep, I hope your brain power can comprehend.
If you still didn't understand, I can give you some scenarios.