₦airaland Forum

Kukutente23:
Is ageing the foundation of life?
I'm not getting your logic
It seems you just want to type something

The logic is simple: physical existence is defined by inevitable suffering, genetic defects, and eventual total systemic collapse. It's patently absurd to think that human gratitude is mandatory when the reality of living involves constant vulnerability to disease and mental decline.

NerdCat:
Word? Well then you've just abolished the entire moral case for worshipping God in a single sentence - because a deity whose mercy is merely discretionary and whose creation is just property cannot be a loving Father. You’ve essentially reduced the "King of Kings" to a petty, disgruntled fella who treats human beings like his lawn furniture.

What theory or law do you refer to in the bold above
Can you clearly explain the relationship between being a loving father as you put it and being worthy of worship?

NerdCat:
The logic is simple: physical existence is defined by inevitable suffering, genetic defects, and eventual total systemic collapse. It's patently absurd to think that human gratitude is mandatory when the reality of living involves constant vulnerability to disease and mental decline.

Are you in an alternate universe of some sort?
I don't know of any situation where aging is defined as the whole definition of human existence

Kukutente23:
Are you in an alternate universe of some sort?
I don't know of any situation where aging is defined as the whole definition of human existence

That's because you've sidestepped the actual proposition with the elegance of someone tripping over their own deflection. Given that the original point was about guaranteed suffering being incompatible with mandatory gratitude, your objection addresses a conversation happening entirely in your own head. Or is your misreading of my argument, perhaps, also God's perfect design?

Kukutente23:
What theory or law do you refer to in the bold above
Can you clearly explain the relationship between being a loving father as you put it and being worthy of worship?

Maybe you should stop to sit with the implications of your own question - because demanding a law governing why loving fathers are more worship-worthy than petty tyrants suggests you might have a rather suspicious moral framework. This is elementary relational ethics that even children can grasp instinctively. It is the capacity for genuine love that seperates a benevolent guardian from a malevolent one. Without that genuine love, you cannot be called loving or benevolent.

NerdCat:
...therefore your God is essentially an omnipotent showman who engineered the entire catastrophe of human suffering as an exhibition piece for the heavenly cheap seats, which proves that he is NOT merciful in any definition that humans actually recognise.

Nope. But I don't gainsay your right to position it as you see fit. I'm happy to see you ascribe omnipotence to God. Unless you possess that attribute yourself, you can prove nothing.

NerdCat:
And I don't suppose Ephesians 3:10 lands quite as reassuringly in a hospice ward, or at a child's funeral, or in the mind of someone whose dementia has stolen every dignified thing they ever were - quite the puzzler, isn't it?

Harm and suffering are not from God. They are as a result of the actions of others. Ultimately, everything will be set right for those that put their trust in Him and His salvational work - even if temporal suffering persists for a time.


TV

TV01:
Nope. But I don't gainsay your right to position it as you see fit. I'm happy to see you ascribe omnipotence to God. Unless you possess that attribute yourself, you can prove nothing.

I don't need omnipotence to identify a logical contradiction. Beyond your suspiciously breezy "nope," you've essentially agreed that suffering exists and mercy doesn't explain it. It is what it is.

Harm and suffering are not from God. They are as a result of the actions of others. Ultimately, everything will be set right for those that put their trust in Him and His salvational work - even if temporal suffering persists for a time.


TV

Allow me to stress-test that thesis with a child's brain tumor, thank you very much. Now, you tell me, whose actions specifically caused that one? Harm and suffering from purely human conduct is one conversation, but metastatic cancer in a seven-year-old is structurally another one entirely. Keep in mind - an omnipotent deity who permits the latter while possessing the power to prevent it is morally indistinguishable from its architect.

NerdCat:
Maybe you should stop to sit with the implications of your own question - because demanding a law governing why loving fathers are more worship-worthy than petty tyrants suggests you might have a rather suspicious moral framework. This is elementary relational ethics that even children can grasp instinctively. It is the capacity for genuine love that seperates a benevolent guardian from a malevolent one. Without that genuine love, you cannot be called loving or benevolent.

You did not answer my question
What law says the condition for a deity to be worthy of worship, father or not, is that he should exude love towards his worshippers? What about fear? Is it a valid ground to be worthy of worship? Is admiration allowed? What about the purely transactional idea of being powerful enough to protect and sustain the worshipper? Are any of these valid or love alone is the condition upon which worship can be genuinely built?

NerdCat:
That's because you've sidestepped the actual proposition with the elegance of someone tripping over their own deflection. Given that the original point was about guaranteed suffering being incompatible with mandatory gratitude, your objection addresses a conversation happening entirely in your own head. Or is your misreading of my argument, perhaps, also God's perfect design?

Your comment seems to place the aging and dying of mortals as a misnomer which the deity responsible for creation should be vilified for.
You did not stop there. You somehow summarised aging as the whole essence of existence and defined it as a terrible physical affliction which supersedes all other natural processes
If aging is blamed on God, who do you hang birthing and growing upon? You're simply assuming too much to aging in a bid to disparage the creator

TV01:
Ultimately, everything will be set right for those that put their trust in Him and His salvational work - even if temporal suffering persists for a time.


TV

Oh like it was eventually set right for Job by ensuring that he had fresh children as though that would wipe away the grief over those who were lost in what was a mischievous and sadistic gambling game between Yahweh and the Devil?

NerdCat:
I don't need omnipotence to identify a logical contradiction. Beyond your suspiciously breezy "nope," you've essentially agreed that suffering exists and mercy doesn't explain it. It is what it is.

Allow me to stress-test that thesis with a child's brain tumor, thank you very much. Now, you tell me, whose actions specifically caused that one? Harm and suffering from purely human conduct is one conversation, but metastatic cancer in a seven-year-old is structurally another one entirely. Keep in mind - an omnipotent deity who permits the latter while possessing the power to prevent it is morally indistinguishable from its architect.

You are soooooo on point.

Kukutente23:
Your comment seems to place the aging and dying of mortals as a misnomer which the deity responsible for creation should be vilified for.
You did not stop there. You somehow summarised aging as the whole essence of existence and defined it as a terrible physical affliction which supersedes all other natural processes
If aging is blamed on God, who do you hang birthing and growing upon? You're simply assuming too much to aging in a bid to disparage the creator

Let me come in here. It is not just aging by itself I referred to in the OP. I referred to the infirmities, indignities and vulnerabilities it is often attended with.

Kukutente23:
You did not answer my question
What law says the condition for a deity to be worthy of worship, father or not, is that he should exude love towards his worshippers? What about fear? Is it a valid ground to be worthy of worship? Is admiration allowed? What about the purely transactional idea of being powerful enough to protect and sustain the worshipper? Are any of these valid or love alone is the condition upon which worship can be genuinely built?

There's no singular law or statute. Finito. So come off it already. And I didn't fail to notice that you've just smuggled in a concession by listing fear, admiration, and transactionalism as viable worship foundations, which tells me everything I need to know about your religion: it's no different from a protection racket. And furthermore, the moment worship becomes a purely coercive affair, the term "father" morphs from a benevolent term to become a grotesque euphemism.

Now, I'm not sure how you missed this, but love was YOUR religion's central sales pitch, not mine. So don't blame me for holding up your text to the light of facts.

NerdCat:
There's no singular law or statute. Finito. So come off it already. And I didn't fail to notice that you've just smuggled in a concession by listing fear, admiration, and transactionalism as viable worship foundations, which tells me everything I need to know about your religion: it's no different from a protection racket. And furthermore, the moment worship becomes a purely coercive affair, the term "father" morphs from a benevolent term to become a grotesque euphemism.

@ the bold!

Now, I'm not sure how you missed this, but love was YOUR religion's central sales pitch, not mine. So don't blame me for holding up your text to the light of facts.

GBAM!

Kukutente23:
Your comment seems to place the aging and dying of mortals as a misnomer which the deity responsible for creation should be vilified for.
You did not stop there. You somehow summarised aging as the whole essence of existence and defined it as a terrible physical affliction which supersedes all other natural processes
If aging is blamed on God, who do you hang birthing and growing upon? You're simply assuming too much to aging in a bid to disparage the creator

This is a rather unnecessary wild goose chase you've subjected yourself to - chasing a straw man of your own frantic assembly while the actual argument stands untouched in the corner, waiting. I never summarised aging as "the whole essence of existence," and I'd invite you to locate the sentence where I did, but I suspect the search would be both brief and frustrating. I don't even understand the interpretive gymnastics required to read "inevitable suffering and systemic collapse" as a dismissal of every positive biological process simultaneously. Please reel it in, and actually engage with the proposition: mandatory gratitude is philosophically untenable when suffering is structurally guaranteed. And even if we generously credit your god with the beauty of nature and the gift of life, we must still be forced to reckon with cancer, neurodegeneration, grief, viruses, and the whole bag of nasties. It always amuses me how Christians insist on trying to audit these facts selectively.

Dtruthspeaker:
You say i label people who disagree with as "enemies of God" and "God haters".
Here i am on this thread and this person disagrees with me where is the label?
https://www.nairaland.com/8660762/why-god-called-almighty#139231241

Or is it this person in this threadhttps://www.nairaland.com/8655994/what-youve-been-taught-fear/1#139198204

So, you see, you are only over reacting because you are truly a God hater which you yourself have expressed being an atheist. So I have only identified who you are which is you are a God hater and I said it.

It would definitely be a lie call you a God lover, so I am in very good order as i told you there are only 2 groups of people here in religion, God lovers and God haters. And it is, what it is.

And whereas, whilst God lovers listen, consider and measure the opinions of you anti God people, you anti God people never entertain our opinions, You only see God in your bad anti God light and where we answer and correct one of your queries, you just simply move on to raise another issue raising another bad light of anti Godism.

So, you anti God people are not here for Truth but are here to get Church goers to join you in the peril of anti Godism and God enemyship.

So, it is you who is not here for Truth and so, i won't waste my time.

And on this topic i have expressed my opinion which you do not like but I don't care as all we both have to do is simply watch and see what will happen in our lives, for i love how life and living levels and destroys every argument.

"Experience does not whisper truths; it shouts them, loud enough to shatter our illusions" Anonymous

So, i am happy you disagree with me, so now let's see what life shall do to us and let us see who laments on the death bed and who dies with smiles on their faces

😂😂😂
The level of self-delusion is actually impressive.
You just spent several posts repeatedly calling non-believers "enemies of God" and "God haters", then when called out, you run to two random links and say “See? I didn’t call this person that!”
Bro, you literally called atheists “enemies of God” and “anti-God people” in this very thread multiple times. You did it again in your last post. Stop gaslighting.

You proudly divide the world into only two groups: “God lovers” and “God haters/enemies of God”. That’s not “speaking Truth”. That’s tribalism and intellectual laziness. It allows you to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you without engaging their actual points.
And now you’re saying “let’s wait and see who dies smiling and who laments on their deathbed.”
This is exactly the fear-mongering and emotional blackmail I was talking about.

As Epicurus wisely said:
"Death is nothing to us, since when we exist, death has not come, and when death has come, we no longer exist."

Michel de Montaigne added:
"The ceaseless labour of your life is to build the house of death."

And Seneca put it bluntly:
"We do not die because we are ill; we die because we are born."

Death comes for everyone believer and non-believer alike. Using it to gloat and threaten “just wait till your deathbed” doesn’t make you wise or truthful. It makes you petty and cruel.

You claim you’re “only here for Truth”, yet you reduce complex discussions about suffering, old age, and the meaning of life into “God lovers vs God haters”. That’s not seeking Truth. That’s hiding behind simplistic labels because you can’t handle honest disagreement.

The truth is simple: people die scared or peaceful regardless of their beliefs. Your need to turn every death into a victory lap for your side says more about your insecurity than about any cosmic truth.

Keep waiting for that deathbed “gotcha” moment. The rest of us will continue living without your constant fear and division.

DeepSight:
Let me come in here. It is not just aging by itself I referred to in the OP. I referred to the infirmities, indignities and vulnerabilities it is often attended with.

I suspect he already knows this, but is going to pretend otherwise, as confronting the implications head-on would be significantly lethal to his position. 🫣

NerdCat:
This is a rather unnecessary wild goose chase you've subjected yourself to - chasing a straw man of your own frantic assembly while the actual argument stands untouched in the corner, waiting. I never summarised aging as "the whole essence of existence," and I'd invite you to locate the sentence where I did, but I suspect the search would be both brief and frustrating. I don't even understand the interpretive gymnastics required to read "inevitable suffering and systemic collapse" as a dismissal of every positive biological process simultaneously. Please reel it in, and actually engage with the proposition: mandatory gratitude is philosophically untenable when suffering is structurally guaranteed. And even if we generously credit your god with the beauty of nature and the gift of life, we must still be forced to reckon with cancer, neurodegeneration, grief, viruses, and the whole bag of nasties. It always amuses me how Christians insist on trying to audit these facts selectively.

Is the below you or your alter ego writing from another realm

NerdCat:
The logic is simple: physical existence is defined by inevitable suffering, genetic defects, and eventual total systemic collapse.

I do not waste my time on folks who cannot even remember what they wrote minutes back. Get yourself properly articulate before you come back

NerdCat:
There's no singular law or statute. Finito. So come off it already. And I didn't fail to notice that you've just smuggled in a concession by listing fear, admiration, and transactionalism as viable worship foundations, which tells me everything I need to know about your religion: it's no different from a protection racket. And furthermore, the moment worship becomes a purely coercive affair, the term "father" morphs from a benevolent term to become a grotesque euphemism.

Now, I'm not sure how you missed this, but love was YOUR religion's central sales pitch, not mine. So don't blame me for holding up your text to the light of facts.

I don't believe the subject of this conversation is too interrogate the base of worship in a religion.
This chat was intended to interrogate the relationship between creator and creature and the essence of the relationship. If your wish to reduce it to Christian doctrine, be my guest but don't mix things up in your attempt to reduce deity worship to your narrow prism

Kukutente23:
Is the below you or your alter ego writing from another realm


I do not waste my time on folks who cannot even remember what they wrote minutes back. Get yourself properly articulate before you come back

Well, at least your lack of reading comprehension is no longer in doubt. By the way, what you cited there says "inevitable suffering, genetic defects, and eventual total systemic collapse" - a catalogue of structural vulnerabilities baked into biological existence - which is, rather embarrassingly for you, the precise opposite of claiming that "aging alone defines existence." You've unwittingly submitted evidence that directly contradicts your own accusation. That takes a genuinely special kind of audacity.

I hope we can use this to learn a lesson in reading comprehension before deploying previous quotes as weapons, because nothing announces defeat quite like your own exhibit exonerating your opponent.

Kukutente23:
I don't believe the subject of this conversation is too interrogate the base of worship in a religion.
This chat was intended to interrogate the relationship between creator and creature and the essence of the relationship. If your wish to reduce it to Christian doctrine, be my guest but don't mix things up in your attempt to reduce deity worship to your narrow prism

The creator-creature relationship you've invoked carries every implication I identified, regardless of which brand name you slap on it. So move the goalposts wherever you want - it matters little when you can't defend the goals from coming in.

NerdCat:
The creator-creature relationship you've invoked carries every implication I identified, regardless of which brand name you slap on it. So move the goalposts wherever you want - it matters little when you can't defend the goals from coming in.

You're still not able to pick a side dude
Are you here to interrogate the Christian idea of creator worship or you're here to question why we should worship the creator at all?

Kukutente23:
You're still not able to pick a side dude
Are you here to interrogate the Christian idea of creator worship or you're here to question why we should worship the creator at all?

I'm here to do both, simultaneously, and without contradiction.

NerdCat:
I'm here to do both, simultaneously, and without contradiction.

You would find yourself a confused man

NerdCat:
This is a rather unnecessary wild goose chase you've subjected yourself to - chasing a straw man of your own frantic assembly while the actual argument stands untouched in the corner, waiting. I never summarised aging as "the whole essence of existence," and I'd invite you to locate the sentence where I did, but I suspect the search would be both brief and frustrating. I don't even understand the interpretive gymnastics required to read "inevitable suffering and systemic collapse" as a dismissal of every positive biological process simultaneously. Please reel it in, and actually engage with the proposition: mandatory gratitude is philosophically untenable when suffering is structurally guaranteed. And even if we generously credit your god with the beauty of nature and the gift of life, we must still be forced to reckon with cancer, neurodegeneration, grief, viruses, and the whole bag of nasties. It always amuses me how Christians insist on trying to audit these facts selectively.

Very selective auditing.

SpyMaster1:
😂😂😂
The level of self-delusion is actually impressive.
You just spent several posts repeatedly calling non-believers "enemies of God" and "God haters", then when called out, you run to two random links and say “See? I didn’t call this person that!”
Bro, you literally called atheists “enemies of God” and “anti-God people” in this very thread multiple times. You did it again in your last post. Stop gaslighting.

You proudly divide the world into only two groups: “God lovers” and “God haters/enemies of God”. That’s not “speaking Truth”. That’s tribalism and intellectual laziness. It allows you to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you without engaging their actual points.
And now you’re saying “let’s wait and see who dies smiling and who laments on their deathbed.”
This is exactly the fear-mongering and emotional blackmail I was talking about.

As Epicurus wisely said:
"Death is nothing to us, since when we exist, death has not come, and when death has come, we no longer exist."

Michel de Montaigne added:
"The ceaseless labour of your life is to build the house of death."

And Seneca put it bluntly:
"We do not die because we are ill; we die because we are born."

Death comes for everyone believer and non-believer alike. Using it to gloat and threaten “just wait till your deathbed” doesn’t make you wise or truthful. It makes you petty and cruel.

You claim you’re “only here for Truth”, yet you reduce complex discussions about suffering, old age, and the meaning of life into “God lovers vs God haters”. That’s not seeking Truth. That’s hiding behind simplistic labels because you can’t handle honest disagreement.

The truth is simple: people die scared or peaceful regardless of their beliefs. Your need to turn every death into a victory lap for your side says more about your insecurity than about any cosmic truth.

Keep waiting for that deathbed “gotcha” moment. The rest of us will continue living without your constant fear and division.

If you were familiar with that poster you would understand that everything you have written is far above his head.

SpyMaster1:
😂😂😂
The level of self-delusion is actually impressive.
You just spent several posts repeatedly calling non-believers "enemies of God" and "God haters", then when called out, you run to two random links and say “See? I didn’t call this person that!”
Bro, you literally called atheists “enemies of God” and “anti-God people” in this very thread multiple times. You did it again in your last post. Stop gaslighting.

You proudly divide the world into only two groups: “God lovers” and “God haters/enemies of God”. That’s not “speaking Truth”. That’s tribalism and intellectual laziness. It allows you to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you without engaging their actual points.
And now you’re saying “let’s wait and see who dies smiling and who laments on their deathbed.”
This is exactly the fear-mongering and emotional blackmail I was talking about.

As Epicurus wisely said:
"Death is nothing to us, since when we exist, death has not come, and when death has come, we no longer exist."

Michel de Montaigne added:
"The ceaseless labour of your life is to build the house of death."

And Seneca put it bluntly:
"We do not die because we are ill; we die because we are born."

Death comes for everyone believer and non-believer alike. Using it to gloat and threaten “just wait till your deathbed” doesn’t make you wise or truthful. It makes you petty and cruel.

You claim you’re “only here for Truth”, yet you reduce complex discussions about suffering, old age, and the meaning of life into “God lovers vs God haters”. That’s not seeking Truth. That’s hiding behind simplistic labels because you can’t handle honest disagreement.

The truth is simple: people die scared or peaceful regardless of their beliefs. Your need to turn every death into a victory lap for your side says more about your insecurity than about any cosmic truth.

Keep waiting for that deathbed “gotcha” moment. The rest of us will continue living without your constant fear and division.

Projecting your delusion only shows how deeply rooted it is in you.

Then, you said "every single time you open your mouth, you label people who disagree with you as "enemies of God" and "God haters"." And now I have shown you examples of people who disagreed with me and I did not call them enemies of God and now you don't have anything to say but repeat yourself.

And your delu is so huge that it is not allowing you see that it is already proven beyond every doubt that atheists are God haters and enemies of God.

As already shown here, there are only 2 groups of people here in religion, God lovers and God haters. And no reasonable person can say that you are not a God hater. Same thing for every other atheists, so, that is settled already.

Then all your people's quotes on death don't address the point of this thread which is you all who are enemies of God MUST live and di. e in great fear and tremor when deathing starts.

And I am not threatening you it is your own soul who is making you afraid because I have reminded you and it of what it knows is coming for the both of you, for i have made all the arguments that I can reasonably make and so now I stop and say God, life and experience should take over the matter.

So i have said all i should say and now I leave it to life and experience.

"Experience does not whisper truths; it shouts them, loud enough to shatter our illusions" Anonymous

So i urge you to live your life without being afraid of death and tell someone to call me to your death bed side let me come and see if you indeed are not trembling like others before you.

Kukutente23:
You would find yourself a confused man

Strongly disagree. There really is no contradiction. The problem here is that the distinction b/w specific critique and general principle is something you can't grasp because it operates beyond your current cognitive bandwidth, and I say this without trying to be offensive.

NerdCat:
Strongly disagree. There really is no contradiction. The problem here is that the distinction b/w specific critique and general principle is something you can't grasp because it operates beyond your current cognitive bandwidth, and I say this without trying to be offensive.

Lol
You couldn't even make up your mind on which you want to discuss

Kukutente23:
Lol
You couldn't even make up your mind on which you want to discuss

Can you articulate a reason why we can't discuss both? Go on.

Dtruthspeaker:
Projecting your delusion only shows how deeply rooted it is in you.

Then, you said "every single time you open your mouth, you label people who disagree with you as "enemies of God" and "God haters"." And now I have shown you examples of people who disagreed with me and I did not call them enemies of God and now you don't have anything to say but repeat yourself.

And your delu is so huge that it is not allowing you see that it is already proven beyond every doubt that atheists are God haters and enemies of God.

As already shown here, there are only 2 groups of people here in religion, God lovers and God haters. And no reasonable person can say that you are not a God hater. Same thing for every other atheists, so, that is settled already.

Then all your people's quotes on death don't address the point of this thread which is you all who are enemies of God MUST live and di. e in great fear and tremor when deathing starts.

And I am not threatening you it is your own soul who is making you afraid because I have reminded you and it of what it knows is coming for the both of you, for i have made all the arguments that I can reasonably make and so now I stop and say God, life and experience should take over the matter.

So i have said all i should say and now I leave it to life and experience.

"Experience does not whisper truths; it shouts them, loud enough to shatter our illusions" Anonymous

So i urge you to live your life without being afraid of death and tell someone to call me to your death bed side let me come and see if you indeed are not trembling like others before you.

I've said what I needed to say.
You're clearly more interested in gloating about deathbeds, labeling people "enemies of God", and waiting for others to tremble in fear than actually engaging with ideas honestly.

I'll leave you to your victory dance and deathbed fantasies.
Life will continue as it always does with or without your dramatic predictions.
Have a good day.!

SpyMaster1:
I've said what I needed to say.
You're clearly more interested in gloating about deathbeds, labeling people "enemies of God", and waiting for others to tremble in fear than actually engaging with ideas honestly.

I'll leave you to your victory dance and deathbed fantasies.
Life will continue as it always does with or without your dramatic predictions.
Have a good day.!

The topic is about death and the suffering people go through when they die. And I have said that it is avoidable but that people never listen to God. And the bottom line is that we are all gonna live and die with the decisions we have taken.

Sooner or later everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences.
Robert Louis Stevenson