₦airaland Forum

neocortex:
If the bolded is true , does he deserve to be called a god of love ?

Such is my confusion too. So many contradictions in all these books.

Na yolobas they re good at raping and kidnapping

neocortex:
That is a possibility, he probably supports
the highest bidder.

He chooses sides. I am still yet to hear that he is god of Nigeria.

Hawlahscho:
Bros, watch your comments about God.


Remember: 1 Corinthians 1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men




He knows the end even before the beginning.

He should start acting or is he another body language?

SeverusSnape:
where was God when this happened
''Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?, Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing?, Then he is malevolent. Is he both willing and able?. Then from whence cometh evil?. Is he neither able nor willing?. Then why call him God?''... EPICURUS

The so-called problem of evil is a topic of much debate in theology and the philosophy of religion. It was first proposed by the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus. Many atheists base their views to some degree on their assessment of this argument's strength.

The twentieth century saw the rise of a "reformed" philosophy of religion, spearheaded primarily by Alvin Plantinga, a prominent professor at Notre Dame. Plantinga introduced, in his 1967 work God and Other Minds, a defense of theism that counters the argument of evil with several observations about freedom of will. Rather than trying to give a moral justification for evil, Plantinga prefers to establish only that the existence of God and evil are jointly possible.

Plantinga's view hinges on the claim that even God cannot ensure free moral agents always do the right thing:

Suppose God creates an agent with the intent that this agent freely chooses good all the time. Now, if the agent is to freely choose some good, he must actually be free to choose it or to refrain from choosing it. Further suppose that there is a world - the world God wants to make actual - in which that agent does choose the good all the time. This world can only be made actual if its predecessor - a "world segment" that includes all of the world's states of affairs save the agent's choice - is first made actual (before it can be true that an agent chooses the right thing in a situation, the agent must be presented with the situation at hand). But if a world segment is made actual, then, if the agent is free with respect to the decision that must be made, God cannot control whether the agent will freely choose to do right or wrong. The upshot is that theological compatiblism must be false - for God to determine that an agent will do right all the time is inconsistent with that agent freely choosing to do right all the time. "God determines that an agent must freely choose to do right" is analogous to "God creates a married bachelor."

Plantinga furthers his defense in God, Freedom and Evil. If it is logically possible that all agents are depraved (will go wrong with respect to some action or other) in any world in which they exist, then it is logically possible that God could, no matter which agents he caused to exist, never create a world with human freedom and no moral evil.

He thinks there is no reason to question the possibility of "transworld depravity," and thus concludes that his defense fends off the problem of evil. Many philosophers - both theistic and atheistic - agree with this assessment

Rejecting God does not dispose of the problem of evil; evil continues to exist, and continues to be as problematic as before. While the atheist, having rejected God, no longer needs to justify the goodness of God to themselves (theodicy), now they are faced with the equally difficult task of justifying the goodness of their new objects of faith, humanity and the universe. Thus they turn to what are the atheistic equivalents of theodicy, anthropodicy (the attempt to justify humanity as good despite the great evils humanity has been responsible for) and cosmodicy (the attempt to justify the universe as good in face of the great evils it contains). It is necessary for atheists to do so because the atheist worldview falls apart without faith in the goodness of humanity or the universe. These disciplines are as difficult as theodicy is.

J. Matthew Ashley explains the relationship between theodicy, anthropodicy and cosmodicy:

In classical terms, this is to broach the problem of theodicy: how to think about God in the face of the presence of suffering in God's creation. After God's dethronement as the subject of history, the question rebounds to the new subject of history: the human being. As a consequence, theodicy becomes anthropodicy — justifications of our faith in humanity as the subject of history, in the face of the suffering that is so inextricably woven into the history that humanity makes. Mutatis mutandis, the universe story brings with it the need for a "cosmodicy." How do we think about the presence of suffering, on a massive scale, in the story of the cosmos, particularly when the cosmos itself is understood to be the subject of history? How do we justify our faith in the cosmos?
So, the depth to which we try to objectify our existential experience of evil is merely a reflection of the depth to which we hold the good and the rational to be at once objective and transcendent. The very standards of good-and-evil by which the existence of God is rejected as impossible are rendered epistemologically impotent if God really does not exist. In other words, if it were true that God does not exist, and, thus, that there is no universal standard, or source, of right and wrong, then the argument from evil would be invalid. The argument from evil is like using the tools and materials for building a house to tear down an existing house, and then, since there is no house there, concluding that a house is an impossible kind of object.

Apart from viewing the indifferent cosmos as most essentially pro-human, the denial of the existence of God renders human beings as essentially no better than animals. So, to the extent that humans view animals as having no inalienable rights, such as in regard to the human need to eat meat, and such as the acceptance by humans of animal cruelty against animals as the admirability of 'an integral part of Nature's way', atheism has no objective standard by which either to deny that any kind of violence by humans to humans is anything but part of 'Nature', or to assert that the simple killing of humans by some higher life form is abhorant to 'Nature'.

Those who object to God's typical inaction with regard to human conflict and human plight feel that if God were truly good and truly omnipotent, then God would be stepping in every time injustice is done to one person or group by another. But, no descendent of Adam is essentially more moral than the worst known tyrants in history, else we must explain their tyranny as the product of an essentially lesser and immoral kind of being which merely looks human. No tyrant in history was born practicing the evils he is known for, and every tyrant-in-waiting will, if opportunities fully allow it, strive for his own peace to the detriment of his fellows. This means that no descendent of Adam is as good as he thinks he is during his days of being the underdog. Lack of opportunity to succeed tyrannically in our own selfish interests means only that we tend to focus on how we may best survive by being good. This is what gives us our sense that we are essentially more worthy of God's intervention than are murderous tyrants, when, in fact, we all, including tyrants, are entirely unworthy. David understood this long before he became King of Israel, which is a key reason for why God called him the 'apple of my eye'.

neocortex:
The same way he allows Boko haram to kill thousands of christians ?
How can you call a god who doesn't care if you are dead or alive ;
healthy or sick benevolent father?

Even earthly fathers who allows evil befall any of his children are rejected
and condemned by the society, why then would an "all-loving" "heavenly father"
do something worse and some people still praise him for it ?

Only the truth can set you free.

And what's that truth? I believe in God. He has always been there whenever I call on him. He has never failed me, he shall never fail me. Why not give God a chance in your life?

neocortex:
You can't continue to live in fear of the unknown, you
need to emancipate your mind, this world is simply
beyond what you are being taught in sunday school.

if u believe you breath in oxygen and breath out carbon dioxide without seeing it, why can't you believe that there is a higher authority up there who watches over us?

SeverusSnape:
where was God when this happened
''Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?, Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing?, Then he is malevolent. Is he both willing and able?. Then from whence cometh evil?. Is he neither able nor willing?. Then why call him God?''... EPICURUS

May God forgive U

mackzydon9:
He should start acting or is he another body language?

Who is he

neocortex:
What will happen if he doesn't ?
It is high time you embraced the truth and
stop your pretencious believes.

Is there anything spiritual? I mean something that's more than physically comprehension?

Hawlahscho:
Who is he

Try to work it out

handie:
And what's that truth? I believe in God. He has always been there whenever I call on him. He has never failed me, he shall never fail me. Why not give God a chance in your life?

That is the same thing an Ogun/Allah worshippers in my street claims.
The problem with preachers like you is that you don't do self-
reflection, I am confident the "never fail me"part is a big lie
and you just have to say that to feel justified of your believe,
except you are not human , there are countless of times you have
failed one way or another.

That is how a preacher came to my house to preach and claimed that ever since he
knows god he has never been sick only for me to find him receiving malaria injection
in a nurse house.

You can keep deceiving the simpletons who will accept everything you say
without question, but the fact remains that every of your so-called
testimonies is totally subjective.

And to the oxygen issue, I don't need to see something to believe in
its existence, any thing that can be tested and verified is of course real.
While oxygen can be tested and confirmed by anyone believer/non-beleiever in everywhere it is found ,
can the same thing be said of your god ?


Why not step out of your comfort zone and
ask pertinent questions, trust me if you do
that you will be amazed at the level of freedom
you will attain.
Imagine the possibilities ?

SeverusSnape:
where was God when this happened
''Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?, Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing?, Then he is malevolent. Is he both willing and able?. Then from whence cometh evil?. Is he neither able nor willing?. Then why call him God?''... EPICURUS

The Parents of the stolen child are as fooolish and brainless as you, 'SeverusSnape'. The Almighty God will be more than patient for you to come back to His presence to account for your heresy. The only favour you will get from God if you chose to make the hell fire with your own hand is that he will continue to replenish your skin with a new one when you are burnt out so that your suffering will be continuous for eternity!

When a couple seek deliverance from a mortal like them instead of being on a one-on-one relationship with their creator, they have only invited Satan into their affair.

panachuku:
d way dis white garment churches decieve pple self ehn. dey fit don use am do juju bt God forbid

& does such happen only in white garment churches? was a child not once kidnapped frm canaanland(tho reported found afta yrs)? shit happens everywia

She was sold by her parents.

I suspect their main pastor/prophet to be behind this

neocortex:
That is the same thing an Ogun/Allah worshippers in my street claims.
The problem with preachers like you is that you don't do self-
reflection, I am confident the "never fail me"part is a big lie
and you just have to say that to feel justified of your believe,
except you are not human , there are countless of times you have
failed one way or another.

That is how a preacher came to my house to preach and claimed that ever since he
knows god he has never been sick only for me to find him receiving malaria injection
in a nurse house.

You can keep deceiving the simpletons who will accept everything you say
without question, but the fact remains that every of your so-called
testimonies is totally subjective.

And to the oxygen issue, I don't need to see something to believe in
its existence, any thing that can be tested and verified is of course real.
While oxygen can be tested and confirmed by anyone believer/non-beleiever in everywhere it is found ,
can the same thing be said of your god ?


Why not step out of your comfort zone and
ask pertinent questions, trust me if you do
that you will be amazed at the level of freedom
you will attain.
Imagine the possibilities ?

Free? U joking right? There's no way to freedom except through God almighty. As for u terming me a preacher, I'm not and have never been. The earlier u believe in God, the better

The suspects are those three behind the innocent child, look at the way they are staring at him.........................

Honestly I am confuse too, I just try 2 av faith cos I av seen some of his wonder