logoscope:

Hope for what? There is no hope. Life is meaningless. You create your own reality.

I wonder what your final statements would be like, when you're all old and ready to die. When your weak body no longer has its grasp on you and finally you see that life exist beyond this world.
Lets assume in your terms such reality exist beyond this world, all you've been told about heaven and hell was true all this while..
*** Remember we're assumin'.. ***
What then would be your thoughts..??

Joshthefirst:

PS: Your signature says it all.

It points out the clearly - the confusion of the mind.

Logicbwoy:



Does God really speak to you?

What does he sound like? British or Nigerian accent?

This Question sounds funny every time I hear of it.

Tell me, how would you describe the color Red to a man blind from birth.
Can you explain to me exactly how tea smells like?

logoscope:

The fact that your god exists and is the only true god has implications and bi-implications.

Care to explain how you arrived at your claim?

Joshthefirst:
lol. God doesn't communicate the way I and you would. He is Spirit, and the author of communication itself.

When he speaks, he doesn't speak in one language or the other, but we hear him in the language we understand.

I thought you would ask how I know the God that speaks to me is authentic over other voices and gods. The reason is that I have a spiritual witness, apart from that. God confirms his word with power, and I have witnessed his power.


One more thing, I do not just communicate with God. But now that I know him, I'm part of his big picture. He has an agenda for the worlds, and his plans and purposes are being wrought by men around the globe.

Interesting.

However, there are many priests and pastors who would disagree with you. A popular canard in christianity is that God answers with signs and wonder but not direct communication- which contradicts.

Secondly, you sound like a polygamist when you mention "spiritual witness". God does not need a spiritual middleman- this is one of the criticism the catholic church faces when they say that they ask for Mary (mother of God) to intercede in their prayers.


Rationally, it is difficult to accept your communication with God.

BossTtdiamonds:


This Question sounds funny every time I hear of it.

Tell me, how would you describe the color Red to a man blind from birth.
Can you explain to me exactly how tea smells like?

Non-sequitur. Your argument does not follow.

I am not deaf and dumb. If your God speaks to you, then he must have a voice. A voice that has a unique sound.

logoscope:

It's an arbitrary figure, but then its not far fetched. By the way god(s) is an anunnaki. The heaven and hell most people envision does not exist.

And how did you arrive at your claim.. I though you atheist refer to such as a Negative proposition..??

undercat:


You are quite right. However some people do get convinced by some of the arguments. I think the modest conversion rate might add some fuel to the fire, with most commentators hoping to release other commentators from ignorance.

I suspect that theists will not like your saying that God cannot be proven beyond a shadow of doubt since they consider God to be proven to them.

Actually I'm one of them. I do believe God exists. He exists beyond the shadow of a doubt for me, but I'm also aware that I cannot prove that to someone else.

Knowing God is something that must be experienced personally. A personal relationship with God is not something that can be explained into existence.

I do wish everyone felt the joy and love that I feel. I won't try to force my beliefs on anyone though.

Logicbwoy:



Non-sequitur. Your argument does not follow.

I am not deaf and dumb. If your God speaks to you, then he must have a voice. A voice that has a unique sound.

You might be deaf and dumb to certain voices nevertheless..
Communication between a sender and a receiver requires a technology, a mechanism, a device that aids the translation of sound energy into data, processed by the brain and results in a meaningful information. For humans, the mechanism of communication is quite complex but automated such that we have no idea the processes that lead to the end result consciously but such is expressed simply in real time.
Communication itself is also governed by certain laws not visible to the human eye.

For instance, bats and elephants hear sounds we can't hear, that does not necessarily mean we're deaf we just lack the required mechanism to tap to such frequency or dimension as I love to put it.

The Question you should rather be askin' should be what sounds you're deaf to..

BossTtdiamonds:


You might be deaf and dumb to certain voices nevertheless..
Communication between a sender and a receiver requires a technology, a mechanism, a device that aids the translation of sound energy into data, processed by the brain and results in a meaningful information. For humans, the mechanism of communication is quite complex but automated such that we have no idea the processes that lead to the end result consciously but such is expressed simply in real time.
Communication itself is also governed by certain laws not visible to the human eye.

For instance, bats and elephants hear sounds we can't hear, that does not necessarily mean we're deaf we just lack the required mechanism to tap to such frequency or dimension as I love to put it.

The Question you should rather be askin' should be what sounds you're deaf to..

So I'm deaf to God but some people are not?

Not only insulting but quite silly and biased.

Can't seem to be able to post new topic. Anyone with that problem?

also, these panama papers are the bomb

wiegraf:
Can't seem to be able to post new topic. Anyone with that problem?

also, these panama papers are the bomb

Nothing special about Panama papers- rich people want to avoid being taxed and also, some of them want to hide the money they made illegally in safe spaces. Bankers and financial institutions have always helped rich people to do this.

Not interested.

Logicbwoy:



So I'm deaf to God but some people are not?

Not only insulting but quite silly and biased.

This is in no way insultin', silly or biased.. You've rather chosen to be evasive, an act possessin' all the traits you've listed above.
I'm not dumb, I can clearly aee through your locution.

A fact that disproves your logic is this.
A knows how to drive a car, B dosen't have the knowledge on how to drive a car.
B says: "I have arms, legs, and a working brain" that's all it takes to drive a Car.
A says: you lack the skills and manipulations of such
B says: So some people can drive cars, others can't; This is insulting, biased and silly.
A: Looks at B like ***The thunder that will fire you eh!***

That aside...

It's only logical to conclude that your communication with God is deafened.
The premise of my argument would be substantiated by the followin' statements...
1. You have in no way tried to establish a communication with God?
* I know this is an absolute statement, nevertheless I still affirm it, this is because effective communication with God requires genuinety*
2. Since you have never tried to establish a communication with God, you'd lack the neccessary knowledge or know-how on how to go about communicatin' with God.
3. Since you lack the Know-how, you can't also fathom principles and laws that presides over such communication.
4. Since you lack the know-how/knowledge, your perception, view or thoufhs towards such communication is dead on arrival...

BossTtdiamonds:


This is in no way insultin', silly or biased.. You've rather chosen to be evasive, an act possessin' all the traits you've listed above.
I'm not dumb, I can clearly aee through your locution.

A fact that disproves your logic is this.
A knows how to drive a car, B dosen't have the knowledge on how to drive a car.
B says: "I have arms, legs, and a working brain" that's all it takes to drive a Car.
A says: you lack the skills and manipulations of such
B says: So some people can drive cars, others can't; This is insulting, biased and silly.
A: Looks at B like ***The thunder that will fire you eh!***

That aside...

It's only logical to conclude that your communication with God is deafened.
The premise of my argument would be substantiated by the followin' statements...
1. You have in no way tried to establish a communication with God?
* I know this is an absolute statement, nevertheless I still affirm it, this is because effective communication with God requires genuinety*
2. Since you have never tried to establish a communication with God, you'd lack the neccessary knowledge or know-how on how to go about communicatin' with God.
3. Since you lack the Know-how, you can't also fathom principles and laws that presides over such communication.
4. Since you lack the know-how/knowledge, your perception, view or thoufhs towards such communication is dead on arrival...

All of your points boil down to one thing-

It is either that your God is a selective, biased and unfair being who lacks the commonsense to be universally reachable to all humans OR your God doesnt exist, which then means that you are making things up to cover the irrationality of God speaking to select people.

Logicbwoy:


Nothing special about Panama papers- rich people want to avoid being taxed and also, some of them want to hide the money they made illegally in safe spaces. Bankers and financial institutions have always helped rich people to do this.

Not interested.

Even if many claim to be holier than thou, eg xi jinping and iceland pm? what of messi?

and this is the tip of the iceberg. they are giving people the chance to make statements before publishing their names

nigerians don't really international help to llaunder money, methinks, so don't expect too many oof us mentioned. that said, theres even stuff related to slavery there, so the scope.....

wiegraf:


Even if many claim to be holier than thou, eg xi jinping and iceland pm? what of messi?

and this is the tip of the iceberg. they are giving people the chance to make statements before publishing their names

nigerians don't really international help to llaunder money, methinks, so don't expect too many oof us mentioned. that said, theres even stuff related to slavery there, so the scope.....

Messi? Slavery?

I didnt read that part ooo! This has gotten interesting! I only saw government officials and the FIFA scandal. Nna, I didnt know it was bigger than that!

Make I go research!

sonOfLucifer:

Hmm. You know when you have things to say, but words can't truly express them, and there's a risk it might be misunderstood....



Yeah. I feel that way now. Lol.

*Sighs*

Me thinks he doeth protesteth too much under this moniker. Tis easy to hide from oneself. Take heed one doesn't lose oneself.


"To cheat oneself out of love is the most terrible deception; it is an eternal loss for which there is no reparation, either in time or in eternity."
~Søren Kierkegaard

Especially when he once felt it so strongly!

Logicbwoy:



Messi? Slavery?

I didnt read that part ooo! This has gotten interesting! I only saw government officials and the FIFA scandal. Nna, I didnt know it was bigger than that!

Make I go research!

And jackie chan....

apparently, supposed tax evasion aside, he's always been a bit of an a$$

texanomaly:

*Sighs*

Me thinks he doeth protesteth too much under this moniker. Tis easy to hide from oneself. Take heed one doesn't lose oneself.


"To cheat oneself out of love is the most terrible deception; it is an eternal loss for which there is no reparation, either in time or in eternity."
~Søren Kierkegaard

Especially when he once felt it so strongly!

texanomaly:
I saw it over and over before I finally left the Religion section. No one can prove anything one way or the other. We just keep banging each other over the head with our opinions. I guess it's the debate that makes it interesting. I used to get involved more when I first came to NL. Now I just sit back and watch the sparks fly.

Here we go around and around again...

*sighs*

It's like children trying to prove, "My dad is better than your dad!" How can that be proven when both children believe they are right no matter what the other says? You will never convince one that the others' is better.

Religion can't prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is a God. Science and logic cannot prove beyond the shadow of a doubt there is no God. So...

Is it the love of debate that fuels the fire?

One common tactic of concern trolls is the "a plague on both your houses" approach, where the concern troll tries to convince people that both sides of the ideological divide are just as bad as each other, and so no one can think themselves "correct" but must engage in endless hedging and caveats. This preys on a willingness to debate critics and allow dissent; everyone wastes time discussing the matter and bending over backwards, so as not to appear intolerant of disagreement, all to the great amusement of the troll.

==============================================

There is a reason why texanomaly's comment doesn't sit well with me. Every time there is a debate between atheists and theists (christians mostly), there is always a fence sitter who claims that the debate is futile and one can't prove God either way- be it to exist or not to exist.

This fence sitter is a concern troll because the fence sitter is not only misunderstanding the fundamental atheist position, but also acting as if both sides are equally wrong.

First the atheist position is that there is no evidence for God and by extension the onus is on the theist to provide evidence. Atheists dont need Texanomaly the fence sitter to tell us that God cant be proven to exist or not to exist- atheists already know that since most atheists are also agnostics. We know that the toothfairy can't be disproved the same way God cant be disproved.

Well, I think I'm going on hibernation.

The ratio of reasonable people to dummies on nairaland has dropped too low for my liking this time.

Even nairaland trolls are not creative anymore.

Logicbwoy:
Well, I think I'm going on hibernation. .

Good riddance.

Logicbwoy:
Well, I think I'm going on hibernation.

The ratio of reasonable people to dummies on nairaland has dropped too low for my liking this time.

Even nairaland trolls are not creative anymore.

Lol. They are no good trolls anymore in this section. I don't just understand why people are getting banned in this manner.

Logicbwoy:




All of your points boil down to one thing-

It is either that your God is a selective, biased and unfair being who lacks the commonsense to be universally reachable to all humans OR your God doesnt exist, which then means that you are making things up to cover the irrationality of God speaking to select people.

You're clearly shying away from the fact that you're deafened to hear of God..

Your argument is a non sequitur

But I'd still falsify your claim anyways...

Another fact is you can't even spot if God is tryin' to link one to you. Maybe tis' conversation is one of those ways of communication (indirectly).

So if God communicates through me (indirectly) to tell you that you have to establish a link with him before you can actively hear of him, them its logical to say it's you who's totally unreasonable and irrational not seein' that communication can be made directly or indirectly.

Here's an instance;

Student stays at home does not establish communication with Supervisor on how to proceed about constructing his Thesis.

Lecturer sends mate to student to inform Student he needs to establish a link of communication

Student ignores (Argues supervisor must come directly to him - he further argues the onus is on the supervisor to come down since he is the student).

Students fails at the end of the day and concludes tellin' his other mates "It is either that supervisor is a selective, biased and unfair lecturer who lacks the common sense to be institutionally reachable or that supervisor is a Ghost teacher"

Plus clearly the rule of not declarin' a negative is only applied when it suits you atheists right?

BossTtdiamonds:

Here's an instance;

Student stays at home does not establish communication with Supervisor on how to proceed about constructing his Thesis.

How does Student know what school is the right school? What if the Supervisor never comes out of his office, but only speaks through a PAS?

Reyginus:
Lol. They are no good trolls anymore in this section...

sonOfLucifer:

How does Student know what school is the right school?

This is still a non sequitur

Probing whether the school is the right or wrong school was never in the equation.. This was deceptively introduced.
If you wish to know more about the right school, ask the question genuinely and separately - don't attach it to a premise it dosen't conform to

What if the Supervisor never comes out of his office, but only speaks through a PAS?

You have said nothin' here
A communication would nevertheless be established so far the student willingly leaves his comfort zone
*remember the premise states that the student stays at home*
But in this case, it would be be a waste of time , illogical and irrational to communicate the details of a student's thesis through a Public Address System (PAS).
I'm sure you know how tertiary institutions work and I am sure you know that the compilation of a thesis is singularly based i.e. Individuals within the system has a particular research study which is always particular, will always be particular to that individual and different from every others.
Therefore a Public address system would not suit such purpose as the details of the thesis passed is not meant for the public but for singular persons.

BossTtdiamonds:

This is still a non sequitur

New phrase you learnt? How can you refer to a question as non sequitur?

BossTtdiamonds:

Probing whether the school is the right or wrong school was never in the equation..

Oh, it is. Because it seems a whole lot of you think one's position on God is an option between atheism and Christianity. Atheism is the direct opposite of theism. Christianity, Islam, ATR's and the Pantheon of God's they worship are subsets of theism. So even if I happen to believe in God tomorrow, he doesn't necessarily have to be the same one who spoke to Abraham or Muhammed.

BossTtdiamonds:

This was deceptively introduced.
If you wish to know more about the right school, ask the question genuinely and separately - don't attach it to a premise it dosen't conform to

Read above. The right school is a headache you and your fellow theists to solve. There's only one 'noGod' and many 'Gods'.. Lol.

BossTtdiamonds:

Therefore a Public address system would not suit such purpose as the details of the thesis passed is not meant for the public but for singular persons.

Thanks for explaining clearly how the Quran, Bible and other Holy books came about. God never meant to go public. He's all personal, like an idea and body odor.

BossTtdiamonds:


Care to explain how you arrived at your claim?

BossTtdiamonds:


I wonder what your final statements would be like, when you're all old and ready to die. When your weak body no longer has its grasp on you and finally you see that life exist beyond this world.
Lets assume in your terms such reality exist beyond this world, all you've been told about heaven and hell was true all this while..
*** Remember we're assumin'.. ***
What then would be your thoughts..??

BossTtdiamonds:


And how did you arrive at your claim.. I though you atheist refer to such as a Negative proposition..??

I'm not trying to convert anyone. The fact that I use Christianity in my examples is only because I was formerly a Christian. I also know a bit about other religions. Its atheism vs theism, not atheism vs Christianity. You definitely have the right to your opinions.

Logicbwoy:



One common tactic of concern trolls is the "a plague on both your houses" approach, where the concern troll tries to convince people that both sides of the ideological divide are just as bad as each other, and so no one can think themselves "correct" but must engage in endless hedging and caveats. This preys on a willingness to debate critics and allow dissent; everyone wastes time discussing the matter and bending over backwards, so as not to appear intolerant of disagreement, all to the great amusement of the troll.

==============================================

There is a reason why texanomaly's comment doesn't sit well with me. Every time there is a debate between atheists and theists (christians mostly), there is always a fence sitter who claims that the debate is futile and one can't prove God either way- be it to exist or not to exist.

This fence sitter is a concern troll because the fence sitter is not only misunderstanding the fundamental atheist position, but also acting as if both sides are equally wrong.

First the atheist position is that there is no evidence for God and by extension the onus is on the theist to provide evidence. Atheists dont need Texanomaly the fence sitter to tell us that God cant be proven to exist or not to exist- atheists already know that since most atheists are also agnostics. We know that the toothfairy can't be disproved the same way God cant be disproved.

Actually, I'm not a fence sitter. I think your position is completely wrong and you are missing out on a great deal of blessings because of it. I simply don't wish to argue about it. fortunately, we are free to believe what we will.

sonOfLucifer:

Back atcha Babe

sonOfLucifer:

you do a decent job tho. sometimes i want to shoot you