₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
I prefer we skip the arguments and go straight to examining the evidence.

Okay?

It's worth noting that we've talked before on one of my older accounts. Back then I wasn't this knowledgeable and I still couldn't process your points as being more valid than my dumber points at the time.
You've also talked before on these topics countless times with so many people.
What am I saying? At the end of the day we're the same people talking about Faith & Fate on this forum for the past 3 years+ at least and no one has been able to convince the other (even Max hasn't been able to convince his fellow "Christians" that JW is the way, AntiChrisstian hasn't been able to prove to us why Islam is the way, you have not been able to convince one theist I'm aware of into atheism).

Conclusion? By "examining the evidence" we'd still argue. All arguments lead to null, not necessarily because we're not presenting our points well, but mostly cos of the psychology behind trying to oppose someone's beliefs. And it gets worse when the other party is not OPEN-MINDED.

We already have good ideas of all points the other party will present.
So let's entertain ourselves instead. How do we make this NOT about convincing the other OR showcasing our knowledge OR mockery OR anything in that area? How do we just make this fun, entertaining?
I need to hear your rules.

Everyday247:
Really?
I made the assumption due to your choice of words such as "An invitation to critical reasoning".
You should ignore the reply then.

My reply are thoughts that was "sparked" while reading your post.

Have a nice day.

You too.
You skipped something tho. I love people who skip stuff, especially questions.

If you interpret my invitation to critical reasoning as a one-to-one conversation, then sí, we can go there.
This means we'd have to agree to each other's terms first. You don't appear as someone who'd agree with my terms.

This takes us back to having a nice day instead.

Everyday247:
Why does this post seem like AI generated slop?

There's this YouTuber that loves using this phrase, so simple, yet profound and funny (to me ofc). Meanwhile, which of which looks like the "slop"? My opening post or the two transcripts I posted?

Is it just now that you're encountering the redeemed zoomer?

Most probably. This is the first time I found those particular videos entertaining, any issues there?

I hope you know that that dude believes that the earth is billions of years old instead of the ten thousand years creationists believe
Anyways..........
Who were these eyewitnesses?
Didn't the Bible claim that very few people saw Jesus after his resurrection?
Why did Thomas doubt?

Also, bigfoot, Santa Claus, unicorns, flying spaghetti monster and every other gods also have many witnesses too. So it's nothing new. 🤭

Terrorists die for their faith, Nazis died for their ideology, ancient Roman soldiers died for their empires etc the concept of dying for an ideology is not uncommon. Fanatics are known to die for their ideologies.
What's the difference between a demonic possessed person and a mentally ill person?

What's the difference between unknown languages and gibberish?


Like…?

Define morality.
What are the criterias makes something good or bad?

Another question is that are gods above morality laws or are they subject to it?

If they are above morality, it means that they can for example command their followers to kill babies or sacrifice their children to them, and it will be considered ‘good’ because they are the one who made moral laws.

But if they are also subject to moral laws it means that morality is above them. So there's something greater that even gods must submit to.

The statement “Everything that happens has a cause” contradicts the first cause argument because the ‘first cause’ is also part of “everything”.

The statement only makes sense if you say “everything except the first first cause”.
But then this raises questions:

How did you know that there's a first cause?
What makes you claim that everything can't go forever (no beginning and no end)?
Why can't the universe(or multiverse) itself be its own first cause?

This is just another variation of the first cause argument

This argument doesn't make sense because there are many gods to choose from. The action that will please one god might displease another god

Also, this could be interpreted as: you believe in the gods because there's a gun pointed at your head.

What is this purpose that nature seems to have?

What is the purpose of the designer's existence?

This is a typical god of gaps argument. If we can't explain something, therefore god. We currently do not know what happens inside a black hole so therefore gods live inside black holes.

The god of gaps argument is an argument from ignorance, that uses gods to fill in currently unknown phenomena there by preventing further research and inquiry.

If we do not know or understand something, we should do more research to learn more about it rather than just throwing our hands up and saying “the gods did it”.

The concept of “greatest” exists in our minds. The concept of infinity invalidates the concept of greatest. The greatest means a maximum, and infinity means endless. If there's no start or end, no highest or lowest, no smallest or biggest, no maximum and minimum, then there's no greatest or least great (whatever it's called).

another god of gaps argument. You experience something that you can't explain, therefore gods.

This argument is basically saying that without gods nothing makes sense. But here's a quote I read online: “the universe is not under any obligation to make sense to human beings”.

Another god of gaps argument.
We currently do not understand how consciousness works, therefore gods.

According to you guys, all scientific research regarding consciousness should stop, because you believe the gods did it.

This is just the delusions of a theist who did not understand a mathematics problem and then decided to fill in gods in things that he did not understand.
This isn't the best argument, it's the entire argument for theism.

I don't like the idea of typing long stuff and the person I'm conversing with doesn't reply, apologies cos I might not have anything to say here. To each his own.

Did you see the post I made immediately after the second transcript? Just below... And then the OP here?

No one's really asking for a debate or willing to counter your views. Even if you claim you wanted to counter these YouTuber's point, your opening speech and tone suggests otherwise. I'd rather not indulge.

Dtruthspeaker:
This place ehn. You will laugh tire. And it can also be very annoying.

But anyway, I am just proving that belief does not always need to have a reason. Yes, it is supposed to but, it can also be built on air.

Omooo, anyhow una wan run am oo.

If people believe trans women are women, I believe people can "believe" anything.

It's surprising that the champion of "critical thinking" didn't understand your point about believing and instead chose to pursue this dust that you're dispensing. 😅

All is well sha, mek I dey observe small small from sideline.

StillDtruth:
I answered you saying "mobile chairs".

And now one of your people got angry and deleted it.

Didn't want to interfere with you guys' talk but mehn I have to laugh... 😂😂

Una no real for this forum 😅😅

jaephoenix:
First things first, do you have evidence of this god?

First things first, I believe the person I quoted saw my message and replied sufficiently already. You don't have to step in.

Secondly, I wasn't talking about a "god".

Thirdly, I think you should focus on the reply I made for you specifically, especially the second point there.

budaatum:
And that's okay. Its like finding no argument against .

I believe everyone has a right to his own opinion.
You gave your opinion earlier and I totally respect it too.

jaephoenix:
Whoa! A theist putting religion and critical thinking in the same sentence? Wonders,they say,shall never end.
Are you sure you are ready for this debate?
Because I don't want to start a debate and you start quoting from your lie-filled,self-contradictory and misleading book

1. Where did you see Religion and Critical Thinking in the same sentence? 😂
I think there's something about people who want to spark an argument... Quick to use certain tones, quote people out of context, taking the offensive, drawing conclusions from dust, to say the least. Which leads to a second point.

2. No one asked you for a debate.
I don't care how long you've been on Nairaland dragging with secondary school children and people who derive a certain highness from arguing here (you included), I've been there, but now I'd rather spend all my time talking about the unnecessary things (like what I'm doing now) instead of proceeding into the supposed "debate".
If you're looking into a conversation about things like this (with anyone at all) and you're close-minded, lack logical reasoning, specialise in Point Blank Fallacy, then I believe you're just out to vent or mock or show off whatever knowledge you have.
And then again if you're looking into a conversation about these things with someone who doesn't have an open mind, capacity to respond logically, who believe his points must always stand—point blank, then I believe you're out to waste your own time and you already know from the start.

budaatum:
I find it funny you'd be teaching me this, but that's Nairaland I guess.

Your threads show someone willing to consider both sides of the theist-atheist argument while seeking answers for yourself, which is refreshing, and biblical, dare I say.

Do let me know what you find when you do find. I'd be interested.

For the sentence in bold, remember contexts Bosso. You can't quote a person out of context especially when the full stuff is easily traceable.
In fact, I'm sorry for making it seem like I was attempting to teach Nairalanders how to reason critically. That's not even something I specialise in at all.

There's another thing called "Logical Reasoning". I'd rather discuss with/push for people who have that capacity.

Then... I'm not confused, I'm just an open-minded Christian. I believe there's fun in looking at knowledge and entertaining yourself without needing to change your stance.

Check grammar and give me potential errors I might be making (not trying to rephrase me):
Edit: Didn't want to totally remove this part. This was me grammar checking with ChatGPT before posting.

Then again, don't be confused about my stance. I find no argument against God valid.
Leave Christianity, just drop a standard well laid-out argument against the existence of a creator that fits the dimensions of a "God", it barely makes sense without contradicting itself.
The only thing that would even come close to making sense is the idea that since there's no scientific proof, there's no reason to believe. And this starts to fall apart when you consider the plenty things that science can't explain, simply because it's beyond the scope of the "science" available at the moment.
Even then, there's proof to some of the supernatural occurrences from biblical stories so if we want to follow the law of implication... All this is my own opinion.

So what I found? God.

xprojectlive:
Every car should have a tracking device and a distress alert device.

The driver or passengers should activate distress alert by pressing a button in the face of kidnap or robbery

The security control center (police or army) should receive the distress signal , and dispatch a rescue team nearest to the scene. ( as in 911)

Let me know what you think

This system is actually somewhat available already, but just like many other systems, they don't necessarily work as intended here in Nigeria.

The general name is something called Amber Alerts first used in the US after a girl named Amber was kidnapped and would have been easily saved if there was a way to alert everyone where she was last seen.

It's now a feature that's been added to mobile phones.

Nigeria's Amber Alert system is somewhat different tho, you might want to read about it.

Broo massive congratulations 😅🤝

My main congratulations is cos this thing is fast af.

Not trying to be a show stopper but you know those small children that build carton cars and houses and stuff like that... It only looks impressive when you don't realize how easy it is to build.

There's a lot of open source models already that anyone can fork and deploy, so it would have been interesting to know what this one specialises on, that none can really boast of.

budaatum:
I not only read your op, I went and read other threads you have begun here and found nothing to engage me, but this thread had you mention critical reasoning, and is the only thing of interest to me in it and hence my addition to your thread.

Now, as an atheist, I not only see no reason to believe in the existence of gods, I have sufficient knowledge to know its like believing you have a million pounds in your bank account at this very moment. But I am not that concerned, since you are not telling me to believe what you believe.

I see, understand and consider your points valid (to you).
I think there's something about people not understanding English sometimes tho, jk. 😅
(You might want to take some time to digest that no one presented the certainty of content that will stir critical reasoning. I emphasized PROBABILITY, not CERTAINTY).

Sentence in bold, nailed it proper. 🤝

budaatum:
I couldn't figure out the point of your opening post neither either, but reserved you the right to post it knowing readers will make of it what they want just as you should make what you want of what I've posted, which you ought to be able to do if you reason critically.

As to where one is headed, perhaps concentrate on where you are first.

There, you could have just said this at once. 😂
I understand the thrill of beating around the bush too, I don't blame you.

I think you might want to read the OP again.
I:
1. Gave a little background info
2. Expressed my little thought
3. Referred you to two videos I found (transcribed and posted), with hopes that you might find something that stirs a thought in you, possibly leading to the "Critical Reasoning".

Maybe you expected me to make a presentation of my reasonings or set the stage for people to present their thoughts, that wasn't my objective.

The idea was critical reasoning with/by yourself.

For the last line of your sentence, I believe anyone who claims to have some form of reasoning (not necessarily critical) should have been able to understand the message I passed. If so we wouldn't be stuck in this conversation.

budaatum:
And, critically reason, or learn to.

13 more characters needed.

I don't think I see where exactly you're headed.

I mean, if you're asking me to "critically reason", I have, I can, I'm still learning.

But what's the point of saying this? I don't really get.

budaatum:
https://www.nairaland.com/4923036/learn-reason-critically#74146576

Okay, and?

(Insert random words to match character limit)

MaxInDHouse:
God is not happy killing anyone whether they sin or not His main reason for killing is love for those who are doing the right thing it's like when you wish to save some people out of those who has been infected with a dealy, incurable and infectious disease the first thing to do is quarantine infected ones away from the rest but what happens when the only way to quarantine them is by locking them where they can't in anyway come in contact with the rest?

That's what God is doing!

Most of those killed back then will be resurrected again when the virus has been squashed by then whoever wants to bring back the virus will be exterminated completely never to be remembered again.

So it's an act of love for those who aren't infected that God wiped out infected ones.

Nice touch.

Personally I also believe God takes death just like pausing a timer. It's not like eternal damnation or anything (yet).

Jesus was seen calling it 'sleep' on different occasions. Scriptures say the entirety of our life here is like a speck of dust compared to the life after this one. So...

Whatever the case, whoever has to die will die. We might have an opinion on their death based on the perceived cause and methods, but we'll never be able to see the full picture until the end of this age.

All (Popular) Arguments For God
[https://www.nairaland.com/8477516/all-arguments-existence-god-explained]

Been a long while since I tried to reason with the people of Nairaland. Partly because there was no visible result, partly because I was learning so many new things that made plenty of my previous knowledge seem dumb in certain ways, even while the core concepts still seemed correct to me.

In all my days of argument and till now, I keep marveling at the possibility of atheism. Like fr fr, you just don't see any reason to believe in the existence of a God? Mehnn!

I found some YouTube videos and copied their transcripts. They're long, but it's something I think Christians and atheists might want to read when they have a lot of free time. Might spark some thoughts:

All (Popular) Arguments For God
[https://www.nairaland.com/8477516/all-arguments-existence-god-explained]

All (Popular) Arguments Against God
[https://www.nairaland.com/8477542/all-atheist-arguments-explained#136141320]

All (Popular) Arguments Against God
[https://www.nairaland.com/8477542/all-atheist-arguments-explained#136141320]

Now this is not some Point Blank Fallacy BS where the response given here is given as a final or only response, or even as an in depth response.

It's just the response that the responder chose to give.

We're welcome to entertain ourselves.

[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Can God make a rock He can’t lift?"

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well, you’re just asking if God can [color=#B22222]contradict Himself[/color].
Like:
"Can God lie? Can God change? Can God make another God?"
And the answer to all those things is no.
[color=#00008B]God being all-powerful means He can do anything to things outside Himself[/color].
It doesn’t mean He can do anything to Himself or contradict Himself.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Why did God let evil exist at all?"

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
So [color=#00008B]He could be glorified in defeating it[/color].
Triumph over evil is a greater good than evil never having existed.

[If the Christian God is true, then according to Him, all things are made for HIS PLEASURE. So yhh, you can't really do anything about that, asides understanding the concept. Can take a look at video games for instance where seemingly good and bad are incorporated for the player's pleasure].



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Religion is just wishful thinking."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well, if that were true, then the [color=#B22222]Bible wouldn’t be all about how much we all suck[/color].



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Psychology explains why you believe in God."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
So what? If God is real, we should [color=#2E8B57]expect there to be some psychological or social benefit[/color] to believing in Him.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Spiritual experiences can be explained by brain chemicals."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well, [color=#2F4F4F]romantic experiences[/color] can also be explained by brain chemicals, but that doesn’t mean [color=#00008B]your wife isn’t real[/color]. So spiritual experiences being explained by brain chemicals doesn’t mean that God isn’t real.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Well, drug trips show that spiritual experiences are from the brain."

[color=#8B0000]Responder:[/color]
People who have had both [color=#B22222]drug trips[/color] and [color=#00008B]near-death experiences[/color] say they’re completely different categories of feeling.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"The story of Jesus was copied from the story of Horus or some other ancient character."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Okay dude, that’s a [color=#B22222]Nairaland-atheist-level myth[/color]. Even [color=#00008B]atheist scholars[/color] know that’s silly.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Faith is the opposite of logic and reason."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
No, it’s not. Faith just means trust [and believe]. Anytime you eat food, you’re having [color=#2F4F4F]faith that it’s not poisoned[/color]—even if you can’t scientifically prove it. If you’re married, you have [color=#2E8B57]faith that your wife loves you[/color], even if you can’t scientifically prove that. And if you tried to scientifically prove it, [color=#8B0000]she’d probably get very mad at you[/color], because it would mean you didn’t trust her.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Evolution proves God didn’t create the world."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well, not necessarily. God often works through natural processes in the Bible, and for all of Church history, there have been [color=#00008B]prominent Christian theologians[/color] who had a more metaphorical interpretation of Genesis—even well over a thousand years before Darwin existed.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Christianity only spread because of military conquest."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color] Well, eventually they did do military conquest. But for the [color=#8B0000]first 300 years of Christianity[/color], it was illegal, and it [color=#00008B]took over the Roman Empire despite that[/color]—because of how popular it became.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Constantine invented what we now know of as Christianity."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color] Again... [color=#B22222] Nairaland-atheist-level myth[/color]. [color=#00008B]Atheists can do better than that.[/color] [color=#2F4F4F]Listen to an actual scholar.[/color]



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"If Christianity is true, why are there so many denominations of it?"

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Yeah, there are a lot of denominations. But the things they [color=#2E8B57]agree on[/color] are a lot more significant than the things they disagree on.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"There’s no evidence for Jesus outside the Bible."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
That’s not true. There’s the [color=#00008B]ancient Jewish historian Josephus[/color], who wrote about Jesus. And he’s one of the reasons why even [color=#00008B]secular scholars[/color] know Jesus historically existed.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"You really think God made billions of galaxies with billions of stars in each of them just to have a personal relationship with you?"

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color] [color=#00008B]Yes.[/color]

[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"God killed tons of people in the Bible."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well, it’s actually way more than that.
God numbers everyone’s days.
He’s the [color=#8B0000]Giver of Life[/color], so He can take it—especially if people sin.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Atheist countries are more prosperous."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Yes, it’s true that [color=#2E8B57]northern European countries[/color] are very prosperous and very secular.
But [color=#FF8C00]correlation doesn’t equal causation[/color].
It’s not like atheism causes prosperity—it’s that [color=#FF8C00]prosperity causes atheism[/color], because when people have comfortable lives, they don’t feel a need to depend on God.
But why are these particular countries so prosperous in the first place?
They may be secular now, but they’re [color=#4682B4]rooted in generations and generations of Protestant Christianity[/color].
If you want an example of a country that’s atheist and not rooted in Christianity, look at [color=#B22222]communist China[/color].



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"There are 4,000 gods that people believe in, and you're atheist to 3,999 of them. I just go one God further."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Okay, this isn’t the gotcha that you think it is.
Because the question of [color=#00008B]whether some sort of God exists[/color] is fundamentally different from the question of [color=#00008B]which religion is right about God[/color].



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"If God created everything, then who created God?"

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well, [color=#2F4F4F]God is defined as the uncaused causer[/color].
Everyone knows there needs to be a first cause at the beginning of the chain of all events in the universe.
And it makes a lot more sense for that first cause to be a [color=#00008B]personal God who caused things for a reason[/color]—rather than some random impersonal force.



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Science disproves God."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well actually, [color=#2E8B57]the Church invented modern science[/color].
All the [color=#00008B]founders of the Scientific Revolution[/color] deeply believed in God.
And medieval theologians laid the groundwork for modern science by seeing the world as governed by an intelligent Creator.
That means we can understand the world with our intelligence.
Studying God led to studying the world, because the world is [color=#8B0000]God’s creation[/color].



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"God is just used to fill in the gaps of things science can’t explain yet."

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well actually, [color=#00008B]God is the reason for everything[/color], even things that science can explain.
It’s not one or the other.
It’s not like everything’s explained by either science or God, and the more science can explain, the less God can explain.
Really, [color=#2F4F4F]science can explain almost everything[/color], but God is still behind it all, because [color=#8B0000]science explains the how, and God explains the why[/color].



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"If God is good, why can’t He destroy all evil?"

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Well, He eventually will.
Why can’t He do it now?
Because [color=#B22222]He’d have to destroy you too[/color].



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"Why does God let any bad things happen?"

[color=#8B0000]Responder:[/color]
Because [color=#8B0000]we deserve it[/color].



[color=#006400]Questioner:[/color]
"Well animals don’t sin, so why do they suffer?"

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
The Bible says all things will be restored, so if God is good, we can assume that [color=#2E8B57]they will be compensated[/color].



[color=#006400]Question:[/color]
"How do you know that God isn’t evil instead?"

[color=#8B0000]Response:[/color]
Because evil is not a thing the way good is.
Just like cold is a lack of heat, and dark is a lack of light, evil is just a lack of good.
And for good to be objective, it needs to [color=#00008B]come from God[/color].
So a God who is objectively evil is logically impossible.

It's a long read as well. You can also look up the title above on YouTube to watch a video (from Redeemed Zoomer) with these (better) explanations instead.

This one will be a bit different.
Plenty (if not most) of the arguments for atheism are structured as a confrontation to the Christian God, so the responses to these questions are also included at once.

[color=#006400]Argument from Consciousness:[/color]

Consciousness cannot be explained by material means.
– Machines can be reduced to parts
– Brains can be studied
– But experience (like “seeing yellow”) can’t be dissected

You can’t know:
– If we all see the same colors
– If you’re the only conscious being
Consciousness seems to require something immaterial → a [color=#00008B]soul[/color]



[color=#006400]Argument from Mathematics:[/color]

Math points to an infinite, immaterial reality.
– Simple math = real-world
– Advanced math = abstract, yet it still works

Important numbers:
– 1, 0, i, e, π – All come together in [color=#00008B]Euler’s Identity[/color] → an elegant, beautiful equation
Leonhard Euler, who discovered it, saw this as proof that God designed math. He was also a [color=#2F4F4F]devout Calvinist[/color].
Also: The Mandelbrot Set
– Generated by a simple formula
– Infinitely complex
– Not found anywhere in the universe
→ Therefore, its creator must be [color=#00008B]infinite and beyond our universe[/color]



[color=#8B0000]And finally… the best argument of all:[/color] Trust me, bro.

[color=#006400]Ontological Argument:[/color]

God = That than which nothing greater can be conceived
Therefore, God must be:
– All-powerful
– All-knowing
– All-good
– Existing (because existing is better than not).

Question: "But you can’t just think something into existence. If a pizza has all these qualities, do we then call it God?"

Actually, you can’t do that with pizza, because:
– Pizza has [color=#8B0000]limitations[/color] (size, perishability)
– A pizza that’s indestructible and infinite wouldn’t be pizza anymore
– It would be [color=#00008B]God[/color]



[color=#006400]Argument from Personal Experience:[/color]
Not convincing to others, but very convincing to oneself.
– Supernatural events
– Answered prayers
– Unlikely coincidences



[color=#006400]Transcendental Argument:[/color]

Without God, nothing makes sense.
We assume:
– Logic
– Consistency in nature
– Truth

But we [color=#8B0000]can’t scientifically prove[/color] any of those assumptions. They only make sense if grounded in the mind of God.
Without God → [color=#8B0000]no foundation for knowledge[/color]

[color=#006400]Act and Potency Argument:[/color]

Everything is a mix of:
– Act: What it is
– Potency: What it could become

Example:
– A baby is alive → It could become an adult
– An apple is red → It could be eaten
– You have the potency to be strong, but maybe not yet

When something changes, a potency is being actualized. But this can’t go back forever.
So, we need an unactualized actualizer—a being who is [color=#00008B]pure act[/color]. This being has no potential, only actuality.
That means:
– [color=#2E8B57]Eternal[/color] (no potential to not exist)
– All-powerful (nothing else can affect Him)
– Unchanging

This is the most complex argument. Originally from Aristotle, developed by Thomas Aquinas in Summa Contra Gentiles.



[color=#006400]Pascal’s Wager:[/color]

A thought experiment, not a proof.
– If you're an atheist and [color=#8B0000]atheism is true[/color]: You gain/lose nothing
– If you're an atheist and God is real: You could [color=#8B0000]lose everything[/color]
– If you believe in God and [color=#8B0000]atheism is true[/color]: Still neutral
– If you believe in God and God is real: You could gain everything

So, [color=#00008B]it's a safer bet to believe in God[/color].



[color=#006400]Teleological Argument (Design):[/color]

Nature seems to have purpose, like a machine → implies a [color=#00008B]designer[/color]
Examples:
– [color=#2E8B57]Human cells[/color]
– [color=#2E8B57]The ecosystem[/color]

Darwinian evolution explains some complexity, but not all.
Like:
– The four physical constants:
Gravitational constant
Electron charge
Strong nuclear force
Weak nuclear force

If any of these were even [color=#8B0000]slightly different[/color], the universe would collapse.
[Like if gravity was slightly stronger or weaker, or the force holding atomic particle together was even 2% stronger or weaker. Among the billions of galaxies allegedly out there, the chances of everything happening just right is 1 in 10 duotrigintillion, that's to say you have a better chance at winning the lottery 10 billion billion billion billion times IN A ROW.]

[color=#006400]Evidentialism:[/color]

Tries to argue for God by giving evidence of supernatural events. For example, many Christians believe the [color=#2E8B57]resurrection of Christ[/color] can be historically proven because:
– There were many eyewitnesses
– They died for their faith
– And generally, people [color=#8B0000]don’t die for something they know is false[/color]
Sometimes, people also cite:
– [color=#00008B]Demonic possessions[/color], where people speak unknown languages
– [color=#2F4F4F]Near-death experiences[/color], where people see things they shouldn't be able to



[color=#006400]The Moral Argument:[/color]

Objective morality is only real if God is real. But [color=#00008B]objective morality is real[/color] →Therefore, God is real.
[color=#2F4F4F]Example:[/color] Is cannibalism good or bad?
A: “I think it’s good.”
B: “I think it’s bad.”
So... which one is [color=#8B0000]actually[/color] correct?
B can only be right if there’s a [color=#00008B]supreme authority[/color] that says cannibalism is bad. That authority is what we would call God.



[color=#006400]The Cosmological Argument:[/color]

Everything that happens has a cause. That cause has a cause. And so on.
But [color=#8B0000]this chain can’t go on forever[/color].
Eventually, there must be:
– A first cause
– An unmoved mover
– An uncaused causer
– An unchanged changer

This being must be:
– [color=#2E8B57]Eternal[/color] (can’t start or stop existing)
– [color=#00008B]Outside the universe[/color] (everything inside is caused)
– All-powerful (can move anything but cannot be moved)
This, we call God.

It's a long read. Search the title above on YouTube to watch a video (from Redeemed Zoomer) with these explanations instead.

You'll need a one-to-one guide with someone who's a bit knowledgeable.

It should be a minor issue.

Would be great if there's a way to contact you, give suggestions and get quick follow-up.

ComeComing:
As you can, this youtuber made a mistake in the job a current president who brybed his way into power before becoming president..

Fastest eyes only..

Lol 😂😂

Wait oo, is it what I'm thinking 😅😅

Tinubu's former job is wrong nau... We all know what the job is meant to be 😂

Amaso99:
Can you design telegram bot?

Pretty aware you didn't quote me but if you need someone who's into bots, you can always reach out to me to run it free.

Can build custom Telegram bots using Python via Telethon
WhatsApp bots using NodeJS via Baileys'
EA bots running on MQL5, etc etc.