₦airaland Forum

damogul:
First the argument was that a whale cannot swallow a man. I proved that wrong

Then it was that a man cannot survive in a whale. I proved that wrong

Now you are talking about duration? If a man could survive for 2 days (Because they worked till the afternoon of the next day) its not about hours its about days. The whale was caught at sunset of day 1 and they worked till late into the night which is into day 2 if you say 15hrs. So sunset is at 6pm add 15hrs to that and you would have entered the second day.

If a man can survive for 2 days what makes you think he would not have survived for 3?

the other man survived inside a dead whale, hence no digestion. so show that a man can survive for three days inside a whale that is still alive

damogul:
I have shown proof that the Jonah story is real because it has repeated itself with sperm whales. So feel free to argue among yourselves as the liars you all are.

proof? .... keep telling yourself that... remember the story u referred to, the whale was actually dead... so show us where a human being survived in the belly of a whale for three days and the whale was still alive...
or course there is still the issue of whale and fish

felixomor:
God prepared the giant fish.
Jonah 1:17

So the fish was prepared supernaturally.
Not physically.

oh... so it was not a real fish anymore. firstly, it was a whale or descriptive fish, then it was that whales can actually swallow humans, now u have switched to it was not a physical fish... I wonder what the next explanation will be. it's funny seeing your efforts

damogul:
Gosh so much deceipt in atheists. Was he alive after 2 days? Yes or no? Must his incident repeat itself in every case?

Remember Hasty Generalization

you are the one making hasty generalization...
he was inside the whale for 15 hours, jonah was supposedly there for three days...

damogul:
Dalaman

http://www.ycaol.com/swallowed.htm

Swallowed by a whale

but why did u ignore this part
s a result of his fifteen hours inside the whale's stomach, Bartley lost all the hair on his body and was blind for the rest of his life. His skin was bleached to an unnatural whiteness thatgave the appearance of being bloodless, althoughhe was healthy."
so this doesn't add to the credibility of the Jonah story one bit

damogul:
Who is the WORD OF GOD? The original writer obviously gave a descriptive with what he was used to seeing but the WORD explained it properly as WHALE. is that now a problem? If the word WHALE was not found in the bible then you would have been right. So did Jesus say WHALE or not?

All scriptures are supposedly inspired by the spirit, isn't it? why did the spirit inspire the original writer to say great fish?? I thought holy spirit knew all things now... if Jesus could have described the animal as a whale, why not the original writer... it's obvious there was a word for whale.

damogul:
Jesus said whale and Jesus is the WORD OF GOD. He inspired the old testament words and in the new testament in Mathew 12: 40 He clearly said WHALE. Is your brain "paining you?"

yeah, he said whale but the original writer said fish... or the original writer wasn't inspired by the holy spirit?? well, maybe the holy spirit didn't know a whale is not a fish

damogul:
Another translation called it a GREAT SEA MONSTER the emphasis is on GREAT and not fish. Are you not meant to be intelligent anymore?

The bible says fish. . don't try to put the emphasis on great in order to excuse the inaccuracy of fish... It's dishonest and not classy at all.... Stop trying to say what the bible doesn't say

dalaman:
I just noticed you just concocted some lies. Al what you said previously is not true. The study that show a that whales have enough air to keep living things inside them for a long time can be found where? What about the one that says their digestive juices only kick in when the things inside them are dead. Where is that study that says this.

Christians can lie ehn??

damogul:
Do you see how illogical you look now? The term GREAT FISH was descriptive based on size of a fish like creature and not based on its classification. Jesus was exact when he spoke his own. He now classified it properly. Nobody was lying!

Oh someone definitely lied. So a great fish was descriptive?! U no try at all... A great fish is not a whale. The bible was wrong .. Holy spirit couldn't inspire the writer to say the actual name of the animal?? .. Or the holy spirit told u it's descriptive? Why didn't the bible even use 'like'?
Thanks for pointing this out...

damogul:
Matthew 12:40:

For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (KJV)

Stop lying!

Wow!! Never noticed this . the actual story said fish and Jesus came and said whale. So, was Jesus lying or or was the original writer lying?

damogul:
The thread has been so derailed its crazy.

OP asked for something as simple as proof of NO GOD from the atheists or how they arrived at that conclusion and they have been offered to provide proof from NATURE, SCIENCE, SELF, etc but not one single one has been able to do this. This is my conclusion;

I deduce that a lot of these atheists actually have no reason why they say God does not exist besides emotions, anger, denial or hatred for God. Otherwise they would have offered tangible proof in defense of their NO GOD idea but they have been unable to do so.

How hard can proof of NO GOD be? Some have come here to say you cannot prove a negative but you can prove there is no electricity (which is a negative) You can prove there is no water (which is a negative) You can prove there is no air (which is a negative) etc

They create defenses just to justify their inability to provide proof of their position and this is pathetic.

Some have said they need proof of God yet they still went ahead to say God does not exist. If you say you desire proof but still declare God nonexistent is that not idiocy? Have you gone through all the myriads of proof available daily worldwide to jump to this conclusion?

This thread is clear proof of how irrational atheism is and all it represents. Its shallow, irrational and driven by emotional tantrums as all i have been seeing has been questions like;

If God is good why do we have worms that can eat human eyes...as if there is a pandemic of such

which clearly shows their illogical reasoning.

God bless you OP for this thread as we continue exposing their mental limitations and delusions.

This long epistle just for what.. U are apparently angry about something...
Besides, the reference to the eye eating worm was never addressed or your only response is that it's not a pandemic??

felixomor:
Quiet.
Dont quote me out of context.
Follow our conversation and how I arrived at that.

Besides, who told you pieces of truth cant be corrupted?

Am not quoting you out of context...
And pieces of truth can be corrupted?? Two questions:
1. How do u know it's that part u quoted that it's not corrupted?? Is it because it supposedly agrees with your beliefs?
2. And how do you know the bible is not corrupted?

felixomor:
Verse 10:94; so if you are in doubt, [O Muhammad], about that which We have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters.

Who was the koran referring to there?

I can see u have jumped ship to hinduism....
Lol.
Your confusion is a lot.
Koran could not save you abi?

All in attempt to keep jumping up and down not to provide your backup for your claims.

I just pity.

The basis of Christianity is that Jesus is the son of God, the savior of the world and the coming king of the world. . that's contrary to the basis of Islam... And they are mutually incompatible...
And if u are brandishing a verse of the Quran as the truth, then u can't turn around and say the other verses are not true... That will be double standard .. Again

Lennycool:
Does the OP even know the meaning of "Burden of Proof"
It means that the person making the claim should prove it. Theists are the one's that claim that there God(s) exist, atheist accept that there is no evidence for any God and hence we don't believe in it.
The burden of proof lies on the one that makes the subject of the argument.
There is no proof that there is a fat guy on Mars watching family guy, does this mean this fat guy could actually be there.
There is no proof that Zeus or Odin or Thor don't exist, but I doubt you could believe in them.

Thank you very much... What I've been saying since morning... They can't refute this so they just try to digress

KingEbukasBlog:
Its called a Theophany .

Do u have any biblical authority to show that God does not have a human physical figure

KingEbukasBlog:
I have explained to you before what it means to be created in God's image . I'm not sure why the argument is being rehashed .

Your explanation falls short in many ways... Different parts in the bible point to a god with a human figure, you being uncomfortable with that doesn't change what the bible actually says

KingEbukasBlog:
My preference is not necessary and my reticence does not affect my argument in anyway .

It does... If the creation story is an allegory, the whole bible comes under question. Why can't the resurrection be an allegory?

KingEbukasBlog:
Xenophanes in his criticism of anthropomorphism said that God does not resemble humans in form or in mind . Signature is a way of showing ownership for humans . God is a not a human , so why would God who is not human leave a signature in Nature ?

Please leave me transfixed with your response .

Man is supposedly created in god's image... So I agree god is not a human but humans are like god

damogul:
An analogy built on a faulty premise is a false one. learn that till you understand it.

Utter crap again... Show why this analogy is faulty and stop making bland statements that go to no issue

KingEbukasBlog:
There are Christians who see the creation story as an allegory . There are so many Christians who are evolutionists on this forum .

The bible says something happened, u are hear saying it might be an allegory. So, tell us, which one is it or u can't make up your mind

LiberaDeus:
You theists have never debunked the death, disease and suffering argument.

You have never debunked it, you just run away when the heat is much and later come back to claim that you won the argument.

That's kingebukasblog's style... U noticed he hasn't replied my comment since

damogul:
Are any of those deities?

It's a friggin' analogy... There are documented reports about the Bermuda triangle, just like there is of God. Prove that all those don't exist. U can't... Why?? Because u don't prove negative. Not even in a court of law

damogul:
Wrong again! Is there a prior history acknowledged historically of an existence of a pink unicorn? Is there are 2000 page manuscript speaking of it? Is therr any account of eye witnesses also making this claim? Are their occurrences attributable to this pink unicorn? Has anything happened at the mention of the pink unicorn?

if such data exist then we can talk. If none then its a nonsensical comparison.

Which data are talking about!? Because there is a manuscript means it must exist??
Okay, lemme give another analogy that might be more apt... Prove there are no aliens... Because there are reports of alien sightings... So prove they don't exist

felixomor:
U see why i no longer respond to you?
U read poorly.

Did he speak on "Absence of pink unicorn" or he spoke on "presence of pink unicorn".

Just go.

God... Read carefully-
Your demand is= prove there is no god
His demand is= prove there is no pink unicorn...
My reading is not poor, your comprehension skills are

KingEbukasBlog:
Please stop misrepresenting my views . I said Nature serves as evidence for God .

Yes... And am saying nature also serves as evidence that your claim that there is god is incorrect

felixomor:
Even if u have pink panther in your room.
Its not the business of this thread.

It actually is... By that analogy, he's showing the folly of asking for PROOF OF THE ABSENCE of God.

KingEbukasBlog:
Now we are talking . So let's hear it . Please don't rehash the death , diseases , poverty argument . I'm tired of repeating the same rebuttal .

Before you respond , note that the probability the universe came by chance is highly inconceivable and insignificant . You may now continue .

If you repeat the same argument from nature, then naturally the response is the same... Nature is beautiful but it's also ugly. You can't refer to the beauty of nature as evidence for god and then ignore the ugliness of nature... That's double standard

KingEbukasBlog:
Nature , Consciousness , Intelligence serve as incontrovertible and irrefutable evidence for God.

No, they don't. There are terrible things in nature that refute supposed evidence for god

damogul:
How would you know the kind I subscribe to when you are the one who said THE ONE THAT IS GOOD AND OMNISCIENT AND ALL POWERFUL does not exist.

So if that one does not exist which one does?

How would I know the one you subscribe to?? Are u not a Christian anymore?? Or u don't believe God is good and all powerful?? ...

damogul:
So there is a God afterall but not the kind you subscribe to.

The kind I subscribe too?? No, the kind u believe in and worship ..
Do you agree that that's proof that the kind of God u believe in doesn't exist?

damogul:
Is the worm your proof that there is no God? Are you saying there is a God but he is a bad one? Or are you saying there is absolutely NONE.

Oh. . not ignoring anymore??... Anyways, it is proof that God- the one who is supposedly good and all powerful doesn't exist