₦airaland Forum

vaxx:
am sue your atheist brethren can testify that this techniques of answering question is poor? what is a table? that is my question ......this is not the way someone who consider believer stupid to defend his rational stand....this is indeed poor.... but i will play along

LOL ! Vaxx you certainly know how to humour these dudes. Just watch now, how Atheists will come defend the serious blunders of BudaAtum.

In his defense they will say that you should rather have asked BudaAtum "Where is the table?" This way it is more personal. They will say it is unfair of you to ask him an abstract question.

budaatum:
I have answered you. You can go into a forest and see a tree has fallen if you cared to. I have shown you proof for the table. No evidence was presented for pig feed fraud, so we best not believe it to be true. Regardless of what you or I subjectively think, they are as they are somewhere.

Your god argument is the inverse. You subjectively create one and claim it objectively exists. Imagine if we took that attitude to pig feed fraud?

BudaAtum, I see you are in the habit of continually accusing the esteemed Butterflyl1on of criminal offences without a shred of evidence.
This is the response of a lowly coward. I have investigated this with your best friend Otem, he claims his god revealed this rubbish to him. When he was asked by Butterflyl1on to present a copy of the email conversation between him and Butterflyl1on he made poor excuses.

You claim to be one that is a stickler for proven fact, but you are showing another side of yourself. It is not good.

butterflyl1on:
No you were not being sarcastic . Let me post your numerous comments that show you were not being sarcastic and which show I am right and you are simply clutching at straws.

All comments from budaatum on this thread

1.

2.

3.

Since those were your very quotes why are you now seeking evidential sensory perception to believe a table exists or a tree fell?

So I asked again, Can God exist even when you cannot experience him using your sensory perception?

It is very instructive how one fallen tree can reveal serious flaws in the Atheist mind. It is not that they dont have access to knowledge, but rather their corrupt way of processing knowledge that is meant to open the door to higher truths.

Atheists have a serious mental block, which is in reality a spiritual block.

budaatum:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=table&hl=en-GB&dcr=0&prmd=ivnsp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwia8OelkefYAhXBKMAKHTRDDxwQ_AUIBigB

What a terrible way to answer a direct question from Vaxx. He asked you a simple but leading question. Please answer.

butterflyl1on:
How can God not exist when you already said something can exist without us experiencing it?

So I ask again is this not your statement?
Based on your declaration can God exist without you experiencing him?

Your are a good interrogator, get his truth out of him.
You should have joined the SS.

budaatum:
Please, anytime you read my responses to ScienceWatch you will be best minded to assume I am being sarcastic. I denoted this with the "Smh" at the end of that comment.

LOL ! I am not gay, I have no romantic feelings for you Sir. Why send me a Smh?

vaxx:
i love that analogy good

what is a table?

Excellent question. BudaAtum will take now take the so-called solid table to a science lab that has an Electron Microscope. What will he find out about the table?

budaatum:
I was in a bar one day reading Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.
This beautiful young girl comes up to me and asks me how I know the table in front of us was there.
So, I took her by the arm, held her hand turned upwards, and brought it down hard towards the table but she quickly pulled her hand away.
So I asked, is the table there?
She, grunted.

Very good Sir. Now your next step is to take that table to a science lab. They will tell you that it is not as solid as it seems. It is entirely made up of swirling untouchable atoms, molecules etc.

Suddenly the table is not so objective after all.

budaatum:
Dude, I have a life outside you. Today is BAOSA UK Meeting. I'm there rest of today. Learn to be patient.

Is BAOSA UK still so damn good at soccer? Enjoy the fundraising.

vaxx:
i salute your interpretation

Thanks. We can clearly see from a scientific view point, why Atheism was born to fail.

@BudaAtum

When you say to Vaxx, "You obviously need to do some research on the topic at hand. You might want to read up on it here.
Good. You kept track.
I am saying the objective stands in its own right and has nothing to do with the eye of the beholder. This is the opposite of what vaxx said, so I imply vaxx's statement is false," you can make the needed correction later Sir.

If we consider that the mental experiences are the visible things that we take to be outside us, in this case the fallen tree. The thing itself is admittedly existent, but the character of the thing is what we have now found out and we have found it to be quite other than it is commonly thought to be.

BudaAtum, if you declare as in the bolded Red, that there are two separate facts, the fact of perception/subjectivity and the fact of an objective external material object, you have made a false analysis of sensation. The oneness of both idea and object is a discovery to which the subtle thinking of world religions and the sharp observations of good scientists inescapably lead us.

But this understanding emerges only after the hardest and most rigorous reflection, if one refuse to accept the anceint spiritual doctrines
Once this point is grasped, then one may say to himself: " I am aware of my awareness of this fallen tree," and he will then perceive that he cannot strip the second awareness from the tree in itself; they constitute an indivisible entity. Those who want to divide the facts, the tree known, into a perception of it on one hand, and its material objective substantiate on the other, who make perception a mental act and materialialty a non-mental thing, who challenges mind against matter, fall into a grievous fallacy. This is the downfall of Atheism.

What we can only know about the fallen tree is an idea, what we perceive is not a discovery but a mental construction. Those who deny this put themselves in the predicament of explaining away the inexplicable.

@ BudaAtum

For the sake of simplicity, let us create an objection: "Here am I with direct experience of a fallen tree which lies outside me in space, separate from me, which I can pick up and grasp in my hand, finding it to be solid, weighty and hard. How then can you expect me to believe that it is merely an idea in my mind ?"

To this the reply is that this doctrine spiritual/mentalism must not be misunderstood to mean that it is asserted that the fallen tree is not directly present to our vision. It most obviously is present. Its very immediacy disarms us.

We have got to grasp this scientifically verifiable truth that the perceived fallen tree is not less rounded and weighty and coloured and useful than the supposedly-existent material tree, despite the fact that the former is a mental construct. The mind/spirit is involved in all our experience of the world and we have found that sensation, so far from being a purely passive and receptive process, is creative and even projective.

But we are so impressed by the sensations of solidness which we receive from the things around us, and so deceived by the sensations of distance and position which we receive from their relations to each other and to our eyes, that we habitually underrate the tremendously suggestive and creative force of mind.

We are almost totally ignorant of the proven and provable fact that mental images can assume size, shape, length, height, breadth, solidity, relief, perspective, weight, colour and other qualities that we usually associate with external objects.
They can provide all these sensations with perfect vividness and with all the actuality of ordinary experience. And yet they remain
nothing more than ideas !

Now we know that the fallen tree can only EXIST because we became aware of it. Now for us it is real. That is why God dont exist for the unbeliever even if he is real.

JacksonD7:
Religion As A Pillar Of Society

According to legend, Rome was founded by Romulus. A distant descendant of Aeneas, who sailed the Mediterranean with a tiny band of survivors after the fall of Troy. These survivors settled at Latium, where they established a settlement and intermingled with the Latin population.

After defeating a tyrant King and learning of their royal heritage, Romulus and his twin brother Remus decided to found a city in the land where they were raised. A heated argument broke out between the brother's regarding the naming of the city. After a bloody duel, Romulus triumphed killing his twin brother.

Romulus and his followers worked to organize the government of the newly created city. One of the first things Romulus did was to establish the religious rights of Rome.

Romulus identified a constellation of gods and set a rough spiritual course for his tribe, before advertising Rome as an asylum for all men to start a new life.

Lacking women, that Romans waged war and made deals with their neighbours to acquire wives for themselves, thereby ensuring the survival of Rome.

The creation story of Rome makes it clear that religion and family are two fundamental pillars of society. There is no civilization that has or can exist properly, without these foundational pillars.

Every human being with the ability to think and reason is religious. Any misguided atheistic attempt at destroying religion, is nothing more than an attack on the pillars of civilization.

Wise, rational minds build instead of destroy civilizations. Barbarians on the other hand burnt down Rome.

Thanks once again. Atheists burnt down Rome !

hopefulLandlord:
honestly, I admire your patience

Because of his patience and humility he will receive his reward from me now. While you wallow in your pride. He will certainly move on while your look in admiration.

budaatum:
You mean, it exists only because you are aware of it?
You funny, dude. Smh

If you calm down, I will explain seriously. No funny o. Here you will quickly see why Atheists battle to understand the awsome reality of the invisible.

We can see that the notion of a tree existing independently of the mind to which it is present is a pure fiction. The perception of the tree is nothing less than the tree itself.
If any other tree exists separately and materially is utterly beyond our range of possible knowledge and must therefore be ignored if we are to deal with scientifically ascertained facts rather than uncertain assumptions.

The tree is a construct in our own consciousness. Its being is being known. There are not two trees, a material one and a mental copy of it.
There is only one. The image which is immediately before consciousness is the tree itself. It is so vivid, so perfect and so convincingly stamped with the characteristic of objectivity that we do not stop with merely seeing i t : we go on to infer that it is
nothing less than the independent tree itself and refuse to believe otherwise.

The TREE which is known by the our own senses is none other than the perception which is known by the mind/spirit.

Humanistme:
subjectivity does not affect objectivity you mean?

thanks for the correction Sir. But his assumptions are wrong. The truth is that nothing can EXIST without us first becoming aware of it first.

butterflyl1on:
Very true.

Let me further buttress your point here. How can anyone CONCOCT a story of a fallen tree if it never even fell?

If there was no observer or hearer of this said tree that fell how did the objective declaration that a tree fell regardless of a viewer or listener begin?

Just like you said, this objective position is self refuting and a baseless logic.

Awesome Sir. The can be no objective declaration about that tree. I humbly make my merger contribution to the fallen tree below;

Unfortunately the Atheists have lost it all again. Better luck next time dudes ! We cannot hold existence and the perception of existence apart from each other, and so we are forced to form the conclusion that the two are not two in reality but an undivided one.

The thing and the sensation of the thing live in fundamental and inseparable union. That is why there is nothing else but awareness.

Atheists, ask yourself whether that statement will explain all your experience and you will find that it will do so quite adequately. Try, on the other hand, to discover whether the theory of the materialists/Atheists will explain your experience of the world, the theory that there is nothing else but independently existent physical things, and you will find that it does not and cannot explain the existence of thoughts and feelings.
For if you believe that you can put something material into a test-tube, you cannot do the same with thought.

I must therefore be emphatically repeat that a perception is not a mere copy of something external. It is primal and not
secondary.

This should not be overlooked, because it is a key to correct understanding of "mental-ism/spiritualism", which is the doctrine that
all things are mental/spiritual things.

budaatum:
Okay. And I promise to be diligent.


Yes. (The word "evidence" in itself implies subjectivity so I've striked it out. It's inclussion makes the question either meaningless, or strawmanlike).


Yes. The Christian for instance would claim God exists whether a human being exists to confirm God's existence. The tree fell whether anyone saw it fall or not. There is sea in the ocean regardless of observers.


It does not need to, and I cannot safely say that the tree did not, at its point of falling say in tree language "oh my timber, I am falling". My subjective knowledge does not extend so far.


Probably not, since they were not there to observe it falling. If the falling tree were the beginning of the universe, one may point to the numerous subjective creation stories as a case in point.


Let me rephrase, for this is the specific point in question:
If there were no one to observe the falling of the tree, can the tree fall?

The answer is yes. You yourself have agreed to this!


If this were true, if a group of people, or even one person, subjectively accused me of fraudulently dealing in pigs food, it would not matter if I did or not. Their subjective no evidence based allegation [the source] would produce the objective truth, and I would be guilty as charged, whether I actually committed the crume or not! Basically, whatever subjective statements individuals make would be the objective truth! You will kindly accept that I chose to not think that way.

Do you take to thinking that way yourself?

Unfortunately, Vaxx and Butterflyl1on are correct again Sir. The fallen tree in question can not exist without the observer. The ocean can not exist without an observer. This truth has been observed in clinical studies.
If you start from that premise, you will come up with exciting conclusions.

Allow me to add this; When the scientific principle of relativity says that the observer is part of his observation, this means that the person who has experience of anything is part of his experience.

We may carry this further and now say that it means that the thought is part of the thing thought of. If we dig deeper into this statement we will see that the mental factor is inseparable from every object known.
And if we dig deeper we will find that the two are really one.

All the best !

JacksonD7:
06. Evangelism

All major religions evangelize, atheism included. Atheists make financial contributions to spread their message, they hold rallies. They used the internet to get their beliefs across, they publish books on atheism.

They try to influence society and governments, to pass laws that favour their belief system. They are actively trying to convert the works to atheism. These actions are mirrored by all religions with the intention of spreading.

07. Behavioral Changes

Followers, or new converts to a religion tend to change their behavior in order to match the teachings of their religion.

A man converted to Christianity would start praying, reading the Bible, attending church etc.

A man converted to Islam would read the Koran, pray 5 times a day, grow a beard etc.

A man converted to Atheism would stop attending churches, adopt nihilism, join an atheist forum, blame God for the world's problems etc.

Awesome truth revealed to the world. 2018 has arrived Wow.
Yes, I have been to Atheist rallies, read Atheists books, I have read deceptive Theology books written by Atheists, I have scoured Atheist websites and understand their beliefs. Their mission for mankind is frightening to say the least.

budaatum:
Why must I understand you trying to find evidence for what you claim is my "remembrance"?

Dude, do me a favour. If you do not understand my writing, just ask me to clarify. Stop trying to find evidence of non-existing things that seem to only exist in your imagination.

I beg your pardon Sir. You did say that Vaxx reminds you of a fallen tree. I decided to see if I could find objective evidence that supports your claim, that you had in fact, had that remembrance. Or could it be pure conjecture on your part. I beg you to clarify.

While you command me to stop finding evidence of non-existing things I have the pleasure of informing you that it is exactly what Atheists are doing when they keep asking for evidence of a Non-existing God.

vaxx:
the one i ask on the objectivity? the purpose and essence of peace and love without GOD

I observed the psychology behind his ducking Sir. His religion does not permit him to examine the purpose and essence of peace and love without GOD. This is something all Atheists adhere to without conscience. Ask Butterflyl1on to help you get the answers from him. He is like a master interrogator. Over to Butterflyl1on - be gentle Sir !

butterflyl1on:
You are clearly missing the point so let me narrow it down for you in a simple way.

Can there be any objective evidence without a subjective presentation?

Can objectivity exist on its own without a subjective interference or inclusion?

Let me specifically focus on your tree analogy here.

Can your objective tree that fell bear witness of itself without a subjective viewer?

Can all subjective viewers offer same narration of how this objective tree fell if they were all viewing from different angles?

IF THERE WAS NO SUBJECTIVE VIEWER IN EXISTENCE ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD WOULD OBJECTIVITY EXIST?

Objectivity is a product of a subjective source. Take it or leave it.

Thank you for expanding Vaxx's wisdom on this issue so fluently Butterflyl1on. Considering the Bolded Red above, my narration would subjectively be that from where I was observing, there was no tree in the first place. Sorry !!!

vaxx:
check my post, i have raised more than three question for him......he left it unanswered .....


hpefullanlord is very good in dodging questions

By now you must know that Atheists are not good at answering questions.

Atheists are very good at asking questions, because asking is easier. Just ask beggars and thief's?

JacksonD7:
03. A Promise Of A Reward

Every religion promises a reward to it's faithful followers.

Christianity promises salvation and heaven

Islam promises heaven, unlimited alcohol when you get there. 72 virgins etc

Scientology promises the world global peace if it were to follow it's teachings

Buddhism promises enlightenment, and achieving higher states of consciousness

Atheism promise a wise, logical and rational mind. Which is a step above the ignorant masses who still believe in God, gods, and other delusions

04. The Presence Of Spiritual Leaders

Every religion, has it's great philosophers or spiritual leaders whose ideas shaped the religion. In some cases, the religion would not exist or enjoy mass appeal without that particular leader.

Christianity has Jesus

Islam has Mohammed

Judaism has Moses

Buddhism has Siddharta Gautama (the Buddha)

Scientology has L. Ron Hubbard

Atheism has Richard Dawkins

05. The Creation Of Organizations

In the course of spreading their religion, atheists have created a number of tools to assist them. They have websites, forums, blogs, YouTube channels, they've written books on theology etc. Every other major religion makes use of these same tools.

JacksonD7, I take my hat off to you in public Sir. I have shown your study on Atheism to many of my Atheist friends and they say you have found the Holy Grail of Atheism. They are impressed and afraid at the same time.

vaxx:
lol panting because of what ? i am only taking enough time to explain better to you but since you already conclude you are right shekenah......

your questions are not tally bro..... you can ask your partner if am wrong...

maybe when you accept your deficiency we may continue ...bye

He has still not subjectively worked out what happened to that tree. His main question was, "Can someone be 6ft tall without a dick."

JacksonD7:
Atheists claim to be non-religious by saying that they don't believe in God or gods. Well, lack of beliefs in God is a philosophy shared by all atheists. That makes atheism a religion, according to the first definition.

You should also note that you don't have to believe in a deity to be religious. There are such things as non-theistic religions. Buddhists don't believe in any particular god, but would you say Buddhism is not a religion?. Obviously not.

Non-theistic religion

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontheistic_religion

Comparisons Between Atheism And Other Religions

01. An Organized Set Of Beliefs

Every religion, has a collection of principles and beliefs that are shared by adherents of that particular religion. There's beliefs often form the foundations of the religion, and any sects that don't believe in them are considered heretics or unbelievers.

Christianity has God, Jesus, the resurrection, baptism etc

Islam has Allah, Sharia, Ramadan etc

Chapter 2 vs 1 to the end of the "Atheist Scriptural Handbook", states that "Thou shalt believe in"

a. The non-existence of God (there is no God, everything is an accident

b. The big bang (in the beginning nothing exploded and created everything)

c. Abiogenesis (non-living things gave life to living organisms)

d. Evolution (and everything arose as a result of countless accidents over billions of years)

e. Deep time (the Earth is billions of years old, if you think otherwise you must be madly ignorant)

Wow! The truth is coming out with aplomb !!!

[quote author=JacksonD7 post=64185408][/quote]Wow ! The hidden truth is out !!!

hopefulLandlord:
I wasn't talking to you sir

Ok then you were talking to yourself. Go ahead !

I simply love this conversation about the tree. It reveals the inner workings and psychology of the ATHEIST RELIGION.

Atheism is a wonderful religion - they love fallen trees !

budaatum:
Hmm. I think I might have not been as wise as you've just been.

Dont belittle yourself in font of him. He is not fit enough to
serve you breakfast.

hopefulLandlord:
cuz I notice you guys tend to agree and disagree based on who's saying something rather than what the person is saying

Now you are hitting below the belt. I dont know you like that.
You know that Atheists are trained to do what you now, suddenly accuse others of. We all know that, what you are complaining about is a distressing Atheists phenomena.

Fvcknames:
Can the Christians in the thread not disagree with anything sciencewatch says.
Because he's a Christian, you are Christians and are arguing against atheists, that doesn't mean you'll agree with everything he says.
There's no way you can't at least find a few statements he makes ridiculous.

This is a very serious topic indeed. You are right, no humor is allowed. Let me help you deal with your very reasonable complaint here and now.
Yes, Christians disagree freely with everything I say, I encourage that. Your other complaint is that Christians are arguing against Atheists.
Please calm down while I explain what is really happening. Christians and Muslims have nothing to prove to Atheists. They are simply trying to chastise them for entering hallowed ground, and then get them to go play somewhere else.

It is just a little inconsiderate of you claim that Christians cant find at least a few statements of mine as ridicules. If there was any truth to your painful assumptions, I would have been an Atheist by know.