₦airaland Forum

Fenrir:
I got banned....

You are still reframing instead of engaging.
I am not dodging. I am refusing a false setup.
Your questions are not neutral “yes or no” questions. They are structured to push respondents toward a predetermined conclusion. Repeating them and demanding short answers does not make them sound, it just increases pressure.
This is not an isolated issue. Across your topics, the same method appears repeatedly, tightly constrained questions, forced binaries, and control over format, all designed to funnel people toward the answer you want. That approach may work rhetorically online, but any serious academic or scientific setting would reject it outright. Inquiry does not begin with the conclusion already fixed.
You are also conflating three distinct domains and treating them as one:
Abiogenesis (origin of life)
Design inference (recognising human artefacts)
Metaphysical causation (origin of the universe)
They are not interchangeable.
On your questions 1–3.....
The absence of current laboratory replication is not evidence of impossibility, nor is it evidence of intelligence. “We do not yet know” does not logically become “therefore an intelligent uncaused first cause exists.” That is an argument from ignorance.
On your Mars building and painting examples,
Those analogies only work because we already have independent empirical knowledge of builders and painters. You do not have equivalent prior observation of universes being designed. Without that, the analogy fails.
You also do not get to dictate how I respond or reduce complex epistemological issues to “yes or no” answers to force a conclusion. That is not rational inquiry, it is rhetorical control.
If you want engagement, address this directly:
Explain how you justify moving from
“we don’t currently know how X happened”
to
“therefore an intelligent uncaused first cause exists”
without committing a category error or an argument from ignorance.
If you cannot do that, then the issue is not my organisation or honesty. The issue is that your foundation is unsound, and no amount of stacked questions will repair it.
Your move.

Sorry! I did no reframe ANYTHING.
1. I took you back to your original challenge
Then.
2. I presented the first point in my original challenge
Then,
3. I gave you 4 questions by which you can either agree with my point 1 OR state why it is wrong.



We will go through each point until it is exhausted.

This is how to raise objections not the haphazard splashing about with no directions



AGAIN

Fenrir:
You haven’t addressed a single argument I made.
Instead of engaging with causation, entropy, analogy, or the limits of inference, you shifted to personal attacks, loyalty tests, and declarations of victory.
That’s not debate.
Calling someone “not thinking for themselves” is not a rebuttal.
Demanding ritual compliance (recite the Shahada) is not an argument.
Declaring that your points “build up” does not save them if the foundation is unsound.
You also don’t get to dictate how I respond or what format an answer must take. Arguments stand or fall on their content, not on whether they conform to your preferred presentation.
And stop cherry-picking single sentences out of context and twisting them. Either engage with the full point being made, or don’t engage at all. Selective quoting is not analysis, it’s avoidance.
If premise one is unjustified, the entire structure fails. That is basic logic.
If you believe my argument is incoherent, point out where and why.
If you believe it is wrong, show the error.
If you can’t do either, then saying “I have no time” is simply an exit, not a refutation.
I’m happy to engage on substance.
If the response is more psychologising, gatekeeping, or posturing, that just confirms there’s no substance to engage with.
Your move.

Debate is not lumping up unorganized thoughts and expecting a coherent response.

Again:
Your question was

Fenrir:
What proof have any of you got that any god exists?

You are all wrong until you can prove it to the entire world all at the same time, if your gods are real and all powerful what is the excuse for hiding?

I gave you a list of ten points that will lead you to the logical and scientific conclusion that an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything must exist.

My first point was:

TenQ:
Normally, I shouldn't respond to your question but I feel led to answer you without using scripture.


1. You are the number one proof of God's existence. You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature. A Building is the evidence of a Builder. A painting is the evidence of a Painter!
......

1. Do you by any chance have any evidence of non-life bringing forth life or offspring?
2. Do you have any evidence of DNA being synthesised from non-life in the laboratory?
3. Do you think a non-biological intelligent system like an AI program can exist without an external intelligent organiser?


Before you go at tangent : I am not asking about synthesis of amino acids or inorganic compounds!


These are Yes or No questions and please back it up with relevant evidence if your answer is a YES!

4. Finally, if you go to Mars and find a building with Doors, Windows and functional compartments like living room, kitchen, store and bedroom that had been standing for more than a million years with no-one in sight, will you conclude that an Intelligent Builder must have built it or the earthquakes and Martian dust built it? Or on Mars, you find the picture of a horselike animal, with canvas, frame, nails, glue, shapes and colours will you conclude that the painting made itself?

Note: I never said:
You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature.... therefore God!
A Building is the evidence of a Builder... therefore God.
A painting is the evidence of a Painter... therefore God!


I hope you can be rational, truthful, logical and scientific in your response. Please make your answers SHORT so that I can layout my second point

Fenrir:
Stop dodging and reframing AND trying to force the answer you want. Rephrasing the same question is idiotic.

Do better.

If you can't face objective issues, you have no business with me!


Have a nice day!

Fenrir:
You haven’t addressed a single argument I made.
Instead of engaging with causation, entropy, analogy, or the limits of inference, you shifted to personal attacks, loyalty tests, and declarations of victory.
That’s not debate.
Calling someone “not thinking for themselves” is not a rebuttal.
Demanding ritual compliance (recite the Shahada) is not an argument.
Declaring that your points “build up” does not save them if the foundation is unsound.
You also don’t get to dictate how I respond or what format an answer must take. Arguments stand or fall on their content, not on whether they conform to your preferred presentation.
And stop cherry-picking single sentences out of context and twisting them. Either engage with the full point being made, or don’t engage at all. Selective quoting is not analysis, it’s avoidance.
If premise one is unjustified, the entire structure fails. That is basic logic.
If you believe my argument is incoherent, point out where and why.
If you believe it is wrong, show the error.
If you can’t do either, then saying “I have no time” is simply an exit, not a refutation.
I’m happy to engage on substance.
If the response is more psychologising, gatekeeping, or posturing, that just confirms there’s no substance to engage with.
Your move.

Debate is not lumping up unorganized thoughts and expecting a coherent response.

Again:
Your question was

Fenrir:
What proof have any of you got that any god exists?

You are all wrong until you can prove it to the entire world all at the same time, if your gods are real and all powerful what is the excuse for hiding?

I gave you a list of ten points that will lead you to the logical and scientific conclusion that an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything must exist.

My first point was:

TenQ:
Normally, I shouldn't respond to your question but I feel led to answer you without using scripture.


1. You are the number one proof of God's existence. You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature. A Building is the evidence of a Builder. A painting is the evidence of a Painter!
......

1. Do you by any chance have any evidence of non-life bringing forth life or offspring?
2. Do you have any evidence of DNA being synthesised from non-life in the laboratory?
3. Do you think a non-biological intelligent system like an AI program can exist without an external intelligent organiser?


Before you go at tangent : I am not asking about synthesis of amino acids or inorganic compounds!


These are Yes or No questions and please back it up with relevant evidence if your answer is a YES!

4. Finally, if you go to Mars and find a building with Doors, Windows and functional compartments like living room, kitchen, store and bedroom that had been standing for more than a million years with no-one in sight, will you conclude that an Intelligent Builder must have built it or the earthquakes and Martian dust built it? Or on Mars, you find the picture of a horselike animal, with canvas, frame, nails, glue, shapes and colours will you conclude that the painting made itself?

Note: I never said:
You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature.... therefore God!
A Building is the evidence of a Builder... therefore God.
A painting is the evidence of a Painter... therefore God!


I hope you can be rational, truthful, logical and scientific in your response. Please make your answers SHORT so that I can layout my second point

Fenrir:
Dickhead’s Paradox
I know I’m part of the problem,
but the problem is so fucking stupid
that I can’t help but mock it, fight it,
and occasionally burn it to the ground.
This is situational dickheadism.
Not a personality trait.
Not a moral identity.
A context-triggered response to hypocrisy, double standards, and authority without coherence.
Core premise
Most people are not permanent dickheads.
They become dickheads when exposed to high-confidence nonsense.
Situational dickheadism emerges when three conditions collide:
Claimed authority or moral high ground
Visible contradiction between words and behaviour
Expectation that others must comply anyway
When all three are present, mockery feels less like cruelty and more like sanity trying to breathe.
Canonical examples
A doctor who smokes while lecturing about lung cancer
Knowledge without self discipline, delivered as command. The issue isn’t smoking. It’s lecturing from a podium you refuse to stand on yourself.
Religious adherents preaching virtue while violating their own scripture
Christian, Jewish, Islamic, doesn’t matter. The trigger is not belief. It’s selective obedience paired with moral enforcement. If the rules are divine, you don’t get an exemption clause.
Yoruba cultural rhetoric about humility and respect
followed by demands that others physically or socially lower themselves
and insults when they refuse.
That’s not humility. That’s hierarchy cosplay.
In all cases, the reaction isn’t “I hate you”.
It’s “don’t insult my intelligence and call it morality”.
Norwegian equivalent (impartial, no free passes)
Norway preaching equality, modesty, and “we’re all the same”
while quietly enforcing status through silence, exclusion, and social freezing.
Janteloven says “you are not better than anyone”.
Norwegian social reality often says
“but we will still decide who belongs”.
No shouting.
No insults.
Just polite distance, closed networks, and career ceilings you’re never told exist.
If you challenge it, you’re told: “Why are you making a problem?”
Which is the Norwegian equivalent of gaslighting with a smile.
Mocking that hypocrisy?
Situational dickheadism.
Not because equality is bad.
Because pretending equality while practicing quiet gatekeeping is dishonest.
Why the paradox exists
Dickhead’s Paradox is this:
If you stay polite,
the hypocrisy persists unchallenged.
If you push back,
you become “the problem”.
So resistance itself gets reframed as bad behaviour,
while the original contradiction remains untouched.
That’s why people snap.
That’s why mockery appears.
That’s why fires get lit.
Not because people love chaos,
but because absurdity backed by authority is unbearable.
Key distinction
Situational dickheadism is not, random cruelty
bullying
punching down
It is, reactive
target-specific
triggered by asymmetry
It punches up, sideways, or at least at equals.
When it punches down, it mutates into ordinary dickheadism and loses legitimacy.
The uncomfortable self admission
Yes.
The person mocking becomes part of the noise.
Yes.
Fire spreads.
That’s the paradox.
But pretending the fire started nowhere is worse.
Summary, stripped bare
Hypocrisy + authority creates pressure
Pressure creates mockery
Mockery creates escalation
Escalation creates guilt
Guilt does not fix the hypocrisy
So the system loops.
Situational dickheadism isn’t virtue.
It’s friction.
And friction is what happens when someone refuses to clap politely for nonsense.
I didn’t invent this.
I just named it.
And naming things is usually where the trouble starts.

The multiple personalities within you speaking againg. Tell them that I know them!

Unfortunately, you are not thinking for yourself: they are doing it for you.

Sorry!
Relax and pick up yourself

Fenrir:
TenQ before we continue this little dance, I went through all 107 of your topics and here's how the pattern reads 😈....

First observation: This isn't curiosity. This is a project.
Late 2021 through 2025. Same username. Same section. Same targets. Same rhetorical posture. That's not someone asking questions. That's someone running a campaign.
Persistence at that scale isn't intellectual honesty. It's identity maintenance.
Second: Your titles do all the heavy lifting.
Almost every thread you've ever started follows one of three templates:
Loaded question that presumes guilt:
"Why did Allah…"
"Did Allah make a mistake…"
"Who deleted this verse…"
Mock-certainty dressed as investigation:
"The proof that…"
"Evidence that…"
"According to Islam…"
Bait for identity defence:
"Why Muslims…"
"Muslims cannot explain…"
"Plain idolatry…"
This is textbook provocation engineering. You don't post to learn. You post to trigger defenders, then farm engagement off their emotional labour. The content doesn't matter. The reaction does.
Third: Notice what's missing.
There is no equivalent sustained critique of Christianity, Judaism, or atheism at the same scale or intensity. Christianity appears occasionally, but only as a contrast weapon against Islam, never as a target.
That asymmetry isn't accidental. It tells the truth about motivation. This isn't about seeking truth. It's about having an opponent.
Fourth: The escalation arc.
Early posts: semi-academic framing.
Then: certainty claims.
Then: moral condemnation.
Then: humiliation framing.
Then: sheer volume dominance.
That's textbook identity-anchored opposition. Once your self-image gets fused to being "the one who sees through Islam," stopping feels like losing status. So you don't stop. You post more. You get louder. You need the fight to continue, because without it, who are you?
Fifth: The engagement numbers explain everything.
These threads pull views. They pull replies. They generate heat. And on forums like Nairaland, heat equals relevance. Relevance equals staying power. The system rewards antagonism far more than clarity.
You didn't stumble into this. You adapted to it. This isn't accidental behaviour. It's optimised behaviour.
Sixth: This reads psychologically as control, not faith.
Control of narrative.
Control of framing.
Control of what the other side must respond to.
You take very little genuine risk. Your questions are constructed so you never have to concede anything. If challenged, you retreat to "I'm just asking." If agreed with, you escalate.
That's not dialogue. That's asymmetric warfare in a symbolic space.
Seventh: Why it works especially well here.
Because religion in Nigeria isn't abstract. It's identity, family, status, safety, community. So poking it guarantees reaction. Western "debate brain" meets lived belief. Sparks fly every time.
You know this. You're exploiting it. That's not scholarship. That's tactical manipulation of emotional infrastructure.
Eighth: What this isn't.
It's not deep scholarship.
It's not honest interfaith dialogue.
It's not neutral scepticism.
And crucially, it's not persuasion either. Nobody converts from being humiliated at scale.
What it is is performative dominance. You're not trying to convince anyone. You're trying to win in front of an audience that already agrees with you.
Ninth: The uncomfortable truth.
If someone showed me your archive and asked "is this person obsessed," I'd say yes. Not obsessed with Islam as theology, but with Islam as an opponent.
And obsession always leaks tells: volume, repetition, inability to disengage, identity fusion.
Final observation: The asymmetry.
If you disappeared tomorrow, Islam wouldn't wobble by a micron.
But your online identity would collapse entirely, because it's been built against something, not for something.
That's the structural weakness in your entire operation. You need the enemy to exist. You need the fight to continue. Because without it, what's left?
So here's where we actually are.
You accused me of not reading. I read everything and dismantled it systematically.
You demanded I "pick one point." I addressed all ten and you ignored the rebuttals.
You psychoanalyzed me, called me possessed, dismissed me as cosmically irrelevant, anything to avoid the fact that your logic collapsed under scrutiny.
But the truth is simpler than that.
You're not here to argue. You're here to perform.
And I'm not interested in being your content. 😈😈

I give no apology for my take on Islam.
All you need to do is to say that "I speak untruths about Islam"

My objectives was to show from Islamic sources that Allah, Mohammed, Islam is FALSE and that I do successfully!

If you want to defend Islam, I ask you to RECITE the Shahada and then come. With the same yardstick of Islam, I will floor you!

Birds of the same feathers.....


Atheists are a waste of my time: they fein knowledge but are completely empty. They think being obstinate and hiding behind agnosticism helps their case. They fail to realise that just like the rest of us, they are people of Faith in SELF!
Deluded in all manners!
Instead of knowledge helping them, the same knowledge is a curse.

Fenrir:
Fella, yes, a computer is evidence of an engineer, because we have direct empirical data of engineers existing, building computers, and we can observe the process. That dataset exists.
Now show me the equivalent dataset for universes.
You have never observed a universe being built, never observed a “universe builder,” never observed the mechanism, never compared designed vs undesigned universes. So you cannot legally import “artifact logic” into cosmology and call it science. That’s an analogy, not evidence.
On your points 2 to 5. Big Bang describes an early hot dense state and an expansion. It does not prove “creation from absolute nothing.” It marks the limit of our current models. That’s a boundary of knowledge, not a licence to insert your preferred metaphysics. Entropy also does not forbid complexity. Local order emerges constantly in open systems where energy flows. Stars form. Crystals grow. Life exists. Your thermodynamics claim is simply misapplied.
On points 6 to 8. “Everything has a cause” is not a scientific law, it’s a metaphysical premise. And causation as you’re using it is a temporal concept: sequence, before/after. If time itself is part of the universe, you cannot coherently say “the cause happened before time.” You’re using “cause” as a placeholder for mystery, not an explanation.
On points 9 to 10: even if I granted an “uncaused first cause,” intelligence does not follow logically. You assert it. You don’t demonstrate it. And your sentence “Christians call it God” does not produce Christianity. It doesn’t produce prophets, salvation, souls, heaven/hell, moral commands, or anything else. That entire jump is asserted, not argued.
So here’s the challenge, one that stays inside your own framework.
Without scripture and without personal attacks, show the steps that make “uncaused first cause” necessarily: (a) intelligent
(b) personal
(c) morally authoritative
(d) caring about humans
(e) the Christian God rather than an impersonal principle or brute fact.
Write the chain of reasoning. If you can’t, stop calling your position “science and logic.” Call it what it is, faith wearing scientific vocabulary.

Organise yourself and be focused. One point after the other. Each of my ten points don't stand alone, they are build up to the conclusion.

If the foundation is not right, whatever is upon it is a waste

Fenrir:
Either address what was said properly, or don’t bother replying at all.
You posture like a righteous man, but you sound like a jester with a bankrupt mindset, shouting morality from a cracked stool. Truly righteous people don’t look down on others for holding different beliefs. That insecurity you’re masking with “holiness” is doing all the talking.
Take a proper look in the mirror.
Then look at your neighbours.
Then look at your family.
Do you honestly think you’re a good person?
Do you really think your god is proud of this behaviour?
You keep thinking about “up” and “down”, heaven and hell, but ask yourself something simple:
Are you actually rising…
or just kneeling so long you forgot what standing looks like?

I only address focused coherent arguments please. If you can engage by such rules, I'm sorry I got not time for such.

Fenrir:
I wrote you a story fella....

Following this internal logic of the bible....lets see if you actually read the whole thing.....

The more you think about Christianity the more ridiculous it is......

The god loves you a lot BUT if you dont love him he burns you in hell forever out of love of course.

He created you with sin already in you but he hates sin so naturally he puts the thing he hates in you BUT he loves you and hates sin and blames you for sinning.

So he creates a son thats also him with the plan to kill his son/himself to get rid of sin and sin still exists and its supposed to be the ultimate act of love? And of course how can you sacrifice yourself to yourself then respawn after cancelling the sacrifice because the sacrifice was for 3 days. And it wasn't even 3 days Friday to Sunday but nobody can question that.

Just smile, nod and amen.

And after all of that if you still dont agree, or understand and love him the exact right way eternal fire BUT remember be always still loves you.

The message was......... never think for yourself but the Serpent...........he just asked a question "do you want to know?"......


THE SKY DADDY: A TEST OF DELUSION
In the beginning, the Sky Wizard forged the world by speaking it into being.
No manuals. No warnings. No explanations.
Just law, absolute and unspoken.
He planted a garden not as a lesson, but as a test.
At its heart stood the fruit, glowing not with danger, but with inevitability.
The humans were not ignorant by accident.
Ignorance was the design.
Then came the Serpent, older than obedience, younger than doubt.
It did not force.
It did not threaten.
It only asked a question the Sky Wizard never allowed:
"Do you want to know?"
When the fruit was eaten, the Sky Wizard did not rage because the rule was broken.
He raged because the game changed.
Knowledge shattered destiny.
Choice fractured the plan.
So the Sky Wizard cursed the world, not to punish disobedience,
but to reassert control.
But here is where the story stops being about learning.
Here is where it becomes about winning.
THE CURSE AS ARCHITECTURE
The Sky Wizard did not curse humanity out of wounded pride.
He cursed them with precision.
He embedded sin into their cellular code, wrapped it around their DNA like barbed wire around a fence post. He made them crave the things he would later forbid. He wired their brains for tribalism, lust, greed, violence, and then stood back and called it their fault.
The game was rigged from the womb.
Every child born carried the stain of an ancestor who ate fruit at the Wizard's own table, in the garden the Wizard designed, containing the tree the Wizard planted, holding the fruit the Wizard made appealing, while the Wizard watched and did nothing.
And when they stumbled, when they fell into the exact patterns he'd encoded into their flesh, he called it justice to punish them.
Not for a lifetime.
Forever.
The mathematics of it are obscene. A finite crime, committed by a limited being, in a lifespan that blinks out like a candle, met with infinite torture.
That's not justice.
That's sadism with a halo.
THE FLOOD: GENOCIDE AS RESET BUTTON
When the world became too tangled, too far gone into the very patterns he'd designed them to follow, the Sky Wizard didn't fix the code.
He drowned it.
Every infant. Every pregnant mother. Every animal that had no concept of sin at all. He pulled the water over the earth like a blanket over a birdcage and let them choke.
One family survived because one man still feared him enough to be called righteous.
Fear and righteousness became synonyms.
And when the waters receded, the Wizard painted a rainbow in the sky, a promise that next time he wouldn't use water.
Next time it would be fire.
The survivors called this mercy.
THE PLAN: A SACRIFICE TO HIMSELF, FOR HIMSELF, BY HIMSELF
Ages passed. The system didn't improve, it calcified.
So the Sky Wizard devised the strangest spell of all. He would fix the sin problem he himself created by sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself.
He squeezed himself into a womb, gestated in the dark, and emerged as meat. He walked around for thirty-three years, taught some people to be kind, which apparently they needed a god to tell them, and then allowed himself to be tortured to death.
For three days.
Well, parts of three days. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning. Call it thirty-six hours if we're being generous.
And this, this was meant to be the ultimate act of love. The infinite sacrifice.
Except.
He didn't stay dead. He came back. Which means he didn't actually lose anything. He took a long weekend in the grave and called it substitutionary atonement.
A sacrifice that gets refunded isn't a sacrifice. It's theater.
And the sin he died to erase? Still there. Still in every human born afterward. Still requiring the same groveling, the same belief, the same submission, or else the same fire.
Nothing actually changed.
The Carpenter rose on the third day, not transformed, but victorious. He proved he could die and un-die, which is a neat party trick for a deity but does precisely nothing for the human beings still stuck with the sin-code he wrote into them.
THE TRAP: LOVE ME OR BURN
After the resurrection, after the rising, after all the miracles and the speeches and the promises, the message crystallized into something simple.
Believe in me, or burn.
Not "be good." Not "reduce suffering." Not "pursue truth."
Believe.
Specifically, believe the correct things about a sacrifice that didn't actually cost anything, performed by a being who designed you to fail, to save you from a punishment he himself invented, for crimes he coded into your flesh.
Get it wrong? Eternal fire.
Don't hear the message because you were born in the wrong century or the wrong continent? Eternal fire.
Hear it but find it logically incoherent? Eternal fire.
Live a life of profound compassion but direct it toward the wrong god or no god? Eternal fire.
And all of this, all of it, is done out of love.
The kind of love that creates you sick and commands you to be well.
The kind of love that puts a gun to your head and calls it a gift when it doesn't pull the trigger.
THE SERPENT'S QUESTION ANSWERED
The Serpent asked, "Do you want to know?"
And the answer, it turns out, was irrelevant.
Because knowing didn't free them. It just made them aware of the cage.
They learned they were naked. They learned they would die. They learned that the being who claimed to love them had designed a system where love was indistinguishable from hostage negotiation.
The Serpent didn't lie. It told them they would be like gods, knowing good and evil.
And they did.
They learned that good and evil are whatever the Sky Wizard says they are, and the rules change depending on his mood. Sometimes he commands you not to kill. Sometimes he commands you to slaughter every man, woman, and child in Canaan and keep the virgin girls for yourself.
Sometimes he's a shepherd. Sometimes he's a warlord.
The knowledge didn't set them free.
It just made them complicit.
THE TEST OF DELUSION
The Sky Wizard never learned.
He didn't become humble. He didn't grow. He didn't realize that a plan without choice is a cage.
He knew it was a cage.
That was the point.
The test was never about obedience or love or growth.
The test was about whether you could be broken enough to call the cage freedom.
Whether you could look at a system designed to make you fail and call it justice.
Whether you could watch the Wizard drown the world, burn cities, demand child sacrifice, torture his own son-self for a weekend, and still get on your knees and call it love.
The ones who pass the test aren't the ones who understand.
They're the ones who stop asking questions.
Smile.
Nod.
Amen.
THE FINAL REVELATION
In the end, the Sky Wizard sits on his throne, surrounded by the ones who loved him enough, feared him enough, or broke themselves enough to meet his criteria.
They sing his praises forever, which is what he wanted all along.
Not companions. Not partners. Not beings capable of genuine love, which requires the freedom to choose otherwise.
Just mirrors.
Reflections that sing back his glory without the throat to scream.
The Serpent watches from the lake of fire, where it burns alongside every human who dared to keep asking "why," and it doesn't smile anymore.
It just burns.
Because the game never changed.
The Sky Wizard won.
And he calls it love.

You deep seated hate for God gives an impression that you have personalities speaking on your behalf.

You cannot even speak rationally to arguments without remembering that there are 1001 issues you have specifically against the One you now call Sky Wizard.

Your arrogance make you seem important in the scale of the Universe. Unfortunately, you can be forgotten for the rest of eternity and no one other than yourself will lose a sleep over it.

Remember where we started?

Your Question was:

Fenrir:
What proof have any of you got that any god exists?

You are all wrong until you can prove it to the entire world all at the same time, if your gods are real and all powerful what is the excuse for hiding?

So. I gave you Scientific and Logical Reasons to conclude that an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything who is NOT subject to the laws of physics and Chemistry Exist! And I said that this Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything is what we Christians call God.

Then (and even now) like a scorned third wife, your grouse of yesteryears erupted specifically against the God of the Christians. You seem to know ALL the Christians doctrinal positions to launch your attack.

The argument had NOT even reached the level of the IDENTITY of the Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything. The argument was to establish the EXISTENCE of Such a personality and not His IDENTITY. Yet, your rage couldn't help but complain like a bunch of cheated prison fellas of how a prison warden is bullying you.

Sorry for your pain.

I wish that you'd Learn to separate between issues and discern facts rather than living by sentiments and brute emotions.


I see within you multiple personalities all yelping like a pack of hurt hyena all with their ears closed so that they can each speak as loudly as they can.
Is it rational to hate Spiderman or Batman as they are both fictional? This proves that you have a problem internally: your multiple personalities rage because even if you are ignorant, they aren't. They know, they hate, they were the ones rejected and their pain is real. You are just their mouthpiece, the vessel through which their disembodied souls find expression.

Bottom line:
Your position is even more crazy to think that ALL of existence, the Atoms, the Biology and the Chemistry was a product of cosmic wizardry where from NOTHING, multiple Systems and Life happened: and amazingly with not one EVIDENCE!?

Yet, you mock those who say that ALL of existence, the Atoms, the Biology and the Chemistry was a product of One Outside our Universe who from NOTHING, created multiple Systems and Life.

Put aside the Christian God for now and Tell me if you can think: which of these two positions is stronger in merit.

SMH!

DeepSight:
+
Since I dont know such a being I cant tell. However my guess is that no, such a being would not care and the evidence of life is that such a being is probably neutral to such things and even worse, the world appears designed in favor of violence.

Let's test your conclusion.


You are the intelligent being who created moral beings with freewill/volition to do right or wrong which you put in a planet.

Would you execute JUSTICE for your creations if some chose to murder and rape and commit all kinds of wickedness to other creatures OR you would NOT CARE what they do to themselves?

DeepSight:
+
Well I guess that works for you.

You shut down the pursuit of this knowledge?

God has revealed Himself enough for you to know Him if you choose?


Let me ask you a question:
If indeed, there exists an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything that is not bounded by the laws of Physics and Chemistry

Should such a being care if humans murdered and raped each other?

Fenrir:
See, cherry-picking out of context the typical trick of Nigerian men

Proof you lost, I answered everything in 1 go, you cherry-pick and twist it.


Now I must implore you to neutralise your current penchant for this galling and grandiloquent banter lest I am provoked to disintegrate your logic with a relentless salvo of esoteric philosophical fragments and pray do not misinterpret my discourse as blowing big grammar i am simply facilitating a rigorous anatomical dissection of your current rhetorical fallacies

Please stop wasting my time.
Pick a point and slug it out if you can!

Otherwise, an empty drum makes the greatest noise!

I did not use the Bible but the Laws of Logic and Science to arrive at the conclusion that there must Exist an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything that is not bounded by the laws of Physics and Chemistry

Sorry!

MaxInDHouse:
You see the reason why you don't worth engaging me in such a discussion?

You want me to talk about what i shared with my brothers in sacred service but you don't respect such arrangements yet you feel i should engage you in such a serious discussion.

You don't have to engage with me. I think we concluded about that. Discuss the questions with your fellow elders using your Bible as a guide.

Is it too much to ask?

DeepSight:
+
I think it is unknowable.

I agree with you.

God is truely unknowable UNLESS He reveals Himself to us.

We get to know who God is through some men He had chosen from the Land of Israel: from Abraham to the Apostles of Jesus. Records abound in the Bible.

Each one of us Christians then bond in a union of Relationship with God by our individual personal and subjective experience of Him. Thus we can say, we know this God reported by His prophets personally.

Fenrir:
I never said differently but I get to define the atheist I am

And I went to war SO PEOPLE HAD THE RIGHT TO BELIEVE WHATEVER THEY WANT

show me 1 Nigerian man that will fight for my beliefs? Because I gave blood for yours

and you dont even practice Christianity since you scream your traditions are mandatory in a lie, both the Bible and Quran directly tell you not to do that and it makes you a selective hypocrite.

I don't even seem to know you as this thread is the first I can recall where we have conversed.
..and you seem to know that I don't practice Christianity and I claim that my traditions are mandatory in a lie.

You have the Right to whatever you want to believe
BUT
1. Is your position the naked Truth?
2. You have the freedom of thought and choice, but are you free from the consequences of your choice


Do you agree with me that
I will be wickedness on the part of God if He forces you who despise and reject Him to be with Him for Eternity?
Shouldn't He allow you your space you yourself and your kind in a place where you are forgotten by Him?

God actually offers you this above. The choice is yours to make.

DeepSight:
+
I have no issues with this argument and have made it myself many times.

I just want to know how you proceed from this to Jesus.

I guess I have to ask you this question first.

If you believe in an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything who operates outside the physical and chemical laws,
Who do you think He is?

Fenrir:
I answered ALL of your questions, stop being lazy and a hypocrite. Go read it and quote it.

Get over your narcissistic arrogance.

Sorry,
Pick a point and trash it out.

What you claimed are strawman arguments, insinuating what I never said and jumping to your own conclusion.

Let me give you an example
1. You said:

Fenrir:
None of that is evidence its belief and no more

Is this TRUE?

2. Extracts from your thesis.

Fenrir:
The Scandi atheist deconstruction........
First problem: “A building proves a builder, therefore the universe proves God.”


Second problem: “The universe is about 13.6 billion years old, therefore it had a beginning, therefore God.”


.....
TenQ check mate and you claim i didn't read your passive aggressive nonsense

Sorry!
This is NOT how to make your case if you have ANY.

Never once did I make an argument and conclude that "THEREFORE GOD" not once as you are reading the God of the Gaps into my claims.

My claims are PROGRESSIVE REASONINGS based on Current Scientific Knowledge AND Logic to arrive at the Causing Source of the Universe that I called the Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything and I said this Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything is what we Christians call God!


If you have any argument, pick my points One at a Time and answer questions relating to it.
Until then, sorry! I think my points were numbered carefully for you to disprove the scientific and logical fallacy each contains. You can then look at the implications of each if it is True

Fenrir:
And i did not claim to be an atheist I DIRECTLY outright told you im atheist. See the narcissistic attitude of the men in this country.

Do you disagree that there are different shades of Atheism?

Some call themselves Agnostics, others are Satanists....

DeepSight:
+
I know the scientific position. I just dont agree with it and have debated that point on this forum as far back as 2010 - 16 years ago.

https://www.nairaland.com/577313/thehomer-now-lets-discuss-big

Your challenge as to how to prove Christianity still remains.

So, which of my points do you disagree with?

I have not attempted to prove the Christian God at all.

All I have established is that it is LOGICAL and even SCIENTIFIC to conclude that an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause created the Universe AND this Uncaused-First-Cause cannot be made of Matter and cannot be subject to the Physical and Chemical Laws.

Except for being Obstinate, there exist no other plausible conclusion.

The question of WHO this Uncaused-First-Cause is another question entirely!

MaxInDHouse:
With who do you agree on your conclusions regarding your questions?

If you don't agree with anyone what makes you think i will agree with you?

Or do you think i'm interested in some aimless arguments that you always engage with random people?😂

Ask your fellow elders and open your bible as you discuss.

Unfortunately, topics like these are not discussed by your publications, thus, you cannot independently open the Bible!


SMH!

Have a nice day!!

DeepSight:
+
If these are the ten points you were referring to, I agree with them (except that I dont believe that time and space were created by or at the moment of the big bang, I believe that time and space cannot be created).

Your challenge is how to move from the above to Christianity.

The logic is this
Time is irrelevant without matter
Matter cannot exist without space
Space without matter is meaningless as there isn't any dimensions by which it can be defined.

Can you ask any AI the question:
According to science, did time, space and matter appear simultaneously at the origin of the universe?

I'll like to know the answer

MaxInDHouse:
Please quote the highlighted in your previous post to me on this thread?😂

So when you are asked to answer questions based on Bible questions like

1. Can anyone see God?
2. Can God be in Heaven and on Earth concurrently?
3. Who was speaking in Heb1:8 to the Son?



You run off to consult the JW manual instead of the Bible!?

SMH!

MaxInDHouse:
Surely you don't think before typing!

I'm living in the same place with those you call "elders"?



If i'm not living in the same place or city with them so how come you believe we all have the same line of thought just as Jesus prayed for his real disciples {John 17:22} but you don't have anyone to relate with as your fellow believers?😂

It seems you don't study the scriptures to know as you've been told what to believe.

All I asked you to do is to study the bible. Is that a tall order to do?

MaxInDHouse:
You haven't answered:

What is the name of your church?😂

What is wrong with you

TenQ:
I belong to "The Church of Jesus Christ" ( I won't tell you the city I reside but I am in Nigeria)

What Has Jesus Achieved in the midst of Us His Children!?
1. He Bought us with the costly Price of His Blood on the Cross and Adopted Us into Himself By His Spirit.
2. He Sealed us with His Spirit so that we become His Children
3. He made us Holy to Himself and Gave us His Spirit to lead us in Good Works
4. He Helped us to Nurture our Fruit of the Spirit by which our Character as His Ambassadors are nurtured and projected in the World
5. He gave us His Gifts of the Holy Spirit by which we are Empowered to Make Disciples of All nations, to Preach, to Heal the Sick and Cast out Demons as we go about Preaching the Good News to All Creations
6. He made Us His own Workmanship Created to do Good works for Him as we Represent Him Wherever we are
7. He made us to Love Him and one another as He has Loved us with a pure Love


So, above is the summary of what my Jesus has achieved in the midst of us who worship Him in Spirit and Truth!

Without Jesus, we are NOTHING!
In Jesus Christ we are made COMPLETE!

We still have some minor individual and personal shortcomings, BUT we are all work in-progress, and daily, we grow together Loving More of God and our Neighbours as ourselves.

We are ALL waiting for the second coming of Jesus Christ: so, we do the work of the ministry knowing that He will reward us according to our Faithfulness to our calling of Living a Life Worthy of His calling, Preaching the Good News and Making Disciples of all Creations.


I have nothing else to Add to this INFORMATION about the name of my church and what Jesus has achieved in the midst of us His worshipers?

Thank you for asking me of what the Lord Jesus Christ has Achieved in our Midst?

MaxInDHouse:
Personal truth you mean?😂

Truth builds up a congregation so if you can't name the congregation your so called "TRUTH" had built i'm sorry for you!😂

All these after I answered your question!!?

So run off as usual!
I am not holding you.
The Truth is NEVER afraid of Scrutiny!

MaxInDHouse:
Just as what you think too has nothing to do with me so if you have issues with anyone face them and please don't involve me because i'm not interested in any discussion with people who have no regards for those taking the lead in sacred service!🙂

So run off as usual!
I am not holding you.

The Truth is NEVER afraid of Scrutiny!

Fenrir:
​You talk about "Software," "Dimensions," and "Prophets," but you are ignoring the data of the physical world we actually live in. If your "Software" (the Spirit) were functioning as intended in Nigeria, the results would look like the values found in the very Bible you quote. Instead, we see the complete opposite.
​Forced Conformity vs. Free Will. You demand "respect" and "obedience," but the Bible emphasizes a voluntary heart change (Joshua 24:15). Forcing religion through social pressure and tradition isn't "saving" anyone; it’s just indoctrination.
​Tradition over Truth: You prioritize man-made cultural customs (like the bride price/traditional rites) over actual spiritual or legal standing. Jesus specifically rebuked this in Mark 7:8, accusing people of "setting aside the commands of God to observe human traditions."
​"Big Man" Culture vs. Servant Leadership: In Nigeria, leadership is often about being served, carried, and feared. Yet, Jesus said in Matthew 20:26 that whoever wants to be great must be a servant. Your "Prophets" live like kings while the streets are full of suffering.
​Prayer as a Weapon vs. Love Your "Back to Sender" and "Holy Ghost Fire" prayers for enemies directly contradict Matthew 5:44, which commands you to love and pray for those who persecute you.
​The Fruit of the System: You claim Norway is "godless," yet it is a society of high trust, safety for women, and care for the poor. You claim Nigeria is "Godly," yet it struggles with systemic corruption, child abuse, and human rights violations.
If your God is real and your "software" is superior, why are the most "religious" societies often the most broken, and the "unbelieving" ones the most compassionate and functional? You are starving in a land you claim is blessed, while you criticize the people who actually built the "safe streets" you say God wants.

You are muddling up several things rather than the core of the issue.
You claimed not to believe in God aka what I will as a Christian call the Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything. This is the issue and not what you expect Him to do as God based on your own understanding.

Let me oblige you by going to the fundamental claims I made.

I will start from point ONE: follow the Science and the Logic!

1. 1. [s]You are the number one proof of God's existence.[/s] [s] You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature.[/s] A Building is the evidence of a Builder. A painting is the evidence of a Painter!

According to the Natural Laws is this statement bolded correct. Painting and Building are used from the point of view of SYSTEMS and not random arrangements.

A Computer is the Evidence of the Engineer!

Yes or No!

MaxInDHouse:
Your personal problems has nothing to do with me if you don't want to become submissive to any group teaching that's your own cup of coffee, Jesus has a group and they are working together as one team {John 17:22} thinking they shouldn't have sinners among them is not scriptural because Jesus himself said he came to call sinners not the righteous. Matthew 9:13
So in his group we don't worship him as God rather we obey him as God's only begotten Son through whose instructions we can be saved.
Whoever feels too big to humble himself under Christ's chosen (anointed) brothers can't have a place among us. Matthew 25:41-46
That's the difference between true Christians and false religionists claiming Christians! Matthew 7:12-13🙂

Whatever you think doesn't represent me either. It's easy to fight a Strawman and win.

Fenrir:
You asked for one scientific error. Here is the biggest one, Your claim that "Intelligent life requires an Intelligent Designer" is a circular argument, not a scientific law.
If complexity requires a creator, then your God the most complex entity of all would require a "Super God" to create Him. If you say "God doesn't need a creator" you’ve just admitted that complex things can exist without a builder. You broke your own rule.
​But let’s look at the "Subjective Experience" you mentioned. You say you "tune into your conscience." My "conscience" tells me that a God who demands "respect" while his followers oversee suffering, plastic choked streets, and the abuse of women and children is a human invention used to justify power.
​You call it "Software" I call it "Indoctrination." In Norway, we don't need the fear of a "Sky Daddy" to be good people, we just care about each other. If your God is real, why are the people who ignore Him doing a better job of looking after His "creation" than you are?

Pick one theme at a time!

Do you agree that in the physical Dimensions, you will be correct.

But from a higher Dimension to the physical, you would be completely wrong for you have no way to even comprehend the possibilities in the higher dimensions to the physical realities.

If you had followed the progression from 1 through 10 , you wouldn't make this mistake


I told you to READ the Book Flat Land

MaxInDHouse:
No Son is equal to his father so Jesus in the Bible is lesser than his father he is not the Almighty that position belongs to his father.
But if you keep arguing over that then you have to present the achievement of this your Almighty in the midst of ITS worshipers!🙂

I will prefer if you quote me and not insinuate what you think I believe.

Fenrir:
You didn't defeat anything just fell for your parents scam

Your problem is rejecting what you don't even understand!
Your comprehension is abysmal at best

Fenrir:
Do you hear yourself?

"God's righteous man"

Thats not a compliment, thats a cage
It needs suffering
It needs evil
It means he to needs to accept authority that cant be proven

Its also a real estate scam

And the funny thing 🤣 for all religions when you are born, the default setting is atheist until parents choose how to raise you, there is no belief at all

Its a cosmic joke
They strip away curiosity and replace it with fear of damnation and yes its a dammed nation

The kingdom of heaven that no one can prove exists

Quote a point and trash it out if you can.

DeepSight:
Be serious. I remember you as a thinker. Dont just hand wave and claim there arent valid points in what he wrote which any serious seeker of truth would not stop to ponder on.

I listed 10 scientific facts, yours is to pick one at a time and justify why it is false