blueAgent:


Gbam!!!!!

You would do well to actually make an argument. You should have considered my response to that character further down the thread. I've posted my response to him below.

thehomer:

davidylan:

As is usual, those who blab about being "educated" would rather refer you to websites even they dont understand. Its way too difficult to expect them to actually sit down and analyse their position.

We know all about the big slam . . . that was not the question of the thread. The question is quite simple - where did the big slam come from? Nothing?

Just to humor myself . . . i got this off the wikipedia page thehomer links to . . . of course since he has no knowledge of his own . . .

thehomer:
And I guess you have all this knowledge of your own? Beware the Dunning-Kruger effect.

davidylan:

According to the Big slam model, the universe expanded from an extremely dense and hot state and continues to expand today.

this is a silly claim - where did this "extremely dense and hot state" come from? So is the claim that matter and energy have ALWAYS existed? How did this "dense and hot state" result in the complex organisms we have today? How did it create such a delicately balanced universe that depends on such fine tuned laws of nature with very little room for flexibility?

thehomer:
Which part of the claim is silly? You're one hilarious fellow. Are you disagreeing with the fact that the universe expanded or that it continues to expand? How's that for comprehension?
It could be that this matter and energy always existed in some form. Do you not understand this possibility?
Delicately balanced universe? That is an example of what is known as "puddle thinking". I wonder what your answer is.

davidylan:

How then can we claim that net energy in space = 0 if matter had ALWAYS existed in the form of a "dense and hot state"?

thehomer:
So this is the root of your entire problem. The point isn't that the net energy in space is zero because recall that space is as a result of the expanding matter and energy. Hawking's point is that gravity when considered as negative energy counterbalances the matter and energy of the universe. Keep in mind that it wasn't matter that was in that hot and dense state but the universe in another state.

davidylan:

Hopefully thehomer isnt going to answer by telling us to "link here". That's all he seems capable of doing despite bleating about "knowledge".

thehomer:
No. Since you were able to clearly point out what you were unable to understand, I simply had to try to help you along. I hope you're now better informed.

3kay945:


Maybe I didn't notice, cos it has been a while I read your post. Most especially when it comes to religious matters.

I do enjoy it, I must confess.

Thanks. I aim to please.

3kay945:
Where is this dude *thehomer* ?

Your favourite thread is here.

What do you want with me?

Amujale:


Nobody is claiming anything, merely opinions with hard facts on the topic.

For me, Olodumare is Allah in various ways that makes more sense expressed in this form however if you attempt to interchange, then it hardly makes sense not to mention of having to qualify in it essence. Allah is Olodumare in many ways yet if you attempt to interchange, then. it hardly makes sense not to mention of having to qualify in it essence.

According to you,

Olodumare = Allah but Allah ≠ Olodumare unless you mean Olodumare + extra qualifying essense.
But your very next sentence says

Allah = Olodumare but Olodumare ≠ Allah unless you mean Allah + extra qualifying essense.

I'm sorry but this makes no sense. Either Olodumare is the same as Allah or he isn't. There's no room for adding qualifying essenses to one and not the other at the same time.

winner01:

I get it, every other person is wrong but not you, you must be right.

Correct.

winner01:

Actually it does, some atheists have claimed that they want atheism to be true and that even if "proof" existed, they still won't believe in God.

You may like it if gravity were suspended temporarily but that won't make you believe it will happen tomorrow at 10 am.

winner01:

Except the meaning of preconceived notion has changed, several atheist seem to get naturally defensive when they hear the word christian scientist as if science is atheism-based.

Has it now? A scientist can be a Christian. It merely shows their ability to compartmentalize. Science doesn't assume a God.

winner01:

Of course many atheists claim to have read the bible only for you to discover in arguments that they understand next to nothing in scriptures. Do you also care that some atheists became Christians and that many of us who hold Christianity as truth weren't always Christians?

And many atheists understand the Bible better than Christians. Many Christians became atheists by reading the Bible.

winner01:

I do not understand. Does this mean anyone who does not agree with the atheistic ideology is close minded?
This is serious.

No, it means you've shown evidence of your mind being closed due to your religious beliefs.

winner01:

That's what it seem like atheists want to do. Atheist evangelists
You'll have to have studied all religious beliefs and know all things to make such an outrageous claim. Do you now see the meaning of close minded?

Atheists pointing out that religions aren't true is good service to humanity. I'm willing to limit myself to the religion you believe since you also don't believe all the other ones.

winner01:

All these general accusations about Christians make you sound bigoted. Christianity have provided many of the brightest minds that have ever lived.

When accusations are true, you have to deal with them on that basis. Christianity didn't provide the minds, some of those people with those minds happened to be Christians. Many others weren't Christians.

winner01:

I do not understand what you mean by zombies

Dead bodies becoming reanimated to roam the streets.

winner01:

Now you have a soft spot for pseudoscience, I understand .

I was not there during the events but with historical record and evidence, hearsay, archeological evidence and existential relevancy, I have come to make my own decisions.

I still do not understand what you mean by zombies.

How did you come by this understanding?
Hearsay isn't acceptable evidence for a claim like a virgin birth. See above for zombies.

winner01:

How can you say religion requires false beliefs, this is tantamount to infinite knowledge. Science was advanced by majority of these folks whose ideology you so detest.

Because religion requires false beliefs. Science was advanced by all sorts of people.

winner01:

Lol, maybe if you have a better look at the fossil record, you'll be able to decipher that the transitional fossils required as proof of evolution of one form to another is outrightly missing. Till date, there are no examples in history or presently of "change of kinds".

This is the religion inspired blindness I've been talking about.

winner01:

Lol, that quote was in reference to the whole theory of evolution. Darwin admitted to many other inconsistencies in his ideas.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/3980959_1353325912111307855847593601288972119265443n_jpeg22bb58dc800fe4501ff9a5a9384c533e

www.nairaland.com/attachments/3980960_132266881743167462609206803864670214952096n_jpeg1a7e4a245eba31b90fb39d4a415a27b6

And the Darwin quotemine continues. I don't know why you think this will impress me or add anything because it doesn't.

winner01:

Lol, you have no point you know.

Have you looked into what the theory of evolution is? Have you looked into the biological definition of species? Looking into them will show you the point.

winner01:

You examined it and found them wanting what did you examine and why did you find them wanting also why are you combating the examinations of other on scientific based atheism. Are you the custodian of truth?

I examined them with the usual tools. What did you examine your God with? Sure. You may call me the custodian of truth if you want it still won't make make the ideas of your God coherent or useful.

winner01:

Lol, Hindus have a god or gods, are you not outraged about that or is it just the Christian God?

I'm not outraged by any God. Do you believe in the Hindu Gods?

winner01:

Also you do know that a belief in God is native to humanity?

Even if that were true, it still won't make your particular God exist. Unless you believe in Zeus.

winner01:

How can you desperately want to write off the real life experiences of billions of people and claim that only yours is true. Your atheism has all the bigotry of most religions cos that's what you make it seem like.

Millions and billions of people have been lying to themselves but only you and a few others are correct. Okay, I get your point.

People misattribute experience all the time.
Thanks for getting my point. Many are called but I and a few others are chosen and correct.

If this is true, it sounds like a money laundering operation.

AgentOfAllah:
Oh wow! koolJ1, shaybebaby and ModusOperandi, I am flattered beyond self-recognition to be so recognised by yous! Still, I enjoy engaging with brilliant minds such as yourselves. I have to admit though, I wouldn't say I'm always on point, as I do make lots of mistakes.

In categories, my picks are:
Philosophical depth: PastorAIO, thehomer (if this person still exists) and DeepSight

Witty ripostes: sonofluc1fer

Poignant allegories: Johnydon22 and dalaman

That person still exists.

Blogthug:


it's like I'm talking to a wall, u keep repeating this " humans can represent it as code" who is suppose to represent it as a code? your village juju? look if u discover something edible and nutritious in your backyard that no one has discovered before, won't it be categorized as food ? of coz u will because it fits description of food,pls try to think with that brain of yours.

I have to keep repeating it because you don't seem to understand this fact. You seem to think that bees represent and understand codes. Calling something food isn't coding. This is why I asked you if you thought that all communication was code but you didn't respond. It is clear to me that you're finding thinking difficult.

Blogthug:

"what you've not shown is the God u think is behind it" that's a strawman, my argument was for intelligent design try again

What do you think is the point of the intelligent design argument?

Blogthug:


no I'm not confused but you rather have just exhibited full blown ignorance about DNA, let me spoon feed u abit , thank me later

https://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/gene-code/history.html

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Organic/gencode.html

Yes you are confused and you've shown so far is that your confusion arises whenever you see the word "code". The first article tells you DNA is a physical molecule that can be represented as code, the second article does the same. What you've also shown is that humans can represent it as code. What you've not shown is the God you think is behind it.

Blogthug:


from your statement " The notion of a code is imposed by humans for ease of understanding " it shows u don't even know what u are talking about. who should name it a Code ? a god? words were invented by humans and understood by humans to mean specific things , codes are hidden language, words or signs used in passing specific information that must be decoded by the receiver , Scientists called the way dancing bees communicate a code because it fits the description of a code which makes it a code just like Morse codes, u don't have to like it, your being incredulous won't help u gain true knowledge , and I choose to believe the words of experts and scientist rather than believe a random Nairalander who has some ignorant opinion

It is difficult responding to your post due to your poor punctuation but I'll try anyway.
You're confused and have no idea of what you're talking about. DNA is a physical molecule that can be represented as code. What you're revealing is that you're confused because the word "code" is used.

Blogthug:


who says it's not a code, you? do u even understand the meaning of codes? or what makes sometime a code? u should research on that first

Yes me, and the dictionary. You want me to do your work for you for some reason. If you think all communication is code, then you need to actually show it to be the case. e.g is one person waving at another person code for something? How about someone nodding their head in agreement? Or are birds nests also code? How about lions stalking their prey? Is that code too?

Something you dont' seem to understand is the fact that something can be represented as code e.g a DNA sequence of physical molecules, doesn't make the molecules code. The molecular sequence comes first. The notion of a code is imposed by humans for ease of understanding.

So, you need to do the work to show that all communication is actually code.

Blogthug:
p 1. All codes of known origin is a product of intelligence (empirical observation)
p 2. The DNA is a code
p3 .therefore the DNA is a product of intelligence

Deductive logical inference

for those that would think all codes of known origin are produced by only humans :
http://www.livescience.com/3812-dancing-bees-speak-code.html

please avoid Strawmaning my Argument as u attempt to refute p1 and 2 , if u can't u should concede to the argument and prolly become and Atheist that believes in ID if that's even possible lol, good luck Atheist

Your argument fails rather obviously.

p1. All codes of knownn origin are a product of human intelligence.
p2. DNA is a physical molecule that can be represented as code. Codes are symbolic representations not molecules.
Therefore, your argument is unsound.

Note that bee communication is not code in this sense. All you're doing is failing by equivocation.

JackBizzle:





I lack thehomer's patience with your artful doging

I've learned to be patient when addressing these poor apologists.

KingEbukasBlog:



To be clear : First , I thought what you meant by zombies are ghosts or possessed people . Then I told you that we have documented cases of such occurances . You then explained what you meant by zombies as people who died and resurrected but gave me an article on ghosts and bodily possession .

You must really be confused. Which notion of zombies refers to ghosts or spiritual possession? If you were serious and wanted to properly play the game of semantics properly, you could have looked up the meaning of zombies. You're online for your God's sake. Which came first, the article I gave you after you talked about ghosts and bodily possession or my pointing out the fact that zombies are resurrected dead people?

KingEbukasBlog:

Now from your own explanation of what zombies are , what is the correlation between it and people possessed by demons and spirits and ghosts ? Again , you are the confused one .

There's no correlation but you were the one who brought up the idea of spiritual possession. Why on earth did you bring that up when the passage I quoted for our discussion talked about dead people roaming the streets? Recall that you were the one who asked for a Biblical passage. And I notice that once again, you shy from talking about these living dead bodies roaming the streets.

KingEbukasBlog:

Secondly , there is no such thing as a deist God What the heck is that anyway ? Deism is a different concept of God formed through logic and reasoning - a posteriori knowledge devoid of any divine revelation or inspiration. The question should have been : Do you accept FULLY , the deist's concept of God ?

Once again you try to play language games and fail as expected. Deists think there is a deist God and that the Christian God doesn't exist. Christians think that only their God exists so my question stands. If as a Christian who believes in three / one God(s) you don't believe in such an entity, simply say so rather than trying to play a game you're clearly not able to play.

KingEbukasBlog:

Example : Xenophanes a Greek philosopher criticized theism' use of anthropomorphism to describe God . And with reason , he stated that God does not resemble humans in form or in mind , he stated that God does not involve himself in the affairs of mortals and there is no such thing as hierarchy in divinity - this is what a deistic concept of God looks like . No one told him , he just expressed his thoughts about God .

Another is Aristotle. He described God as a primary substance whose existence is ontologically based . And secondary substances can only be caused by a primary substance . And without the primary substance , nothing will exist .

These are deistic concepts of God , based on reasoning . There are so many other recondite knowledge of God the deists possess but it would b a waste of time to share them . You don't deserve to know it , you are an atheist ; one doesn't cast pearls before pigs

More useless diversions. I didn't ask for your idea of what deists believe and your attempt at introducing irrelevant information only shows just how desperate you are to avoid the questions I've raised.

KingEbukasBlog:

Apparently, your questions reek of ignorance of the subject you attack as false . Like I earlier said , acknowledging the existence of God is one thing and understanding the behavior of God or is nature is another . Because you don't understand the nature of God does mean God does not exist .

Do you understand the nature of the God you worship? Why should someone acknowledge the existence of your God at all? That is one of the questions I raised but you've as usual run away from that. And you also admit that your God's existence is separate from his behaviour.

KingEbukasBlog:

I can't answer your questions on the Bible properly because I feel like I'm wasting my time . Of course I am . Why pour out knowledge about it and it won't lead to any change . You seek not the knowledge for understanding , so why bother me ?

This coming from the person who didn't know that the Bible he belived in had actual dead people roaming the streets. I would say that you're the one who is clearly out of their depth. You lack knowledge and refuse to seek it while playing a game you're incompetent at playing. My questions remain as follows:

1. Your failure to reason logically
2. Your failure to decide whether or not you would worship a deist God
3. Your actual experience of your God
4. The failures of both yourself and your God to heal amputees
5. Your God's immorality in failing to act on his knowledge of the timing of rapists and murderers committing their heinous acts
6. Your God's decision to commit mass murders knowing it won't solve the problem he ostensibly set out to solve.
7. The fact that your trinity still makes no sense

You've run from these issues long enough. It is time for you to respond or bury your head in shame.

KingEbukasBlog:


I don't know what Zombies look like So you tell me

It isn't about what they look like, it is about what you think happened. Again I notice that you're trying to distract yourself from the issue. The bible quotation is clear. Zombies are people who rose from the dead. According to your Bible, dead people got out of their graves and roamed a city. My question to you is whether or not you believe this story. In addition to the talking donkey and other ridiculous notions.

KingEbukasBlog:

Are we talking about spirit possession or mass resurrection of the dead ? You seem confused .

You brought up the issue of ghost visitations and body possession so it seems that you're the one who is confused. Do you want a quote of that too or have you forgotten? You also know that we're talking about this mass resurrection of the dead so why are you trying to distract yourself by claiming ignorance?

I also notice that you're trying to avoid the most painful issues like:

1. Your failure to reason logically
2. Your failure to decide whether or not you would worship a deist God
3. Your actual experience of your God
4. The failures of both yourself and your God to heal amputees
5. Your God's immorality in failing to act on his knowledge of the timing of rapists and murderers committing their heinous acts
6. Your God's decision to commit mass murders knowing it won't solve the problem he ostensibly set out to solve.
7. The fact that your trinity still makes no sense

You can run but you can't hide. You may try to call these all old problems but the fact that you Christians still haven't been able to solve them actually speaks volumes.

KingEbukasBlog:


Made no sense to you .

Nope. Made no sense period. You're welcome to try and explain how three people can be one person at the same time. Or how one person can be three people at the same time.

KingEbukasBlog:

If need be , all to the glory of God .

Well, there's a need right now. I just asked for it and it will give a chance to reveal your God's glory.

KingEbukasBlog:

What are zombies ? Sometimes , the cause of an argument could be different views as regards to definition of a word

Rubbish. I quoted a passage from your Bible. Do you think that those dead people roamed the earth? Stop this attempt at obfuscation and language games.

KingEbukasBlog:

Is there any attributed to any god in History ?

Yes there is. As usual there's a good Wikipedia article on it here. Simply read it and realize that your religion is just one of many religions.

KingEbukasBlog:


Done that . Explained and posted videos . Josh even contributed . It is now incumbent on you to grasp it .

No you've not. The videos made no sense.

KingEbukasBlog:

Sure , I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me .

Good. Now when will you publicly heal an amputee or two? I would really love to see the clips on YouTube. Your failure to do so would suggest that Christ has failed to strengthen you though.

KingEbukasBlog:

Of course , event in recent times and through out history , there are well documented occurances of ghost visitations and bodily possession

So you believe that zombies once roamed the earth?
Wow. And you can say this with a straight face. How many of those visitations would you believe? Would you believe one attributed to Shiva? Or is it only those attributed to Jesus that are real?

KingEbukasBlog:


Actually it's a wonderful to think and reason logically . Just that it's apparent that atheists can't do so . That's your opinion about God , I have no problem with it . Again , a blatant appeal to common sense .

You're not an atheist and you're failing to think and reason logically. It isn't mere opinion, it is based on the Bible and an appeal to common sense isn't necessarily wrong.

KingEbukasBlog:

You can check the first page for the answer . You can read my posts from the first page before I switched to Christian theism . I think you should study deism to understand the logic behind acknowledging the existence of God .

The first page just has a definition. I'm yet to find actual useful logical proofs or evidence for your God. Would you worship a deist God?

KingEbukasBlog:

God can manifest in different ways and I experience Him in a lot of ways especially miracles not just in my life but in the life of so many people I know .

How exactly did you experience him? Was it divine revelation or information from a third party? Since you and your God like miracles, have you guys figured out how to heal amputees yet? If not, why should I or anyone else believe these anonymous claims of miraculous healing?

KingEbukasBlog:

FREEWILL . Even Pharisees and the Sadducees were called hypocritical by Christ himself while they worked as religious leaders in the vineyard of God . Christ also warned us of false prophets and teachers ; apparently anyone who sexually abuses any member of the church isn't of God thus a false prophet or teacher .

So your God is a monster who is less moral than an ordinary human being. An ordinary person would inhibit other people's freewill to stop such acts but your God won't. How then can you say your God loves innocent people more than the person who would stop such a crime? You're committing the "no true Scotsman" fallacy by claiming that anyone who commits a crime is a false prophet. This demonstrates the failure of logic I'm talking about.

KingEbukasBlog:

Christ's action correlates with the meaning of sacrifice : he gave up his position as God , ruler of the universe , to die for man so that he won't be damned forever : John 3 16 explained that clearly . And According to Job : what is man that thou shouldest magnify him and that thou shouldest set thine heart upon him ? Why should an ineffably great being like God be concerned with the affairs of men ? Job couldn't fathom why God, the source of existence to all that is , is immensely interested in man .

He lost nothing and gained everything. By that line of reasoning, anyone who sacrifices themselves for someone else has actually paid a much higher sacrifice than Jesus could ever hope to achieve.

KingEbukasBlog:

God abhors sin and sin separates man from God . This same Punishment would be meted out to man not with water but with fire before the eternal reign of Christ here on earth .

He knew sin would persist after the flood so why did he go ahead with it?

KingEbukasBlog:

Your existence is self evident that God exists .

And your existence is self evident that Brahma exists. You need to do better than that.

KingEbukasBlog:

Probably tired of responding to the same questions being asked over and over again .

Then you need to answer the questions reasonably once and for all. The answers you've given so far are atrocious.

KingEbukasBlog:


I do bro . It's pretty simple

Please go ahead and explain how three people are one person. Or how one person is three people.

KingEbukasBlog:

Who said God can't make amputees grow new limbs ? People just don't have enough faith for that .

I'm saying so. Unless you think no one on earth has ever had enough faith to grow new limbs? Recall that Jesus said it was possible to move mountains with a tiny amount of faith. Do you think people don't have enough for that too?
You can easily show that God can make amputees grow new limbs by you demonstrating your faith on an amputee and making that amputee grow new limbs.

KingEbukasBlog:

Quote verses let's discuss them

Bible NIV:
Matthew
51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split
52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.
53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and[e] went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

Do you really think these events actually occured?

Edit: I notice that for some reason, you skipped the response I made here. Would you like to address that too?

KingEbukasBlog:



All I see is you appealing to common sense tacitly : I can't believe God would do or is doing this , therefore He does not exist . It's like you are saying , since God does not fit into my own expectations of Him or definitions I made for Him , therefore He does not exist .

You speak as if it is a bad thing to think and act reasonably. Actually, it is more like, certain actions ascribed to a so-called good God make no sense so either the God is malicious or doesn't exist.

KingEbukasBlog:

Acknowledging the existence of God is one thing , understanding how God works to a particular level is another thing . Logic helps with the former, divine revelation helps with the latter . That's why I conflate ideas in deism and Christian theism .

Why acknowledge the existence of a God when there's no good reason to do so? What is your logical proof or demonstration of your God's existence? Did you receive this so-called divine revelation? Or was it from a third party?

KingEbukasBlog:

So what do you want to actually know ? I can't keep answering questions which would have no use to you .

I want to know why you think a good, omnipotent and omniscient God would allow child abuse in his church.
I want to know why you think Jesus' act was a sacrifice.
I want to know why God thought drowning almost all of humanity in a flood was a good idea.
I want to know why God has failed to do what is necessary to get me to believe in him.
I want to know why you've avoided addressing the clear issues I raised.

KingEbukasBlog:


I understand if you have problems with understanding the triune nature of God .

And I'm sure you don't understand it either because it makes no sense.

KingEbukasBlog:

I don't know why you have problems with donkeys talking . It's unnatural , yes , but since God can control nature , he made that possible . Atheists want unnatural occurrences to happen like amputees growing limbs as a way of God proving his power but ridicule Christians for believing that God made a donkey talk ? Funny guys

The fact that you think God can make donkeys talk or made them talk according to some stories but can't make amputees regrow their limbs doesn't make you pause and think? I think it is ridiculous to believe a donkey can speak like we were told in our stories.

KingEbukasBlog:

I don't know what you mean by zombies roaming cities 2000 years ago

You need to read your Bible then. Did you know that on Jesus' death, graves opened up and people had close encounters with zombies?

KingEbukasBlog:
o

There is no rationale behind atheism . These questions are otiose to an atheist . We as logical beings try to involve science , cosmology in our discussions with them just to let them know how stupid atheism , I'm glad most of them are now receiving sense . Atheism is a mental disease .

From someone who believes that one person is three people and three people are one person. Someone who believes that donkeys can talk and zombies roamed cities 2000 years ago.

KingEbukasBlog:


He already knows he'll change course even before he did . Here's an example you should be familiar with : God asked men to immolate animals for the atonement of sin in the Old Testament, right ; what then happens in the New Testament? Christ now laid his life for us so that through Him our sins can be forgiven . What's the goal : atonement for sins ; and the paths taken to achieve that was animal sacrifice at first and then Christ himself later .

So God knew he was going to change his mind yet he let thousands of animals and at least one person to be killed as sacrifice? You present this story of Christ as if it were an actual sacrifice or even a good thing. It was neither.

KingEbukasBlog:

Now look at this : Even before the universe was caused to exist , God already knew that Christ would come to die for the sins of man ( this is my opinion and I believe some Christians will agree with me) . So with this , will you say God decided to change course to achieve the same goal or he just acted out you know his foreknowledge ? And this knowledge is God's free knowledge - the knowledge of things that will be.

Yes I would say he decided to ineffectively change course and still fail despite the fact that he has all this knowledge.

KingEbukasBlog:

Of course he wants you in Heaven . But it's left for you to choose - that's your expression of FREEWILL . According to Deuteronomy 15:19

19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

God has laid out a gamut of possible choices for us to make and since he knows what is good for us , he wants us to CHOOSE life . Life is all about choices as my newly converted friend would always tell me , it's up to us ; where we are today is due to the choices we made yesterday , what we will be tomorrow would be due to choices we make today .

Let me get this straight. He wants me in heaven, knows what to do but has refused to do it? Come on. If he really wanted me to make an informed decision, he knows what to do. Since he doesn't do it, I can conclude that he either doesn't want me or isn't there.

KingEbukasBlog:

Brutal crimes , natural disasters , accidents ,life's vicissitudes - all these are adversities man faces and God has promised he would see his people through trials and tribulations .

There's a difference between a hurricane killing 12 people and a serial killer killing 12 people. The police would try to stop the serial killer by inhibitting his freewill but not the hurricane.

KingEbukasBlog:

Are you saying FREEWILL is evil ?

No, I'm saying your God is evil for saying that freewill prevents him from stopping a series of rape he knows will occur and has the power to prevent from occurring. I would also say that a police officer who knew a series of rape would occur and had the power to stop them but refused to stop them was also evil.

KingEbukasBlog:


Changing his mind does not mean he actually made a poor decision at first , it just means he has changed course to achieve a particular goal . God can have a thousand and one ways to achieve a goal . He already knows that a particular point or instance he would switch courses as a prescient being .

Changing his mind means he made a decision. Why would he have to change course if he already knows everything that will happen?

KingEbukasBlog:

Of course . If you need a certain experience to could possibly make you believe in God , then he could let you experience it .

Why doesn't he? Doesn't he want me in heaven?

KingEbukasBlog:

FREEWILL .

Not good enough. We as ordinary humans want to inhibit the freewill of criminals. Does God think so little of victims of brutal crimes?

KingEbukasBlog:

Plus , Only God Himself knows why he does not intervene in every situation ; I don't know as a human , my knowledge is limited . Also , remember that God has His own freedom of will as a personal God , so he expresses anytime he wants to

Sure only God knows why but why should someone like me think it is a good reason? Is that really the best way for an omnipotent and omniscient entity to make a good world?

KingEbukasBlog:


An omniscient being does not need to think . A prescient being only needs to act not to decide . Making a decision entails acting out your thoughts due to uncertainty of the future .

But God has been known to change his mind based on what someone did. Isn't that due to making a decision?

KingEbukasBlog:

But is God really omniscient? God is actually beyond omniscient : God has all propositional knowledge and the appropriate non propositional knowledge. Having all propositional knowledge means God knows all truths , that is the knowledge of everything ; and having the appropriate non propositional knowledge is like God knowing He is omnipotent , immutable , eternal . But does God know that he is the thehomer ? Of course not . You can say I am thehomer , but God can't say that . God does not know what it feels like to be a sinner but he knows that a sinner feels guilty . So God cannot have all non propositional knowledge but can have only the appropriate non propositional knowledge .

Does God know what will make thehomer start believing in him?

KingEbukasBlog:

There are three characteristics of God's knowledge : natural knowledge , free knowledge and middle knowledge . Natural knowledge are necessary truths , free knowledge are contingent truths , middle knowledge is like the middle . Natural knowledge things that could be , middle knowledge things that would be and free knowledge things that will be .

Sure.

KingEbukasBlog:

There are many philosophers and theologians that believe that God made a descision but in my opinion , he just acted out his foreknowledge.

If that is the case, why did he need sacrifices in the past? If your God knows via his foreknowledge which serial killers are about to start killing, why doesn't he act? When ordinary human police officers have such information, they try to prevent it, why not God?

Joshthefirst:

You misunderstand. God has revealed himself as three persons.

Is your God one person or three people?

Joshthefirst:

And when I say he is the sum total of all existence, I don't mean all fractions and niches of existent verities add up to him. I mean existence itself and everything in our reality is contained in him. He is boundless and everything. A being who is "everything" cannot be duplicated, as the very definition of his presence takes up limitless infinity.

Do you mean that your God is the Cosmos?

Joshthefirst:

As I have said, I don't mean our collective consciousness equals God. I mean God's limitlessness contains all of existence and reality.

So your God is the Cosmos. How then can it actually have coherent thoughts and ideas?

So God couldn't protect this pastor?
If this story is true, why not just tell the pastor to zip up?

Joshthefirst:
God is revealed as a community of three persons, yet one being. The very definition of God's nature shows that he is the sum total of all existence and all reality. This obviously means that every form of existence that is manifest in reality is a subunit of his boundless limitlessness.

You are confused. If your God is the sum total of all existence, then he is more than three persons since more than three persons exist in this reality.

Joshthefirst:

There can't be any other being that exists as God, because this ultimate being(God) is the sum total of existence. Any other personality revealed will be the same being.
God has revealed himself as three persons, A Father, a Son, and a Spirit. Simple.

You just said there were three beings that exist as God and that all human beings are a subset of your God. Humans are individual persons therefore we have more than three persons that are a part of your God.

orisa37:


Very good! Only God is Good---Step one.
Believe in Others in their Wisdom, Knowledge and Understanding----The Discernment of The Faithfuls---Then you're wise and better----Step two.

The Christian God is not good. I accept the wisdom of others after they demonstrate such wisdom. The faithful aren't very discerning. If they were, they won't be faithful.

orisa37:


Do you believe in yourself?

Yes.

orisa37:
God is Everywhere and Nowhere.

No he isn't.

DeepSight:


It is the very point on which all existence rests.
The singular point which is the "necessary permanent something" that makes all existence possible, as opposed to nothingness.

Does this God of yours think? Does it make any decisions at all?