₦airaland Forum

OJEEMAH:
please do. Do not forget to mention me and that's the reason he said I should forward the money to a particular pos runners by a school.

Exposing him will safe a lot of people here

Below is a link to one of the ithreads with his old moniker ,hellvictoeinho

.....https://www.nairaland.com/6339099/brother-needs

Another one

https://www.nairaland.com/6702632/before-die

OJEEMAH:
are you for real??

Wow!!

Numerouno94, are you seeing this??

Thinking of creating a thread to exposé all his activities here.

He has been on this game since January this year . His first moniker is hellvictorinho .That has been deactivated.

Numerouno94:
Re u serious?

Yes of course

hellvictorinho3 is the same as crystano

Numerouno94:
Jesus, i can't blif this is the guy i was even trying to intercede for. OJeemah pls do watever u want i dey ur back wit full chest.

The guy Ojeemah helped is a scammer..The reason he feels no gratitude

OJEEMAH:
This is the thank you I get

Well done!

Numerouno94, bear me witness as this will be the last time I will to assist anybody here.

Don't stop helping others if you can.

You didn't know that the person you helped is a scammer who is using fake stories to beg for money on nairaland.

It is the reason he can't feel any gratitude for what you did for him. He scammed you and scammers have no gratitude to give their victims.

After a time, he will deactivate the current account and come up with a new one.

So my friend don't feel bad but only feel pity for him as he will soon reap the consequences of all his actions. He is never going to escape it.

Cc .budaatum

Kingpin1000:
Why argue the obvious.. without believing in Jesus you can't make heaven.
John 3:16. For God so love the world that He gave his only begotten son that WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH IN HIM shall not perish but have everlasting life.

Answer the question I asked; cant we love our neighbor as ourself without Jesus?

Yes or no

Kingpin1000:
1) Jesus said I'm the way, the truth and the light, no one cometh unto the Father except through me.
2) Jesus is known as our spiritual advocate, while the devil is the accuser of brethren. Loving your neighbor as yourself will make the world a better place

Then we don't need to believe in Jesus since we can love our neighbor without him

Kingpin1000:
The most important thing is love your neighbor as yourself and believe that Jesus is the only way.
If you love your neighbor as yourself, you won't do those things you listed above.

So , even after loving your neighbor as your self , you will still commit the listed crimes if you don't believe that Jesus is the only way?

Kingpin1000:
Make heaven no shock una o..
It's only God that can determine what is sin or not.
The only instruction Jesus gave that supersedes other instruction is to love your neighbor as your self and believe in him.
People will definitely make mistakes no one is bigger than that.
Even Peter who was Jesus 2 I.c machetes someone's ear and even denied Jesus after hearing from Jesus himself that he will deny him.
No one can determine who goes to heaven or not.

A child of 5 may know good and evil, but saying because that child knows good and evil, if He dies at that age will go to Hell shows you don't even know God. You guys are trying to paint God as a cruel being more than a kind being and that hurts me.

God chose Elijah and Elisha, both are known to have anger issues, He chose Moses, who was a murder, all of Jesus disciples had their flaws.
Abi na David, the man of God's heart solomon or Samuel.
The God I serve is a merciful God and He knows I will make mistakes.
Sometimes, when I here preachers preach, I get sad because, they make it look so difficult to make heaven.
Go back and read from the 1st to the 12th commandment God gave to Moses, you will see that, those commandments given for man to have peaceful coexistence with his neighbor that is why some refer to it as Laws.

Remember God said " THOU SHALT NOT KILL" but I have seen instances where God commanded people to kill and when saul disobeyed, He was punished.

I still stand that only God can determine what is sin.
If you can love you neighbor the way you love yourself and believe in Jesus. Bro heaven is your home. Don't allow the Devil, who is the accuser of brethren to give you a guilty conscience when you stand in front of the Lord on the final day of Judgement.

If I keep food that I want to eat and my brother picks up the food and eat it, because He is hungry is that not stealing? Yes it is according to the law .
But should I get angry? No, because He is my brother.
But I guess if it were a man from the North and a Muslim I will be angry and that's where God will be angry with me and not be angry with that man if a stranger can steal his meal and He won't be angry.

I believe if you don't love your neighbor as yourself, no matter how you believe say you dey serve God you n0 dey go heaven

This version of Christianity is not the one I use to know while growing up. Everything has changed and I think it is the reason Church people these days no longer behave like Church people anymore. Anything goes

David slept another's wife ,God still loved him. Moses murdered somehow and yes God still loved him. .Peter injured someone and again, God still loved him. Elisha and Elijah were always angry and one of them even caused wild beast to eat up little children and once again, God still loved.

So therefore, if Christians do all of the above, God will still love them.

With the so many Churches everywhere in Nigeria ,it means we are not safe in this country.

So many people with the licence to rob, steal, sleep with your wives, cheat you, 419 you, yahoo you and even kill you and God will still forgive them with a bonus free passage to heaven while the rest of us who manage to avoid the above listed crimes, will be sent straight to hell to burn forever since we don't worship the Christian God.

Na wah.

Pr0ton:
Atheists are just responding to a claim. We are not creating a claim from thin air.

Anyone who responds to a false claim as if it were true and still continue to respond to it, is not different from the person who made the false claim in the first instance

Let's assume a "God" actually exist in a form or something we yet to see but only suspect it is there, how proper is it to entirely reject this "God" based on the false claims or description of it by theist that may not even know anything about it?


In other words ,if that "God" actually exist how did you determine that the description of it by theist is the correct one ?

What if God is not what we think it is or what the theist says it is, how would you know as an atheist?

These are questions the agnostic is seeking answers for before dismissing or rejecting it anything.completely.

Agnostics on the other hand are considering this claim theists created from thin air and saying no one can disprove it. If it is like that, I can create anything from thin air and claim you can't disprove it and so it might exist. But that isn't the way reality is. Agnostics, like theists, are just obsessed with the concept of God.

Wrong. Theist did not create anything from thin air they sense something at the very beginning but are not certain about it and without being sure of what it is have decided to create imaginary stories around it that doesn't exactly describe what they sensed. It might be something that science would one day find a correct explanation for. We can't rule out this possibility.

Agnostics are not even close to accepting the God claim (description) by theists but considering the possibilty that such a thing like a "God" might exist or be there already but whose exact description is not known by any. We might already be interacting with this "God " and don't even know it since its description doesn't fit those of the two abrahamic religions which forms the foundation of most atheists worldview.

Workch:
My first comment did not suggest that most scientist don’t believe in god, my first comment suggest that the disbelief in god in more prevalent in the scientific world than any other sphere. Please kindly know the difference.

You created the confusion at the beginning of our conversation.

At first, you asserted something confidently and it formed the basis of my initial response . I suspected you were trying to create a false impression; theist don't know science and how the world works and blah blah blah ,then naturally it should be more atheist and less theist in the scientific world.

If you deny that wasn't your intention, why did you then suddenly replace the word, atheist , in your next reply and your other replies with the phrase, " do not believe in a god" or "accept the god claim," which loosely covers atheist and continued until the point you succeeded in blurring the lines and thereby ended up steering the conversation from its normal course. I am not stupid not to notice

You were using different expressions to mean the same thing. The reason we got here.

No way you would have been confident in making your subsequent claims if you had been consistent . And now here you are telling me I should know the difference. You yourself should be sure of the meaning of the words and phrases you use in your conversation so as to avoid creating confusion.

The phrase, (people who) "do not believe in a god " doesn't exactly cover atheist. Atheism is a lack of or the absence of belief in the existence of God or gods and the supernatural due to lack of inadequate evidence. If you say you don't believe in a god and end it there, it doesn't equate atheist, it implies a god might exist somewhere or actually exist. but you don't believe in it .

There are people who don't believe in a god or accept the god claim but still believe in the supernatural or accept it. Those ones are not atheist. You should be the one doing this explanation as an atheist not me who is almost agnostic.

Below is your first comment and please stick to the key word ,"atheist," if we should continue. Don't blur the lines again with word abracadabra

Workch:
Delusions and profound inability to understand statistics/probabilities, science and how the universe works.
This is the reason why the scientific community has more atheists than any other group of people.

I believe you changed it because you don't want to be pinned down to one thing

That’s the only available data to work with, another data suggest that scientists in Europe and China are more atheistic.

There's data that don't fully give support to the above. If you don't know then you're arguing with limited information. The real reason why we have more atheist in certain regions of the world is due to the type of false religious constructs and fake supernatural claims or practices that they were exposed to at some point in their lifes. Once they get to know the truth about what they use to believe, they feel a deep sense of betrayer and anger that all their lives they have been duped with lies and so the
next thing is to abandon it.

And again in the western world, a lot of people are too embarrassed to be openly associated with any religion or anything supernatural because you would be regarded as not too educated or smart enough.
So shame is another reason some persons even become atheist in the western world.

And again,if US were to be a Buddhist country or a country
where some other kind of religion that are unlike the two mostly practiced, I believe we would have very few atheist practicing the sciences over there.

It has been argued that Buddhism is almost atheistic and there some atheist who find that religion very appealing . Buddhist don't worship a god and some of their religious practices find some support in science. Back home in Nigeria, an IFA initiate who is a scientist would hardly abandon that religion no matter the level of scientific education acquired. In IFA traditional religion, gods are a personification of natural energies and they are never worshipped contrary to what the public thinks. Infact in traditional African religion we "use" god in the form of energy. So my friend ,you need enough information before you can confidently state anything. It is obvious that your atheistic worldview is based on the two popular religions in the world which are false religious constructs and it is from this position you're interpreting everything around you. You won't know the complete truth from there.

i didn’t say you have to be a professor to be an atheist. Data shows that the more scientific you become, the more you stop believing in religion. That’s why the U.S data reveals that people who excel up to the point of becoming professors in science have more atheistic tendencies. This may not be true in less advanced countries like in Africa.

The above is not completely true because it is not so everywhere and I already explained why. And are you implying that African scientist are not practicing the same science as their counterparts elsewhere? Is it different set of scientific facts and theories for Africans and another for Europeans? If it is the case then you are included.

it’s also necessary to stop teaching it as fact and trying to teach it in science classes. Fundamentalist are trying to do that in Europe and U.S. please kindly read about how the church has been trying to integrate creation myths in science curriculum in U.S. specifically read about the Kansas school board creation motion and, Ken Ham’s effort and institute of creation science.

The Church has been trying and trying but it will never see the light of day. The people pushing for it a religious fundamentalist and nobody takes them serious and Ken Ham's head is not there at all.A lot of theist
even oppose the idea .So they have less support. You're just worried over nothing. In Nigeria ,it can't even work not to talk of US with strong laws ,which protects the rights of everyone. Such fantasies will be nipped in the bud before they even begin

What you should be more worried of is that atheist don't entrench themselves everywhere and it doesn't matter if you are one. If they do, especially the fanatical atheist then what is happening in China would be replicated everywhere. There are uprooting everywhere form of religious expression whether good or bad in order to take complete control of the lives of their people. Nobody wants that in the modern world that we live in.

I don’t have a problem with people believing things as long as they keep those beliefs to themselves and not try to make it a universal fact and try to make it influence my personal space.

Then also learn to respect the beliefs of others too by not intruding into their space. You constantly label religious people as not normal and yet you live amongst people who are mostly religious . how do you then expect to have harmonious relationship with people you look down upon as almost insane?

i don’t understand what you mean here

Get to do more readings and research on other world religion apart of the popular ones then my statement would make sense. Presently, your opinion on religion in general and the supernatural is founded on
wrong information given to you by Christians or Muslims

frank317:
I had to just stop here. I said we wouldn't be arguing if all religious folks were not fanatics and u call it a generalization? Common sense didn't tell you that this statement meant that the reason we are having this communication or for the op is because some religious folks are fanatics.... how can I be conversing with someone who calls anything generalization?

have a good day bro. You jumped into the thread with nothing substantial to say.

Below are your words

frank317:
if every religious person was not fanatical u and I will not be having this conversation..

Off all things I said, it was the least important that you picked while the others you had nothing to say.

If you can't tell that your above statement was a generalisation how can you know what is substantial or not. So the ploy after all was to look for an opportunity to label my comments not substantial since you have nothing reasonable to say?

If you knew you had nothing reasonable thing to say about my comments why bother yourself? You should have ignored it and it wouldn't have descended into this.

I only made a harmless observation at the beginning that the op is not false but not cogent enough to persuade a deeply religious that prayer is useless and gave my reasons. The response was insults and snide remarks. "Daft" "yeye person" and so on.
Please I have had enough. Don't need any quarrel with anyone.

frank317:
I am not generalizing... i am interested in religious person who are fanatical and go over board. They are the problem of religion... people like righteousness(I am sure u know the moniker) who will go to every post to preach dooms day, people who survive accident and thank God for specifically saving them and allowing other people to die.

You say you're not generalising but it is not true.

if every religious person was not fanatical u and I will not be having this conversation.

And you ended up generalising in the above. It is either you don't take time to read what you typed before clicking the submit button or you don't know what it means to generalize

are u specifically saying that there are Christians who believe that after praying, they were not healed by God but they were healed as a result of the process u described? and u claim the person believes in God?.

I never said so. I said some of them know of the studies Conducted by scientists. Everything is on the net. If you have not come across it don't think others have not. Please try to read yourself.

are u saying that there are Christians who understand the process u described and still believe its God that healed them? u think they are ok?.

Christians or Muslims receive treatment from hospitals and still say it was God that healed them. So why are you surprised. It is their belief and why pretending not to know this. I know of an hospital in Warri (that is not the only one though) that has a banner at the entrance which reads, ' We treat but God heals" Have you not seen such before. And those are doctors who understand better . Are they not OK too?

Oga no scientist will explain such physiological movement during prayer without explaining why biko... .

. This is why I have asked you to read yourself. They observed that during prayers certain movements occur but don't know exactly why it happens. It is like the placebo effect. Science does not know exactly what causes the placebo effect even though it is used in clinical trials. Or you don't know that one too. It appears you just want to argue with limited information. It won't help you in any way. Do some readings.

go and read why people are advised to be positive in life. .

I dont see the relevance of above to our conversation. Maybe you have to explain how it relates..

Any scientist that explains such a prayer-induced physiological process will clearly explain other psychological condition that will also result in the process and sure has nothing to do with any God. .

I have not said everything. Go and read yourself. You have access to the Internet.Where did I mention that it has anything to do with any god?

if u accept there is no evidence of God, how then do u come to conclusion that something with no evidence healed u after some rambling called prayer?.

Which of the Gods? I never came to any conclusion myself. I have never mentioned of any personal healings. .Again, go and read and get yourself informed so you can argue better

Oga please scientists have identified the healing properties constituted in majority of plants used to heal... most of the drugs u used today are extracts from these plants... .

You just miscontrue my words and it is not the first time. It appears your are not ready for any honest conversation . Go back to my earlier comments where I said ,some.. I never mentioned that scientist are completely ignorant of the healing constituents of most plants.Go back and verify from my reply.

are u for real? .

You should be asking yourself that question since you have a problem of misconstruing statements.

.

isn't that part of what the op is all about .

Why do you want me to keep repeating myself. I never labelled his argument has false but not cogent enough. It appears you don't know what the word cogent means.

.

We cant play ignorance here. i think u and I understand what the op meant when he said prayer is useless...

. How is it useless . If people can find some use ,no matter how little ,for something that they do ,how can it be useless? It is the ops responsiblity to make himself clear and not me..

the whole scenario described in the op clear explains why he thinks prayer is useless. Was there a God who was supposed help people under the fallen building after being prayed to?.

The above is why I said it would not be convincing for enough a religious person to accept. They believe God is real but you don't. I hope you understand me at this point. You're viewing things strictly from your own perspective and that is the reason you struggle to see my point..

if some people were meant to die there what was the point of their prayer? does that not make prayer useless..

But the religious person who still find prayers useful in other situations may not agree.That is it.

Could those who think their were save because of their prayer be wrong? .

Make them see that they may be wrong. Stop judging from you what you know which they may not know. You keep showing you don't know how the mind of a deeply religious person works.

The point of the op was to show that they were wrong and their prayer was useless. .

I said it can't and I have given reasons which you're unable to respond to but have have dancing around .

And of course it can actually convince SOME deeply rooted fanatics... that's the power of conversation..

Then sorry ,you know nothing. Fanatics are not amenable to reason and that is a fact. The only time they can listen to you is when they have left that condition.

.

it means it wasn't any God that did it.. which is the whole essence of saying prayer is useless..

Then show that it wasn't any God that did it to those who believe God exist.

.

any parents who says that is wrong biko..[quote]Are you a parent? Obviously you're not. .[quote]And being rich here means living and afluent and comfortable life..

Riches doesn't have the same meaning for everyone

.

why such a flimsy statement? who said it wasn't their choice....

Then why the anger ? You judge it has flimsy why? .

It is wrong cause such thinking has created unnecessary friction..

It was a response to your earlier comment. How is it wrong?.

isn't robbery some people's choice of living?.

You're comparing someone who has chosen a religious belief with someone who has chosen to rob other people? Do you know that it is a crime to rob people? Is accepting a religion a crime? Just imagine your reasoning

.

of course, he cannot use all instances, this is not his first post on nairaland and the other posts still touched on other points. .[quote]It is never proper to use one instance or a single story to judge anything.It can lead to wrong conclusion .
[quote]A strong argument for prayer would have been if only the people rescued where the people that prayed. Things working at random cannot be termed answered prayer, which is supposedly the reaction of a supposedly intelligent and loving God. Mbanu.

I am not pro prayer .Only making my observation known. Why can't you understand this? I don't offer prayer to any god and I have my reasons .

.

you are hasty in ur conclusion bro. I have been here a long time and majority of active atheists now on nairaland were once arguing back and forth with us just like u..

you are the one that has been arguing back and forth. So because you're an atheist I should just accept any nonsense you produce . BTW who tells you I am part of any religious organization? The atheist that you refer to were already having doubts and questioning their religious beliefs. It is never easy or possible to use rational arguments to convince any deeply religious person. You were never deeply religious so you can't understand this. You should go and get yourself informed about the deconversion process of the deeply religious so you know better. I have been in that state before to know that it takes more than rational thinking to convince anyone that is fully convinced about the "truth" of their religion.

.

you want the op to come u with an argument that will convince every deeply rooted religious fanatic? like I said I think the op has a good point... i really don't know what u expect from him... he cant satisfy u, neither can he satisfy everyone...

Were you paid for the above ? Allow him to respond by himself, that is , if he wants to. I am not forcing anybody to do anything.

.

No, I think u want him to come up with a perfect argument..

You can continue to imagine anything.

.

I think the statement 'completely useless is an absolute one, hence my problem with ur argument. .

In the context of the op, he has said so.

Actually, a lot has been said to prove prayer is useless and u agree he has a point but not enough. The major thing to me is that No God answers any prayer... things follow due process and looking at it from this angle... prayer is useless.

The above is sheer humbug.
I am not defending any God or gods neither am I interested in your atheistic position .I already showed what I am concerned with on this thread. Focus that. I won't be replying you again. It has been back and forth. I don't have the time to waste and it is not compulsory you answer me neither is it that I should respond to any of your comments.

frank317:
I agree, but you and I know that most religious folks are comfortable with being unreasonable..

Everyone is prone to being unreasonable not only religious people. Some religious persons are even more reasonable than you. Islam and Christianity are not the only religion in the world and not every religious person is fanatical about what they believe in. We have atheist and the non religious who are fanatical about their non belief and are comfortable with it even when their behavoiur offends others around them.

what do u think about someone strapping a bomb and kill people, or someone giving his whole earning to a pastor or eating grass or... when discussing with someone who believes in an unseen being u should know u are a long thing.

Most religious people don't get involve in the above. You're very close to generalising.

tell a Christian or Mulsim what scientists discovered as u described above and they will tell u u are the devil

You're generalising here and it is not reasonable to do so. Some of them are aware of what I explained

Prayer here to a religious person is God deliberately answering their request and not some psychological movement that results in relief.

I never said psychological movement but physiological movement that can result in healing. If scientist has confirmed such movement within the human body during prayers but have not been able to explain exactly why they happen how do you then convince a religious person who has experience it that a god is not responsible?. You think because there's no evidence for a god then any claim of prayers working must be false.? That conclusion is wrong. Some plants are used in herbal treatments by herbal practitioners and they work perfectly well even when science has not been able to identify what constitute
the healing properties in those plants or why they work.No evidence or explanation why they work but they work.

Any believer who had had that sort of feeling and stick to 'God healed me' is wrong hence he needs convincing and the OP is just part of the process

If the believer is wrong according to you then explain to him what is really happening so he can think "right"

I cant recall the op saying he is most convincing... but I think he has a point, do u?

Your comment above shows that you just jumped midway into the conversation without finding out what has been said before. I have been saying that the op is not completely untrue but that it can't persuade a deeply religious person and those, who know better, that prayers is useless. The summation is that prayer is useless. But Is that really true from what I have been explaining here? and what is the meaning of useless?

then lets accept prayer gives psychological relief and stop saying God did it.

If Prayers can provide even if it is only psychological relief then it means it is not completely useless as you and your friends wrongly think .

you could have been right if the assumption is 'without school no one can be rich'. Go to church and u will hear Christians let u know how vulnerable u are without prayer..

Alot of parents tell their children that without education they cant succeed in life. And what is your understanding of being rich.

some will even pity u. yet they pray and fall into danger.

It is what they have accepted .It is their choice.

Another problem with comparing school with prayer is that while school is a process where one can see where one falls short and lose it, while prayer is just a a magical, automatic response to our desires... ur example will only lead to a long unreasonable argument because the comparison is wrong.

My argument is not centered on the above but only used it to highlight the fact that he was generalising using just one instance of where prayers appeared to fail ,that is ,if we all can accept it can work. If everyone under that rubble was rescued alive would he accept that it was prayers that led to it?

you can convince a religious person actually, and that's the power of human interaction.

How many have you succeeded in convincing with rational arguments? It is obvious you don't know enough of what forms the basis of most religious beliefs if not you wouldn't be saying this.

The problem with folks like you is that you just condemn the attempt to convince another.

Sorry the problem is yours and not mine . I have not condemned anything but only made an observation from what I know about the subject matter. My observation should be addressed and not taken as condemnation.

what the Op did was involve in the process of conviction, some will accept some will not.
by the way whats ur point... that the op shouldn't have bothered?

Why do you want to imagine my response as that. Where did I suggest he should not bother. Please keep your imagination in check

I understand your point.... The op should come up with an argument that must convince religious folks or don't try at all

So when you disagree with somebody's arguments it is because you don't want them to say anything at all. Just imagine the way you reason

u can quickly clarify me so that we don't waste time repeating ourselves

. Nothing has been said to prove that prayers is completely useless especially for a deeply religious person to accept. That is my argument and I have given reasons why I say so.Address those .

frank317:
Actually, it is enough to convince any reasonable person, except u want to argue for the sake of twisting what's obvious.

Sometimes what is convincing to you may not be convincing to the person you're trying to convince.. Judging the person you're trying to convince as unreasonable doesn't solve the problem of your inability to be more convincing about what you know. It is possible that the problem is your fault and you don't even know it.

Prayer has never been proven to work,

. Your above statement is evidence that you have very limited information about the practice of prayer. There are have been studies conducted by scientist to demonstrate that prayers can result in certain physiological movements in the human body which can result in healings. Anyone who has had that sort of healing or has known any who has it, would not completely accept that prayers is useless. This is the foundation of why I said the op is not convincing enough. Maybe you have another definition for the word, "useless" I have never argued on this thread that prayers is a sure bet .

it's just a psychological way of making people feel good, that's why it is still relevant.

If prayers can provide psychological relief then what is your point then? Or have you used the word psychological without really knowing the meaning?

if people are archiving things (u say only prayer can achieve) without prayer what's wrong in concluding that prayer is useless?

With your reasoning there, one can also conclude that since people can still become wealthy without going to school then schooling is useless

recall prayer is the point here basically because of the way something so irrelevant has been promoted by religious folks. "Prayer works" only becomes a claim when you cannot even prove its effectiveness to ur achievement. Given the way prayer is being promoted, one actually expects much... same as God.

. I have not said much about what prayers can do or not do or even made any God claim . My argument is that you can't convince a religious person or any other person that what they do is completely useless especially when they think that the benefit they're getting is enough for them. If they're OK with it at this time why should it be your problem .

Now the school example u gave is wrong... school has never been preached to be the only way to success. Education has its effect on people and when u bring an educated person and an uneducated person out, the difference will always be clear. if someone attains education and still behaves like an uneducated person, I can confidently say education was useless to him.

Ensure you understand an argument vary well before responding

if smoking has been proven to cause cancer in some people, then the statement, smokers are liable to die young is true.

It's not about claiming that prayer works neither is it about claiming that overspeeding could lead to death or smoking could cause cancer... Has any dead person been confirmed to have died due to over speeding or smoking? Fine, can you prove your prayer was what led to their rescue? did god confirm that people were rescued from that building because they prayed to him?

You don't get me at all. I never made any claim about prayers. I said the op is not convincing. Please respond to the reasons I have given and not try to bring in things that doesn't concern me

Workch:
Please kindly show me where I said most scientists are atheists?

The data shows that the more one digs into the ranks of science, the lesser the believe in god prevails.

More science, less beliefs. Most professors and scientists at the top of their science field cadre usually do not believe in god. This is fact

The idea that one shouldn’t take the Noah ark story literally is a deceitful way of covering the loopholes in the story. It’s either the story is false or true and it’s obviously false from a scientific evidence point of view. No mincing words
Most Top scientists cannot believe such stories because it’s contradicts everything we know in science

Your first comment suggested that most within the scientific community are atheists. Go back and see.

As for your data, it captures those in the US alone. I hope you're not ignoring that? What of scientist in other countries. what do you know?

See, one doesn't need to be a professor in the sciences to become an atheist. Science doesn't extinguished belief completely and It has never succeeded in doing so.

Noah's story is a myth. It is unnecessary and a waste of time to use science to investigate what is obviously a myth.

There's is reason you were made to accept it as a real story; it is to stimulate believe in the Christian God. Every religion does the same thing.

Yes, it is deception but it is a means to an end and it is what you don't know..

LordReed:
This is what I dunno why some people have a hard time grasping. Always asking atheists questions on science as if we replace religion with science. I was always interested in science before I even became an atheist.

Yea ,some religious people think science is against their god and religion. Some of them have thought that it is the devil that brought science to challenge their god while denying the fact that science has helped them in several ways.

Workch:
while you stat is correct, In the U.S study conducted among 1000 top science professor shows that 85% of them do not believe in god.
It’s pointer to the fact that the more you do science, the less you disbelieve in the claim of god.

And true, science is neutral but it unintentionally contradicts religion in most cases like cosmology and evolutionary biology.

Studies also shows that more than 90% of top physics professors don’t believe in god.

It’s difficult to reach full potential in quantum physics when you still believe stuffs like the Noah’s ark. That’s utterly ridiculous to even an average scientist.

You earlier said most scientist and never specify if they were professors. You don't need to be a scientist or practice more science to become an atheist. When you already believe in a god,( depending what god) an increase in scientific knowledge may result in non belief. That is the pattern. But not in all cases

The unintentionally contradiction has helped some of us , me especially, to have a rethink of what we used to believe. But this doesn't mean that science is actively interested in replacing religion.

Concerning quantum physics and believing in Noah's ark, not every Christian take the story as literal. So those can still be good in quantum physics and excell in it.

But wait. I thought they said that if you think you know quantum physics, then you don't know it. If that is true , then who are those that can excell in it?

And please which of the gods are we talking about

XXXXTENTACION:
Up till today I still wonder how I never fell despite attending church several times... The stories don't always seem to make sense...

You didn't fall because you never truly accepted those believes. Those who did were the ones who accepted it as real

Workch:
Delusions and profound inability to understand statistics/probabilities, science and how the universe works.
This is the reason why the scientific community has more atheists than any other group of people.

It is true that the scientific community has more atheists than any other group but it doesn't mean they're the majority within that group. It is 59%--41%

Science is neutral. It doesn't support belief or non belief. Anyone can become a scientist.

A person's worldview is not an hindrance to becoming a scientist.

XXXXTENTACION:
yeah I used to...
but it was all just playing along not that I truly believe in any of those shits...

It is not possible to believe in a god and at the same time not believe (play along)

You would need to really believe in a god without any doubt in your mind to have the same sort experience of those that believe.

Once you have that experience, then you can better judge for yourself whether it is enough to make you feel special.

XXXXTENTACION:
Well what i really wanted was for you tell me how these religious nutjobs are some kind of special snowfakes...

Then, your op is not sincere but a bait. But of course I know.

But let me ask, have you ever believed in a god before?

XXXXTENTACION:
Apart from belief what else...

I replied your op. What again?

XXXXTENTACION:
Recently attended a church, and looked at how they behave and I get to wonder what's the difference between religious people and godamn atheists...
Religious people eat normally like atheists,
they shit and Piss like atheists, they fvck like atheists and the die just like the fvcking atheists...
so what makes religious people so goddamn special...

Religious people believe in something while Atheists don't.

So, the only way you can really know the difference between you and them is to have, even if for a moment,, the same sort of belief that they have and practiced it.

Because as it is now, you have presented yourself as an outsider who is judging things from the outside.

Modified: I have not said that their belief makes them special even if they feel that way.

HardMirror:
sir how has any of these nonsenses addressed the main issue in the op. 0please stop derailing this thread if it is beyond your intellectual capacity

I have indirectly addressed the op through your friend. Respond to that and quit what you want to start.

The op is not convincing enough. I gave my reasons already. Go and see them and react to it

Prove your intellectual capacity

My arguments here is clear to those who can see it

I have not made any claim about prayers neither have said that the argument is completely false

But only being pointing out that the arguments for prayers being useless is not cogent enough to convince a religious person to abandon the practice. And for god sake, I have given my reasons.

Now, instead of countering those, one egocentric nonentity who sees himself for what he is not, is now throwing tantrums everywhere .

I have said this before, some persons are not truly themselves here. They are living their lives under a false identity and don't know it.

There's a difference between an atheist who was once a religious person and those arheist who never practiced any religion before .

This difference is easily identified from their behavior. The marker of an atheist who never practiced any religion before is that of insults, intellectual bullying and an insane lack of understanding that usually metamorphose into narcissistic personality disorder.

Atheist who were once religious are usually immuned from all of those and have the huge advantage to come up with very convincing arguments to make the theist start to think.

They have been there before and so it is expected that their attitude should be one of concern understanding and not to descend so low as to start using the sad incident of those who unfortunately perish in that building collapse without any regard for the feelings of the families still grieving.

All we see mostly on this board is recycled ideas and reworked threads of other atheist before now. No dynamism in thinking at all and yet one of those nitwit thinks he has the licence to insult . Nonsense.

Only few are atheist here. The others are confused.

Cc, lordreed, budatum, Seun

hupernikao:
You could also see how HardMirror is shouting daft, daft around, qualifying one who hold a different view from him. He already assumed a position of knowledge while knowing nothing.

You could see I just ignored him. The wrong impression he has of himself is obviously the problem.

hopefulLandlord:
They can't state it that way because it's very possible to follow all road laws and get screwed over by those who don't! a vehicle parts can fail and manufacturers can make a mistake which is why certain cars get recalled I don't see what message you're trying to say here. are you agreeing with me?
And Jesus answered and said to them, “Truly I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, `Be taken up and cast into the sea,’ it will happen. “And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive.” (Matthew 21:21-22)

Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst. (Matthew 18:19-20)

Amen, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it shall be done for him. Therefore I tell you, all that you ask for in prayer, believe that you will receive it and it shall be yours. (Mark 11:24-25)

And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. (John 14:13-14)

(Matthew 17:20 For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.)

I never dismiss your argument completely. My position is that it is not cogent enough to convince a Christian faithful to abandon prayers, that is, if you're see things from their own perspective.

Amongss those that survived, were people who prayed and believed after rescue, that their prayers were answered.

So, do you think your arguments is persuasive enough to convince them and their family members that their prayers were not answered even if others did not make it. Have you not heard Christians saying that their God has the prerogative to choose who to save or who not to save?

If that's is what they believe, what makes you think your arguments can work. Or is it not directed at them.

As for the bible passages you quoted ,one can not fail not to see that they come with certain conditions.

How were you able to evaluate the mental state of those who prayed to know if those conditions were met?

Please I need an answer to the above and don't skip it.

Now, Matt. 17.20 doesn't mean small faith or little faith as you interpret it. Even most Christians don't even know exactly what it means.

The mustard seed metaphorically represent a faith that is complete and certain because when you plant a mustard seed you're sure of having a huge an mighty tree later.

It is the Certainty of this outcome about the mustard seed when planted that is being referred to in that passage if not the same Jesus would not later accused his disciples of having little faith when they saw him walking on the sea. That would be contradicting himself..

Someone who is praying and at the same time crying ( doubting) is not certain and so can't be said to have the faith of a mustard seed.

Let me remind you again, I am not a Christian and not defending the religion. But to let you know that your arguments can't convince any neutral judge ,not to talk of a Christian faithful that prayers are useless. You need to come up with something better.

Put yourself in the position of those you're trying to convince

hopefulLandlord:
The problem with the examples you gave is that following traffic rules doesn't promise you an accident free life or at least I've never heard ministry of transportation claim that. For the smoking example the word "Liable" is simply "Likely" so they aren't saying you're definitely dying young if you smoke. However I've heard several preachers claim that prayer would definitely work for you. even the holy bible have several verses saying you'd get what you want even if your faith isn't big at all. If we go by conclusion from the bible and preachers who preach with these verses then my premise and conclusion is sound

So you want the ministry to expressly state it before you know? There are not a religious body and so are expected to deal with the public in a formal manner so as to avoid any form of lawsuit

Liable is liable I never in anyway suggest definite. I am trying to present your logic to you in another form so you see ,maybe ,more clearly what you did

Some preachers may be wrong. We know that Some Doctor give wrong diagnosis sometimes. That should not be enough reason to form an opinion about general medical practice. As for the Bible saying you require a little faith, well I have not forgotten my Bible. There's nothing like that. Please provide the passage in the Bible.

hopefulLandlord:
if the two premise are agreed to be true then the conclusion would be that you're better off not praying as prayer makes one unfortunate

However I'm curious about what's wrong about these premise of mine

1. Some who prayed and some who didn't died
2. some who prayed and some who didn't survived

conclusion: prayer is useless

1, Those who smoke and those who don't smoke are liable to die young.
2, Those who smoke and those who dont are still liable to live long

Conclusion: It is useless not to smoke.

1, if you adhere to traffic rules or don't while driving, you still can't avoid accidents.

2, If you obey traffic rules or you don't while driving, ,you still can go on without accidents

Conclusion: It is useless to obey traffic rules.

With the two above ,I hope you can see that your arguments is not cogent enough to persuade any even though it is not completely false.

How can you tell that those who survived was not as a result of their prayers answered?

BTW I am not a Christian . But only trying to show that the argument you have presented is not sound enough. If as you said that some who prayed survived through it, then how does it become useless?

Or you have another definition for the word useless?

LordReed:
See here:



You can see he was quite psychologically affected by the event. He was about to sleep at 3am, meaning he was partially sleep deprived and tired. These conditions could have compounded to make him susceptible.

For Nigerian doctors and suicide see here: https://healthwise.punchng.com/suicide-a-silent-scourge-among-nigerian-doctors/

Scientists don't make those kinds of pronouncements about people without evidence. You can check scientific investigations into NDEs, you won't find that kind of language.

I do have an open mind to the possibility that a soul or whatever exists but I don't see the supporting evidence.

Yes she was weak and sad But to what extent?

If that would be enough reason, then nearly every doctor in Nigeria would be hallucinating everyday and we would all know about it. Go to any emergency ward in Nigeria and see what these doctors encounter everyday, is even far worse than that of the op and yet it doesn't results in them seeing things.

I have read the report from the link shared and can't find any evidence that patients dying under their care is the cause.. The reason from the report, is personal problems at home added to work stress.

Concerning the soul, I doubt if scientist would call it soul if in the future it is discovered that some part of us continue to live on after death But of course it would be better understood by them.