Bobbysworld28: Wht claims has God ascribed to himself or wht claims hv man ascribed to God?

omnipotence, omniscience and omnifiscience and perfection. just 4 out of like uncountable perfect qualities all of which contradicts observations in nature.

U say there is no intelligence in d eyeball? U hv lost it then. There is & continually will be. If there is no intelligence how come man has never bn able to replicate it. They just might in d future but scientists still marvel at it.
U expect d creator of nature to be bound by nature? Hv u ever tot dt their dimensions greater than u can comprehend? D universe shows u d vastness of a mind dt dwarfs wht u can aim to comprehend in a thousand lifetimes. Omnipotence - as incomprehensible as d concept sounds to ur feeble mind, whn u come in awe of one of his creations (nature) u will be brought to ur knees abt his unfathomable might. All those characteristics compared to u r extraordinarily awesome.
When u aim to kill off God in ur life, it does nothing to depreciate d creator nor his creation. It is just like denying gravity yet its presence is with u daily. It only closes d door to u regarding a character so great one dt u can only gape in awe at his splendour.
Obviously we r going round in circles but my submission is dt u look beyond mans assumptions and focus on d grandeur dt is represented by d sovereign of d universe.
Peace

Bobbysworld28: U say there is no intelligence in d eyeball? U hv lost it then. There is & continually will be. If there is no intelligence how come man has never bn able to replicate it. They just might in d future but scientists still marvel at it.
U expect d creator of nature to be bound by nature? Hv u ever tot dt their dimensions greater than u can comprehend? D universe shows u d vastness of a mind dt dwarfs wht u can aim to comprehend in a thousand lifetimes. Omnipotence - as incomprehensible as d concept sounds to ur feeble mind, whn u come in awe of one of his creations (nature) u will be brought to ur knees abt his unfathomable might. All those characteristics compared to u r extraordinarily awesome.
When u aim to kill off God in ur life, it does nothing to depreciate d creator nor his creation. It is just like denying gravity yet its presence is with u daily. It only closes d door to u regarding a character so great one dt u can only gape in awe at his splendour.
Obviously we r going round in circles but my submission is dt u look beyond mans assumptions and focus on d grandeur dt is represented by d sovereign of d universe.
Peace

And where is your god's signature on anything we see around in the world today?. . .And which particular god are you talking about?. . .

Bobbysworld28: Wht claims has God ascribed to himself or wht claims hv man ascribed to God?

All gods are man made as such no god can be shown to exist on its own independent of what man says about such a god. . .If you can showme a god that exist independent of what man chooses to say about such a god then pls go ahead and do so, if not the FACT remains that all gods are man made. . .God is just a idea that lives exist in the minds of believers not in reality. . .

Bobbysworld28: U say there is no intelligence in d eyeball? U hv lost it then. There is & continually will be. If there is no intelligence how come man has never bn able to replicate it. They just might in d future but scientists still marvel at it.
U expect d creator of nature to be bound by nature? Hv u ever tot dt their dimensions greater than u can comprehend? D universe shows u d vastness of a mind dt dwarfs wht u can aim to comprehend in a thousand lifetimes. Omnipotence - as incomprehensible as d concept sounds to ur feeble mind, whn u come in awe of one of his creations (nature) u will be brought to ur knees abt his unfathomable might. All those characteristics compared to u r extraordinarily awesome.
When u aim to kill off God in ur life, it does nothing to depreciate d creator nor his creation. It is just like denying gravity yet its presence is with u daily. It only closes d door to u regarding a character so great one dt u can only gape in awe at his splendour.
Obviously we r going round in circles but my submission is dt u look beyond mans assumptions and focus on d grandeur dt is represented by d sovereign of d universe.
Peace

once again I ask, where is the evidence of intelligent design.

Bobbysworld28: U say there is no intelligence in d eyeball? U hv lost it then. There is & continually will be. If there is no intelligence how come man has never bn able to replicate it. They just might in d future but scientists still marvel at it.
U expect d creator of nature to be bound by nature? Hv u ever tot dt their dimensions greater than u can comprehend? D universe shows u d vastness of a mind dt dwarfs wht u can aim to comprehend in a thousand lifetimes. Omnipotence - as incomprehensible as d concept sounds to ur feeble mind, whn u come in awe of one of his creations (nature) u will be brought to ur knees abt his unfathomable might. All those characteristics compared to u r extraordinarily awesome.
When u aim to kill off God in ur life, it does nothing to depreciate d creator nor his creation. It is just like denying gravity yet its presence is with u daily. It only closes d door to u regarding a character so great one dt u can only gape in awe at his splendour.
Obviously we r going round in circles but my submission is dt u look beyond mans assumptions and focus on d grandeur dt is represented by d sovereign of d universe.
Peace

once again I ask, where is the evidence of intelligent design.

ooman:

there is no way you can be religious and live curiously. to live curiously, you have to do away with religion.

god kills all curiosity in you and replaces it god's will and god's design.

to live curiously, the first thing to do is to terminate god off your life.

This is such nonsense. How does religion inhibit curiosity? How does following God preclude discovering the world He created?

ooman:

once again I ask, where is the evidence of intelligent design.

And I ask, where is the evidence for the lack of it?

Ihedinobi:

This is such nonsense. How does religion inhibit curiosity? How does following God preclude discovering the world He created?

Lol, Garden of Eden, anyone? Tower of Babel? Pray for miracles rather than visit a hospital? Madness is caused by demons?

It inhibits curiosity by pretending to answer questions. Remember onyfrank's hydrological cycle biblical explanation?

It's funny though. You claim Christianity is not a religion, yet feel a need to defend ooman's statement here..

It's quite funny watching you trip all over the place in the absence of Anony.. Where dat guy dey sef?

musKeeto:

Lol, Garden of Eden, anyone? Tower of Babel? Pray for miracles rather than visit a hospital? Madness is caused by demons?

What about the Garden of Eden or the Tower of Babel? How did God inhibit curiosity there? By asking man, in the first instance, not to eat of a tree that would ruin his life? Is it inhibiting curiosity, in the sense that ooman means, to warn your little son not to play with fire?

Or was it by going down to prevent man from making a god of himself? Has history not taught us what men with ambition to be gods do to the world around them?

And what's this nonsense about demons causing madness? Where does that feature? And the crap about not going to the hospital? Seriously, what did you mean to say?

It inhibits curiosity by pretending to answer questions. Remember onyfrank's hydrological cycle biblical explanation?

What about onyfrank's explanation? When we judge atheism by individual atheists, you guys will go running for the rocks screaming how different you are from one another and are alike in only one thing, your belief that God does not exist. Is onyfrank's explanation bound by law to be Christianity's explanation? Ridiculous reasoning!

And the nonsense about pretending to answer questions, what is that one about? Where have you guys ever succeeded at faulting Christianity's answers? Nonsense!

It's funny though. You claim Christianity is not a religion, yet feel a need to defend ooman's statement here..

Really, why would I defend ooman's statement?

As for Christianity's status, I hold that, going by what religion is defined to be, it is not one. But why should I fight over semantics when the argument made is against Christianity, regardless what we define it to be?

It's quite funny watching you trip all over the place in the absence of Anony.. Where dat guy dey sef?

What I keep wondering is when you folks will open your eyes and see that I am not and do not intend to be the gentle Anony for you. So the digs at my style mean less than nothing to me, if that's possible. When you talk crap and I feel like it, I'll call you out on it and mess up your day over it. That's granted, you can be sure. I have no intention to pamper your enmity against Christ. I will be gentle only when I see that you really benefit by my being so.

And my twin is away. He's on other business, so you've got just me to deal with.

They say truth hurts. I understand your pains and your current mood. Lol

Ihedinobi:
What about the Garden of Eden or the Tower of Babel? How did God inhibit curiosity there? By asking man, in the first instance, not to eat of a tree that would ruin his life? Is it inhibiting curiosity, in the sense that ooman means, to warn your little son not to play with fire?

He put the tree in the garden. And then tells man not to eat of it? I put drinks in my fridge and put a mysterious bottle (containing poison) then warn my kids not to drink it? Curiosity is a desire to know something. Adam and Eve would have loved to know. God didn't want them to.

Ihedinobi:
Or was it by going down to prevent man from making a god of himself? Has history not taught us what men with ambition to be gods do to the world around them?

hmmm.. Ihe... the plan wasn't to make man GOD..

Gen 11:
Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words. 2 It came about as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. 3 They said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks and burn them thoroughly.” And they used brick for stone, and they used tar for mortar. 4 They said, “Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, [color=#990000]otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.”
[/color]

They didn't want to be scattered...

Ihedinobi:
And what's this nonsense about demons causing madness? Where does that feature? And the crap about not going to the hospital? Seriously, what did you mean to say?

Ihedi.. lol

James 5:
Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord.

Mark 5:1-15:

Then they came to the other side of the sea, to the country of the Gadarenes. And when He had come out of the boat, immediately there met Him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit, who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no one could bind him, not even with chains, because he had often been bound with shackles and chains. And the chains had been pulled apart by him, and the shackles broken in pieces; neither could anyone tame him. And always, night and day, he was in the mountains and in the tombs, crying out and cutting himself with stones. When he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and worshiped Him. And he cried out with a loud voice and said, “What have I to do with You, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I implore You by God that You do not torment me.” For He said to him, “Come out of the man, unclean spirit!” Then He asked him, “What is your name?” And he answered, saying, “My name is Legion; for we are many.” Also he begged Him earnestly that He would not send them out of the country. Now a large herd of swine was feeding there near the mountains. So all the demons begged Him, saying, “Send us to the swine, that we may enter them.” And at once Jesus gave them permission. Then the unclean spirits went out and entered the swine (there were about two thousand); and the herd ran violently down the steep place into the sea, and drowned in the sea. So those who fed the swine fled, and they told it in the city and in the country. And they went out to see what it was that had happened. Then they came to Jesus, and saw the one who had been demon-possessed and had the legion, sitting and clothed and in his right mind. And they were afraid.

Ihedinobi:
What about onyfrank's explanation? When we judge atheism by individual atheists, you guys will go running for the rocks screaming how different you are from one another and are alike in only one thing, your belief that God does not exist. Is onyfrank's explanation bound by law to be Christianity's explanation? Ridiculous reasoning!

Lmao. Ihedinobi, atheists profer their opinion on different issues. We do not claim to be subservient to any 'guiding' truth or Holy Spirit. Onyfrank's explanation was backed up by Scripture... All you Christians could do was either ignore or tell him he was ignorant. None of you could refute his scriptures.

Ihedinobi:
And the nonsense about pretending to answer questions, what is that one about? Where have you guys ever succeeded at faulting Christianity's answers? Nonsense!

Lol. And who told you we make efforts to fault Christianity's answers. You can choose to call the color blue 'red'.. whatever works for you. Christianity has answers for Christians. Feel free to hold on to those 'answers'...

Ihedinobi:
As for Christianity's status, I hold that, going by what religion is defined to be, it is not one. But why should I fight over semantics when the argument made is against Christianity, regardless what we define it to be?

Definitions and semantics are important, going by what we've learnt from the apologists on here. Tbaba also believes Islam's not a religion.

Ihedinobi:
What I keep wondering is when you folks will open your eyes and see that I am not and do not intend to be the gentle Anony for you. So the digs at my style mean less than nothing to me, if that's possible. When you talk crap and I feel like it, I'll call you out on it and mess up your day over it. That's granted, you can be sure. I have no intention to pamper your enmity against Christ. I will be gentle only when I see that you really benefit by my being so.

Feel free to flatter yourself. An ostrich is a bird that can't fly...

Ihedinobi:
And my twin is away. He's on other business, so you've got just me to deal with.

Extend my regards to him...

Ihedinobi:

I'm not sure it's my question you tried to answer here. Who said anything about meaninglessness? I asked what allusions to lapse of time mean to a being of eternity not whether time means anything to it.



So you know that omniscience is mutually exclusive with free will because some people including Christians think so.

You won't talk about Christians not thinking for themselves again after saying this, will you?



Lol. What are you whining about?

See the dodger? Guy, admit that you have nothing to say rather than dodging.


1) you are now revealing how useless your question about time is. Why are you now asking what time means to god? How will that change anything?

2) Are you now arguing that the reason why i accept that omniscience andfreewill cant coexist is because some christians or some people believe it? You do realise that there is a logical contradiction and a body of philosophy on the problem of freewill and omniscience? I have made this clear to you on this thread and another thread but you choose to be in denial.


Embarassing

Ihedinobi:

And I ask, where is the evidence for the lack of it?

mistakes called mutations are overwhelmingly present in nature. The bane of intelligent design that all ID proponents couldnt deny or absorb into their theory because it destroys ID'ner

Ihedinobi:

This is such nonsense. How does religion inhibit curiosity? How does following God preclude discovering the world He created?

There is no denying that religion puts you in quietism. The only answer you get is "That is how God made it or God's wish be done".

To really search out the deepest secret of nature, you must do away with God, if not, you would think you are searching for the secret of God.

Good morning LB,

Logicboy03:

The highlighted showcases the dubious apologetics that christians have to do to defend their God.

Your approach to arguments really makes me laugh...it seems I am now noticing a trend with some of you guys (Atheists). You accuse someone of something but fail too prove it.

Logicboy03:
Omnipotence means that the omnipotent being can not be wrong in knowledge as it knows everything present to future.

That's the implication most definitely!

Logicboy03:
The knowledge of an omnipotent being is binding because it can never be wrong.

When you say 'binding' what exactly do you mean? If by 'binding' you mean that his ability to see the future is impeccable then I will agree but if you mean that our future has been determined already then that will be incorrect.

Logicboy03:
God being omnipotent means that his foreknowledge of tommorow can not be wrong.

The bold is a separate concept which God can decide to use or not. It is not a must for an omnipotent being to use this ability all the time. When it comes to freewill the relevant concept is omniscient and this ability God uses without putting man's freewill in jeopardy.

Logicboy03:
Such foreknowledge is binding, hence predestination.

You still miss the point by a mile. If I have the ability to see into someone's future does this mean that I have impaired the freedom of choice for that person? As I continue to repeat, knowing what someone will do is different from rendering the person incapable of making his own choices.

Logicboy03:
You say that the actions of man must be influenced before predestination can occur.

Indeed I did!

Logicboy03:
Where did you get that rule from? Your azz?

Actually I got that from thinking for myself as against borrowing someone else' thoughts If man's actions are not influenced in any way then your theory of predestination will not make any sense. Now check out the implication of your logic:

Man is free to act in whatever way they choose; Man decides to eat the forbidden fruit; God determined that man will eat this fruit, hence man does not have freewill.

Does the above make sense? If man's actions are not influenced then predestination holds no meaning.

Logicboy03:
You fail to see that an omnipotents knowledge alone should be binding on human action.

The fact that you believe it is binding does not mean that it is exactly as you suggest...refer to the question I asked about the bold.

Logicboy03:
If God knows that Sammar will die tommorow. Wont Sammar die? Was it Sammar's decision to die?

If God knows that Sammar will die by an accident that same tomorrow, does this mean that God caused the accident to happen? Having knowledge of what will happen is way different from making that thing happen.

ooman:

there is no way you can be religious and live curiously. to live curiously, you have to do away with religion.

god kills all curiosity in you and replaces it god's will and god's design.

to live curiously, the first thing to do is to terminate god off your life.

Ah! This is the height of it. Dumbness raised to power infinity. Are you high?

wiegraf:

No no. This is the bit of your post I quote.



This implies a core prerequisite is that god makes choices for you, and it is not. The only prerequisite, like I stated already, is that the universe be capable of being determined. To be able to do that there must be only 1 possible future. Or is the omniscient going to say either x or y will happen? That's in now way infallibly omniscient, or is it?

This is regardless of what anyone says, does, or thinks, even the omniscient himself. For instance, assuming you somehow had this knowledge of the future and did all you could to change it, you would fail. So would the omniscient as well actually, else he'd be wrong.

Put in another way, if there's only one possible future, where exactly is the choice? Choice would imply more than one possible outcome, no? If one had free will, when the time comes, he should be able to take option A or option B. But, so long as the future is set in stone, there is no option B. There is just the illusion of an option B as the person cannot take it without voiding omniscience by veering of the already determined path.

That one future must occur, it is already set. This does not require a conscious agent pulling the strings. It is a basic requirement.





Again, you're missing the point. The bold is not necessary, he just needs to know the response that will be taken, he need not influence it.




I never said this.




You'd be illogical for other reasons, stated above.

Also, exactly how was knowledge about the future obtained? Hypothetically, of course.




Oh, okay. But you do get my point with that as well, yes?

Will attend to this at my free time...

musKeeto: They say truth hurts. I understand your pains and your current mood. Lol

A load of bull hurts too, didn't you know?

He put the tree in the garden. And then tells man not to eat of it? I put drinks in my fridge and put a mysterious bottle (containing poison) then warn my kids not to drink it? Curiosity is a desire to know something. Adam and Eve would have loved to know. God didn't want them to.

The fire I mentioned is mysterious to little children, did you miss that?

And what makes you think that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is comparable to a bottle of poison? That which God forbade Adam and Eve at the early point of their existence could have been forbidden because they needed to develop to be able to partake of it. We were not told anywhere that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was bad. Rather, we were assured that God saw all that He created and it was good.

hmmm.. Ihe... the plan wasn't to make man GOD..


They didn't want to be scattered...

How very funny. It's this sort of thing that leaves me wondering why in the world you folks insist that you are expert in the Scriptures.

Right before the part that you italicized to gloat about is the statement, 'and let us make for ourselves for a name'. Somehow, it didn't occur to you that it meant something, did it? Well, it does, Sir Agnostic Expert Theologian.

Ihedi.. lol

Where does the first forbid using medical science?

How does the second attribute all madness to demons?

Lmao. Ihedinobi, atheists profer their opinion on different issues. We do not claim to be subservient to any 'guiding' truth or Holy Spirit. Onyfrank's explanation was backed up by Scripture... All you Christians could do was either ignore or tell him he was ignorant. None of you could refute his scriptures.

Lol. So it's now 'we', is it? You are now a full-blown atheist, are you? You are now sure that there really is no god, are you?

See that bolded part? It is a blatant, bald-faced lie. You guys are proselytizing and making grand nuisances of yourselves because, according to you, you have discovered the truth that there is no God and religion is a lie. No be so?

About onyfrank, you are still talking a heap of nonsense. Based on what do you say what we could do or couldn't do? I never even saw what it was he said and snippets I've heard of it bore me so I didn't bother to ascertain what it was about. It seems to have to do with how water proves that God exists or something like that. I wasn't interested and soon forgot about it. Perhaps those who addressed him simply saw no real trouble in his theories and didn't bother to do much more than you saw them do. Doesn't even remotely suggest that they couldn't have done more. Just that they didn't.

And why would any true Christian refute Scriptures? You think we're all wolves in sheep's clothing like those you know?

Lol. And who told you we make efforts to fault Christianity's answers. You can choose to call the color blue 'red'.. whatever works for you. Christianity has answers for Christians. Feel free to hold on to those 'answers'...

Well, if you haven't faulted and/or can't fault Christianity's answers, you mock them for no more than jealousy, not so?

Definitions and semantics are important, going by what we've learnt from the apologists on here. Tbaba also believes Islam's not a religion.

And have I suggested that they're not? I have said only that I don't bother to fight about what anyone calls Christianity while they are besieging her. Call Jerusalem a hamlet or call her a jewel, but when you lay siege to her, be prepared to receive the answer of those who call her a heavenly city.

Feel free to flatter yourself. An ostrich is a bird that can't fly...

Need I answer this? Not at all. There are threads all over the forum that you could dredge up to show how I'm only flattering myself, are there not?

Extend my regards to him...

I'm sure you've got both his number and his email.

Reyginus: Ah! This is the height of it. Dumbness raised to power infinity. Are you high?

and this is coming from who? a person who doesnt know what inanimate means? religious intellectual laziness is your condition

Logicboy03:


See the dodger? Guy, admit that you have nothing to say rather than dodging.

This is why I insist that you are the dumbest of them all. You want me to admit that I have nothing to say, why? Because you're scared that I really might have something to say? How perfectly silly.

1) you are now revealing how useless your question about time is. Why are you now asking what time means to god? How will that change anything?

Is it useless or do you wish it were, I wonder?

If God dwells outside of time, then "before such-and-such event" means something different to Him than it does to us. And if it does, then, perhaps what could be called fore knowledge by us may be other than fore to Him, may it not?

2) Are you now arguing that the reason why i accept that omniscience andfreewill cant coexist is because some christians or some people believe it? You do realise that there is a logical contradiction and a body of philosophy on the problem of freewill and omniscience? I have made this clear to you on this thread and another thread but you choose to be in denial.

Perfect Nonsense!

What argument did I make? I only pointed out the implication of what you said. Slap yourself if you're mad about it, it's you who said it, not me.

Ok. I could also argue that because there is a body of theories and knowledge about the tooth fairy or Santa Claus, there must be something to them. I have only ever asked you to explain how the two are mutually exclusive so that we can make sure that you understand what you are building your arguments out of. Have you ever succeeded at doing so without pointing to other people who think it is a valid philosophical problem?

Embarassing

I agree that your level of intellectual development is for all your acclaim. It's a pity really.

ooman:

mistakes called mutations are overwhelmingly present in nature. The bane of intelligent design that all ID proponents couldnt deny or absorb into their theory because it destroys ID'ner

"Mistakes" are evidence of a design. There is no such thing as a mistake where there is no perfect design to depart from.

Ihedinobi:
A load of bull hurts too, didn't you know?

Yes, yours does.. a lot.....

Ihedinobi:
The fire I mentioned is mysterious to little children, did you miss that?

And what else used to be mysterious? Space, strange occurrences, rains etc.... We know fire's dangerous cos someone got burnt, not so? Why skip that experience and the lesson?
Hmm, on deeper reflection, maybe it was all God's plan. Maybe Adam and Eve had to go against the warning, so we could learn from their mistakes.. thanks to their curiosity..

Ihedinobi:
And what makes you think that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is comparable to a bottle of poison? That which God forbade Adam and Eve at the early point of their existence could have been forbidden because they needed to develop to be able to partake of it. We were not told anywhere that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was bad. Rather, we were assured that God saw all that He created and it was good.

Na so una go dey spin Bible dey go..

Genesis 2:16-17:

And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

Ihedinobi:
How very funny. It's this sort of thing that leaves me wondering why in the world you folks insist that you are expert in the Scriptures.

Right before the part that you italicized to gloat about is the statement, 'and let us make for ourselves for a name'. Somehow, it didn't occur to you that it meant something, did it? Well, it does, Sir Agnostic Expert Theologian.

Ah, Sir MyFaithIsBuiltOnLogic Christian Theologian... how does 'let us make for ourselves a name' make man God.. When a group of people decide to work under one banner, how do they make themselves God? The reason they built that is clear: to create an identity for themselves -- earlier, we are told they had just migrated -- lest they be scattered across the earth... FEEL FREE TO PUT ON YOUR DANCING SHOES AND KEEP DANCING, though...

Ihedinobi:
Where does the first forbid using medical science?

How does it support using medical science? If you fall sick, take A (PRAY) not B(seek medical counsel)...

Ihedinobi:
How does the second attribute all madness to demons?

Without medical breakthrough, all madness would still be attributed to demons. Feel free to deny that.

Ihedinobi:
Lol. So it's now 'we', is it? You are now a full-blown atheist, are you? You are now sure that there really is no god, are you?

Read my sig. And yeah, I'm sure Yahweh doesn't exist.. 100% convinced..

Ihedinobi:
See that bolded part? It is a blatant, bald-faced lie. You guys are proselytizing and making grand nuisances of yourselves because, according to you, you have discovered the truth that there is no God and religion is a lie. No be so?

No, no, no.. I do not come her to make a 'nuisance' cos I'm an atheist/agnostic/whatever. My only concern is where the religious leaders in Nigeria seem to be leading the country to. I speak because I'm concerned, you can't preach atheism.

Ihedinobi:
About onyfrank, you are still talking a heap of nonsense. Based on what do you say what we could do or couldn't do? I never even saw what it was he said and snippets I've heard of it bore me so I didn't bother to ascertain what it was about. It seems to have to do with how water proves that God exists or something like that. I wasn't interested and soon forgot about it. Perhaps those who addressed him simply saw no real trouble in his theories and didn't bother to do much more than you saw them do. Doesn't even remotely suggest that they couldn't have done more. Just that they didn't.

I take it you haven't been through that thread. Your conclusions therefore hold no water whatsoever and should be hidden by the mods.

Ihedinobi:
And why would any true Christian refute Scriptures? You think we're all wolves in sheep's clothing like those you know?

Of course, those I know would include you..

Ihedinobi:
Well, if you haven't faulted and/or can't fault Christianity's answers, you mock them for no more than jealousy, not so?

Not jealousy, just for FUN. To a few, watching a group of lions argue over if some beef is real beef or corned beef is quite fun.

Ihedinobi:
And have I suggested that they're not? I have said only that I don't bother to fight about what anyone calls Christianity while they are besieging her. Call Jerusalem a hamlet or call her a jewel, but when you lay siege to her, be prepared to receive the answer of those who call her a heavenly city.

And when we call you slaves, you deny? Why not defend Owerri or Aba? O, God does not live there... neither is He from there..

Ihedinobi:
Need I answer this? Not at all. There are threads all over the forum that you could dredge up to show how I'm only flattering myself, are there not?

Yeah, Christian blood has been spilt all over this forum. No need to go through all that muck.

Ihedinobi: I'm sure you've got both his number and his email.

And how do you know this?

ooman:

and this is coming from who? a person who doesnt know what inanimate means? religious intellectual laziness is your condition

Lolol. A man who is down can say anything.

Ihedinobi:

"Mistakes" are evidence of a design. There is no such thing as a mistake where there is no perfect design to depart from.

Lol. Bro, the real 'mistake' is taking this dude serious. To begin with, how can a scientist label mutation as a mistake in nature? Smh.

Ihedinobi:

"Mistakes" are evidence of a design. There is no such thing as a mistake where there is no perfect design to depart from.

If mistakes are evidence of design, doesnt that make your omnipotent intelligent designer a mistaken god?

Logicboy03:



If mistakes are evidence of design, doesnt that make your omnipotent intelligent designer a mistaken god?

Here comes logicboy. That one of your father's children scratched a brand new car he designed amounts to a mistake in the design and designer of the car. Oh Knight! Smh.

striktlymi: Good morning LB,



Your approach to arguments really makes me laugh...it seems I am now noticing a trend with some of you guys (Atheists). You accuse someone of something but fail too prove it.



That's the implication most definitely!



When you say 'binding' what exactly do you mean? If by 'binding' you mean that his ability to see the future is impeccable then I will agree but if you mean that our future has been determined already then that will be incorrect.



The bold is a separate concept which God can decide to use or not. It is not a must for an omnipotent being to use this ability all the time. When it comes to freewill the relevant concept is omniscient and this ability God uses without putting man's freewill in jeopardy.



You still miss the point by a mile. If I have the ability to see into someone's future does this mean that I have impaired the freedom of choice for that person? As I continue to repeat, knowing what someone will do is different from rendering the person incapable of making his own choices.



Indeed I did!



Actually I got that from thinking for myself as against borrowing someone else' thoughts If man's actions are not influenced in any way then your theory of predestination will not make any sense. Now check out the implication of your logic:

Man is free to act in whatever way they choose; Man decides to eat the forbidden fruit; God determined that man will eat this fruit, hence man does not have freewill.

Does the above make sense? If man's actions are not influenced then predestination holds no meaning.



The fact that you believe it is binding does not mean that it is exactly as you suggest...refer to the question I asked about the bold.



If God knows that Sammar will die by an accident that same tomorrow, does this mean that God caused the accident to happen? Having knowledge of what will happen is way different from making that thing happen.

.


Lol.........the foreknowledge of an omniscient being is predestination. Like an accurate prophecy. There is no difference between god knowing that a person will die and saying that a person will die- they will both happen.


Lets see you deny simple logic

Reyginus: Here comes logicboy. That one of your father's children scratched a brand new car he designed amounts to a mistake in the design and designer of the car. Oh Knight! Smh.

Fail.....just fail........how does one reply this nonsense? the fact that we werecreated with foreskin is enough to ask questions.

Logicboy03:



Fail.....just fail........how does one reply this nonsense? the fact that we werecreated with foreskin is enough to ask questions.

Lol. You should realy think about it. How do you reply that question?

Ihedinobi:

This is why I insist that you are the dumbest of them all. You want me to admit that I have nothing to say, why? Because you're scared that I really might have something to say? How perfectly silly.



Is it useless or do you wish it were, I wonder?

If God dwells outside of time, then "before such-and-such event" means something different to Him than it does to us. And if it does, then, perhaps what could be called fore knowledge by us may be other than fore to Him, may it not?



Perfect Nonsense!

What argument did I make? I only pointed out the implication of what you said. Slap yourself if you're mad about it, it's you who said it, not me.

Ok. I could also argue that because there is a body of theories and knowledge about the tooth fairy or Santa Claus, there must be something to them. I have only ever asked you to explain how the two are mutually exclusive so that we can make sure that you understand what you are building your arguments out of. Have you ever succeeded at doing so without pointing to other people who think it is a valid philosophical problem?




I agree that your level of intellectual development is for all your acclaim. It's a pity really.

It remains foreknowledge to god since he would have to still operat within time to make effects in our time filled universe. No arguing with that. Note that a timeless being is also nonsensical

Also there is a logical contradiction between omniscience and freewill which i wont explain for the 5th time. Sensible people dont argue with facts. There is no choice on a predestined or chosen path