nwuyag:
What do you mean by a backslider?
I am appreciative of your approach because you did not result to those irritating rants. You see, my own journey out of religion is not like those common stories of others(from the threads I guess). I have encountered a lot. I have put some in posts, but a lot of it is too personal. When I joined NL, after a while, i noticed that no one is actually passing any information across between xtians and atheists due to the arrogant approach of both parties. And obvously, I am in more support of the atheist's claims. So its why I thought that reasoning things calmly will be better. I get pissed easily, when I feel someone is trying to trick me to something which I think is going on in this thread. I dont know how people manage to argue logic on very long threads. Its why I guess.
However, Let me just say that religion is not meant for everyone. You might not understand. If there is any god out there, he should understand.

Lol, religion is only meant for people who refuse to use their brains. How else will someone believe a fish swallowed jonah if not that he has refused to use his brain

nwuyag: @ rationalmind and david hume
Did you guys deduce what I was trying to say by "inherent"?
what I meant was there is a small unit in the definitions of a word, which no matter the time or its usage or corrections, will never change. Eg, There is no way the word "make" (which can be used in many ways) mean "take". Did you get me well?, Correct me where I am wrong. I dont think alcuin or image123 are in the best position to do that.

I really didn't follow the arguments on the "inherent". From the example you however gave now, I agree with you. But then, hope you know a word can have more than one "inherent" meaning.

alcuin:

Your logic is staggering. I think it borders on ignorance. Are you perchance saying that meanings of words do not change with time?

In fact, it may well happen that the word "good" will be extinct in the next 2000 yrs. I even doubt if it existed 3000 yrs ago.

Consider the word "Lucifer".

Isn't it worrisome that the word meaning "bearer of light" is now given to the so called spirit of darkness?

If in the next 2000 yrs, going by this trend, the word becomes synonymous with darkness, will u ever think it was once associated with light and beauty? That is, if you stand on current meanings.

That was just an instance. I'm not a Luciferian apologist.
Thanks.

@alcuin

Knowing that Lucifer is a Latin name, is what should be slightly more worrisome

That "heylel" (i.e. the original Hebrew text) meaning "shining one; like brass or with brass-like lustre" is what was, among others, translated to Lucifer is interesting,

That Lucifer ended up in the old testament, a Hebrew literature written before there was Roman language is enough to make one think, what else or similar in the bible (e.g. Sheol, Gehenna and Hell) was injected, mistranslated or taken out of context

alcuin:


Hehehe.....the tiny unit u allude to, who invented it in the first instance? Man, of course. The meaning of which must reflect the limit of his understanding. Get it.



Listen to yourself. You acknowledge that the bible was in existence before the present definition was promulgated. Why then do you seek to understand the bible with the present definition? You know quite well that the bible meaning may be different. When I pointed out that the word "omniscience" as used in the bible and other sacred literature is different from what it connotes now. You cried fowl, preferring to stick to present definition. And yet again, you implicitly acknowledge it.
Now, who promulgates the meaning? God or man?

Sorry for calling an atheist. And for the record too, I'm not a Christian.

Thanks.

Lol, reminds me of how muslims try to defend the most loony verses of the quran. They pick up words and then twist its meanings to suit them.

When christians pray and God doesn't answer, the general consensus is that, he has something better for you which you don't know. That means he knows the end of the choice ure about making and also knows the end of the choice u'll make if he doesn't grant the present one. So he wants you to choose the other one cos of the end he knows.

So you see, on one hand, you people agree with the general definition of omniscience but when ure confronted with the logical implications, you twist the meaning of the word.

alcuin: Don't get me wrong, man promulgating meanings to words does not mean that he is incapable of conceiving truth. What it implies is no matter how far he goes he must always be limited in his understanding. He can never comprehend absolute truth, which is GOD HIMSELF.
So, hammering on fixated meanings (as coined by men) only limits one and using the meanings as a yardstick to measure TRUTH is plainly unhealthy.

Thanks.

But alluding to fixated meanings when it supports you and discarding it when it doesn't is intellectually dishonest.

rationalmind:

, religion is only meant for people who refuse to use their brains.

How else will someone believe a fish swallowed jonah if not that he has refused to use his brain

@rationalmind

[img]http://3.bp..com/-YLCta2Xi7q0/T1ZFOWLKjOI/AAAAAAAAAjI/OQgfhrSnLdE/s400/73257-050-7BA1BE72.jpgr[/img]

Probably not the kind of fish you are familiar with or currently know

Religion is translated from "ligare"; latin for "to bind".

Drop religion, relationship is a sure fire solution

Kabieosi:

@rationalmind

[img]http://3.bp..com/-YLCta2Xi7q0/T1ZFOWLKjOI/AAAAAAAAAjI/OQgfhrSnLdE/s400/73257-050-7BA1BE72.jpgr[/img]

Probably not the kind of fish you are familiar with or currently know

Holy shi*t. This is elementary brother. You are far more intelligent than this. But this is the kind of mess you run into trying to defend the indefensible.

WHALES ARE NOT FISHES. THEY ARE MAMMALS.

Chosen4ever:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDGAeTMoU-I

PLease, if u have nothing meaningful to add, don't derail us with silly vidoes

rationalmind:

reminds me of how muslims try to defend the most loony verses of the quran. They pick up words and then twist its meanings to suit them.

When christians pray and God doesn't answer, the general consensus is that, he has something better for you which you don't know. That means he knows the end of the choice ure about making and also knows the end of the choice u'll make if he doesn't grant the present one. So he wants you to choose the other one cos of the end he knows.

So you see, on one hand, you people agree with the general definition of omniscience but when ure confronted with the logical implications, you twist the meaning of the word.

@rationalmind

"christians pray and God doesn't answer"

The joke is on you, as considering alcuin is one with a programming background and skills

he is probably laughing his rockers off at your inability to relate it with syntax, function calling, event handling etc etc

Kabieosi:

@rationalmind

"christians pray and God doesn't answer"

The joke is on you, as considering alcuin is one with a programming background and skills

he is probably laughing his rockers off at your inability to relate it with syntax, function calling, event handling etc etc

What is this one saying? When I say christians pray and God doesn't answer, what I mean is that, his answer is NO answer. What don't you understand?

rationalmind:

Please, if u have nothing meaningful to add, don't derail us with silly vidoes

@rationalmind

Actually watched it, out of curiosity, it was OK
but was a mix of over-the-top content in some areas, some misinterpreted or half truths, rhetorics, some intolerances etc

rationalmind:

What is this one saying?

When I say christians pray and God doesn't answer, what I mean is that, his answer is NO answer. What don't you understand?

@rationalmind

No, since the rules are not followed, events are not triggered and certain functions do not run or get activated via the arguments or parameter passed or called

Click on nairaland, expecting an orange to pop out on your screen,

you'll be waiting till eternity, as Seun did not assign an element to respond to your whim

Oh, forgot, you're more engineering and so FORTRAN

Kabieosi:

@rationalmind

Actually watched it, out of curiosity, it was OK
but was a mix of over-the-top content in some areas, some misinterpreted or half truths, rhetorics, some intolerances etc

Lol, that was why I never bothered to watch. I knew what to expect.

Kabieosi:

@rationalmind

No, since the rules are not followed, events are not triggered and certain functions do not run or get activated via the arguments or parameter passed or called

Click on nairaland, expecting an orange to pop out on your screen,

you'll be waiting till eternity, as Seun did not assign an element to respond to your whim

Oh, forgot, you're more engineering and so FORTRAN

I understood what you just said. How this relates to omniscience and the double standards of christians which I showed you is what I don't understand.

rationalmind:

I'm sure about two things. I will one day die and all religions are false. Nothing, I mean NOTHING will make me go back.

You may be correct in another context. All men must drop the physical body, in a process we call death. Well, all religions MAY the false. But, this is not a proof of the nonexistence of the Magnificience and Splendour of God. Religion can be loosely understood as "man's idea" of God. This clearly presuppposes the religion can be wrong, as man's ideas are generally limited to his perceptive capacity. That said, religion serves a useful purpose on earth but there is no religion in the spiritual.

Thanks.

Kabieosi:

@rationalmind

No, since the rules are not followed, events are not triggered and certain functions do not run or get activated via the arguments or parameter passed or called

Click on nairaland, expecting an orange to pop out on your screen,

you'll be waiting till eternity, as Seun did not assign an element to respond to your whim

Oh, forgot, you're more engineering and so FORTRAN

lol....I think I get your drift.

One reason I think people don't get what they pray for ia that most times, they want something and disregards the laws of nature. How can one plant corn and expect to harvest rice? Even pray and fast to that effect. It simply will not work and does not mean that GOD doesn't answer prayers. They plainly disregarded his laws of sowing and reaping.

@rationalmind. Yeah, God gives "No" answer which in itself is an answer. Does this proof that He doesn't exist? Mind you, the responsibility falls on man to recognise God's answer, if he doesn't recognize it and instead calls God and religion a fraud, who will you blame

alcuin:
You may be correct in another context. All men must drop the physical body, in a process we call death. Well, all religions MAY the false. But, this is not a proof of the nonexistence of the Magnificience and Splendour of God. Religion can be loosely understood as "man's idea" of God. This clearly presuppposes the religion can be wrong, as man's ideas are generally limited to his perceptive capacity. That said, religion serves a useful purpose on earth but there is no religion in the spiritual.

Thanks.

Yea, ure right. That religions are false is not a proof of the nonexistence of God. The question is, what is proof? NOTHING.

Religion serves a useful purpose? Millions of people have died as a result of religion. What a useful purpose that is. I couldn't agree more with you.

You see all religions are lies .It only takes a man who is ready to be true to self and a sincere study of written history to realize that organized religion is a creation of man .

Hell was created in Christianity to keep men tethered to the church. I don't know about islam . There is no HELL . Which god worthy of worship will torment ordinary man for billion years to come all because of so-called sins ?

99% of these Hell preaching people including nairalanders won't even make 'heaven' according to their criteria!

@nwuyag ....there is no answer to your question . They will just bore you with senseless illogics with quotes from the 'BIBLE '.

alcuin:

Your logic is staggering. I think it borders on ignorance. Are you perchance saying that meanings of words do not change with time? In fact, it may well happen that the word "good" will be extinct in the next 2000 yrs. I even doubt if it existed 3000 yrs ago.
Consider the word "Lucifer". Isn't it worrisome that the word meaning "bearer of light" is now given to the so called spirit of darkness? If in the next 2000 yrs, going by this trend, the word becomes synonymous with darkness, will u ever think it was once associated with light and beauty? That is, if you stand on current meanings.
That was just an instance. I'm not a Luciferian apologist.
Thanks.

Why are you comparing a word to a name?
If the meaning of the name of a serial killer is "love", does that automatically change the meaning of love?
We're talking about a word, not a name!

That aside, u said that it's humanly impossible to understand God because of man's finiteness. Does that mean that there are no attributes of God that YOU are ABSOLUTELY sure of?

alcuin:
You may be correct in another context. All men must drop the physical body, in a process we call death.

Well, all religions MAY the false. But, this is not a proof of the nonexistence of the Magnificience and Splendour of God.

Religion can be loosely understood as "man's idea" of God.

This clearly presuppposes the religion can be wrong, as man's ideas are generally limited to his perceptive capacity.

That said, religion serves a useful purpose on earth but there is no religion in the spiritual.

Thanks.

Religion Religion Religion - Arrghhh !

Stop! Pack it in!! Cut out the misinformed notion of religion!!!

The watchword is relationship, in tune with true religion

Look at James 1:27 to know what true religion is and what it is all about?

Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this:
to look after orphans and widows in their distress
and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world
^{- James 1:27 New International Version (NIV)}

rationalmind:

But alluding to fixated meanings when it supports you and discarding it when it doesn't is intellectually dishonest.

Where have I alluded to fixated meaning? The meaning, I gave to the word "omniscience" is personal opinion and as such can not be found in any dictionary, AFAIK. I think, you guys are the ones trying to size Divinity into the little frame of dictionary words and meanings.

As an aside, it is really worrisome when men create the standards by which God is judged. Most atheists go as far to set conditions, which must be meant by God, for them to believe in God. Well, God doesn't succumb to man' intellectual whims and masturbations.....lol, ( I remember that phrase from school). Man don't set the rules, God does.

Thanks.

alcuin:

lol....I think I get your drift.

One reason I think people don't get what they pray for ia that most times, they want something and disregards the laws of nature. How can one plant corn and expect to harvest rice? Even pray and fast to that effect. It simply will not work and does not mean that GOD doesn't answer prayers. They plainly disregarded his laws of sowing and reaping.

@rationalmind. Yeah, God gives "No" answer which in itself is an answer. Does this proof that He doesn't exist? Mind you, the responsibility falls on man to recognise God's answer, if he doesn't recognize it and instead calls God and religion a fraud, who will you blame

When you knew you didn't get my point, why not ask me for clarification?

I'm not talking about weather God exists or not. I'm saying the general consensus amongst christians when God gives them a No answer to their prayer is that God has a better plan for them. Which means God already knows the end of the choice they were asking of, didn't answer them because he wants them to make another choice that will have a more favourable end.

This idea clearly shows depicts God as having perfect knowledge of ones choices and the end.

When faced with the logical absurdities of this definition of God, christians change tactics. They change the meaning of the word omniscience to suit them. That is what I call double standard and that exactly is my point.

alcuin:

Where have I alluded to fixated meaning? The meaning, I gave to the word "omniscience" is personal opinion and as such can not be found in any dictionary, AFAIK. I think, you guys are the ones trying to size Divinity into the little frame of dictionary words and meanings.

As an aside, it is really worrisome when men create the standards by which God is judged. Most atheists go as far to set conditions, which must be meant by God, for them to believe in God. Well, God doesn't succumb to man' intellectual whims and masturbations.....lol, ( I remember that phrase from school). Man don't set the rules, God does.

Thanks.

Do you believe you'll one day die? Do you feel God knows exactly how and when you'll die? Your answer will help me show you how you allude to fixated meanings only to shift away from it when ure faced with the absurdities

Kabieosi:

Religion Religion Religion - Arrghhh !

Stop! Pack it in!! Cut out the misinformed notion of religion!!!

The watchword is relationship, in tune with true religion

Look at James 1:27 to know what true religion is and what it is all about?

Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this:
to look after orphans and widows in their distress
and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world
^{- James 1:27 New International Version (NIV)}

Kabieosi, my point exactly. All definitions of religion are coined by men, and as such man's idea.
The verse you quoted reflects James' idea, I, Alcuin, can have another idea. But all our ideas are limited to the extent of our perceptive capicities.
What James described in the verse above is charitableness and chastity, which are very good but do not totally encapsulate religion. Religion has other arms too like rites and rituals.
Again, that's my idea.... You see, you cannot run away from the subjectivity of this topic.

Thanks.

alcuin:

Where have I alluded to fixated meaning? The meaning, I gave to the word "omniscience" is personal opinion and as such can not be found in any dictionary, AFAIK. I think, you guys are the ones trying to size Divinity into the little frame of dictionary words and meanings.

As an aside, it is really worrisome when men create the standards by which God is judged. Most atheists go as far to set conditions, which must be meant by God, for them to believe in God. Well, God doesn't succumb to man' intellectual whims and masturbations.....lol, ( I remember that phrase from school). Man don't set the rules, God does.

Thanks.

Of course man has to create standards, how else will we be able to tell reality from hallucinations?
I think the problem here is the mysteriousness of the process by which you gain knowledge of God.
As an empiricist, i don't believe in knowledge gained outside "sense experience". Such knowledge is too open to the forces of falsehood

rationalmind:

When you knew you didn't get my point, why not ask me for clarification?

I'm not talking about weather God exists or not.

I'm saying the general consensus amongst christians when God gives them a No answer to their prayer is that God has a better plan for them.

Which means God already knows the end of the choice they were asking of, didn't answer them because he wants them to make another choice that will have a more favourable end.

This idea clearly shows depicts God as having perfect knowledge of ones choices and the end.

When faced with the logical absurdities of this definition of God, christians change tactics.

They change the meaning of the word omniscience to suit them.

That is what I call double standard and that exactly is my point.

@rationalmind

Still don't get from all you've posted up there, why denying God knows everything or all things

Have you tried pottery?

What happens to the inhibitions, knowing that the clay has a mind of it's own?

Do you jack in and stop the creativity. Hmm?

Have you watched Bruce Almighty?
- It is a 2003 religious comedy film/movie
about a down-on-his-luck TV reporter who was offered the chance to try being God himself for one week
after complaining that God was not doing His job correctly.

Try watch it (i.e. and others)- it might give a different perspective of God

rationalmind:

When you knew you didn't get my point, why not ask me for clarification?

I'm not talking about weather God exists or not. I'm saying the general consensus amongst christians when God gives them a No answer to their prayer is that God has a better plan for them. Which means God already knows the end of the choice they were asking of, didn't answer them because he wants them to make another choice that will have a more favourable end.

This idea clearly shows depicts God as having perfect knowledge of ones choices and the end.

When faced with the logical absurdities of this definition of God, christians change tactics. They change the meaning of the word omniscience to suit them. That is what I call double standard and that exactly is my point.

Interesting, I get your point. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Well, the basic assumption is false. As much as many Christians believe that God takes personal inventory of their lives and guides them or even personally hears their prayers. It is not true. That view of God is the bane religion. God is not anthropomorphic. Man is directly subject to the laws of nature, what he gets is dependent on how he swings in these laws. God does not personally intervene in any situation.
Mind you, the extent of these laws has not been fully experienced by man. So manifestations may erroneous be called "supernatural" or miraculous. It is simply natural laws playing out in ways not yet known by man.

Thanks.

alcuin:

Kabieosi, my point exactly. All definitions of religion are coined by men, and as such man's idea.

The verse you quoted reflects James' idea, I, Alcuin, can have another idea.

But all our ideas are limited to the extent of our perceptive capicities.
What James described in the verse above is charitableness and chastity, which are very good but do not totally encapsulate religion.

Religion has other arms too like rites and rituals.

Again, that's my idea.... You see, you cannot run away from the subjectivity of this topic.

Thanks.

@alcuin

Stop trying to wriggle out.

James 1:27 said what TRUE religion is and which God accepts as PURE and FAULTLESS

Rites and rituals are not necessarily acceptable pure and faultless

Kabieosi:

@rationalmind

Still don't get from all you've posted up there, why denying God knows everything or all things

Have you tried pottery?

What happens to the inhibitions, knowing that the clay has a mind of it's own?

Do you jack in and stop the creativity. Hmm?

Have you watched Bruce Almighty?
- It is a 2003 religious comedy film/movie
about a down-on-his-luck TV reporter who was offered the chance to try being God himself for one week
after complaining that God was not doing His job correctly.

Try watch it (i.e. and others)- it might give a different perspective of God

Tell your christian brothers to stop denying God knows everything not me

rationalmind:

Do you believe you'll one day die? Do you feel God knows exactly how and when you'll die? Your answer will help me show you how you allude to fixated meanings only to shift away from it when ure faced with the absurdities

Of course, I believe I'll die someday. When and where is highly probable. It depends on my actions and choices. God does not know when and where I will die, neither does He need to know. It is solely dependent on my actions. I am a free agent. The only certainty here is that I'll die someday, which is the neccesary end of this road on earth.
God knows where all roads end but the exact turn I'll make in my journey of life is not necessary for Him to know.

Thanks.

alcuin:

Interesting, I get your point. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Well, the basic assumption is false. As much as many Christians believe that God takes personal inventory of their lives and guides them or even personally hears their prayers. It is not true. That view of God is the bane religion. God is not anthropomorphic. Man is directly subject to the laws of nature, what he gets is dependent on how he swings in these laws. God does not personally intervene in any situation.
Mind you, the extent of these laws has not been fully experienced by man. So manifestations may erroneous be called "supernatural" or miraculous. It is simply natural laws playing out in ways not yet known by man.

Thanks.

Lol... Ure a deist?