Blogthug:


if u can't grasp a simple analogy, there is no point discussing with you, meet others for notes later

Failed analogy

I disagree with this

Blogthug:
if you are open minded and understand these basic fallacies such as :
Strawman
red herring
non sequitor
Ad hominem

then let's get talking, if you don't, go google and understand them, then we can get talking ait? if u won't then don't waste my time

Na this kind people I deh like. Bros, more grease to your elbow. May God continually give you the wisdom to reveal the hypocrisy of an Atheist. They are the modern day Pharisee and Saducees.

oaroloye:
SHALOM!



If Atheists were open-minded, we would have no trouble with them at all.

Strawman

A False Example they can easily demolish, claiming to have demolished your point.

red herring

A pointless diversion from the actual issue.

non sequitor

An irrelevant point.

Ad hominem

An attack on the person raising an issue, in order to divert from the issue.



I doubt if any actual Atheists ever come online.

What you are dealing with are SHILLS- people posing as legitimate Posters, just to obstruct the free-flow of information, and abort enlightenment.

Actually his time was wasted without him knowing

luvmijeje:

Na this kind people I deh like. Bros, more grease to your elbow. May God continually give you the wisdom to reveal the hypocrisy of an Atheist. They are the modern day Pharisee and Saducees.

what hypocrisy has he revealed?

he is the real hypocrite here, wasting our time with failed analogy.

donnffd:


What is your definition of "nothing"?

Same old, same old. Blogthug is an atheist masquerading as a deist. I joined his group and was in it till he brought up a ridiculous argument where he claimed nothing caused God.

luvmijeje:

Na this kind people I deh like. Bros, more grease to your elbow. May God continually give you the wisdom to reveal the hypocrisy of an Atheist. They are the modern day Pharisee and Saducees.

If hat he displayed in this thread is he kind of wisdom our God gives, then i am sorry to say, you are serving a very foolish God.

izublingz:


I was preparing to beg their God for forgiveness. But, once again, I was disappointed.

These religious people are Myopic in their reasoning

The day you guys would be able to separate God from religion you'd understand better. About the begging part? One day you'd definitely beg, I hope it just won't be too late. Don't quote.. I've said my bit

izublingz:


I was preparing to beg their God for forgiveness. But, once again, I was disappointed.

These religious people are Myopic in their reasoning

[quote author=izublingz post=55075566]


The day you guys would be able to separate God from religion you'd understand better. About the begging part? One day you'd definitely beg, I hope it just won't be too late. Don't quote.. I've said my bit

mrmrmister:


They aren't dodging your questions.

Your questions are just invalid.

You want to make atheists believe in the existence of god and you tell them to disprove his existence?

Really?

if u don't know that negatives can be proven then u are arguing from ignorance

ScepticalPyrrho:
As an open-minded atheist, I took the time to read through all the posts from page(0) to page (5), in a sincere quest to see if the op has came up with a proof for the existence of a god....

Blogthug,

Your "nothing" "something" mumbo jumbo is just another shallow argument.

Keep an open mind, think of a better argument then quote me.

do u have any argument to back up your atheism position?

ScepticalPyrrho:
As an open-minded atheist, I took the time to read through all the posts from page(0) to page (5), in a sincere quest to see if the op has came up with a proof for the existence of a god....

Blogthug,

Your "nothing" "something" mumbo jumbo is just another shallow argument.

Keep an open mind, think of a better argument then quote me.

just because u lack the intellectual capacity to understand it doesn't mean it's mumbo jumbo, by the way, do u have any argument to back up your atheism position?

adepeter26:
I talk am. This thread scatter. Blogthug, you ended up proofing nothing

how can I prove it when they all avoided my question ?

akintom:
Just how you're gonna do that, is what am curious about.

can we debate? let's go
God exists!

DeSepiero:


This is similar to asking "Is Zero something or nothing?".

and yes zero is something, it's a word and words are something not nothing get it?

ScepticalPyrrho:


You are yet to establish if God exists in the first place, but you are asking atheists to choose which characteristics best describes god.

Avoid starting your question with "Is god...?".

We have to agree that God exists before you ask about his qualities. God being "nothing" or "something" is a big loop.

Either options would mean to assert that "God is..."

I don't believe that God exists.

You're backing the wrong tree. Go and have a rethink.

do you believe ideas exists?

Blogthug:

can we debate? let's go
God exists!

Hmmmm... Let's start this way - you said God exist, so, what's God?

Blogthug:


and yes zero is something, it's a word and words are something not nothing get it?

Do you not know that the English dictionary defines zero as naught (nothing) ?

Blogthug:


it's like a scientist asking another scientist " which nature exists ? " nature is nature and God is God, though no two scientists will describe Nature same way, so as no two religion will describe God same way , get it?

Hollllllddddd up

If the two scientists you asked don't describe nature the same way, then that means they are quack. They forged their certificates like our senators. All properly educated educated scientists learn the same things about nature and describe nature the exact same way. At most, differences only occur for the unknown, when they form hypotheses if what they think is actually going on. But, religion doesn't say its a hypithese, each religion claims to be absolutely 100% sure that they're right.

akintom:

Hmmmm... Let's start this way - you said God exist, so, what's God?

the creator of the universe and origin of life

AnonyNymous:

Hollllllddddd up

If the two scientists you asked don't describe nature the same way, then that means they are quack. They forged their certificates like our senators. All properly educated educated scientists learn the same things about nature and describe nature the exact same way. At most, differences only occur for the unknown, when they form hypotheses if what they think is actually going on. But, religion doesn't say its a hypithese, each religion claims to be absolutely 100% sure that they're right.

think bro, how would you expect two people to describe something the same way? even dictionaries don't define words the same way, let's use Atheism for e.g some dic say Atheism is denial of existence of God, some say it's the belief that God doesn't exist another might say it's a lack of belief in God, so I guess u have been debunked

prove that religion claims to be 100% , by the way u are aware that theism is the BELIEF in the existence of God or gods right?

DeSepiero:


Do you not know that the English dictionary defines zero as naught (nothing) ?

is Zero a word? yes or no? pls don't write epistle, just answer me

Blogthug:


think bro, how would you expect two people to describe something the same way? even dictionaries don't define words the same way, let's use Atheism for e.g some dic say Atheism is denial of existence of God, some say it's the belief that God doesn't exist another might say it's a lack of belief in God, so I guess u have been debunked

prove that religion claims to be 100% , by the way u are aware that theism is the BELIEF in the existence of God or gods right?

No. . .at most the wording is different in the example you gave. However, Jesus Christ that was described in Christianity is a Pacifist to the point of stupidity. Allah is a warmonger. Yahweh is very very petty and a warmonger as well, though not as bloodthirsty as Allah. They are all completely different and do not seem even in the slightest to be pointing towards the description of the same person.

AnonyNymous:

No. . .at most the wording is different in the example you gave. However, Jesus Christ that was described in Christianity is a Pacifist to the point of stupidity. Allah is a warmonger. Yahweh is very very petty and a warmonger as well, though not as bloodthirsty as Allah. They are all completely different and do not seem even in the slightest to be pointing towards the description of the same person.

strawman argument , God is simply the creator/cause of the universe and origin of life, God is a different category of being, different religions just give different names, description and personalities to God, but they all believe that God by definition is the source of the universe , creator of all things and source of life. Eledumare, chukwu Abiama, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman all Same God, get it? now do u believe that God doesn't exist?

Blogthug:


strawman argument , God is simply the creator/cause of the universe and origin of life, God is a different category of being, different religions just give different names, description and personalities to God, but they all believe that God by definition is the source of the universe , creator of all things and source of life. Eledumare, chukwu Abiama, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman all Same God, get it? now do u believe that God doesn't exist?

What are you saying? The only thing they agree on is that God is the creator and that's just because they have no other answer. But based on the descriptions of them in their books/belief systems, they are NOT the same person. How can the same person say to turn the other cheek when slapped and at the same time ask you to burn all infidels, does that make any sense to you?

AnonyNymous:

What are you saying? The only thing they agree on is that God is the creator and that's just because they have no other answer. But based on the descriptions of them in their books/belief systems, they are NOT the same person. How can the same person say to turn the other cheek when slapped and at the same time ask you to burn all infidels, does that make any sense to you?

it's like you have a poor reading comprehension, I said different religions have different names, description and personalities attached which isn't necessary , u are about committing a Red herring fallacy by trying to divert the discussion. what's important is the fact that they attributes the creator of the universe to a particular category of being in English called God,

now u said they have no other answers, now if I may ask you, how would u explain the origin of the universe?

Blogthug:


it's like you have a poor reading comprehension, I said different religions have different names, description and personalities attached which isn't necessary , u are about committing a Red herring fallacy by trying to divert the discussion. what's important is the fact that they attributes the creator of the universe to a particular category of being in English called God,

now u said they have no other answers, now if I may ask you, how would u explain the origin of the universe?

No, I stopped you when you said scientists describe nature differently because that is WRONG, once a LAW is made in science then all scientists accept it to be correct. If you ask anyone to state Newton's laws they will say the exact same thing. So I'm not diverting anything, rather, I'm correcting something you said which was wrong.

As for the gods, you cannot say that just because one characteristic is common to them (that they supposedly created the universe), then they are same person. And just choose to ignore their descriptions and personalities.

Lastly, just because I said something is wrong diees not mean I know the answer. I believe its more honourable to say 'I don't know' than to fill the void with something incorrect. I don't know who the president of Malaysia is but that doesn't mean its Michael Jackson.

Blogthug:

the creator of the universe and origin of life

OK.
*how did you know that the universe/life was created?

Blogthug:

is Zero a word? yes or no? pls don't write epistle, just answer me

I hope you know how to use a dictionary.

If adam and eve were the first humans. How come Asians red indian white black chinese came to be. Bearing in mind that since my village started no man der has giving birth to an Asian or white .oya come explain bros

luvmijeje:

Na this kind people I deh like. Bros, more grease to your elbow. May God continually give you the wisdom to reveal the hypocrisy of an Atheist. They are the modern day Pharisee and Saducees.

The Pharisees and Saducees believed in God. 'Nuff said.

akintom:


OK.

*how did you know that the universe/life was created?

created in this sense is synonymous with caused, now do u believe that the universe is eternal or it began to exist?

AnonyNymous:

No, I stopped you when you said scientists describe nature differently because that is WRONG, once a LAW is made in science then all scientists accept it to be correct. If you ask anyone to state Newton's laws they will say the exact same thing. So I'm not diverting anything, rather, I'm correcting something you said which was wrong.

another strawman, nobody mentioned laws here, I was talking about how scientists will describe Nature differently when asked the question "Describe nature ?" but none of them would ask the other " which nature? " same way it will be illogical for a theist to ask another theist "which God ?" if u believe that two scientists will have same description then there is something wrong with your thinking

As for the gods, you cannot say that just because one characteristic is common to them (that they supposedly created the universe), then they are same person. And just choose to ignore their descriptions and personalities.

adding their description isn't relevant here, it will be a red herring fallacy, what's important is that they all attribute the universe to have been created by a supernatural being

Lastly, just because I said something is wrong diees not mean I know the answer. I believe its more honourable to say 'I don't know' than to fill the void with something incorrect. I don't know who the president of Malaysia is but that doesn't mean its Michael Jackson.

false anology, u claim not to know what causes the universe but u know it cannot be a supernatural being called God? lol, u my dear are an illogical hypocrite