Godmouth:

@ Jayriginal,

You are the one who is deluded by saying God does not exist.

I think not.

Godmouth:

@ Jayriginal,

In the bible: it is written that it's only a fool that says in his heart that there is no God. There is nothing you will say that will change the experiences/encounters of God that I have heard: even if you put a gun to my head and ask me to deny it.

It is also written that he who calls his brother a fool is in danger of hell. I guess we are both going to burn together.

Godmouth:


Who created you? where did you come from? when you die where are you going? why is the earth the only place where life is found in the entire universe as tiny as it is?

It all started some years ago with my father and mother.

When I die, I cease to exist. Thats it.

You cant say for certain that earth is the only place life is found. Have you gone round ? Carbon based life forms may not be the only type of life existing. Isnt it possible that there might be some kind of life form that we dont as yet know ? Afterall, early man was not aware of microbes but that didnt stop them from existing.

Godmouth:



There is no point arguing with you because you do not understand what I am saying. You cannot understand unless God helps you to do so.

You are the one who needs help: because life without Christ is empty and pointless. You know deep down that you need God, so stop pretending and answer his call before it is too late!

Your arguments are too simple. You insult the creator you believe in by advancing such folly. My spare tire can comprehend your God theory even in its "in-animacy". Here goes your logic.

[center]I believe in God cos it says so in the bible. It says he is the alpha and omega. The everything. He created everything in the universe, he is perfect and all that. There is nothing God cannot do. The bible is the word of God. I know this is true because its written in the bible.[/center]

Thats your simplistic argument, which I understand and even my old slippers understands that. I understand and thoroughly reject that argument. You people are not helping your cause at all.
You are right. With your poor grasp of logic and your ignorance of your own scriptures, you are better off not arguing. Infact, you arent even arguing. You seem like you are trying to convince yourself.
As has been said severally, just because you cant explain something, it doesnt mean it is supernatural. It simply means you dont understand it.
For some reason, dont you wonder why your "God" gave you a brain ?

@ Jayriginal,

There is really no point arguing with you! You quote scripture out of context saying because I refer to the bible reference that calls atheists fools that I'm in danger of going to hell. I can give you several examples of things God has said to me in the past and every one of them have happened to the letter. My point to you is that I believe in God beacuse the bible makes His existence very clear, however I have also encountered Him several times: which makes me believe that stories in the bible about men of God such as Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha, David, Jeremiah, John the Baptist and the Apostles are true. You are entitled to your opinions: however my prayer for you is that God will make you understand what I am talking about by revealing Himself to you if you allow Him in to your life.

God is so tangible and more real than this physical world you see around you. You are free to ask me about my encounters and I would be willing to answer them. Some examples of the things God has revealed to me in the past about future occurences which have happened are as follows:

1. David Cameron would be the next Prime Minister of Britian, before  the UK elections

2. Spain would win the Fifa World Cup in 2010 overcoming strong oppositions such as Germany, and Holland who beat Brazil in the Quater Finals: considered to be one of the favourites .

3. Yohan Blake would win the 100metres Gold medal in the the World Athletics Championship in Daegu, South Korea rather than Usain Bolts

4. This is one for the future: if you are Nigerian, or you know about Nigerian current affairs, you must have heard of the terrorist group; Boko Haram. God has told me that their days as an organisation are numbered. They shall cease to exist very soon, as God would fish out those who are behind the evil group and expose them. His judgement would fall upon the group and disband them.

5. God also told me a day before about the bomb blast that would happen at the UN building in Abuja. He gave me a vision of how the event unfolded a night before the day it happened

There are more encounters that are personal to me. I am willing to share them with any one who is interested.

God bless!

Personally, I don't believe in god but I don't go around lecturing people about it. People have the right to believe whatever dumb shìt they want, there's a saying that god made stüpid people for a reason.

In any case that journalist is clearly a mörön and deserves to be sacked. I'm starting to suspect that there isn't one single competent journalist in the whole of Nigeria.

@ayox2003 I was laughing at first when I started reading your post but by the end I felt really, really sad. Nigeria's educational system has really failed you, my friend. And for that I apologise on behalf of my country.

Deleted. Double post.

Godmouth:

@ Jayriginal,

There is really no point arguing with you! You quote scripture out of context saying because I refer to the bible reference that calls atheists fools that I'm in danger of going to hell. I can give you several examples of things God has said to me in the past and every one of them have happened to the letter. My point to you is that I believe in God beacuse the bible makes His existence very clear, however I have also encountered Him several times: which makes me believe that stories in the bible about men of God such as Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha, David, Jeremiah, John the Baptist and the Apostles are true. You are entitled to your opinions: however my prayer for you is that God will make you understand what I am talking about by revealing Himself to you if you allow Him in to your life.

God is so tangible and more real than this physical world you see around you. You are free to ask me about my encounters and I would be willing to answer them. Some examples of the things God has revealed to me in the past about future occurences which have happened are as follows:

1. David Cameron would be the next Prime Minister of Britian, before the UK elections

2. Spain would win the Fifa World Cup in 2010 overcoming strong oppositions such as Germany, and Holland who beat Brazil in the Quater Finals: considered to be one of the favourites .

3. Yohan Blake would win the 100metres Gold medal in the the World Athletics Championship in Daegu, South Korea rather than Usain Bolts

4. This is one for the future: if you are Nigerian, or you know about Nigerian current affairs, you must have heard of the terrorist group; Boko Haram. God has told me that their days as an organisation are numbered. They shall cease to exist very soon, as God would fish out those who are behind the evil group and expose them. His judgement would fall upon the group and disband them.

5. God also told me a day before about the bomb blast that would happen at the UN building in Abuja. He gave me a vision of how the event unfolded a night before the day it happened

There are more encounters that are personal to me. I am willing to share them with any one who is interested.

God bless!

I believe you, brother. I've met dozen's of people who've had similar experiences. But don't worry, modern medicine has made a lot of advances in that area in recent years. There's now a drug called olanzepine for people like you. It will make the voices stop and it has much milder side-effects compared to the old-generation antipsychotics. I advise you to talk to your doctor about it. God is ready to heal you if you just take the first step.

PA1982:


Well, the first thing that struck me was that the writer of this editorial even  more space to their own musings, which read like some preliminary notes for a sermon, than  even naming  Professor Wole Soyinka's literary works. After all, they were the reason he was awarded the Nobel prize, weren't they?

Let's go to Muda Oyeniran's burning questions.
Not who, but what.
It's called the circadian cycle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circadian_rhythm

Is the writer aware the Earth spins on its axis?
No mystery there.
Here's a youtube video that explains it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pej15xWLqSw

To understand the 'growth' of hair, here's a good starting point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_hair_growth
What a question.
Why does the writer suppose Professor Wole Soyinka was created by anyone other than his parents?
For an overview of human reproduction:
http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/

As for the second part of the question, well that depends on your religious point of view, doesn't it?
Here's an excellent variet of source material on the subject of creation myths
http://www.magictails.com/creationlinks.html

Not who, but what.
Tectonic plates, anyone?
http://www.platetectonics.com/book/page_4.asp

Um.
What about it?
Birth and death happens all that that live, from uni-cellular life forms on up.

It constantly surprises me that people seem to think that providing a rational scientific explanation for phenomena may lend credence to an unscientific idea that one may have effects without causes.

That you can explain the science of a phenomenon does nothing to take away the cause, purpose or trigger of that phenomenon.

That eternal element which is understood to be the ultimate or uncaused cause - is what is understood by the philosophical mind to be the element that is referred to as God.

^^^ I think she was addressing the manner people go about trying to "prove" God's existence. Their posers are almost always easily refutable, the funny journalist in op being a perfect example. One cannot have effect without causes, but to go around asking someone, "do you know how mountains form" and expect that that seals the argument is not smart in my opinion. It is a good question, but to expect that it seals the argument is not a good idea. We know how mountains form, what we don't know - speaking from the point of view of the intellect - is what causes the how. That is not something anyone can answer. And that is why I seriously doubt you can "prove" the existence of God to anyone.

^ I hear you. I do sense that she is not an atheist, so I understand her comments in context. However it still remains a concern for me that many people fob off theistic questions on the formation of the world by addressing the formative process and not looking to that which should be signal - namely - the cause of the formative process.

MyJoe:

what we don't know - speaking from the point of view of the intellect - is what causes the how.

The bolded in red poignantly captures my concern. It seems to me that for many people, explaining the scientific "how" obviates any recognition of the "what" that causes the "how."

That is not something anyone can answer.

Fair enough. However you are well acquainted with my view that certain qualities may yet be discerned. It will however, be purposeless to drive that discourse here.

And that is why I seriously doubt you can "prove" the existence of God to anyone.

That depends on what "God' is understood to be. If God is defined as a primordial causative element, that may be possible to prove. But if God is expected to be a Grand Old man sitting in the clouds, then sure, I agree, nobody can prove such a fantasy.

Now having said, that, let me add one thing. The OP did not advance particularly good arguments or questions for the existence of God, I agree. Now, I do not know if Wole Soyinka is theist or atheist, but I must say this and this only: if it is true that he gave the specific reason quoted in the OP as a reason for atheism, then I am of the view that that is a very poorly articulated reason.

I must say that your comments are always so perfectly balanced, its almost inhuman. kudos.

@ EvilBrain

You do not know me or haven't met me before. However you cannot stand in front of me and say the things you are saying here on NL.  I know people who have encountered God more than I have. I have met them: they tell me their experiences and it is tested and proven to be true as it's aligns with scriptures (The bible). You may claim to believe in God: however you have limited Him to what you think He is in your mind. I still maintained that God is very real, more real than you can ever think or imagine. The events I mentioned in my recent posts were proven true by friends and family who know me as I told them these things in advance. When they happened: they knew straightaway that I am a true prophet (man) of God.

Let me explain one of those events in detail. I live and work in the UK, and last year during the 2010 UK general elections: I was rooting for the Labour Party under Gordon Brown to win. I supported them, persuaded friends friends on reasons why I thought Gordon Brown should remain in power.

Three days to the election: God gave me a dream, and in this dream I was upstairs in my room at home where I live in London. The news came on air (Sky News) if you know about it in the UK: I heard the song of the news programme starting from the TV downstairs and they were about to announce the results of the elections. I quickly ran downstairs and saw my younger sister in the sitting room. I stopped at the stairs (you can see our sitting room from the staircase) and called my sister to ask her who won the election as they had announced it. She turned to me, and before she said anything, I saw a look on her face which gave me the answer. I knew Gordon Brown had lost the election because in our house (family) we all wanted Gordon Brown who was still the Prime Minister then to win. Then as I got to the living to see the TV for myself, I saw David Cameron being unveiled as the new Prime Minister, he was waving to the public and there were so many journalists and camera men around him.

I woke up from that dream knowing that whatever happened in the elections, David Cameron was going to be the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom which turned out  to be true. I told friends and family about this dream that God gave me and when it came to pass, they all came to me to acknowledge that God had truly spoken to me.

God also told me about Yaradua's demise months before it happened. In this vision God took me to a room wherein I saw the wife of the late President: Tura'i and other close relatives of President Yaradua weeping and mourning. It was a very large room and at the centre of the room, there was a table in the which had a human body lying on it covered from head to toe. By the spirit of God I knew that was our late president. That vision was very strange as their was a very morbid presence in the room. I woke up knowing that our president's days were numbered. I put up a message on Facebook calling on all Nigerian Christians to pray for our president to accept Christ into his life

Godmouth:

@ Jayriginal,

There is really no point arguing with you!

We've agreed on that.

Godmouth:

@ Jayriginal,

You quote scripture out of context saying because I refer to the bible reference that calls atheists fools that I'm in danger of going to hell.

Its in the bible. You cant take liberties in determining what is in context and attempt to deny me the same liberty. I could as well say everything you say from the bible is taken out of context.

Godmouth:



God is so tangible and more real than this physical world you see around you. You are free to ask me about my encounters and I would be willing to answer them. Some examples of the things God has revealed to me in the past about future occurences which have happened are as follows:

1. David Cameron would be the next Prime Minister of Britian, before  the UK elections

2. Spain would win the Fifa World Cup in 2010 overcoming strong oppositions such as Germany, and Holland who beat Brazil in the Quater Finals: considered to be one of the favourites .

3. Yohan Blake would win the 100metres Gold medal in the the World Athletics Championship in Daegu, South Korea rather than Usain Bolts

4. This is one for the future: if you are Nigerian, or you know about Nigerian current affairs, you must have heard of the terrorist group; Boko Haram. God has told me that their days as an organisation are numbered. They shall cease to exist very soon, as God would fish out those who are behind the evil group and expose them. His judgement would fall upon the group and disband them.

5. God also told me a day before about the bomb blast that would happen at the UN building in Abuja. He gave me a vision of how the event unfolded a night before the day it happened

Ok your God seems quite interested in sports and UK politics. Assuming (without conceding) that you were told these things, Evil Brain has suggested that you get help. Still in line with the assumption that you did hear from God (that is, I'm assuming you believe you heard rather than actually hearing from God), what steps did you take  to warn the populace about it. Did you send a message to them ? Did you relay the contents of your revelation to any security agency ?
Why is your God so interested in sports and not stuff that affects us daily here in Nigeria ? Wouldnt it be nice if he could reveal to you something that could help lives in Nigeria (I guess there's no use for that when he warned you about the bomb blast and , )

I couldnt help noticing that while all the other revelations were exceedingly clear ie 1, 2, 3, and 5, the only one that deals with the future is sufficiently vague so as to come under different interpretations in case anything remotely close does happen. Is this a way to later come back to this thread in the future and point at it as a sign that god speaks to you ?
Why wont your god give us specific info. Ask him for us. Tell him to tell you the names of the boko haram leaders, where their camps are, their members, their sponsors, the quickest and most effective way of stopping them. While he is at it, he may draw up a sound economic policy that will transform the lives of Nigerians. Let him also tell us who killed Bola Ige, MKO and many others. Im sure he knows these things.

In like manner, to prove that your prophecies have no hint of divinity, I'm going to make some of mine.
1) The sun will come out tomorrow.
2) There will be power outage in some parts of Nigeria
3) Some of our old leaders will soon die
4) The Niger river will not evaporate tomorrow

Notice how all my prophecies are future and not past events like most of yours are ? Not to be outdone, I'll give you a past event that was 100% accurate.

5) I knew before the election that Fashola would win his reelection.

As for Spain winning the world cup, a certain octopus (Paul I think), predicted the same too. If an octopus can do the same thing your God did ,

My ''educated'' dudes, Thanks for all what u have said above. I dont need to tell u how real God is. I know the reality of His presence and the manifestations of His presence will urge u to beleive in Him and follow hard after Him. Even as I do today. Every man must choose his world. If we who follow Christ, with all the facts before us and knowing what we are about, deliberately choose the Kingdom of God as our sphere of interest I see no reason why anyone should object. If we lose by it, the loss is our own; if we gain we rob no one by so doing.

@deep sight.
The causative factor or agent that you refer is a plausible idea that can be comtemplated even by people with athiestic viewpoints. It is an idea that has kept philosophers and the people of science busy and will continued to keep them busy for quite a while.
Hower, such concepts belong in realms of astro-physics and deep philosophy . Most of the debates and arguments on this forum center on the judeo-christian concepts of divinity.Almost all theists that I encounter are mainly interested in th validation of the lores that are the foundation and pillars of their faith and nothing more.
The problem is not the "HOW. If we can all agree that we dont know the "How", then there is no issue worth debating. Scientific enquiry is mainly concerned with the "how" of any phenomena.But when theists claim that they know "how" and when and who, but then offer fairy tales as support,rationality has to overule.
In summary, I beleive the "cause" is an abtract intuitive idea that is and has been a subject of scientic investigation. It should never form the basis for any kind of doctrine.

There are no poor reasons for adopting an athiestic viewpoint. All you need is good normal healthy skeptism. All you need is doubt. There dozens of reasons for choosing an ahtiestic viewpoint. I believe prof. Soyinka just offered one, albeit the simplest one that came to his mind at that particular time. If probed further, am quite sure he would given a dozen more.

Soyinka is an atheist? But he worships Ogun the god of Iron?

I guess he means Judeo-chritian athiesm.

@Deep Sight
Thanks for the compliments.

Even when we talk about the primordial cause. Certain qualities can be discerned, but using what parameters? Since we are not dealing with matter where we can talk about size, shape and colour there would be too much subjectivity involved and what is discernible to you may not be to someone else. The result is that you only prove things to yourself but not your interlocutor. As for Soyinka, I guess he's an Abrahamic atheist, as he is a well-known Ogun devotee.

Deep Sight:

^ I hear you. I do sense that she is not an atheist, so I understand her comments in context. However it still remains a concern for me that many people fob off theistic questions on the formation of the world by addressing the formative process and not looking to that which should be signal - namely - the cause of the formative process.

What does that comment have to do with the OP?
I addressed the OP.
Why don't you?

@globexl
I think your post highlights the matter with atheism. No, I'm afraid scientific enquiries will not reveal God because he/she/it will not show up in any satellite pictures, and will certainly not stop over at your place for dinner tonight. Even if he/she/it did any of the above where are the accepted precedents that might cause a recognition and force a consensus? Only deep personal observation and thinking might help the atheist, not spending time within the sterile confines of a laboratory.

By the way, we know how things work, the issue is the cause. And there is certainly no agreement that that cannot be known. When you consider the matter intellectually, nobody has seen or touched God. But it doesn't end there.

Double post.

MyJoe:

@globexl
I think your post highlights the matter with atheism. No, I'm afraid scientific enquiries will not reveal God because he/she/it will not show up in any satellite pictures, and will certainly not stop over at your place for dinner tonight. Even if he/she/it did any of the above where are the accepted precedents that might cause a recognition and force a consensus? Only deep personal observation and thinking might help the atheist, not spending time within the sterile confines of a laboratory.

By the way, we know how things work, the issue is the cause. And there is certainly no agreement that that cannot be known. When you consider the matter intellectually, nobody has seen or touched God. But it doesn't end there.

Hey,I am in total agreement with you. I hv said it before, it is not everything that can be observed in a lab. The poster befor eyou said it well, somethings are subjective and they should be treated as such. Theories emanating from subjective experiences should not be trusted.Therefore, religious faith should no business outside the sacred precints of ones mind or heart, as the case may be.

Let's go back to the OP, please.

IT is an incontrovertible fact that Professor Wole Soyinka is reverred in Nigeria and indeed globally. As the first African to be awarded the highly coveted Nobel prize in Literature, our cerebral Professor of Literature is, indeed, a pride to the black race.

Aside from being a literary giant, Prof. Soyinka is also a celebrated social critic, being a thorn in the flesh of successive governments in Nigeria. As the founder of the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC), in Nigeria, Soyinka’s contribution to the development of the country is, indeed, legendary.

But I must say with all due respect that the Nobel laureate goofed recently when he was responding to a question bordering on why he remained an unrepretant atheist on a popular television talkshow Moments with Mo, designed to celebrate his 77th birthday.

The presenter of the programme, Mo’ Abudu had asked Prof. Soyinka why he does not believe in the existence of God, in spite of the fact that he was raised by Christian parents.

To my utter dismay, the Nobel Laureate turned logic on the head and gave an answer which left this writer wondering whether I had heard him right.

Although I might not be able to quote him verbatim, Professor Soyinka had replied thus. “The reason why I don’t believe in God is simple. I simply cannot imagine that somebody (emphasis mine) will be responsible for the action of billions of people. I think everybody should be held responsible for his actions and inaction.”

That I was taken aback by his response was to say the least. How on earth could Professor Soyinka give such an absymally poor answer? However, since Professor Soyinka has stirred the hornets’ nest, I will like him to answer the following questions: Who is responsible for the phenomenon of sleeping and wakefulness? What about the mystery of day and night; who is in control?

As simple as this may sound, can the Professor explain the process of hair growth on his head? Who created him or even if he is a believer in the evolution school of thought, who created that creature that he evolved from? Who created all the wonderful things we see around us - the mountains, valleys, oceans seas etc. What about the phenomenon of birth and death?

http://tribune.com.ng/index.php/opinion/28087-soyinka-posers-for-an-atheist-at-77

The writer of the article asks about the 'mystery' of day and night.
Whether hair growth can be explained.
'Who' is 'responsible' for sleeping and wakefulness.

The writer is calling a mystery natural events they don't understand, much as primitive people think eclipses are sign's of divine wrath.
You could compare it to people who think remote controls for their televisions are 'magic'.

PA1982:

What does that comment have to do with the OP?
I addressed the OP.

I will be mildly surprised if you do not recognize that I commented on your comments which were directly directed at the OP.

Why don't you?

I will be just slightly more than mildly surprised if you also did not see my comments on the OP.

globexl:

@deep sight.
The causative factor or agent that you refer is a plausible idea that can be comtemplated even by people with athiestic viewpoints. It is an idea that has kept   philosophers and the people of science busy and will continued to keep them busy for quite a while.

Very true. And this is my trouble with the generality of atheists that I come across. They appear obsessively fixated on the idea of God as delivered by religious constructs, and finding absurdity therein, cannot be troubled enough to contemplate the idea of a first cause as a strictly logical and philosophical precept, away from the confines of religious lore and doctrine. That, for me, is not the hallmark of the keen and curious mind.

Hower, such concepts belong in realms of astro-physics and deep philosophy . Most of the debates and arguments on this forum center on the judeo-christian concepts of divinity.Almost all theists that I encounter are mainly interested in th validation of the lores that are the foundation and pillars of their faith and nothing more.

True again.

The problem is not the "HOW.

A point seemingly lost on those on this board who seek to set out scientific explanations of "how".

I cannot put it any better than MyJoe already has - the prime issue governing the cosmological question is and always has been - "what caused the how."

There are no poor reasons for adopting an athiestic viewpoint.

O yes indeed there are many very poor reasons for adopting an atheistic worldview, and the reason (allegedly) given by Professor Soyinka in the OP is plain disastrous and makes a mockery of his otherwise massive intellect.

I have certainly heard many better reasons for atheism. And like i said, some people do advance poor reasons for their atheism. For example if a man were to tell you that he is atheist on account that he has not seen God appear to him in physical form, would you consider that a cogent reason for atheism - having due regard to what God is said to be - namely - the prime mover and first cause of existence? Is that an element a person might expect to show up for dinner and drinks?

There dozens of reasons for choosing an ahtiestic viewpoint.

I will task you with providing me with just one - which addresses the logical and philosophical precept of a prime mover and not the religious constructs.

Very stupid journalist!!! Is it a Christian publication or a secular newspaper? More reasons I can't read Nigerian papers loaded with illogical sentiments

^^^
I couldn't agree with you more.

Deep Sight-

Deep Sight:

I will be mildly surprised if you do not recognize that I commented on your comments which were directly directed at the OP.

I will be just slightly more than mildly surprised if you also did not see my comments on the OP.

You are constantly taking discussions out of their area!
Speculation about first causes may interest you, as is your right, of course.

But please keep in mind that such a discusssion is way beyond the scope of the OP, where the journalist is making a mystery of simple natural proceses.
Such as hair growth, the rotation of the Earth and the circadian cycle.

There is no point in asking people who don't understand eclipses and thunder are not signs of divine wrath to consider first causes.
I think you're putting the horse before the cart.

^ Its unfathomable how you seek to constrict discussions. It appears that you do this when you cannot fathom a proper response. This thread is about the reasons proffered by an eminent professor for his (supposed and alleged) atheism. There is nothing in my comments outside that very specific scope.

Secondly, discussions evolve.

Deep Sight:

^ Its unfathomable how you seek to constrict discussions. It appears that you do this when you cannot fathom a proper response. This thread is about the reasons proffered by an eminent professor for his (supposed and alleged) atheism. There is nothing in my comments outside that very specific scope.

Secondly, discussions evolve.

Wrong again.
Since when are you the judge of what is a proper response?
You don't want to stay on topic? No problem. Start a thread on the subject that interests you, rather than piggy-backing others!

The thread is about the commentary of the journalist.
Or have you forgotten the OP already?

Remember the posers?

That I was taken aback by his response was to say the least. How on earth could Professor Soyinka give such an absymally poor answer? However, since Professor Soyinka has stirred the hornets’ nest, I will like him to answer the following questions: Who is responsible for the phenomenon of sleeping and wakefulness? What about the mystery of day and night; who is in control?

As simple as this may sound, can the Professor explain the process of hair growth on his head? Who created him or even if he is a believer in the evolution school of thought, who created that creature that he evolved from? Who created all the wonderful things we see around us - the mountains, valleys, oceans seas etc. What about the phenomenon of birth and death?

The journalist wanted to confound the Nobel laureate by asking him to

explain the process of hair growth on his head

along with the other things the journalist doesn't understand.

By the way-
have YOU read any of Soyinka's works?

Soyinka is an embodiment of contradiction !!!!

^^^ Why not give some examples, from the works of his you've read?

Atheist are indeed very intelligent people.
They believe in logic, science and facts.

However, understanding and believing in God doesn't involve logic.
It involves faith, having belief in something that seems illogical and mythical.

I believe in somthing i cannot explain and i'm fine with it.
I don't and will never criticize an atheist, to each his own.

Wrong again.

O? Since when did you become the judge? See?

Since when are you the judge of what is a proper response?

Since logic exists.

The reason proffered in the OP (allegedly) by Professor Soyinka is at best puerile and entirely devoid of any philosophical depth whatsoever.

However that may only be obvious to persons well acquainted with cosmological philosophy.

You don't want to stay on topic? No problem. Start a thread on the subject that interests you, rather than piggy-backing others!

Oh no, not again?

The second time and the second thread you will fail to see the relevance of a comment to a topic and request a fresh thread. Dear, i cannot oblige you this time.

The thread is about the commentary of the journalist.
Or have you forgotten the OP already?

Go figure. It's tiresome having to connect the dots for you.

My young daughter of 5yrs has started asking who created god. So far, she has gotten no satisfactory answers. I'm afraid that in her young mind, she might begin to doubt the exixitence of god. If she decides not to believe in god as a result, would you call that a bad or weak reason for embracing an athiestic viewpoint? Does she need to write a philosophical or scientific thesis to justify her doubts?
Athiesm is not a philosophical proposition, therefore it does not need an elaborate defence or justification. It is just simple Doubts or rejection of religious doctrine as it pertains to the origin of the universe.
Athiesm, speaking for myself , is not dogmatic . I simply prefer to begin with doubts and seek to arrive at certainties than to begin with certainties, arrive at doubts and then fight to defend my certainties.
As per the assignment you gave to me, here it goes:

I do agree that logic and intellect might not be the sole arbiter of our reality. As an athiest, I contemplate and intuit the possibility of a first cause or prime mover. However, I'm not quite sure whether those insights are genuine or contaminated with the biases of my early christian indoctrination. But whether that is the case or not, my insights or intuits are still subjective and as such , I'm at liberty to give them any coloration that suits my bias or orientation. That is the problem with subjective phenomena: It is too fluid. It can take the shape of any vessel that it is poured into.
No two individuals can give the same interpretation to the same subjective phenomena.
Therefore it is not trustworhty. In otherwords, an intutive revelation is only as good as the head from which it came from. unfortunately, most of the world's religions are built from the subjective revelations of madmen, neurotics and psychopaths, with a few good men in between.
Actually, the idea of the first cause is the basis of most of the worlds religions. It is something that we have been trying to distance ourselves from and is not something that we should be embracing all over gain. Once you accept a first cause, then naturally you assign a personality to it, a name, human emotions, then a tale follows and its DEJA VU all over again.SinceThe first cause or prime mover is arrived at by virtue of intuitive and philosophical comtemplation, it cannot form the basis of any universal theory on the origin of the universe. We've been there and we've done that ,and still ,have not asnwered the even biger question of "what could have caused the first cause?"
Yes, its good to let our imaginations roam free and concieve of all manners of possibilities. I prefer to arrive at the answers by means of scientific deductions, not because it is the only path, but because it is the most trusted and safer means.
My athiestic worldview is therefore justified.

Sorry, my last post was in response to Deepsight.

Deep Sight:

Very true. And this is my trouble with the generality of atheists that I come across. They appear obsessively fixated on the idea of God as delivered by religious constructs, and finding absurdity therein, cannot be troubled enough to contemplate the idea of a first cause as a strictly logical and philosophical precept, away from the confines of religious lore and doctrine. That, for me, is not the hallmark of the keen and curious mind.

True again.

A point seemingly lost on those on this board who seek to set out scientific explanations of "how".

I cannot put it any better than MyJoe already has - the prime issue governing the cosmological question is and always has been - "what caused the how."

O yes indeed there are many very poor reasons for adopting an atheistic worldview, and the reason (allegedly) given by Professor Soyinka in the OP is plain disastrous and makes a mockery of his otherwise massive intellect.

I have certainly heard many better reasons for atheism. And like i said, some people do advance poor reasons for their atheism. For example if a man were to tell you that he is atheist on account that he has not seen God appear to him in physical form, would you consider that a cogent reason for atheism - having due regard to what God is said to be - namely - the prime mover and first cause of existence? Is that an element a person might expect to show up for dinner and drinks?

I will task you with providing me with just one - which addresses the logical and philosophical precept of a prime mover and not the religious constructs.