If I had an award I would give it to TATIME,dude cracks me up a lot,first it was him saying that Jesus is no longer performing miracles,now he is saying that except the Jehovah witnesses all other Christian groups are seeds of the devil

See this clown

BluntBoy:


Christ did not threaten nonbelievers with eternal torture. The idea of an eternal torture came from a misinterpretation of the passages on hell.

What do u have to say abt that passage of the bible were Jesus sent his disciples out and told them to shake off the sand from there feet from any town or household that refuses them,saying it would be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgement than for such city ?

What of when Jesus said if ur hand causes u to sin u should cut it off,better to enter heaven with one hand than to enter hell were the fire never quenches ?

NnennaG6:

Because it’s true.

So u were a Christian after all and in the thread u created u were trying to be diplomatic and u refused to answer the last question I asked

There are no deists in foxholes

Sorry if u are a deist,I mean no harm but 99% of these pple parading themselves as deists are actually christians,insecure christians

Besides Nnenna,in ur own words u said God's features can not include "omnibenovolence" and "love",that seems a bit contrary to the way Yahweh is described,the bible even says that God is love!
What sayeth thou ?

Pls add 08109373311

Seun ur mods are doing a poor job,this is a very sensitive topic and can ruin the reputation of the malawian govt,I doubt if the lady in the said video is the Malawian minister of budget,but one useless blogger posted it and ur mods took it to front page without any delay,but one of ur rules says no false information is to be posted in the forum

sinaj:
Mehn! This is quite painful


Getting her 24th title seem impossible no matter how close she gets to it
Now it will make her come back for it again.

How do u do it
I mean the likes u get for ur profile pix

NnennaG6:

God, being omnipotent, space-savvy and ubiquitous, would have himself exist simultaneously on Plane (A) and Plane (B). After fashioning a rock with a weight sufficient to exceed his ability to lift, the rock is positioned on Plane (B) where we find God attempting to lift the rock. On Plane (A) we have God physically lifting Plane (B), which already holds both God and the very heavy rock …and all done so at the exact same moment.

So the answer is “Yes!” God can create a rock so heavy that he couldn’t lift it while simultaneously maintaining His omnipotence.

…But how is this possible? This is called the “Circular God Counter-Paradox.”

This video is a 9 minute illustration of my argument:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDTsYYGNAMY&feature=youtu.be

lolz
See logic
The question is "Can God make a stone so heavy that he can not lift it
If he eventually succeeded in lifting the stone then that means that he made a stone that he could lift,the stone that he is to make is one that he can not lift,but in the scenario u gave he ended up lifting the stone,so he did not make a stone that he could not lift


Another point @ the bolded in ur explanation " to exceed his ability,what does that mean,how can something omnipotent have a limit to its ability,you just succeeded in creating more problems

NnennaG6:

Look at my response to LordReed.

Yes I have and that doesn't have much to do with what I posted

NnennaG6:

This isn't even a question. Any deity that presupposes all events is meant to be everlasting. Hence, attributes of omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence suffice to define said deity.

Can God make a stone so heavy that he can not carry it ?

UyiIredia:


Correct though she may be trying to say that God as the omniscient, omnipotent & immaterial Creator is revealed in the natural order we see in the universe just as Paul did in Rom 1:20.

People frequently think that someone is saying God is Nature when what they mean is God (the Creator) exists in the natural order. To analogize, dreams are creations of the dreamer & dreamers exist in world their dreams make since all of the dream is a mental projection of the dreamer. The dreamer's body is obviously sleeping outside the dream but in the dream everything is the dreamer's mind and brain processes at work.

That's how people misunderstand Spinoza's God or his term Deus sive Natura (God or Nature). Spinoza explained in a letter to Oldenburg that he didn't write that to mean God is Nature but that Nature we see is one out of many (in fact infinite) attributes of God. Read up on panentheism in Wikipedia to further understand this concept.

Could u explain Spinoza's concept of God,I still haven't grasped it fairly well

Hermes019:

If your definition of God ends as the first cause or designer of the universe then I don't have problems with ur idea,I would say I am agnostic in that regard
But when u go beyond that to include other features such as omnipotence and the rest of them then I would say I am an atheist,and in most cases when the term "God" is used it us often in the context of a being that is fully defined,and I don't conform to that

Let me use this car analalogy to explain what I mean

Assuming u see a an aston martin parked on the roadside ,u know from experience that a car can't get to the road by itslef hence someone must have parked it there,but is that enough information to tell u the persons height,favorite food,temperament ,state of birth,salary, and so on.
The only thing u can infer is that the person must be very rich because of cause we are talking of an Aston martin here not just any vehicle

I relate to the universe that way,now I would say that the idea of an entity being responsible for the existence of the universe is a possibility not a fact,because for me I think human beings have limited knowledge and there may be other possible non-designer explanations of how the universe was formed that is why I see it as a possibility not a fact,but in the car analogy it is a fact that the car must have been brought by someone,we can relate to that from experience, unlike the formation of the universe which scientists say took place billions of years ago
Now the idea that God created the universe is similar to saying that someone parked the Aston Martin there,and as demonstrated in the analogy,the only thing we can confidently say about the person who got the car there is that s/he must be very rich giving how sophisticated the car is,any thing besides that is just mere speculation,likewise God,the only thing we can say about the designer of the universe (if such exists) is that such entity must be complex giving how complex the universe is,anything besides that is mere speculation and guesses

Finished

NnennaG6:
Good morning @XxSabrinaxX, LordReed, Hermes019
I know the point you all are trying to make. How can we possibly know a God exists if science cannot prove it? Well, the fine-tuning argument convinced me. I couldn't believe the universe was an accident. The alternative, as far as I can see, is design, be it by simulation or by omnipotence (in which case a designer might make genuine omnipotence and their existence look impossible and deceive people into thinking they wouldn't/couldn't do that and can't/don't exist.). There is almost no chance that our universe would exist by accident. I understand probability theory and almost no chance means almost no chance, not 'almost no chance unless a naturalistic explanation comes up'. It literally means 'almost no chance' and if it turns out to be true, it's a miracle because there was almost no chance it would turn out to be true.

Before you debate me, first read up or have read up on probability theory and its real life applications or prepare to look bad; debating someone about something involving probability theory without them having a good understanding of probability theory is like debating a three year old about nanotechnology; they'll think they're somehow winning because they can't fault their own arguments like you can, make stupid arguments and look really clueless to you (maybe not to other people who are just as clueless).

My argument goes as follows:

P1. There is almost no chance that the universe occurred by accident.

P2. If there is almost no chance of something, that thing is false.

C1. The universe isn't an accident.

P3. If something isn't an accident, it was designed.

C2: The universe was designed.

P4: I define the designer of our universe as a god.

C3: A god exists.

If your definition of God ends as the first cause or designer of the universe then I don't have problems with ur idea,I would say I am agnostic in that regard
But when u go beyond that to include other features such as omnipotence and the rest of them then I would say I am an atheist,and in most cases when the term "God" is used it us often in the context of a being that is fully defined,and I don't conform to that

Let me use this car analalogy to explain what I mean

Assuming u see a an aston martin parked on the roadside ,u know from experience that a car can't get to the road by itslef hence someone must have parked it there,but is that enough information to tell u the persons height,favorite food,temperament ,state of birth,salary, and so on.
The only thing u can infer is that the person must be very rich because of cause we are talking of an Aston martin here not just any vehicle

I relate to the universe that way,now I would say that the idea of an entity being responsible for the existence of the universe is a possibility not a fact,because for me I think human beings have limited knowledge and there may be other possible non-designer explanations of how the universe was formed that is why I see it as a possibility not a fact,but in the car analogy it is a fact that the car must have been brought by someone,we can relate to that from experience, unlike the formation of the universe which scientists say took place billions of years ago
Now the idea that God created the universe is similar to saying that someone parked the Aston Martin there,and as demonstrated in the analogy,the only thing we can confidently say about the person who got the car there is that s/he must be very rich giving how sophisticated the car is,any thing besides that is just mere speculation,likewise God,the only thing we can say about the designer of the universe (if such exists) is that such entity must be complex giving how complex the universe is,anything besides that is mere speculation and guesses

LordReed:


My question is how do you acquire specific knowledge of the god when you say it is incomprehensible and cannot be investigated, that sounds like a gigantic contradiction to me.

Exactly,she said God is omnipotent,dadada,if u can't substantiate it with objective evidence how did u now come about all that,people would just be saying things they don't understand

I don't understand your first question. What did you understand from my initial response? How belief in God affects people is subjective. Re-read my response more carefully.

In my first question I asked if belief in God can affect humans,and I added this "ur own description of God" because people define God in many ways,in ur Op u gave us a description of God that tends slightly towards deism but in ur response u started talking about religion
U say u believe in God,and I am asking how believing in what u describe as God(not what others describe but ur own specific description) can affect human beings

I hope u now understand my question

I'd describe God as possessing the following attributes:
1. Omnipotence
2. Omniscience
3. Omnipresence
4. Perfection
5. Everlasting

Others might add “Omnibenevolent” and “Love,” but I left them out. These terms require either an object or a comparison, which would be impossible, as the previous five qualities preclude creation.

How did u find out that God(ur own description) has those features,considering that u claim that God can not be proven with objective evidence

U say God is everlasting,assuming he dies or stops existing,how would u find out ?

I''m not changing goal posts. The whole point of my thread is to explain how objective evidence can't be given for the existence of a deity.

Since objective evidence can't be given,then what kind of evidence can be given,or is there no evidence at all ?

Something I have to point out here

Op people define God in various ways,when we (or at least I) say we are atheists we are making iur claims putting the conventional description of God into perspective,so if you come up to say God exists u might want to tell us what u mean by God
In ur posts u have hinted towards a deist kind of description but quoting religious views haven't really helped out
If you say that God is the first cause and nothing more than that stick to it,if you say that God is the universe and everything in it then stick to it,if you say that God is an abstract thing that can not be understood by human minds,stick to it
Not telling us that God is this and next,u are using religious Philosophy to back up what u are saying

NnennaG6:

How belief in a deity effects people is subjective to how seriously a person adheres to a certain religion or not. Or if not part of a religious faith - how it effects people through others.

Then it depends how fervently individuals follow the law of that particular religion to the degree it effects them. If taken very seriously it will be a predominant force in their lives. If people are loyal to the teachings - this will influence hugely their conscience, values (of right from wrong), their actions, and ultimately who they become.

Religion teaches and builds on a person's "faith" in God and goodness", which can have a positive effect on their mental health strengthening and protecting individuals against despair - as instead of giving up when troubles and adversity strikes, even in the face of death - they believe with God's help that goodness will win in the end and all will be well leaving it in God's hands. Even when losing a loved one - they believe they will be joined together again one day and not all is lost.

This faith which religion teaches can help people believe in themselves, as when they do their best God will do the rest, giving them the added strength through his grace to achieve and get through anything. That is great faith in action when up against the odds, and the effects on a person is an inner peace that the world cannot give.

Religion can be a big deal and have an enormous effect on people either for the positive or negative. If the religion does not have moral leaders and Godly example - it can be to a person's downfall if he/she cannot think objectively calling out a snake or fraud. If it's a virtuous leader, it can develop virtue and goodwill, and make the world a better place.

All depends if God's law of love is upheld, interpretated correctly and is a genuine religion (not a cult); - or if the religion's laws are misinterpreted by leaders made up of wolves in sheeps clothing, to brainwash people for personal power and selfish gain (i.e. The Pharisees and certain individuals using God's name to brainwash others to commit Godless acts for political power). The latter can lead to a vulnerable person's ruin - here and for eternity.

A good foundation to test the credibility of any religion I ask myself "if what they teach/preach is advocating love or harm?". If it is the latter it is false and can adversely effect a person's life. If the former it can transform a person from within and hugely enrich their lives.

Actually I thought ur description of God was different from that of theists but ur answer says otherwise,I wanted to know how belief in God(ur own description of God) could affect us

Please could u define "God" and maybe mentions his features,is he senient,is he omnipotent,is he interested in human affairs and stuff like that

Op do u think that belief in God(ur own description) can affect humanity in any way ?

If YES,please tell me how

dfrost:


At Sassuolo? Guy has disciplinary problems. Don't worry. Barca has a reason for buying him of which the future will soon unfold.

Not a Barca fan either

Barca has made some poor transfer decisions in recent times,from Alexandre song to Jeremy Mathieu Vermalaen and now Boateng,I don't know why they have a penchant for buying outdated players,a team like Barca should attract the best players in each position,what is wrong with them moving for icardi or reus if they want an attacker,in the midfield you have Adrien rabiot who is certain of leaving PSG,Pjanic is also there u can tempt him away from Juve,what did they see in Boateng that other teams didn't see ?

dfrost:


At Sassuolo? Guy has disciplinary problems. Don't worry. Barca has a reason for buying him of which the future will soon unfold.

Not a Barca fan either

He is a good player and the barca team is set up in such a way that players can thrive,imagine playing were ur side is guaranteed over 60% in every match ?,he might perform normally but he wouldn't add anything special to the club,its almost like it doesn't make any difference if he was signed or not

BruncleZuma:
Hahahahahahahahaha, Just last year somebody was calling me oversabi for saying the developed world don't play with tax evasion.

Dem rather you kee person than, evade taxes....

"There are two things certain in life,death and tax"
Nigerian is a heaven when it comes to tax,try and live in los angeles,even if you are pauper u go dy pay tax

In Spain footballers pay up to 52% of their weekly income as tax

elRamani:



he wuz originally a top 9, one mumu coach convert am to midfielder nii nd he wuz bought for striking purposes to provide attacking options for aerial crosses, i think dahz one of d deficiencies for barça at d moment, attacking from only d ground has cost dem a lotta games if not 4 Messi's proficiency, it would av being worse,

sumtyms u see d fullbacks moveup front then pass bak to d midfielders to restart d attack once opponents are jam-packed in their own half.


they need to force crosses into the box, if tiki taka no work, wether na striker or own goal, person go chuck head mid-air, goal na goal

If Barca needs a striker,there are many top guys out there that possess better aerial ability and are also younger than Boateng,Icardi is there,even Morata is very good with aerial balls if that is the most important factor here
Seriously I don't get this signing,what can he add to the Barca team ?,he is going to be 32 in March,can thus guy play quality football for the next 2 seasons,where does he really fit in,as a box to box midfielder ?,as a striker ?
This is one of the weirdest transfers I have ever seen

All the best I wish him luck

dfrost:


Beast mode quality contribution. Why did Juventus get Ronaldo at 33?

If you are Barca supporter, you should be happy for the club. Barca is really lacking killer guys in the midfield. Go and read FIFA's comment about him in 2014.

Note also that he is not going to play all matches. Matches against teams like Atletico Madrid will bring out the best in him and Vidal.

When signing footballers age always counts of course there are exceptions,Boateng is past his prime,Barca should be building a team not signing players on a temporary fix,Vidal is already there to provide the experience,besides he is going to spend most of his time on the bench anyways Barca's front trio is Messi,Suarez and Dembele,Coutinho and malcom are also there so except if any gets injured he can't break into the attack,in the midfield Barca parades Busquets,Arthur,Rakitic and Vidal,Denis Suarez and Alena are alsothere,he definitely won't be starting either.
He won't get playing time at Barca except if a lot of players get injured,Barca doesn't need a player well past his prime.
If he was so good then what was he doing at Sassuolo

P.s I'm not a Barca fan

This is not a good move for me,barca have enough midfielders especially when u consider those coming from their youth team like Alena and the likes,what would Boateng contribute to the team,I don't understand tgis move at all he is going to clock 32 very soon

alfredilly:
Fall and if making wave accross US? I can't imagine that. Those songs are poor at best. The tunes are bizzare and lack globally acclaimed melody. I don't know what American are embracing right now but a lot of this Nigerian hip hip artist keep giving us bad songs. Aside the beats which is a product of technology and has nothing to do with their creativity, there is nothing melodiously flavouring and palatable among the top songs in Nigeria save a few. The good one abund amongst the alternative singers. Whoever listen to simi smile for me or sheyi Shay yolo yolo will definitely be attracted to it no matter the part of the world he comes from.

U don talk am finish

I don't like the song,I don't know why,maybe cos the lyrics are sparse and not too meaningful, nonetheless I wish him the best

Is this what nairaland is turning to,two posts made FP today,all the op had to do was import videos from gossipmillnaija IG page

toksworld1:

This is wack reasoning. Dude, are you for real?

What is wack about that,it is impossible and unnecessary to love anyone as yourself

MrPresident1:


Stop expecting a sweet sexy Jesus, the Jesus that is coming is fearsome and fiery. When he speaks, it thunders

OK we are waiting

hahn:


How is religion beneficial to the society?

A couple of them actually but I think the most important is that it gives hope,albeit false

#1 Do you believe the universe is eternal?

I don't think anyone has the answer to this question

#2 Do we have freewill or is everything determined?

I would say we have free will

#3 Is our existence the product of chance?

Yes

#4 Would you say morality is objective or relative?

Morality is determined by human beings,whatever we deem moral becomes moral and what we deem immoral becomes immoral

#5 What type of universe would you expect if there was no God?

First I would assume the term "God" represents the one worshipped by theists
I stick to the answer that Johnny gave

#6 What’s your take on the fine-tuning argument for the existence of God?

biased and deceitful

#7 What’s you take on miracles? Do you believe everyone that has ever claimed to have witnessed a miracle was lying or was mistaken/hallucinating?

I would need to do more research to confirm that but knowing how ignorant and insincere people can be,I'm afraid I can't believe that miracles are real unless there is sufficient evidence
[

#8 What’s your thoughts on near death experiences and the afterlife?

I do not believe in the after life as there is no evidence of such,near death experiences has been proven to be merely psychological

#9 Do you think we have souls?

If by soul u mean something that lives on when we use,then no

#10 Is religion beneficial to society?

yes,but compared to its disadvantages I would say that humans are much better off without religion

MrPresident1:



Fuc5k you. He will fill your mouth with jizz and seal it with gravel.

You use expletives too impressive