Speechless3:

The atheist thinks with his heart first. He is first of all offended that a God will demand for accountability from him. And then he proceeds to question his authority and then his existence. Looooool. Thats backwards.

What!!!
Ok, I have heard you. So does this in anyway prove your initial point that god created the earth and I must agree with you because I believe GM makes cars so seeing cars makes me say GM exists. Or what exactly are you saying? Miss head thinker

onetrack:


No, this is religionist logic: the earth exists -----> there must be a creator -----> therefore Jesus is our lord and savior (or Muhammad is a prophet). These are huge gaps that just cannot be ignored.

Skeptic logic (atheist, if you will), says that until there is sound evidence for any particular creator, it does not make sense to make one up and believe in it.

Does it make sense to you that something as abstract as Logic exists?

Speechless3:


Does it make sense to you that something as abstract as Logic exists?

Logic is not abstract. Logic makes sense because your mind is able to process and picture the premise of the logic. Logic is based on real things you can experience at varying degrees.

"Chipatuwaka will always huoloster when touched by yertupama"
Does that make sense to you?
What am I saying?
You can't ever give me a right answer be cause what I typed up there does not relate to anything your brain has achieved from experience. So tell me how logic is abstract. And why belief in logic must mean disbelieve in god is illogical

Nobody expects to literally see logic, since it is abstract. If you define your God as one which is abstract, I won't ask to see it. However, you can't claim that you have a God who can physically appear to people or otherwise measurably interfere with the physical world and then put up this kind of nonsense post when asked for physical evidence, expecting that to be the end of the matter.

PastorAIO:
Laws in general are deduced from observing real phenomena that occur around us all the time.

Laws of logic do NOT exist the way that you can say that River Niger exists. They don't have a location, or a size or other physical characteristics.

Yet we can see the effects of the Laws of logic.

We can use the emotions to draw an analogy. Take Love. You've never seen love before, but you can certainly see it's effects. When someone loves you you can tell by the way they act towards you and the things they do for you. So it is with Laws of Logic. If you choose to be illogical and think illogically then you will keep coming up with the wrong answer to your problems and your suffering is prolonged. That is the effect of being illogical and you will feel it and see it as clear as daylight.

As with the God part…. If an atheist feels that he can explain the phenomena that are going on around him without having recourse to God then the idea of God becomes moot.

To use the example in your captions… If you see a car in a carpark you know that it got there cos someone brought it there. However, is it the engineer from Ford? Is it GM? Is it Renault? Or Mercedes Benz? Many people are making many claims. Furthermore each of these claimants can give you the address and town of the GM factory ( or ford or Renault etc) that they claim the car came from. An investigation can then be carried out.
However in the case of God the claimants cannot tell you where this God is located. Now, no one claims that the Car didn't come from somewhere. Many Atheists are happy to explore ALL the possibilities to explain the origin. Thus far the God claims have been found wanting in their opinion.

I hope this clarifies things for you.

Speechless3, do you understand? Or you need a more fundamental explanation? Because it seems our explanations are not simple enough, so we can know the level at which to explain things to you

Speechless3:


Lol.

This is not true.

Here is a kid's example: 2 oranges + 2 oranges will equal 4 everywhere and every time. Is this a fact? yes. Will it be like that tomorrow? yep.

If a mad man says its 3, do we say its his logic? Nope. We say he is being unreasonable.
If a scientist says its 5, is it reasonable? of course it will be ridiculous reasoning no matter his numerous studies.

How do we hold conversations with people if our logics are different? How do we know someone is unreasonable if we hold ourselves to different logical standards?

How come atheists want us to accept their logic if we all have different logic. I thought they were liberal?

I'll let the Atheists take take it away.

Pastor AOI So we should believe logic exists because we see its effects? How do you know for sure that logical laws are responsible for what you see and not unintelligible thought processes that have no origin?

I see people getting saved and turningva new leaf and you said i shouldn't think God is responsible. I see people praying and giving there all and all to God and you said i shouldn't think its because of God.

I see evidence that God exists and you said i shouldnt think its because God exists but i should try another logic. Talk of two standards!

HardMirror:

Speechless3, do you understand? Or you need a more fundamental explanation? Because it seems our explanations are not simple enough, so we can know the level at which to explain things to you

He doesnt know what he is talking about.

ramalot:
Speechless3, your primary argument seems to be "looool." That is about as much sense as you've made, to be honest.

The problem with religious people isn't that they're illogical, no, far from it.
It is that they're illogical as it relates to their specific brand of religion, but logical with everything else in life. This includes the theist religions of others.

e.g If a Jihadist explained to you his ultimate reward of 72 virgins, you would declare that it makes no sense. Then proceed to use logical reasoning to debunk his delusion.

As someone once said, "Atheists and monotheists aren't that different, only difference is atheists believe in one less god than monotheists."
In essence, if there are 1,000 religions on earth, the monotheist believes 999 religions are false and illogical, while the atheist believes 1,000 religions are false and illogical.

Logic in itself is not subject to "interpretation." Logic is logic. Logic isn't a "thing," it is a process.

Logical reasoning: A = B. Because, ABC. Hence, XYZ.

Illogical reasoning (or lack thereof): A = B. That's just it. It's a fact.

Logical laws are constant. Yes or no?

First of, Logic does not exist the way you seem to think it does. Logic does NOT exist the way Olumo rock in Abeokuta exists. You cannot say that Logic is situated here and it so big and Omniscient and great etc.
Secondly, Logic does not cause anything to happen. Laws of Logic are extrapolated from our experiences.

Thirdly, Your comparing God to Logic is sooo damning for your argument for God's existence that if you got it you'd never use such a comparison again, but I don't think you'll get it. I'll try anyway.

Logic does not Exist, neither does it cause anything. We derive it from observations.

If your belief in God is based on such similar methods as they belief in logic then the same things can be said for God.

'God does not Exist, neither does it cause anything. You've derived God from your observations of people getting saved etc'.

Speechless3:
Pastor AOI So we should believe logic exists because we see its effects? How do you know for sure that logical laws are responsible for what you see and not unintelligible thought processes that have no origin?

I see people getting saved and turningva new leaf and you said i shouldn't think God is responsible. I see people praying and giving there all and all to God and you said i shouldn't think its because of God.

I see evidence that God exists and you said i shouldnt think its because God exists but i should try another logic. Talk of two standards!

HardMirror:

Logic is not abstract. Logic makes sense because your mind is able to process and picture the premise of the logic. Logic is based on real things you can experience at varying degrees.

"Chipatuwaka will always huoloster when touched by yertupama"
Does that make sense to you?
What am I saying?
You can't ever give me a right answer be cause what I typed up there does not relate to anything your brain has achieved from experience. So tell me how logic is abstract. And why belief in logic must mean disbelieve in god is illogical

Looooooooool Logic is not abstract. I guess love is not abtsract. Anger is not abstract.

You can picture the premise of logic therefore logic is not abstract. Looool. V.funny.

Anything that is not material, cannot be seen or touched but has evidence is abstract. And this explanation fits logic.

Speechless3:
Looooooooool Logic is not abstract. I guess love is not abtsract. Anger is not abstract.

You can picture the premise of logic therefore logic is not abstract. Looool. V.funny.

Anything that is not material, cannot be seen or touched but has evidence is abstract. And this explanation fits logic.

Make I follow you laugh. Loooool.
Hope you are enjoying the attention you are getting cos I know that is your primary objective.

Fine girl, such a cutie like you should do well without brains anyway, just look how far olajumoke has gone and you are more beautiful

Of all accusations I've read against Skeptics. This is the funniest. The OP herself is totally confused. I've seen 3;4 people explain to her but she still doesn't want to accept explaination.
Here are my 2 kobo.



It was perfectly logical to people during Pythagoras time to say the earth was flat. Anyone that says no was considered a fool, indeed a big idiot.

Now, the reverse is the same. It's illogical to say the earth is flat.




Logic will always hinge on Observations, facts, theorems and experiments.

Just as Gallieo succesfully proved that the earth revolves round the sun and not vice versa; Just as Newton proved that Gravity was what caused the earth to move round the sun and not Invisible spokes; Just as quantum physicists proved that "God does play dice ()", Logic in every case was turned on its head and called the previous theorems "illogical".



Now, as to your picture, I find it to be quite......shortsighted. The people above me have done a good Job dissecting anyways so......... What next





*Walks out of thread smiling at the OP's weak attempt*

PastorAIO:

First of, Logic does not exist the way you seem to think it does. Logic does NOT exist the way Olumo rock in Abeokuta exists. You cannot say that Logic is situated here and it so big and Omniscient and great etc.
Secondly, Logic does not cause anything to happen. Laws of Logic are extrapolated from our experiences.

Thirdly, Your comparing God to Logic is sooo damning for your argument for God's existence that if you got it you'd never use such a comparison again, but I don't think you'll get it. I'll try anyway.

Logic does not Exist, neither does it cause anything. We derive it from observations.

If your belief in God is based on such similar methods as they belief in logic then the same things can be said for God.

'God does not Exist, neither does it cause anything. You've derived God from your observations of people getting saved etc'.

I understand logic does not exist in a place but i know it exists. And i know it exists everywhere. Notice, the explanation for logic existing is the same for God. God does not exist in a place because God exists everywhere. Am not saying logic=God but i am trying to draw your attention to the fact that Logic laws are in all of us and are the same till tomorrow.

Now, the christian believes the sun will shine tomorrow. Why? is it because it has been like that. No, its because He knows God will never change. And so far he has seen no reason to doubt God or disbelieve God.

On the other hand, an atheist explanation of his belief that the sun will shine tomorrow are based on observation hence probability and not certainty. For all he knows, he cannot be sure of the future of a world whose origin is unclear to him. In this case he has denied the certainty of the laws of logic. If he however, believes that the sun will certainly shine tmao then he is trickish because he has accepted the laws of logic without giving credit to its creator.

The OP is very very confused.

On the contrary an atheist has more facts that will burst your behind in proving that there is no God.
Do your homework kid.
Get educated from the innumerable threads ur erudite brethren have created.

Speechless3:
Laws of Logic are abstract and not material but atheists say they exist! funny. I mean you cant see logical laws but you believe they exist. How so?

Why are they not consistent in their reasoning when it comes to God? God cannot be seen too but atheists say he must be seen first before they believe? Loooooooooooool

Atheism is unreasonable and illogical if you ask me.

musKeeto:
The OP is very very confused.

Indeed he is very confused

musKeeto:
The OP is very very confused.

Silkmoth33:
On the contrary an atheist has more facts that will burst your behind in proving that there is no God.
Do your homework kid.
Get educated from the innumerable threads ur erudite brethren have created.

The atheist has no fact that God does not exist. All he is left with is his opinion.

So far so good, no atheist has proven that logical laws exist with material evidence? But they want God to appear before them before they believe he is. Looooooooool.

Theists always winning because the facts speak for themselves.

Speechless3:
The atheist has no fact that God does not exist. All he is left with is his opinion.

How can one 'prove' the non-existence of that which doesn't exist?
How can I convince you that blue colored bruminereswayne do not exist? Do bruminereswayne exist? Can you provide facts that prove bruminereswayne do not exist?

You must be a bruminereswayne hater.

Speechless3:
The atheist has no fact that God does not exist. All he is left with is his opinion.

On the contrary! The atheist's opinion is fact and proven theory that indeed we are truly and utterly alone in this universe. It still stands to be corrected though, so until a theist can come out to prove otherwise. The atheist opinion remains fact.

Speechless3:
So far so good

Now, this is funny. Declare yourself winner of a contest against yourself.

Silkmoth33:


On the contrary! The atheist's opinion is fact and proven theory that indeed we are truly and utterly alone in this universe. It still stands to be corrected though, so until a theist can come out to prove otherwise. The atheist opinion remains fact.

Do you know what fact is?

musKeeto:

Now, this is funny. Declare yourself winner of a contest against yourself.

How? The world is for theists. Where have you been?

musKeeto:

How can one 'prove' the non-existence of that which doesn't exist?
How can I convince you that blue colored bruminereswayne do not exist? Do bruminereswayne exist? Can you provide facts that prove bruminereswayne do not exist?

You must be a bruminereswayne hater.

I love this.
Bruminereswayne and yahweh visited me yesterday. We eat and we talked about speechless3. What I say is the truth

musKeeto:

How can one 'prove' the non-existence of that which doesn't exist?
How can I convince you that blue colored bruminereswayne do not exist? Do bruminereswayne exist? Can you provide facts that prove bruminereswayne do not exist?

You must be a bruminereswayne hater.

Can you prove that logic exist?

Speechless3:
Do you know what fact is?

How about letting me show you what the facts are? Give me your whatsapp number.

Speechless3:
Can you prove that logic exist?

Pardon me pls. Have you been laid of late?

HardMirror:

Pardon me pls. Have you been laid of late?

Lol i thought you were going to ask where to buy common sense.

HardMirror:

Pardon me pls. Have you been laid of late?

She's about to!