DoctorAlien:


Where did the time collapse?

You have not answered my question: what is time?

And if I may add: how is it necessary to the existence of cause and effect?

How is time important to cause and effect?
If I throw a stone at you and there no time difference the stone would already hit you at the same time I pick the stone.
Now can you say I threw the stone at you seeing that the stone had already hit you before I even threw it?

dalaman:


Is the sharia law God? It displays God's character according to muslims.

Even Muslims reject the Sharia Law

The presence of evil is the proof of the existence of God

KingEbukasBlog:

Even Muslims reject the Sharia Law
The presence of evil is the proof of the existence of God

What is this argument from morality.

Vanceastro:

How is time important to cause and effect?
If I throw a stone at you and there no time difference the stone would already hit you at the same time I pick the stone.
Now can you say I threw the stone at you seeing that the stone had already hit you before I even threw it?

That statement is contradictory. If there is no time difference, then there is no time.

What is time and how is it necessary to the existence of cause and effect?

Vanceastro:

What is this argument from morality.

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.

2. Objective moral values and duties exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

KingEbukasBlog:


Even Muslims reject the Sharia Law

The presence of evil is the proof of the existence of God

You've started with your madness. How can muslims reject the sharia law when that is the law that was revealed by the Koran? Again is the sharia law good since it displays God's character?

KingEbukasBlog:


1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.

2. Objective moral values and duties exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

Objective moral values and duties do not exist, so God does not exist. Argument debunked.

dalaman:


Objective moral values and duties do not exist, so God does not exist. Argument debunked.

So it's not really immoral to kill people indiscriminately.

dalaman:


You've started with your madness. How can muslims reject the sharia law when that is the law that was revealed by the Koran? Again is the sharia law good since it displays God's character?

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.

2. Objective moral values and duties exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

That means if there are objective moral values and duties then God exists

There are behaviors considered as objective moral values like to show love , compassion and kindness . And as far as you see something as evil then it proves the existence of God . Why?

God is described as Good

And evil is just the deviation from good . Good is like a standard while evil is erring from that standard .

Objective : not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

DoctorAlien:


So it's not really immoral to kill people indiscriminately.

The question is, is morality objective. The answer is no.

Morality is a feature and invention of humanity. We must make moral codes of conduct. If morality were objective then every member of our species would share and agree to the the same moral values. But it is a fact that we do not share the same moral values at all. There’s clearly a lack of moral consensus amongst human so how is morality objective when morality varies from society to society and in history?

Kilian g people indiscriminately actually stands against the God of the bible as the source of human morality. If you read the bible you'll see God commanding that people be killed indiscriminately.

dalaman:


Athiest have debunked these arguments.

Its 6 pages and you ran away from our argument on causality . But it is clear what I was hinting at .

1. The Cosmological Argument still stands

2. The Moral Argument still stands because I showed you three objective moral values : to show love , compassion , kindness

3. Let's talk about the Teleological Argument for the existence of God

A. The fine tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity , chance or design

B. It is not due to chance or physical necessity

C . Therefore, it is design

dalaman:
Objective moral values and duties do not exist, so God does not exist. Argument debunked.

In asserting this, you claim that everyone is directed by their consciences. Therefore a moral absolute for every person is "do not disobey your conscience"

Do you agree?

DoctorAlien

Dalaman don run as usual .

Time don reach to sleep



We go see in the morning , Amen

dalaman:


The question is, is morality objective. The answer is no.

Morality is a feature and invention of humanity. We must make moral codes of conduct. If morality were objective then every member of our species would share and agree to the the same moral values. But it is a fact that we do not share the same moral values at all. There’s clearly a lack of moral consensus amongst human so how is morality objective when morality varies from society to society and in history?

Kilian g people indiscriminately actually stands against the God of the bible as the source of human morality. If you read the bible you'll see God commanding that people be killed indiscriminately.

We are not talking the Bible now. The question is: is everything permissible?

DoctorAlien:


The cosmological argument, properly presented, destroys every nonsense about an eternal universe.

But an eternal universe does not actually refute the existence of God

God and the universe could have co-existed eternally (eternal cause-effect) . But that'll make God look like an impersonal God .

KingEbukasBlog:


But an eternal universe does not actually refute the existence of God

God and the universe could have co-existed eternally (eternal cause-effect) . But that'll make God look like an impersonal God .

Yea. If GOD is the Cause of the universe, He must exist before the universe. I'm tinkering and hammering my argument from time.

KingEbukasBlog:


1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.

2. Objective moral values and duties exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

In this argument how did you jump from morality on planet earth to God the creator of the universe?

Vanceastro:

In this argument how did you from morality on planet to God the creator of the universe?

God is the standard of Good . Morality is all about good and evil behavior . In both cases- good and evil - prove the existence of God .

I explained in the preceding posts .

Should we face the Teleological Argument now . Its more exciting . Before we move to last two interesting arguments - the ontological argument and the Leibniz Contingency Argument ( this argument is so powerful too )

KingEbukasBlog:


1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.

2. Objective moral values and duties exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

Let me atgempt to debunk this entire premise which to me is dubious. Firstly the premise tying the objectivity of morals to God's existence assuming objective morality exist is faulty. How does the person that formulated this moral argument (William Craig ) know that objective morality exist? He does this by appealing to our moral intuitions. How we all intuitively "know" and agree that things like rape, slavery, child abuse etc are wrong and things like.love compassio and kindness are good. Channeling somehow this objective morality.

This to me is absurd because Craig's candidate for the source of morality is a character described in the bible. And yet the bible is FILLED with God producing acts and injunctions that strike many of us - a great many Christians included - as being against our moral intuitions.

It's like saying we all agree that math is valid and objective so there must be a great Mathematician from which math flows. And then saying "Hey, I've got the best candidate for who that mathematician might be...here he is described in this old book!" But the character in the book is found espousing
all manner of "wrong" mathematics, like 2 +2 = 5. Well if you are appealing to the objectivity of mathematical formulations like 2 + 2 = 5 as a starting point then you clearly do not know what you are talking about.

There are behaviors considered as objective moral values like to show love , compassion and kindness . And as far as you see something as evil then it proves the existence of God . Why?

They are not that is why I asked you if the sharia is an objective system of morality. The sharia also advocates for compassion, kindness, justice and love for the umma. But then you do not agree with that kind of love, kindness, justice and compassion, do you?

God is described as Good

First, defining God as the source of “good” is mere theological wordplay. It doesn't demonstrate that “good” cannot exist independently of God. Even if goodness is an essential property of God, it is a property that can apply to other things independently of god’s existence. Just think of how being hot is an essential property of fire, then fire must be hot, it cannot be cold. But “hot” can apply to many other things independently of fire. For example, microwaves cause things to be hot and so does friction.

And evil is just the deviation from good . Good is like a standard while evil is erring from that standard .

Objective : not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

Evil is not a deviation from any God. Evil is a deviation or violation of laid out laws and moral codes of conduct. Moral codes of conduct are man made. In Germany it is evil to descrimanate against gays. In the same.Germany it is evil to marry 2 women. In Nigeria on the other hand it is evil to be gay and it is not evil to marry two wIves.

DoctorAlien:


We are not talking the Bible now. The question is: is everything permissible?

Which God are you defending here? Brahma? You are defending the God of the bible so why are you objecting when the binle Is brought into the discussion?

How can everything be permissible? Morality by definition doesn't allow for everything to be permissible.

KingEbukasBlog:


Its 6 pages and you ran away from our argument on causality . But it is clear what I was hinting at .

1. The Cosmological Argument still stands

It has been debunked. How many things in nature have you seen begin to exist from the very begining? Have you seen the universe, planets for example begin to exist?

2. The Moral Argument still stands because I showed you three objective moral values : to show love , compassion , kindness

Is the sharia law objective? It advocates for love, compassion, justice for the less privileged and kindness. Do you see it as an objective moral code of conduct? It was revealed by God himself. Why do you disagree with it since it displays God's character?

3. Let's talk about the Teleological Argument for the existence of God

A. The fine tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity , chance or design

B. It is not due to chance or physical necessity

C . Therefore, it is design

What was the universe design for?

Ranchhoddas:
Unless you want to lie to yourself, the title of the thread is an assertion of the 'illogicality of atheism'. He who asserts must prove remember?

I'm beginning to like you.
Calling kingebukasblog out when he spews B.S even though you're a christian.
Very admirable
The illogical shouldn't be supported even if it supports our views

KingEbukasBlog:


Please note that the

a. Universe creating itself is a logical absurdity .

No it's really not, but what is though is the assertion that God always existed.

b. Infinite regress of causes is illogical and impossible

Yet this is what theistic reasoning amounts to.
If everything must have a creator then does it ever end?
Have you seen how illogical that stand is

With that sorted out here's the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God

1. Whatever begins to exist must have a cause

2. The universe began to exist

3. Therefore , the universe has cause

Do you agree that this is a tenable argument for the existence of God ?

Again this is wrong as it will lead to an infinite regress, which you stated before was illogical.

Atheism is truth gotten from mere observation of our world. All theistic Gods are imaginary, all evidence points towards that conclusion.

As for a deist God well I think, the word God itself would be a misnomer, it has too much bearing with religion, what if the deist God was just a mindless force, devoid of any form of individual characterization, what if it was the universe itself, would the title God suit it?
Whether a creating force exist or not, doesn't concern us humans, we're on our own either way.

randomperson:

It seems u don't have access to a dictionary...
noun (plural atheisms)
(narrowly) Belief that no deities exist (sometimes including rejection of other religious beliefs).
(broadly) Rejection of belief that any deities exist (with or without a belief that no deities exist).
(very broadly) Absence of belief that any deities exist (including absence of the concept of deities).
(loosely) Absence of belief in a particular deity, pantheon, or religious doctrine (notwithstanding belief in other deities).

All these statements are ORS
They exist alone
They are not "ands"
Choosing one means u cant choose the other. Hence "Ors"

Stop trying to make ur own dictionary.
U r only deceiving urself.
Atheism is foolishness.

Its very easy to catch a thief.
When people cant answer simple one line questions.
And thats what u have done.

KingEbukasBlog:
DoctorAlien

Dalaman don run as usual .

Time don reach to sleep



We go see in the morning , Amen

Lol

KingEbukasBlog:


You just admitted the existence of God(s)




You didn't show why the premise is faulty .



This is just the Euthyphro dilemma in disguise and it is a false dilemma because God's own nature or character defines with is good .

- No I didn't admit the existence of God. U seem to assume that God is always equal to creator of the universe. But that's a presumption without any basis in either science or philosophy. If I create a robot today which can do basically all things a human can do, does that make me God? No, that simply makes me a creator. If you are claiming the being that created the universe is god, then u have to show the logical or scientific basis for equating creator with god. Because, if we are simply assuming, I can as well assume that we were created by a super intelligent alien who is not god...

- The premises are unproven. That's why I have the example of all humans are stupid. It is not proven that all humans are stupid so drawing a conclusion from that premise is dubious and lazy. So, if you're laying a premise that states god exists out of time, or that God is necessary, u have to Prove the veracity of those premises...

- it's not a false dilemma. I studies ethics in 100level and under natural law theory, that question was the major criticism of that theory... U say god's own nature defines what is good. Therefore, if it is in God's nature not to kill, killing is wrong. But the question is why it's in God's nature not to kill. Is it because killing is bad?? That will mean god is not the highest reason. If killing is bad simply because god prohibits it, then god makes decisions without reason...

Your attempt to claim atheism is illogical is pathetic... It's just dead on arrival and I expected a better job

Twelve Or a dozen.

Somebody says something is twelve but he is undecided on wether the same thing is a dozen.


Its only on Nairaland u see such.
Mscheww

felixomor:


All these statements are ORS
They exist alone
They are not "ands"
Choosing one means u cant choose the other. Hence "Ors"

Stop trying to make ur own dictionary.
U r only deceiving urself.
Atheism is foolishness.

Its very easy to catch a thief.
When people cant answer simple one line questions.
And thats what u have done.

...I can seriously feel you struggling.... Just making bare assertions without anything to back them up..
U claimed I was replacing 'and' with 'or'. I brought simple dictionary definitions that completely distinguished and separated the different meanings or notions of atheism. It even had more 4 different meanings and you are still crying here...
Lemme ask u, if a word has multiple definitions in the dictionary, are those definitions as alternative (or) or are they cumulative (and).

randomperson:

...I can seriously feel you struggling.... Just making bare assertions without anything to back them up..
U claimed I was replacing 'and' with 'or'. I brought simple dictionary definitions that completely distinguished and separated the different meanings or notions of atheism. It even had more 4 different meanings and you are still crying here...
Lemme ask u, if a word has multiple definitions in the dictionary, are those definitions as alternative (or) or are they cumulative (and).

Bros answer those questions.
I beg u.
Prove ur dictionary correct.
I beg u.

A simple one line question should be answerable anytime, anyday.

Richard dawkins says "God does not exist"
There is nothing like 50℅ existence.
You either exist or u dont.

Answer those questions.
Proove u r not a thief.
No innocent person should be afraid of a one line question.

felixomor:


Bros answer those questions.
I beg u.
Prove ur dictionary correct.
I beg u.

A simple one line question should be answerable anytime, anyday.

Richard dawkins says "God does not exist"
There is nothing like 50℅ existence.
You either exist or u dont.

Answer those questions.
Proove u r not a thief.
No innocent person should be afraid of a one line question.

U are sounding desperate... Richard Dawkins says God does not exist? Then he's an atheist. I say I don't believe that God exists. i.e rejection of a belief.. I am an atheist too, ... That's why those two notions of atheism are contained in the dictionary definition of atheism...

Dalaman,
How far?
U didnt answer my question on sight and ecidence again?

randomperson:

U are sounding desperate... Richard Dawkins says God does not exist? Then he's an atheist. I say I don't believe that God exists. i.e rejection of a belief.. I am an atheist too, ... That's why those two notions of atheism are contained in the dictionary definition of atheism...

Ok answer this one.

God does not exist?
True or False

If u run from this one,
(No comments)