butterflylion:


I didn't say he listed. You keep claiming what is never said. WHY?

he said THE 10,000 which means they are EXACTLY 10,000. If that isn't specific then you need to check your grammar.

This is what you said:

butterflylion:

Budaatum do not tell me tomorrow that an atheist did not SPECIFICALLY mention 10000 magical fairytale creatures.

Anyone reading that statement would be led to expect a list of "10000 magical fairytale creatures".

Perhaps you should learn to be specific!

Gggg102:



when the believers share their experiences we are to take their words for it according to you but when budaatum shares his', it is just his opinion.

Abi now. He make the rules!

butterflylion:


This thread has long flown over your bird coop. So you have always missed my point despite the pointers I have always given.

Nice try but you said nothing.

Guess you'd never ever get it. It was worth a try.

Gggg102:




'absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence' only works for pantheist/deist god.


the theist god wants to have a relationship with us and according to their stories, they reveal themselves to man. evidence of the god should easily be available.

unless he is hiding but wants us to believe he exists.

'' i will be everywhere yet i will not be seen''. how do you understand this beautiful contradiction

Gggg102:



when the believers share their experiences we are to take their words for it according to you but when budaatum shares his', it is just his opinion.

This thread is not about believers making you believe anything and this was why I said earlier and I quote

Revelations of such nature are often linked to experiences of a God or gods or a type of it, this is all inclusive for those originally having it and the one simply embracing it as an authority.

So if I speak from the side of a specific God or god I simply voice my experience or opinion and not speaking ON BEHALF of the other who has his or her own opinion or experience which can comparatively be put alongside mine

budaatum:

This is what you said:

Anyone reading that statement would be led to expect a list of "10000 magical fairytale creatures".

Perhaps you should learn to be specific!

He mentioned the phrase THE 10,000 fairytale magical creatures. Did I throw you off with the word "mention"?

butterflylion:
Oya let the atheists come and let's discuss God. Kindly note that when I say God I am not segregating or separating by using names such as ALLAH, YAHWEH, CHUKWU, OLODUMARE, etc.

So do not focus on any of the above. I simply wish for us to discuss God devoid of names.

Also do note that before you comment you need to let us know if God exists or not.

Remember we are not talking about Yahweh or Allah or any other names given to God but SIMPLY GOD!

also do not ask me to define God for you because we all know the definition for God as the dictionary is available to all.

Let's begin

your op clearly states 'god devoid of name'

and you expect someone to disprove 4999 specific named god.

butterflylion:


He mentioned the phrase THE 10,000 fairytale magical creatures. Did I throw you off with the word "mention"?

Not really, you just wrote bad ambiguous English.

vaxx:
'' i will be everywhere yet i will not be seen''. how do you understand this beautiful contradiction

then I will treat you like someone who is not seen.

Gggg102:


your op clearly states 'god devoid of name'

and you expect someone to disprove 4999 specific named god.

Sigh.

How many times do I have to say this. I did not raise the issue of 4999/5000 gods . Atheists did.

My posting that rather long list of gods known to man is just to show what such a list looks like and expect atheists to show me how they sifted through the entire lot to arrive at their no god assertions.

1) I did not ask for an itemisation

2) I did not separate them

They are free to take on the gods in China collectively and disprove them as a whole without mentioning the names after all the list is well segmented into regions.

Gggg102:


then I will treat you like someone who is not seen.

He is everywhere (definite)

Yet will not be seen (deliberate)

You cannot treat what is already everywhere as what cannot be seen because it can be seen. Everywhere shows tangibility. What you should focus on is what it looks like in every place it is located which make up "everywhere".

It may look like a key in one place and a hook in another and a fish in another but does not change the fact that it is everywhere.

cc vaxx

butterflylion:


monotheism
noun
the doctrine or belief that there is only one God.

When atheists are told God exists they always ask "which of the 4999 Gods " ?

So let's do away with the selectiveness and just gather all of them together and thrash them all out once and for all. After all the definition of atheism isn't selective. It does not say " Atheism is the lack of belief in the existence of Yahweh and not Brahman" or Atheism is the rejection of Allah or Olodumare and not Chukwu and Mazda".

The definition of atheism says that it is the rejection of GOD or gods or a lack of belief in GOD or gods.

I hope you get it now.

No selectiveness! Let's do it the honest way and not the dishonest way a lot of you here follow.

you want them all to be trashed at once, no selectiveness, yet you accuse budaatum of generalisation.

Gggg102:



you want them all to be trashed at once, no selectiveness, yet you accuse budaatum of generalisation.

I also accused him of being too abridged. I am sure you saw that too.

budaatum:

Not really, you just wrote bad ambiguous English.

It's either that Or you do not understand crispy clean queens English.

mention
verb
refer to (something) briefly and without going into detail

Despite my using the word "mention and what it meant you still jumped to LIST which is talking about detail.

I guess your understanding of grammar is off.

I don't like it when your brain is switched off.

Gggg102:


then I will treat you like someone who is not seen.

it will mean you are not yet evolve to understand God. but wait, i will take my time to explain the contradiction for you, it mean God did not come from somewhere nor is somewhere. Everything that you can sense and yet not sense is an expression of God, the Total.

so atheist were wrong when they say humanity create GOD , they are trying to put God towards a point in time. God does not really exist at a point in time. he did not exist after man evolve, he was existing before man, he exist now and he will continue existing after man. so the element of GOD is this...

- God is ‘the happening’ itself!
- God is ‘the Truth’ which is always happening.
- God is there, never happened.

therefore God is source of every creation, when you see man, you just seen his element, when you see tree, you just seen his element, when you rock etc, you are seeing his element.

so you may ask if the elements are God themselves? i will answer and say no the elements has a source. you may say this is contradiction and i will gladly response that the contradiction is the expression of GOD himself. '' i will be everywhere and yet i will not be seen'' and this is why you were unable to identify GOD, he is there yet you cannot see him.



i will send you some links on some philosophical book only if i see your seriousness

butterflylion:


I also accused him of being too abridged. I am sure you saw that too.

how about this.


the monotheistic god in general, contradicts science and history, makes inaccurate claims, makes promises that prove his existence but this promises fail. majority of the signs and evidence that is used to prove his inexistence are false, the effects of his existence are not felt. most of his attributes are based on human ignorance. the fact that he cannot prove himself undeniably. the only time he does this is in the tales of his existence.

vaxx:
it will mean you are not yet evolve to understand God. but wait, i will take my time to explain the contradiction for you, it mean God did not come from somewhere nor is somewhere. Everything that you can sense and yet not sense is an expression of God, the Total.

so atheist were wrong when they say humanity create GOD , they are trying to put God towards a point in time. God does not really exist at a point in time. he did not exist after man evolve, he was existing before man, he exist now and he will continue existing after man. so the element of GOD is this...

- God is ‘the happening’ itself!
- God is ‘the Truth’ which is always happening.
- God is there, never happened.

therefore God is source of every creation, when you see man, you just seen his element, when you see tree, you just seen his element, when you rock etc, you are seeing his element.

so you may ask if the elements are God themselves? i will answer and say no the elements has a source. you may say this is contradiction and i will gladly response that the contradiction is the expression of GOD himself. '' i will be everywhere and yet i will not be seen'' and this is why you were unable to identify GOD, he is there yet you cannot see him.



i will send you some links on some philosophical book only if i see your seriousness

IDK but it sounds a bit like pantheism.

I'm not really deep into philosophy, but I'd like to see the links.

Gggg102:



how about this.


the monotheistic god in general, contradicts science and history, makes inaccurate claims, makes promises that prove his existence but this promises fail. majority of the signs and evidence that is used to prove his inexistence are false, the effects of his existence are not felt. most of his attributes are based on human ignorance. the fact that he cannot prove himself undeniably. the only time he does this is in the tales of his existence.

I noticed that but remember you said you have not experienced most of the gods so that refutes this post.

We have already tackled this.

Gggg102:


IDK but it sounds a bit like pantheism.

I'm not really deep into philosophy, but I'd like to see the links.

read it again, it is monotheistic concept.... paganism anyway. the idea of paying obeyance to both animate and inanimate object while accepting there is still a source for all of them and that source is unique in kind.

butterflylion:


I noticed that but remember you said you have not experienced most of the gods so that refutes this post.

We have already tackled this.

imagine I wasn't the person who posted. imagine this was budaatum's post.

Gggg102:


imagine I wasn't the person who posted. imagine this was budaatum's post.

"dishonesty" is imagining your post was someone else's post yet treating it as your post.

You are not buda. His path isn't yours.

vaxx:
read it again, it is monotheistic concept.... paganism anyway. the idea of paying obeyance to both animate and inanimate object while accepting there is still a source for all of them and that source is unique in kind.

I think I understand a little bit more.

everything I can sense= god is the universe
everything that I cannot sense= god is distinct from the universe.

so the addition is god.

god is the universe and separate from the universe.

butterflylion:


"dishonesty" is imagining your post was someone else's post yet treating it as your post.

You are not buda. His path isn't yours.

dishonesty is also you maintaining a position which your religion does not support. your religion does not support you validating other gods. their paths are not yours.

Gggg102:


dishonesty is also you maintaining a position which your religion does not support. your religion does not support you validating other gods. their paths are not yours.

Did I say I was " validating" other gods? I have always maintained that all I am about Is EXISTENCE. Or did you miss those comments of mine?

vaxx:
it will mean you are not yet evolve to understand God. but wait, i will take my time to explain the contradiction for you, it mean God did not come from somewhere nor is somewhere. Everything that you can sense and yet not sense is an expression of God, the Total.

so atheist were wrong when they say humanity create GOD , they are trying to put God towards a point in time. God does not really exist at a point in time. he did not exist after man evolve, he was existing before man, he exist now and he will continue existing after man. so the element of GOD is this...

- God is ‘the happening’ itself!
- God is ‘the Truth’ which is always happening.
- God is there, never happened.

therefore God is source of every creation, when you see man, you just seen his element, when you see tree, you just seen his element, when you rock etc, you are seeing his element.

so you may ask if the elements are God themselves? i will answer and say no the elements has a source. you may say this is contradiction and i will gladly response that the contradiction is the expression of GOD himself. '' i will be everywhere and yet i will not be seen'' and this is why you were unable to identify GOD, he is there yet you cannot see him.



i will send you some links on some philosophical book only if i see your seriousness

The part of your quote I bolded sums it up...and I totally agree with it...

The problem with human beings is when they insist on defining what or who God is...based on their limited experiences and perceptions in this realm of existence...this limited and at times faulty perception gave rise to various religions & sects over the course of history...

butterflylion:


I didn't say he listed. You keep claiming what is never said. WHY?

he said THE 10,000 which means they are EXACTLY 10,000. If that isn't specific then you need to check your grammar.

He mentioned the phrase.

OkCornel:


The part of your quote I bolded sums it up...and I totally agree with it...

The problem with human beings is when they insist on defining what or who God is...based on their limited experiences and perceptions in this realm of existence...this limited and at times faulty perception gave rise to various religions & sects over the course of history...

Humanity is trying to bring what is beyond the mind into the domain of the mind. which i think is ok.... it is the first step to seek the truth... some sees it and accept it but some could not.

Then you ask for them to be treated separately, despite starting the thread specifically asking for them to be treated collectively.

I'm certain you make sense, unfortunately, only to yourself it seems.

butterflylion:


It's either that Or you do not understand crispy clean queens English.



Despite my using the word "mention and what it meant you still jumped to LIST which is talking about detail.

I guess your understanding of grammar is off.

I don't like it when your brain is switched off.

butterflylion:


Did I say I was " validating" other gods? I have always maintained that all I am about Is EXISTENCE. Or did you miss those comments of mine?

your religion claims that YHWH is the only God. stop being dishonest.

butterflylion:


You do not need to lie when making a post. Are you blind when people say God exists and the atheists quickly ask "which of the 4999 gods"?

Will you deny this?

This is one from such an atheist as I declared in a conversation with vaxx



Here is another



And another



And another



And another



And another



And another




And another



And another



And another



And another



AND SO SO SO MANY MANY MORE. SO WHO IS BEING SILLY NOW?

As you can see, atheists are clearly being dishonest.

Hey, I'm no atheist.

butterflylion:


Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence is it?

You could be arguing from ignorance. If you were in every grain if sand or every drop of water or every leaf of every tree or every ice crystal etc then you can be sure about your knowledge since you would be everywhere, in the past, future, present etc to know that what isn't there today was not there yesterday.

Only fools accept things without evidence, especially when that evidence has been lacking for thousands of years.


5000 god's have been with us for over a millennium, yet no evidence for any of them.

You said not to ask this question, but I'm so sorry, I'm gonna ask.

Who or What is a God?
To disprove something, we have to know its characteristic. What makes something a God?

I think you @butterflylion take anything that is worshipped to mean God. If that is so, then you are right. God(all 5000+ of them) exists.

But if God is someone that is real in that he fulfils his promises, created the universe, is responsible for how the world turns because he knows and is the future of everyone and everything, the atheist will never agree with that since they haven't experienced him in all his characteristics. And until an individual (a god) proves all the characteristics of God(which I hope you will tell us exhaustively) then there is no known God. Just believed God. And atheist don't believe.