XxSabrinaxX:

Is this clown for real?

godwinstringed1:


Will you stay back please?

XxSabrinaxX:

Will you Un-follow me please?

Martinez19:
Lol. Albert Einstein did not believe in god. In fact a letter he wrote stating his disbelief in organised religion was auctioned recently

godwinstringed1:



I intentionally followed you!

godwinstringed1:



I intentionally followed you!

XxSabrinaxX:

You're a jobless dumbass. Keep trolling. I don't even have your time .

XxSabrinaxX:

Joblessness . Grown ass man like you. Keep trolling. I don't even have your time .

TheArranger:

Ignore the guy. He's an obvious troll

XxSabrinaxX:

It still comes back to the main question of why God would allow multiple religions if there is only one true religion though. Certain christian denominations believe that those who do not follow the word of the gospel and the bible are destined for hell and missionary work is the only thing that can save their souls from eternal damnation. There are still large populations that don't have access to television or internet or even literature, so do you believe your God has more or less predeterminedly condemned these otherwise innocent people (they had no choice in that they have no access to the Judeo-Christian teachings) to an eternity of suffering and torment. I guess that's a healthy worldview.

XxSabrinaxX:
All of these you've mentioned contradicts the idea of a God who has the tri-omni qualities. God being merciful and all powerful can easily cancel out every form of suffering, so why doesn't he just do so? I fail to see how God, who is actually the person responsible for the condition of human lives here, couldn't just rectify all these problems from the world's beginning.

XxSabrinaxX:
To your first response, there are some teachings, statements and events in the bible that contradict what is manifest in the world about us. Historians have debunked a lot of events from the bible, the creation story (unless you understand it as a metaphor), has also been debunked, etc etc. To your second response, you've not given any credible, empirical evidence as to why other religions are false.

XxSabrinaxX:
What happens to the righteous ones who never happen to come accross the means to hear the gospel before they die? Do they rot in hell too? If so, how does this justify a loving god?

XxSabrinaxX:
Fair enough. I may not have framed the questions well so let me ask this way: If God created Adam and Eve, how couldn't he have known that they will eat from it?

XxSabrinaxX:
The bolded is my point of contention. Would you mind explaining to me how people are free to sin in a universe created by a tri omni being? As regards to salvation, does this mean that if a sheltered muslim was more moral than a christian, doesn't this make salvation a faulty yardstick for entering heaven?

XxSabrinaxX:
Given that God already has a plan, and has predestined your end from your beginning and fashioned every aspect of your life, what's the ultimate difference between when you pray and when you don't pray, when the outcome will be the same anyways?

XxSabrinaxX:
To the first bolded: What's the point of claiming to have faith in a god when you doubt the extent of his powers?
To the second bolded: What's so hard about understanding the concept of an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent being? Aren't all these written in the bible?

XxSabrinaxX:
Given that God created the universe, Isn't he responsible for bringing these three forms of evil into existence? I don't expect these evils would exist if God hadn't created the universe. Besides the bible text I showed you clearly stated that God himself created evil. How did you begin to know, hence dissect all the forms of evil he was talking of i.e how do you know what evil he was talking of?

XxSabrinaxX:
And exactly how is that an insult? You know very well that this thread is all about christians defending their faith. I never intended any insult when typing my post and I find it insulting that you'd suggest that given you don't know what's in my head. That's my problem with you, you just read meanings into useless sh!t.
If I had known you'd continue this brash method of argument you love to employ, maybe I shouldn't have mentioned you. Like I said, i'm not forcing you to answer my questions, if you're going to continue finding fault with my posts by unnecessarily reading meaning into it, then please leave. I have to say you do know how to get on one's nerves.

XxSabrinaxX:
The problem with your "evidence" is that evolution and the big bang do a better job of explaining how the universe came into being than creationism. Not that I completely believe in the Big Bang and evolution. I still insist there could be other possibilities; but the Big Bang is just more logical than Creationism. Hence, I don't think one can just say "look at the sun!" and conclude that it is empirical evidence for Yahweh(notice i didn't say god?)

Mobilia:
XxSabrinaxX,
Thank you for mentioning me here...
I, so far, see about (2) people here (one of which you are conversing with), that are answering the questions pretty well.
I suggest reading their comments.
I will see if there's anything I can add to them later.

godwinstringed1:




Hmm!


I'll need to correct some instances in Nairaland religion section these days!

The devil is a liar

Mobilia:


I'm a little confused here.
I wasn't referring to you being either of the "two".
I have mentioned them before in another thread because they have written some biblically sound posts/threads.
I am trying to be discreet as to not mention names..or place them on a pedestal.
I, am not familiar with your posts/threads in the religion section. But if I see some, I will check them out.

godwinstringed1:
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode][/font]


I know who you are.
Your mission over mankind will be short-lived

HellVictorinho:

Nema.

5thElement:


Lol. Albert Einstein was Catholic. Even if h wasn't the fact that he didn't believe in organized religion doesn't automatically make him an atheist.

Martinez19:
Lol. He was never catholic. This is ignorance of the first kind.

SHOCKER: Einstein was an atheist.

Martinez19:
Lol. He was never catholic. This is ignorance of the first kind.

SHOCKER: Einstein was an atheist.

Ihedinobi3:

I don't see how it comes down to that at all. Can you demonstrate that? Notwithstanding, I'll answer you.

God gave all human beings a free will. So they are free to choose what to believe about Him. If they deny the Truth about Him, they are able to make up their own "truths" about Him. That is how religions and philosophies are made. These religions and philosophies in turn provide other people with alternatives to God's Truth. If they are unwilling to yield to His Truth, they can choose any of these others to follow if they would rather not create their own fictions. That is how God tests the hearts of men.

I think that you are familiar with the story of Jonah, the guy that was swallowed by a fish and regurgitated later? Atheists tend to like that story since it is more proof to them of how unbelievable the Bible is but just humor me and let me make my point with it. Nineveh was a Gentile city. They did not have the Temple, the Law or the Prophets. So, they would be considered to be just as remote from God today as those who lack TVs, Internet and literature today. Yet God commissioned a Hebrew prophet to take the Gospel to them.

That prophet was unwilling to go - and this is actually the whole point of that story in the Bible (no, the fish was not the point) - because he knew that if he proclaimed the Gospel to these people and they repented, God would forgive them just like He was always forgiving the Hebrews too. But God really pressed the matter. That was where the fish came in. He wouldn't let Jonah escape going. He stirred up a storm to prevent him from escaping the mission. He got a fish to trap him and hold him to ransom until he came round. And he did...as God knew that he would. His heart was really hard against Gentiles though so it still took another lesson for God to get through to him but that was after he had given the Gospel to Nineveh.

He proclaimed the Gospel in Nineveh, like I said, and the whole city repented. And God spared them the destruction He had planned for them. This was how far God went to save a Gentile city in an age without safe travel, TV, Internet or easily portable literature of any kind. How much more today? All it takes for anyone today - as always - to find Salvation or gain access to spiritual growth is to want it. The desire is enough for God to move Heaven and Earth to get the Gospel to them. He has always done that. Jonah and Nineveh are only one example in the Bible. There are others.

So, neither today nor in all of past human history has there ever been a person or group of people who wanted to be saved and wasn't.



Your objections here don't quite demonstrate how what I said contradicts the idea of God's omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence. So, perhaps you should explain the contradiction better. Meantime, I will answer your objections.

God doesn't cancel suffering because His Eternal Plan for creation involves free will. That free will produced moral evil in the case of a third of the angels and 100% of mankind except for Jesus Christ. That moral evil directly causes suffering and also attracts divine judgment which also produces suffering for those associated in any way with the moral evil in question. The only way to change this, as far as I can see, is for God to remove free will from His moral creatures. But that would mean altering His Plan and why should He if in the end that Plan will result in a perfect creation where there is nothing evil or painful or troublesome in any way at all although there will still be moral creatures in it except that they no longer need to make a choice about God since they already have and that choice has been sealed for all eternity?

How do you find God responsible for the condition of human lives? If it is because He created all things knowing how they would turn out, why does that take away from the responsibility of moral creatures to make the right decision and submit to God rather than rebel against Him?



What are these teachings, statements and events you mean and what do they contradict?

Name some of these historians and what they debunked.

Who debunked the creation story and how was it debunked?

You asked a question and I answered it. I was under no obligation to prove anything. Nor did I have any inclination to. Why do you want proof though? Do you consider any religion at all true?



Seeing as I already answered this question elsewhere, I am not sure why you ask it again? Do you mean something other than "absolutely perfect" by "righteous" here?




Still not sure what you are asking about here. I know of no teaching in the Bible that holds that God did not know what Adam and Eve would do when He created them.



Per your first question, I already explained in our earlier conversation. I am loath to repeat it here.

Per your second, I'm not sure what you refer to. I don't see how anything I said translates to what you said here. I told you that if any human being lives a perfect existence not violating God's Will in any way, then they don't need to be saved at all and are automatically qualified to be with God eternally. But if they don't, then their only hope is the Lord Jesus Christ. Otherwise, they can only look forward to eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire.



The difference is that we won't have much of a relationship if I don't pray.



Doubt? Who said anything about doubt?

Why do you think that anyone has any problem with understanding such a concept?



No He isn't. Moral creatures are. Evil was never necessary to creation. Free will does not necessitate evil at all. Nor was evil part of God's Creation. It is by definition the negative response of a moral creature's free will to God's Authority and as such is not God's Work at all.

I know because the Bible also says that there is nothing evil in God. And in that verse, peace, rather than 'good', is placed opposite to evil. That is already an indication to the fact that 'evil' here is not moral. A number of other translations read 'calamity' or 'disaster' instead.



In our last conversation, you remember that I refused to defend an argument because I never made it to you. I told you then that I am averse to being made responsible to prove anything I don't claim. If you ask me to answer questions, I am happy to. If you demand evidence for a claim I have not made to you, I may or may not offer it. That depends on how generous I want to be.

The problem is that you act exactly like many antichristians I know while insisting that you are not one. Your threads are all attacks (not that you are not welcome to them, you certainly are) and for that reason I generally don't participate. But you specifically called my attention here just to attack me in stealth? That is not something anyone does in good faith.

I do find you delightful to discuss with sometimes and I wish that were always the case. I wish that I could believe that you are really just trying to understand the Christian Faith or why anyone could hold such a "ridiculous" worldview. But I don't. I see too much evidence of an effort to destroy a Faith if you can. I told you that I have an interest in the health of weaker believers than myself so it is currently impossible to give you benefit of the doubt anymore.



You are welcome to your preferences. But I don't really care what you believe. However, since you have made these claims, perhaps you can show how evolution and the Big Bang explain creation better.

LordReed:


Einstein was not an atheist, he was sort of an agnostic deist.

5thElement:


there is nothing to go figure here bros.

if Mercedes Benz makes a car and sells it to you and you take the car out and crash it into a rock under the influence of alcohol thereby sustaining an injury would you blame Mercedes Benz for your injury?

I realize that most atheists, especially the Nigerian version are not atheistic by choice but by circumstances.

Most of the youths today shouting atheism like as if it's some new concept do so because of unanswered prayers and that's why I blame all these pseudo religions for promoting the image of God as a fairy godmother.

if every human being would love each other as much as they loved themselves then the world would be a better place.

God has given you life. are you expecting him to come and live it for you?

the circumstances of your life is immaterial because in the end we are all destined to leave all these behind. diseases, poverty etc.

stop blaming the creator unnecessarily. Lord knows, rich people don't.

luvmijeje:


I don't who voldermont was. When you are ready, you will use analogy that I can relate with

LordReed:


Einstein was not an atheist, he was sort of an agnostic deist.

Martinez19:
He was an atheist notorious for using the word "god", god to Einstein was the universe and Einstein adored and venerated what he taught were the beautiful dynamics, synchronisation and structure of the universe. He saw the worship of this god as studying and discovering it's secrets.

In the 1927 solvey conference where quantum mechanics, a fast rising field then, was being discussed, there was a debate between two groups of scientists : one (in which Neils Bohr was part of) which supported the results of quantum mechanics that the universe does yield probabilistic outcomes and the other (in which Einstein was among) which said that the entire universe give deterministic and predictable outcomes. It was during that debate the Einstein said "god does not play dice." Though Einstein's team lost.

Martinez19:
He was an atheist notorious for using the word "god", god to Einstein was the universe and Einstein adored and venerated what he taught were the beautiful dynamics, synchronisation and structure of the universe. He saw the worship of this god as studying and discovering it's secrets.

In the 1927 solvey conference where quantum mechanics, a fast rising field then, was being discussed, there was a debate between two groups of scientists : one (in which Neils Bohr was part of) which supported the results of quantum mechanics that the universe does yield probabilistic outcomes and the other (in which Einstein was among) which said that the entire universe give deterministic and predictable outcomes. It was during that debate the Einstein said "god does not play dice." Though Einstein's team lost.

Martinez19:
He was an atheist notorious for using the word "god", god to Einstein was the universe and Einstein adored and venerated what he taught were the beautiful dynamics, synchronisation and structure of the universe. He saw the worship of this god as studying and discovering it's secrets.

In the 1927 solvey conference where quantum mechanics, a fast rising field then, was being discussed, there was a debate between two groups of scientists : one (in which Neils Bohr was part of) which supported the results of quantum mechanics that the universe does yield probabilistic outcomes and the other (in which Einstein was among) which said that the entire universe give deterministic and predictable outcomes. It was during that debate the Einstein said "god does not play dice." Though Einstein's team lost.

5thElement:



https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/dec/04/physicist-albert-einstein-god-letter-reflecting-on-religion-up-for-auction-christies

Martinez19:
Lol. The writer is just playing mental gymnastics , the letter of Einstein says it all. At least, it shows Einstein wasn't a catholic like you claimed. As an avid student of Einstein's biography, Einstein said repeatedly that he wasn't religious in any way except in the adoration of the universe and trying to unravel it's mysteries. Einstein was a confirmed atheist.

I know many religious folks like to use the argument from authority eg. "this intelligent scientist believed in god therefore god must exist and that god is my god" because when you are supporting bullshit lies, there is safety and validity in numbers. Sorry to burst your bubble, Albert Einstein was an atheist.

ElidaxZiel:
I love your response. nice one

godwinstringed1:



I smile! You know me right?

5thElement:


Even if I concede that to you about Einstein, how about the other scientists too. There must be at least 15 on that list I posted but it was only Einstein you saw right?