Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 3,143,310 members, 7,780,739 topics. Date: Thursday, 28 March 2024 at 09:03 PM

My Thoughts And Questions About Religion - Religion (15) - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / My Thoughts And Questions About Religion (227169 Views)

Questions About Religion For The Deep Thinker / Why Are Atheists Always Talking About Religion / Questions About Demon Possession - Nairaland Demonology Experts (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (3) ... (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) ... (130) (Reply) (Go Down)

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 12:38pm On May 04, 2015
ii. We are held accountable for our choices:

Humans have the choice to do good or evil, Now, if we were compelled to do one or the other, that will be unfair...

This has never made any sense to me.

Consider the following: We have an all-knowing God who knows us more than we know ourselves. Infact he does not just know us. He knows every of our actions and knows the actions we will take years before we take them. He then gives us a choice to choose knowing what we will take even before we were born. He knows that no matter the pleas and the admonitions we get, some of us will never make the right choice.

He knows all this, allows us to still make the wrong decisions and then punishes us for doing what he knows we will do.

Does that make any sense?

How do you make a man accountable for actions you had forknown that the man will make? Does it not make more sense to only create humans who you have foreknown would make the right decisions and in doing that, PREVENT hell?


iii. The humans agree to undertake the trial of fulfilling their purpose.

In the Quran, Mankind's ruh (usually translated as souls) had accepted the responsibility to fulfill his purpose before he was put on the earth and accepted its master.

We offered the Trust [Of reason and moral responsibility] to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains, yet they refused to undertake it and were afraid of it; mankind undertook it– they have always been inept and foolish. God will punish the hypocrites and the idolaters, both men and women, and turn with mercy to the believers, both men and women: God is most forgiving, most merciful. (Surah 33 72-73)

[Prophet], when your Lord took out the offspring from the loins of the Children of Adam and made them bear witness about themselves, He said, ‘Am I not your Lord?’ and they replied, ‘Yes, we bear witness.’ So you cannot say on the Day of Resurrection, ‘We were not aware of this,’ or, ‘It was our forefathers who, before us, ascribed partners to God, and we are only the descendants who came after them: will you destroy us because of falsehoods they invented?’ In this way We explain the messages, so that they may turn [to the right path]. (Surah 7: 172-174)

We have an innate disposition to God (Called the fitrah in Islam), that is why humans throughout history have almost always worshipped God or some kind of diety.

So mankind accepted the trust and therefore accepted the responsibility that came with it. Bliss in the case of obedience, Punishment in the case of disobedience.

[b]
Again, we have no evidence these agreement between our souls and Allah ever took place except from the testimony of the Quran that is said to be directly spoken by Allah.

To even accept it as the Word of Allah, he Muslim would have to prove the existence of Allah first.

Putting that aside, we have to grabble with the fact that there are several contradictions that can simply not be explained away in the Quran.

If one singular contradiction can be found in the Quran, then it ceases to be the infallible Word of God dictated to Mohammmed.

One more quick example should be more than enough. In the Qur'an, on two occasions it is written that the Jews, the Christians, the mysterious Sabians, and anyone else who believes in God and does good deeds shall have nothing to fear or regret (surat al-Baqarah 2:62, al-Ma'ida 5:69, and also consider al-'Asra 103:2-3).

However, surah al-Imran 3:85 contradicts this claim, by stating that anyone who chooses a religion other than Islam will have paradise denied them.

Some heterodox Muslims, such as the followers of Rashad Khalifa, have translated islaam in surah al-Imran to mean "submission to God," thus including Jews and Christians, and making the verse fit with the previously mentioned verses.

Unfortunately this still does not work when one considers surah an-Nisa' 4:150-151, which speaks of painful punishments for those who do not accept all the prophets of Islam.

These differing views cannot be reconciled, and amount to a contradiction. This contradiction is so embarrassingly obvious that tafsir informs us that al-Imran abrogates the the other verses. The claim of abrogation opens the door to arguments about invalid verses, Allah changing his mind, and the dubious claim that the Qur'an is a copy of an unalterable book in heaven (Surah al-Buruj 85:21-22).

It is quite obvious that there were different persons or groups with their own versions of what God said. Some preached a tolerant Islam, where Jews and Christians were seen as fellow believers; others had a differing view, where only Muslims were on the right path.[/b]

6 Likes 1 Share

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 1:24pm On May 04, 2015
i. a recompense for bad actions

The Muslims traditions say that anyone with an atom weight of belief in his heart will be taken out of hell after punishment and only the most defiant will remain there.

Hence hell will be used to settle the balance of bad deeds which they incurred in this life. Unrepentant sinners would serve a term of punishment after which they will be admitted into paradise by the mercy of Allah.

So at some point, after serving their term, they are admitted to the paradise.

Now in Islam, every action is judged by what is intended (bukhari)

Sin therefore is the value of the intention behind an action not the action itself.

Also, the amount of time used to commit a sin does not show its value. For instance, i could inject a person with poison that kills him in 10 seconds... My action in that case does not deserve just a 10 second punishment... The significance of that action is much greater than the time it took...

Rejecting the right of someone is equal in degree to the right that was offended against.

For instance; If i lock someone up unjustly, i have impinged upon his rights. But if i kill that person that is a greater offense against his right...

God has the right to be worshipped alone because he is the infinite and unlimited creator.

To intend to associate partners to God is to intend to claim a limitation against his power and being. As ascribing equals to him will constitute a limit to his power.

Now tell me what do you think is the gravity of denigrating God from the infinite being to a finite one... What is the magnitude/ range between the finite and the infinite?

The gravity of this in the eyes of God is severe and extreme; It is so severe that it merits from God a perpetual punishment. Actually anything less than a perpetual punishment is unjust to God's right.

So you ask why should God punish unrepentant people who associate partners with God forever... The Question is Why should he not? Allah says in the Quran:

God does not forgive the joining of partners with Him: anything less than that He forgives to whoever He will, but anyone who joins partners with God has concocted a tremendous sin. (Surah 4:48)

If one dies without repenting from this sin, there is no hope for forgiveness in the afterlife.. The Quran affirms the magnitude of this sin...

First, the onus is on you to prove that there is indeed God.

Second, like I said earlier, what sense does it make for me to know that my daughter will go to the kitchen and place her hand on my cooker and give her a choice whether to go or not, and then punish her for going to get burnt when I should have done something to stop her from going in the first place.

To say that the length people will stay in hell is premise on the severity of their sins is to create another confusion. How do we ascertain the magnitude of a sin? What is the standard? I mean, if you'll punish me right, I deserve to know the measurement of my punishment?


ii. a punishment for those who intrinsically deserve it

Purpose is the measure of our intrinsic worth. If we go against our intrinsic purpose and become a rejector of God. Then we can be called intrinsically evil. The rejection of God by these people is perpetual and without end, so why shouldn't their recompense also be? Allah says in the Quran:

"If you could only see, when they are made to stand before the Fire, how they will say, ‘If only we could be sent back, we would not reject the revelations of our Lord, but be among the believers.’ No! The truth they used to hide will become all too clear to them. Even if they were brought back, they would only return to the very thing that was forbidden to them– they are such liars! ! (Surah 6 27-31)

Note that when they were faced with punishment they asked to be sent back but like Allah says; if they have been returned; they will do exactly the same thing again. These people would lie and disobey God again. They can not reform themselves. They would keep rejecting God because of their egos and the chance to do what they want in this world.

This will be the afterlife equivalent of letting out of prison an unreformed murderer.

Again, this is flawed logic. There are seven billion people in the world. There are many muslims who have converted to Christians and vice-versa.

For a lot of these people who converted to other religions from Islam, they sought earnestly to know if Islam is the way. They got no revelations. They looked in the Quran and saw contradictions. Some of these people were truly earnest yet they got nothing divine to stop their actions.

To say such people would irredeemably go to hell is not just. I mean, they sought assurances and got none.


So is hell just?

Justice means giving to people what they deserve based upon what they have done. I.e their intrinsic value or the value of the actions they have done.

[b]There is no justice in sending a person like Bill Gates to hell. I mean, there are so many good people that will go to hell, assuming Islam is true, simply because they do not embrace Islam. What is the justice in that? How can it be just to punish people simply because they refused to believe due to lack of insufficient evidence?

Why send people to hell in the first place? The contradiction between the concept of a merciful God, and one that sends disbelievers to Hell, is one that cannot be reconciled.

What is the need to send people who do not recognize His dominance and acknowledge His superiority to hell infinitely? Psychologists will say this depicts insecurity and inferiority complex.

I have come to see the hellfire religions as finely tuned machines determined to claim and retain the allegiance of as many souls as possible by any means possible. I consider it no coincidence that the two most successful world religions, Christianity and Islam, are the ones that feature most prominently the doctrine hell.[/b]

6 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 1:49pm On May 04, 2015
tbaba1234:
Evidence for God
This assumption that God has to be proven empirically is rather ludicrous. It is not the right way to think that everything must be scientifically verifiable, it makes no sense.

Example:1. If you go back 8 generations, you must have had a great, great, great.... grandfather. Scientifically, you can't prove that. You don't have his DNA, you don't know where his grave is, you don't know where his clothes are.

You have nothing, the only way, you can conclude that he existed is by basic rational thinking. Not by scientific evidence.

Ridiculous! If anyone doubts his great great great...grandfather's claims, there are scientific ways to get that. At least I know that you can start from my father. Then my father to his father (my grandfather). Then my grandfather to his own father.

Aslong as the dna samples are available, it can be verified. Since no one has questioned that I have a great great reat...grandfather, there is no need for me to two that path.


2. If you believe that your mother is your mother, this belief is based upon testimony. Testimony of father, midwife etc. However, you do not have any scientific evidence that she is your mother. Right now, you believe she is your mother without any scientific test, yet you hold it as truth.

That I hold something as truth does not mean it cannot be proven. The question we ask religionists is, prove to us the deity you believe.

There are scientific ways to prove motherhood. Here is one: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-discover-childrens-cells-living-in-mothers-brain/


3. If you have never been to China, the only reason, you believe there is a place called china is as a result of consistent testimony.

Cmon...the reason I know there is a place called China is not because of consistent testimony. I'm not even sure I know anyone who is from China or has been to China. I know partly because I studied Geography.

The point is this: Science is a fantastic but limited method and should be applied only when it is applicable.

Even the scientific things we believe are based on testimony because we do not perform these tests ourselves.

The point is simple, coming to truths, is not about scientific evidence as there are other ways to come to truths.

What we ask from atheists is simple, use the simple rational thinking that works perfectly in your daily lives and not apply some special standard when it comes to God.

Do not set up this standard that would not work for many of the truths, you hold in your lives. Even the scientific method is based on testimony. Muslims strongly influenced the development of the scientific method anyway.

[b]It is interesting to me that it is only when religion is concerned that people try to undervalue scientific methods, scientific evidences and its many benefits. I see this all the time.

For those who distrust the scientific establishment because of its many failings, I offer the perspective of Daniel Dennett:

Through a microscope, the cutting edge of a beautifully sharpened ax looks like the Rocky Mountains, all jagged and irregular, but it is the dull heft of the steel behind the edge that gives the ax its power.

Similarly, the cutting edge of science seen up close looks ragged and chaotic, a bunch of big egos engaging in shouting matches, their judgment distorted by jealousy, ambition and greed, but behind them, agreed upon by all the disputants, is the massive routine weight of accumulated results, the facts that give science its power.

Not surprisingly, those who want to puncture the reputation of science and drain off its immense prestige and influence tend to ignore the wide-angle perspective and concentrate on the clashes of schools and their not-so-hidden agendas. But ironically, when they set out to make their case for the prosecution (using all the finely polished tools of logic and statistics), all their good evidence of the failings and biases of science comes from science's own highly vigorous exercises in self-policing and self-correction.

The critics have no choice: There is no better source of truth on any topic than well-conducted science, and they know it
[/b]


If you really think about it, the question of God is a metaphysical question not a physical one and science is limited to the physical

What are the achievements of metaphysics and its benefits to mankind? Why should we devote our time and efforts to it?

4 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 2:12pm On May 04, 2015
alolatee:




well said sir.Those who died without the law Romans chapter 2 tells us 12-16 will be judged without the law.Their consciences will be their judge.
Also, Mr Joseph, i appeal to you to retrace your step back to God.Not all things that contradict the God of the bible you question-All scripture is written under the inspiration of God...2timothy 3vs16...somewhere in the book of Peter also says Holy men of old were moved to write...No scripture is of any private interpretation...My brother, if you believe a goal is scored why watching the Football, while youare not present where it is being played, i see no reason why you should not believe in God and return back to him...I was in your shoes for believing wrongly momentarily believing speaking in tongues can be taught against what i had believed for all that was right concerning that.When i slipped, it was God who helped me o to recover from whence i have fallen.please change


This is what i said in the sports section @Joseph1013.

Bros, your analogy is very laughable. Football goals have replays. There are tens of thousands of eye witnesses. So how does it compare with the existence of God? Where is your proof?

Were you born into a christian family?
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by alolatee(m): 6:25pm On May 04, 2015
joseph1013:


Bros, your analogy is very laughable. Football goals have replays. There are tens of thousands of eye witnesses. So how does it compare with the existence of God? Where is your proof?

Were you born into a christian family?



I still insist on 'Live' football matches which you must have fallen in love with.Goals are scored and when you are on set you do not doubt if the goals were scored or stage managed.Yes i am born into a christian home and am born again by the grace of God.No one who is a real christian believes the bible by seeing signs or convicted through a supernatural event before he believes.Come to the bible believing bro stop doubting. Doubt the hurting aspects like sicknesses, diseases, failure as not for Christians but not the universality of the Word of God, the Holy Spirit and the Father.believe the truth of the bible...2Timothy3vs16...2Peter1vs18-20...accept what it says blessed are you if you believe without having seen Jesus.
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by tbaba1234: 6:41pm On May 04, 2015
joseph1013:


I have so much to respond to in this thread with little time and more keep coming up. Okay. let's see how far I can go.

I guess your first paragraph is to explain this verse:

Qur'an (4:11) - (Inheritance) "The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females"

Good! How do you defend others?

Qur'an (4:3) - (Wife-to-husband ratio) "Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four"

Qur'an (4:24) and Qur'an (33:50)



What do you gain from half quotes? Like i said, read the book first.

The Quran states:
, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly [with them], then only one, " Q 4:3

What does that tell you?

The above verse permits a man to take more than one wife on the condition that he can deal justly with them. So justice between wives is a precondition to marry more than one otherwise one is not permitted, This offers a practical solution to some of the societal problems. For example, In war torn regions of Africa, there are many widows caught in tough financial conditions because they have to take care of their kids alone. The Islamic model offers them Justice in a family environment. In the African American community in the U.S., there are so many men in prisons that the ratio of men to women is unfavourably skewed. We have many women without husbands and end up being mistresses and 'baby mamas'. It is a practical solution to problems societies face.

Also, Islamically a man provides for his family, Whatever a woman earns belongs to her and she has the freedom to do whatever she wants with it.

A muslim woman who doesn't want to be in a polygamous marriage can include the condition in her marriage contract. With that in her contract, her husband can not take more wives.

Also men and women are different, a women having more than one husband is impractical, Who will the child be credited to?? That is why when polygyny has been practised far more than polyandry.

Again, get a copy of the Quran, read it, then come back with questions. You already have preconceived notions without reading the book.

Therefore are you subtly saying that The Quran admonition does not hold true now? Does that mean The Quran should be reviewed since what obtains then is no longer in sync with what we have obtainable at this day and age? Because I make it known to you that some still practice that now with no regard to your own version of interpretation. Some outrightly denounce your interpretation as been haram.

If you are for a review of The Quran to conform to what we have now, where is the place for the belief that The Quran is directly spoken by Allah and therefore should not be tampered with in its form?

What i am saying is that the Quran is a very contextual book. I have studied the Quran to some level so i can talk at a fairly learned level. The verse is useful depending on the environment and context and even if you want to take it literally, no harm done as regards the actual business transaction.

However, the Quran is interpreted by those who have studied it. That is why it is tiring for me to go through the drivel you copied from an anti Islamic site.

Read the Quran yourself and form your opinion. I guarantee that you will be pleasantly surprised.

Therein lies another confusion. It is a known fact that the hadiths that are accepted as valid by a particular sect are not as accepted by another.

How does a neutral person know what to be believe?

Should revelations be exclusive with no means of validating the evidences?

I have lived everywhere in this country and it was a shock to me when I heard once in Kano Hausa Muslims say that Yoruba muslims are not real muslims because they dont follow certain injunctions in The Quran. He further went ahead to say that it is general unwritten rule that Yoruba muslim scholars must not lead Hausa muslims in prayers.

The Quran was revealed in the form of a discussion between parties in many different scenarios, so all ayahs (Usually translated as verses) have the context of revelation; The hadiths are stories that show the context of revelation , i.e why was this revealed?, Some hadiths are just sayings of the prophet so the context of those kinds of hadiths have to be understood as well unless they are straightforward, and some translations in English aren't great..

The most authentic and reliable narrations are collected in the books: i.) Bukhari, ii.) Muslim iii) AbuDawud

It is a science in itself

Hadiths have varying levels of authenticity. A lot of work was carried out by the early muslims to verify every single hadith...

Each hadith has a chain of narrators and a lot of information is used to determine its authenticity. The biography of each narrator, how reliable is each narrator? could each narrator on the chain have met?... Are there similar narrations from other sources?

Hadiths with many consecutive reports from different narrators and sources, who can not possibly agree on a lie because of the sheer number of sources... These are the most trusted hadiths: Mutawatir

Other groups of hadiths include

i. Sahih - Sound -each reporter should be trustworthy in his religion; he should be known to be truthtul in his narrating, to understand what he narrates, to know how a different expression can alter the meaning, and to report the wording of the hadith verbatim, not only its meaning".

ii. Hasan - good: is the one where its source is known and its reporters are unambiguous.

iii. Da`if - weak: a hadith which fails to reach the status of Hasan. Usually, the weakness is: a) one of discontinuity in the chain of narration

iv.Maudu` - fabricated or forged: is a hadith whose text goes against the established norms of the Prophet's sayings, or its reporters include a liar. Fabricated hadith are also recognized by external evidence related to a discrepancy found in the dates or times of a particular incident.

There are controversial hadiths but the vast majority of muslims agree on the most authentic books irrespective of sects.

The Question and the narrations are very clear when it comes to tribalism:

“O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honourable of you with Allaah is that (believer) who has At-Taqwa [i.e. he is one of the Muttaqoon (the pious)]. Verily, Allaah is All-Knowing, All-Aware”
[al-Hujuraat 49:13]


“And hold fast, all of you together, to the Rope of Allaah (i.e. this Qur’aan), and be not divided among yourselves, and remember Allaah’s Favour on you, for you were enemies one to another but He joined your hearts together, so that, by His Grace, you became brethren (in Islamic Faith), and you were on the brink of a pit of Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus Allaah makes His Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.,) clear to you, that you may be guided”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:103]

The Prophet said:

"He is not one us who calls for tribalism or who fights for tribalism or who dies for tribalism. (Abu dawud)

So when your hausa friends claim superiority over yorubas, it is not from Islam.
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by tbaba1234: 7:00pm On May 04, 2015
joseph1013:


Ridiculous! If anyone doubts his great great great...grandfather's claims, there are scientific ways to get that. At least I know that you can start from my father. Then my father to his father (my grandfather). Then my grandfather to his own father.

Aslong as the dna samples are available, it can be verified. Since no one has questioned that I have a great great reat...grandfather, there is no need for me to two that path.


That I hold something as truth does not mean it cannot be proven. The question we ask religionists is, prove to us the deity you believe.

There are scientific ways to prove motherhood. Here is one: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-discover-childrens-cells-living-in-mothers-brain/




Cmon...the reason I know there is a place called China is not because of consistent testimony. I'm not even sure I know anyone who is from China or has been to China. I know partly because I studied Geography.



[b]It is interesting to me that it is only when religion is concerned that people try to undervalue scientific methods, scientific evidences and its many benefits. I see this all the time.

For those who distrust the scientific establishment because of its many failings, I offer the perspective of Daniel Dennett:

Through a microscope, the cutting edge of a beautifully sharpened ax looks like the Rocky Mountains, all jagged and irregular, but it is the dull heft of the steel behind the edge that gives the ax its power.

Similarly, the cutting edge of science seen up close looks ragged and chaotic, a bunch of big egos engaging in shouting matches, their judgment distorted by jealousy, ambition and greed, but behind them, agreed upon by all the disputants, is the massive routine weight of accumulated results, the facts that give science its power.

Not surprisingly, those who want to puncture the reputation of science and drain off its immense prestige and influence tend to ignore the wide-angle perspective and concentrate on the clashes of schools and their not-so-hidden agendas. But ironically, when they set out to make their case for the prosecution (using all the finely polished tools of logic and statistics), all their good evidence of the failings and biases of science comes from science's own highly vigorous exercises in self-policing and self-correction.

The critics have no choice: There is no better source of truth on any topic than well-conducted science, and they know it
[/b]


What are the achievements of metaphysics and its benefits to mankind? Why should we devote our time and efforts to it?

You hold these things as true even without a scientific test. Whether or not , you can conduct one is irrelevant. Besides, a DNA test can not conclusively test for your ancestor 8 steps behind as you are far removed from him.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/9912822/DNA-ancestry-tests-branded-meaningless.html

But if i ask you the Question, Do you have a great, great great great.. grand father, you will say yes, yet you can not prove it scientifically...

I introduce you to the hard problem of consciousness. There are areas of consciousness that lie outside the scientific method, e.g the inner subjective experience.

What does it mean to be Joseph1013 eating a sandwich?

Professor Koch explains:

Well, let’s first forget about the real difficult aspects, like subjective feelings, because they may not have a scientific solution. The subjective state of play, of pain, of pleasure, of seeing blue, of smelling a rose--there seems to be a huge jump between the materialistic level, of explaining molecules and neurons, and the subjective level.

http://discovermagazine.com/1992/nov/whatisconsciousn149

This subjective experience can not be explained via a materialistic approach. Even when we have images of the brain etc. The Subjective feeling of what it means to be you can not be explained by the scientific method.

Professor David Chalmers says:

I argue that neuroscience alone isn't enough to explain consciousness, but I think it will be a major part of an eventual theory. We just need to add something else, some new fundamental principles, to bridge the gap between neuroscience and subjective experience.

http://www.ditext.com/chalmers/chalm.html

Another quote:

There are a lot of hard problems in the world, but only one gets to call itself “the hard problem”. That is the problem of consciousness – how 1300 grams or so of nerve cells conjures up the seamless kaleidoscope of sensations, thoughts, memories and emotions that occupy every waking moment… The hard problem remains unresolved.”

New Scientist: The Collection. The Big Questions. Volume I, Issue I, p. 51.

The problem is there is no materialistic solution to this. It does not conform with the scientific method and therefore lies outside the scope of science.

Materialist attempts have failed to comprehensively explain our subjective personal experiences.

I argue that God is the best explanation to explain this and the reasons are as follows:

1. Where does consciousness come from? Theism best explains this.

2. Theism answers how consciousness entered the physical world.

3. Theism has greater explanatory power. It is something deeply rooted in the very essence of reality.

The materialist view point is a thing of miracles as it fails to explain how consciousness popped into existence through just physical processes.

4. Theism explains the gap between nonphysical mental and physical brain states and how they interact.

5. Theism explains why we have an awareness of what it means to be you

Now, the jump between materialistic naturalistic explanation and the subjective experience is too much. There has to be something that bridges that gap. This is where i feel a theistic explanation is the best explanation and makes perfect sense.

2 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 1:31pm On May 05, 2015
alolatee:




I still insist on 'Live' football matches which you must have fallen in love with.Goals are scored and when you are on set you do not doubt if the goals were scored or stage managed.Yes i am born into a christian home and am born again by the grace of God.No one who is a real christian believes the bible by seeing signs or convicted through a supernatural event before he believes.Come to the bible believing bro stop doubting. Doubt the hurting aspects like sicknesses, diseases, failure as not for Christians but not the universality of the Word of God, the Holy Spirit and the Father.believe the truth of the bible...2Timothy3vs16...2Peter1vs18-20...accept what it says blessed are you if you believe without having seen Jesus.
If you were born into Christianity I assume that's all you've ever known. Let me ask you: Have you considered Islam? What if Islam is the true religion? Does that imply you've wasted eternity? Have you consider Hinduism? Buddhism?

I think you should study the claims of other religions before believing 100% that Christianity is the one true religion.

Your analogy with football holds no water at all.

5 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 2:23pm On May 05, 2015
tbaba1234:


What do you gain from half quotes? Like i said, read the book first.

The Quran states:
, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly [with them], then only one, " Q 4:3

What does that tell you?

The above verse permits a man to take more than one wife on the condition that he can deal justly with them. So justice between wives is a precondition to marry more than one otherwise one is not permitted, This offers a practical solution to some of the societal problems. For example, In war torn regions of Africa, there are many widows caught in tough financial conditions because they have to take care of their kids alone. The Islamic model offers them Justice in a family environment. In the African American community in the U.S., there are so many men in prisons that the ratio of men to women is unfavourably skewed. We have many women without husbands and end up being mistresses and 'baby mamas'. It is a practical solution to problems societies face.

Also, Islamically a man provides for his family, Whatever a woman earns belongs to her and she has the freedom to do whatever she wants with it.

A muslim woman who doesn't want to be in a polygamous marriage can include the condition in her marriage contract. With that in her contract, her husband can not take more wives.

Also men and women are different, a women having more than one husband is impractical, Who will the child be credited to?? That is why when polygyny has been practised far more than polyandry.

Again, get a copy of the Quran, read it, then come back with questions. You already have preconceived notions without reading the book.

[b]Permitting men to marry more than one woman is inherently flawed. Why women are not allowed to marry more than one man is another question. Why are only men given such advantage is a question that Islamic clerics have not been able to address adequately without resorting to 'Allah knows best'.

First of all, the argument that men are allowed to marry more than one woman only if they can justly deal with them is one that has not been found to be very practicable. How do you love two women equally? How possible is it for a man to equally love two people? How do we measure the equal love?

That aside, there is no question about the fact that the legal structure of polygamy codifies an underlying discrimination against women. There are reports from polygamous communities which often point to early and forced marriage, in which polygamy serves as both a shield for, and weapon of, sexist behavior. Polygamy is often practiced secretively and in cloistered islamic communities that exist quite literally outside the norms of broader society. This situation creates impunity for those men who are abusing women.

Personally, I'm on the fence with polygamy. IF the women are of age and make the decision to enter a plural marriage on their own, then afterwards, everyone is happy with the arrangement…I dont see the big deal. But that is not often the case, underage girls are married off to paedophiles. They are abused simply because their parents say they are following Quranic injunctions.

You say a women who doesn't want to be in a polygamous marriage can include the condition in her marriage contract. Funny! What does a girl of 9 years old know about contracts. These girls are married off and you talk about contracts.

And for those following these posts, the verse you quoted is incomplete.

And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hand possesses. That is more suitable that you may not incline [to injustice]. Quaran 4:3

Islam's solution to helping Orphan girls is to marry them. Whatever happened to adoption? Whatever happened to treating these girls like your own female children? Whatever happened to the concept of establishing Orphanages?

You also say women having more than one husband is impractical, Who will the child be credited to? Says who? If Islam could allow men marry more than one woman, why limiting women to just one husband? Who says they can't decide amongst themselves? If they are adults, such decisions should be left for them. DNA tests exist to know which father has one child. But no, men are allowed to marry. Women can not because paternity of the child cannot be established. Yeah, right!

Also touching on why Islam wants only men to marry more than one wives and stops women, you mentioned war torn regions where the ratio of women to men is more than 2:1. Accepted! What about places where men are significantly more than women? Is polyandry justified? Of course not! It's a man's world! Only men are killed in battles! We've never had instances where more women and children were killed more than men in the history of the world.

There is no justifications to why men and women can not have equal rights. If you say men take care of the home, empower the women so they can contribute! [/b]


What i am saying is that the Quran is a very contextual book. I have studied the Quran to some level so i can talk at a fairly learned level. The verse is useful depending on the environment and context and even if you want to take it literally, no harm done as regards the actual business transaction.

However, the Quran is interpreted by those who have studied it. That is why it is tiring for me to go through the drivel you copied from an anti Islamic site.

Read the Quran yourself and form your opinion. I guarantee that you will be pleasantly surprised.

[b]It's very interesting to me when these assertions are made. First, what led to this was your interpretation that the reason Islam says two women should be witnesses compared to one man was because not many women were involved in business. And I would respond by saying that then why use a Book that does not deal with the change in which women conduct businesses in the 21st century to be the judge.

Judging by the many errors in the Quran, are we not right to say that it is due for a revision? Some say that even if is to remove the 'terrorist' verses that are used as justifications to kill and convert people.

It can not be understood by many of us. When two Islamic scholars talk about the same topics and voice out opposite things.

Earlier, I spoke about the revered Islamic scholar, al-Ghazali, who has been called 'the greatest Muslim after Muhammad,', He wrote that the role of a Muslim woman is to "stay at home and get on with her sewing. She should not go out often, she must not be well-informed, nor must she be communicative with her neighbors and only visit them when absolutely necessary; she should take care of her husband... and seek to satisfy him in everything... Her sole worry should be her virtue... She should be clean and ready to satisfy her husband's sexual needs at any moment."

That is the man most muslims refer to as the Greatest muslim after Mohammed.

Can you beat your chest and say that you are more versed in the Quran that he is? Can you say that you are a better Muslim than he is? Will you say his views and opinions about women as revealed in that quote is not informed by the many years he's spent studying the Quran? I think not![/b]

6 Likes 2 Shares

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 3:35pm On May 05, 2015
tbaba1234:


You hold these things as true even without a scientific test. Whether or not , you can conduct one is irrelevant. Besides, a DNA test can not conclusively test for your ancestor 8 steps behind as you are far removed from him.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/9912822/DNA-ancestry-tests-branded-meaningless.html

But if i ask you the Question, Do you have a great, great great great.. grand father, you will say yes, yet you can not prove it scientifically...

[b]You've totally missed the point. If you ask me if I have a father and I say yes. And then you go ahead to tell me to prove it to you. I simply go ahead to conduct a paternity test.

If you ask me if I have a great, great great great.. grand father. I will reply you that I have. If you ask me to prove it. I may or may not be able to prove it. But I guess I can. Your link says it cant be done. This link from a MIT website says it can: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/405384/tracing-your-ancestry/

But let's say I can't. You know what I will do? I will simply accept that I probably dont have and limit it to the degree that I can verify. I patiently wait for a day when science would be able to make it possible. But in the meantime, I would not go about proclaiming what I dont know to be true without evidence simply because I saw it in a book. I would not do that.



But what does the religionists do when confronted with this? They still INSIST that what they hold true without evidence.[/b]


I introduce you to the hard problem of consciousness. There are areas of consciousness that lie outside the scientific method, e.g the inner subjective experience.

What does it mean to be Joseph1013 eating a sandwich?

Professor Koch explains:

Well, let’s first forget about the real difficult aspects, like subjective feelings, because they may not have a scientific solution. The subjective state of play, of pain, of pleasure, of seeing blue, of smelling a rose--there seems to be a huge jump between the materialistic level, of explaining molecules and neurons, and the subjective level.

http://discovermagazine.com/1992/nov/whatisconsciousn149

This subjective experience can not be explained via a materialistic approach. Even when we have images of the brain etc. The Subjective feeling of what it means to be you can not be explained by the scientific method.

Professor David Chalmers says:

I argue that neuroscience alone isn't enough to explain consciousness, but I think it will be a major part of an eventual theory. We just need to add something else, some new fundamental principles, to bridge the gap between neuroscience and subjective experience.

http://www.ditext.com/chalmers/chalm.html

Another quote:

There are a lot of hard problems in the world, but only one gets to call itself “the hard problem”. That is the problem of consciousness – how 1300 grams or so of nerve cells conjures up the seamless kaleidoscope of sensations, thoughts, memories and emotions that occupy every waking moment… The hard problem remains unresolved.”

New Scientist: The Collection. The Big Questions. Volume I, Issue I, p. 51.

The problem is there is no materialistic solution to this. It does not conform with the scientific method and therefore lies outside the scope of science.

Materialist attempts have failed to comprehensively explain our subjective personal experiences.

[b]Again, I find it interesting when religionists try to use the fact that science has not solved some mysteries to thumb down science at the slightest opportunity.

Don't forget that there was a time when someone would have written something similar about thunder, about malaria, about the 'abnormality' of twins, about the fact that a woman delivers only female children, about rainfall, about never-seen-before ancient monuments, about the fact that you could type via your mobile. Thanks to science, we KNOW the answers to those things now.

Also, thanks to science, it's self-correcting. Because rigorous experiments and fact-finding are always taking place, we can improve upon the things we have created and even discard the things we thought once worked but were actually not working at all. Isn't that amazing!

So the Professors are correct. Science does not have ALL the answers to consciousness at this time. But it does not mean we will never have. Attempting to deride science because it is still in the process of getting one piece of the puzzle correctly, despite having gotten millions of other puzzles correctly, is not fair.

It's interesting when theists jump up and call science out when it has not perfected certain things while at the same same enjoy all the benefits science has offered since time immemorial. It is VERY interesting![/b]


I argue that God is the best explanation to explain this and the reasons are as follows:

1. Where does consciousness come from? Theism best explains this.

2. Theism answers how consciousness entered the physical world.

3. Theism has greater explanatory power. It is something deeply rooted in the very essence of reality.

The materialist view point is a thing of miracles as it fails to explain how consciousness popped into existence through just physical processes.

4. Theism explains the gap between nonphysical mental and physical brain states and how they interact.

5. Theism explains why we have an awareness of what it means to be you

Now, the jump between materialistic naturalistic explanation and the subjective experience is too much. There has to be something that bridges that gap. This is where i feel a theistic explanation is the best explanation and makes perfect sense.

[b]You see? What you have attempted to do is called using the 'god of the gap'. You have simply noticed a place where it SEEMS that science has failed and attributed it to the wonder of God.

Not long ago, people felt it was not God's design that man should fly. They argued and called it 'haram' saying God would have given us wings if his intention was for us to fly. Science has proved them wrong.

Not long ago, it was thought that God was up there, in the skies. People would look up and offer prayers (well, most still do). They thought behind the clouds was the palace of God and his angels. They marveled at how he made the earth his foot stool. Alas, men ascended into the skies, landed on the moon and saw nothing. In fact they discovered that we are a tiny bit on planet earth as far as the entire universe is concerned.

Like Neil deGrasse Tyson once said, God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time goes on.

All you need to do is to give science time. You know, science is not scared of saying that it does not know YET.

I mean for you to categorically say God, you have to prove that God exists first and foremost. I dont know anyone who has been successful with that. I dont know if you are aware of the One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge. is an offer by the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) to pay out one million U.S. dollars to anyone who can demonstrate a supernatural or paranormal ability. Over a thousand people have applied to take the challenge, but none have yet been successful. It's been around since 1964. That says something!

What you have attempted to do is use supernatural explanations for something we cant explain now. And using theism to explain consciousness has never been globally accepted because it cannot be proven.

If humanity attempts to toe your lie of attributing what we dont understand YET to the supernatural, there is going to be massive chaos like we are seeing in the myriads of sects in all religions of the world today.

Let us consider the consequences of abandoning too soon the quest for natural explanations for phenomena we do not understand. From a practical standpoint, it removes incentives for further discovery. For example, after centuries of research, scientists still do not understand what causes lightning. Should we then conclude that, on the basis of this failure, Thor, the Norse god of thunder, is responsible for this phenomenon after all? Or perhaps Baal, the Canaanite god of rain and thunder (from the Bible)?

Here is the rub: if we cede to supernatural explanations, we are essentially saying, "We don't know the causes, and furthermore we know we cannot know; therefore, we conclude that Allah did it, and by doing so, we're giving up on any fruitful scientific research into the causes."

Few muslims would fault scientists for their ongoing quest to discover the natural causes of lightning, yet many criticize science for their determination to explain consciousness, the origin and development of life without reference to God. Nothing spells the end of investigation like holding out the possibility that a thorny problem requires a supernatural theistic explanation.

Furthermore, because of our experience with the way the world works, we all subscribe to a scientific outlook in our everyday lives.

Imagine you park your car at Ikeja parking lot to do some shopping. A couple of hours later you return to find your car missing. Well, maybe you forgot where you parked it. No, you remember that you had noted the parking area—opposite the kerbs, infront of the flowers—in your notebook, and you returned to the same location, and you remember the same tree with the oddly twisted branches next to it. Perhaps someone stole it. No, you had installed a brand new alarm Chukwudi sold to you late last week to alert you remotely if anyone bumped it, and you had received no signal. Perhaps the alarm receiver malfunctioned. But why would anyone have been interested in your rusty, dilapidated, decades-old car with an ugly paint job? Perhaps it was a collector's item, unbeknownst to you. Or maybe your spouse needed the car, was in the area, and drove it away using her key.

You get the idea? Notice you start with the most mundane explanations first (for example, you forgot where you had parked it), then you work your way to more unusual possibilities. But however puzzling the situation, a supernatural explanation (for example, that a Jinn lifted it away) is the very last possibility you would consider, and probably one you would not consider at all.

Consider that if we subscribe to supernaturalism (of the theists or otherwise), then nothing is impossible (one could easily substitute the words miraculous or supernatural for the term impossible in this context), and we risk forfeiting the truth if we set aside the improbable in favor of the impossible.

There was a time the world followed that route. And we were not the better for it. The world has left that path and the constant calls by religionists that we go back to it is VERY unfair considering the giant strides we have made because we left it.[/b]

5 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by tbaba1234: 6:27pm On May 05, 2015
joseph1013:


[b]You've totally missed the point. If you ask me if I have a father and I say yes. And then you go ahead to tell me to prove it to you. I simply go ahead to conduct a paternity test.

If you ask me if I have a great, great great great.. grand father. I will reply you that I have. If you ask me to prove it. I may or may not be able to prove it. But I guess I can. Your link says it cant be done. This link from a MIT website says it can: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/405384/tracing-your-ancestry/

But let's say I can't. You know what I will do? I will simply accept that I probably dont have and limit it to the degree that I can verify. I patiently wait for a day when science would be able to make it possible. But in the meantime, I would not go about proclaiming what I dont know to be true without evidence simply because I saw it in a book. I would not do that.

But what does the religionists do when confronted with this? They still INSIST that what they hold true without evidence.[/b]




You are missing the point completely and shifting the goal post....

Now, The point is simple. 98% of your beliefs are simply through rational deductions. You do not believe your mum is your mum from scientific evidence, You believe it because of testimony.

There are many other ways to arrive at truths apart from things that can be put in a test tube. That is the point.

For instance, i do not need to see God, to know He exists... I can arrive at that conclusion through simple rational analysis of the world's realities.

I can also conclude that Islam is that path to truth through its pointers to the transcendent.

You have made your conclusion about Islam from your experience with christianity.... What does the Quran ask its readers to do? It asks them to Question it:

And if you are in doubt about what We have revealed (the Quran) to Our worshiper (Muhammad ), then produce a chapter like it,........ (Quran, 2:23)

This is still an open challenge by the way... The people best placed to challenge the Quran failed to do so... This is a technical subject but you can read about it here:

https://www.nairaland.com/1898514/qurans-miracle-non-arabic-speakers

Our beliefs have proof and firm rational basis. My belief in Islam is based on firm deductive reasoning.

Again, I find it interesting when religionists try to use the fact that science has not solved some mysteries to thumb down science at the slightest opportunity.

Don't forget that there was a time when someone would have written something similar about thunder, about malaria, about the 'abnormality' of twins, about the fact that a woman delivers only female children, about rainfall, about never-seen-before ancient monuments, about the fact that you could type via your mobile. Thanks to science, we KNOW the answers to those things now.

Also, thanks to science, it's self-correcting. Because rigorous experiments and fact-finding are always taking place, we can improve upon the things we have created and even discard the things we thought once worked but were actually not working at all. Isn't that amazing!

So the Professors are correct. Science does not have ALL the answers to consciousness at this time. But it does not mean we will never have. Attempting to deride science because it is still in the process of getting one piece of the puzzle correctly, despite having gotten millions of other puzzles correctly, is not fair.

It's interesting when theists jump up and call science out when it has not perfected certain things while at the same same enjoy all the benefits science has offered since time immemorial. It is VERY interesting!

Perhaps because you come from a christian background, you think all religions are anti science. There were no galileos in Islamic history. Islamic scholars wrote books on astrology, mathematics, philosophy and physics. I have a science background. I understand the philosophy of science and why an induction process does not give you certainty. The difference between you and I is that I keep science in its place.

So when you say 'theists' ... Know that we have different backgrounds...

You see? What you have attempted to do is called using the 'god of the gap'. You have simply noticed a place where it SEEMS that science has failed and attributed it to the wonder of God.

Not long ago, people felt it was not God's design that man should fly. They argued and called it 'haram' saying God would have given us wings if his intention was for us to fly. Science has proved them wrong.

Not long ago, it was thought that God was up there, in the skies. People would look up and offer prayers (well, most still do). They thought behind the clouds was the palace of God and his angels. They marveled at how he made the earth his foot stool. Alas, men ascended into the skies, landed on the moon and saw nothing. In fact they discovered that we are a tiny bit on planet earth as far as the entire universe is concerned.

Like Neil deGrasse Tyson once said, God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time goes on.

All you need to do is to give science time. You know, science is not scared of saying that it does not know YET.

I mean for you to categorically say God, you have to prove that God exists first and foremost. I dont know anyone who has been successful with that. I dont know if you are aware of the One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge. is an offer by the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) to pay out one million U.S. dollars to anyone who can demonstrate a supernatural or paranormal ability. Over a thousand people have applied to take the challenge, but none have yet been successful. It's been around since 1964. That says something!

What you have attempted to do is use supernatural explanations for something we cant explain now. And using theism to explain consciousness has never been globally accepted because it cannot be proven.

If humanity attempts to toe your lie of attributing what we dont understand YET to the supernatural, there is going to be massive chaos like we are seeing in the myriads of sects in all religions of the world today.

Let us consider the consequences of abandoning too soon the quest for natural explanations for phenomena we do not understand. From a practical standpoint, it removes incentives for further discovery. For example, after centuries of research, scientists still do not understand what causes lightning. Should we then conclude that, on the basis of this failure, Thor, the Norse god of thunder, is responsible for this phenomenon after all? Or perhaps Baal, the Canaanite god of rain and thunder (from the Bible)?

Here is the rub: if we cede to supernatural explanations, we are essentially saying, "We don't know the causes, and furthermore we know we cannot know; therefore, we conclude that Allah did it, and by doing so, we're giving up on any fruitful scientific research into the causes."

Few muslims would fault scientists for their ongoing quest to discover the natural causes of lightning, yet many criticize science for their determination to explain consciousness, the origin and development of life without reference to God. Nothing spells the end of investigation like holding out the possibility that a thorny problem requires a supernatural theistic explanation.

Furthermore, because of our experience with the way the world works, we all subscribe to a scientific outlook in our everyday lives.

Imagine you park your car at Ikeja parking lot to do some shopping. A couple of hours later you return to find your car missing. Well, maybe you forgot where you parked it. No, you remember that you had noted the parking area—opposite the kerbs, infront of the flowers—in your notebook, and you returned to the same location, and you remember the same tree with the oddly twisted branches next to it. Perhaps someone stole it. No, you had installed a brand new alarm Chukwudi sold to you late last week to alert you remotely if anyone bumped it, and you had received no signal. Perhaps the alarm receiver malfunctioned. But why would anyone have been interested in your rusty, dilapidated, decades-old car with an ugly paint job? Perhaps it was a collector's item, unbeknownst to you. Or maybe your spouse needed the car, was in the area, and drove it away using her key.

You get the idea? Notice you start with the most mundane explanations first (for example, you forgot where you had parked it), then you work your way to more unusual possibilities. But however puzzling the situation, a supernatural explanation (for example, that a Jinn lifted it away) is the very last possibility you would consider, and probably one you would not consider at all.

Consider that if we subscribe to supernaturalism (of the theists or otherwise), then nothing is impossible (one could easily substitute the words miraculous or supernatural for the term impossible in this context), and we risk forfeiting the truth if we set aside the improbable in favor of the impossible.

There was a time the world followed that route. And we were not the better for it. The world has left that path and the constant calls by religionists that we go back to it is VERY unfair considering the giant strides we have made because we left it.

I did not give you God of the gaps, You gave me Science of the gaps... It is clear that certain aspects of consciousness lie outside a materialistic explanation. Yet, you said... 'Science will figure it out'... Dude, science does not figure things out that lie outside the scientific method. There has to be an alternative explanation outside science. That is basic.

My postulation is simple, Theism best offers that explanation

Professor Koch explains:

Well, let’s first forget about the real difficult aspects, like subjective feelings, because they may not have a scientific solution. The subjective state of play, of pain, of pleasure, of seeing blue, of smelling a rose--there seems to be a huge jump between the materialistic level, of explaining molecules and neurons, and the subjective level.

http://discovermagazine.com/1992/nov/whatisconsciousn149


This explains one of the limitations of science as it fails to account for what is not physical. That does not make science bad. It just shows its limitations.

Theism remains the best explanation to that subjective state of consciousness. This conclusion is based on what Theism brings to the table as regards that conversation not a jump that says God did it.
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by tbaba1234: 6:54pm On May 05, 2015
joseph1013:


[color=#550000][b]Permitting men to marry more than one woman is inherently flawed. Why women are not allowed to marry more than one man is another question. Why are only men given such advantage is a question that Islamic clerics have not been able to address adequately without resorting to 'Allah knows best'.


How practical is it for a woman to marry more than one husband? Are men and women the same? What makes them different? Who takes responsibility for children?

First of all, the argument that men are allowed to marry more than one woman only if they can justly deal with them is one that has not been found to be very practicable. How do you love two women equally? How possible is it for a man to equally love two people? How do we measure the equal love?

Islam says treat with justly, not love equally... There is a difference... Next!!


That aside, there is no question about the fact that the legal structure of polygamy codifies an underlying discrimination against women. There are reports from polygamous communities which often point to early and forced marriage, in which polygamy serves as both a shield for, and weapon of, sexist behavior. Polygamy is often practiced secretively and in cloistered islamic communities that exist quite literally outside the norms of broader society. This situation creates impunity for those men who are abusing women.

Personally, I'm on the fence with polygamy. IF the women are of age and make the decision to enter a plural marriage on their own, then afterwards, everyone is happy with the arrangement…I dont see the big deal. But that is not often the case, underage girls are married off to paedophiles. They are abused simply because their parents say they are following Quranic injunctions.

You say a women who doesn't want to be in a polygamous marriage can include the condition in her marriage contract. Funny! What does a girl of 9 years old know about contracts. These girls are married off and you talk about contracts.


Consent from the woman is an important part of marriage in islam, The woman must agree before she can be married. She also has the right to seek divorce if she is unhappy.

"A woman without a husband (or divorced or a widow) must not be married until she is consulted, and a virgin must not be married until her permission is sought. They asked the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him): How her (virgin's) consent can be solicited? He (the Holy Prophet) said: That she keeps silence. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 008, Number 3303)"

O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good. (The Noble Quran, 4:19)"

And for those following these posts, the verse you quoted is incomplete.

And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hand possesses. That is more suitable that you may not incline [to injustice]. Quaran 4:3

Islam's solution to helping Orphan girls is to marry them. Whatever happened to adoption? Whatever happened to treating these girls like your own female children? Whatever happened to the concept of establishing Orphanages?

You also say women having more than one husband is impractical, Who will the child be credited to? Says who? If Islam could allow men marry more than one woman, why limiting women to just one husband? Who says they can't decide amongst themselves? If they are adults, such decisions should be left for them. DNA tests exist to know which father has one child. But no, men are allowed to marry. Women can not because paternity of the child cannot be established. Yeah, right!

Also touching on why Islam wants only men to marry more than one wives and stops women, you mentioned war torn regions where the ratio of women to men is more than 2:1. Accepted! What about places where men are significantly more than women? Is polyandry justified? Of course not! It's a man's world! Only men are killed in battles! We've never had instances where more women and children were killed more than men in the history of the world.

There is no justifications to why men and women can not have equal rights. If you say men take care of the home, empower the women so they can contribute!

DNA tests are available today due to advancement in science... How could we have determined parentage 1,400 years ago??

A woman can contribute to a home, but purely on her discretion.. She can not be compelled by her husband to fulfill what should be the husband's responsibilities.

Polygamy in Islam is a choice. It is not compulsory... My father married one wife. I hope to marry just one wife.

Equality does not always translate to fairness.

[s]It's very interesting to me when these assertions are made. First, what led to this was your interpretation that the reason Islam says two women should be witnesses compared to one man was because not many women were involved in business. And I would respond by saying that then why use a Book that does not deal with the change in which women conduct businesses in the 21st century to be the judge.

Judging by the many errors in the Quran, are we not right to say that it is due for a revision? Some say that even if is to remove the 'terrorist' verses that are used as justifications to kill and convert people.[/s]

Nonsense... People have used spreading democracy to murder millions.

Again pick up the book, read it first... You can't revise what you have not read...

[s]It can not be understood by many of us. When two Islamic scholars talk about the same topics and voice out opposite things.

Earlier, I spoke about the revered Islamic scholar, al-Ghazali, who has been called 'the greatest Muslim after Muhammad,', He wrote that the role of a Muslim woman is to "stay at home and get on with her sewing. She should not go out often, she must not be well-informed, nor must she be communicative with her neighbors and only visit them when absolutely necessary; she should take care of her husband... and seek to satisfy him in everything... Her sole worry should be her virtue... She should be clean and ready to satisfy her husband's sexual needs at any moment."

That is the man most muslims refer to as the Greatest muslim after Mohammed. [/s]

Lol... There is no one that regards al ghazzali as the greatest muslim after Muhammed Is that a joke NO ONE... This statement is completely unfounded.. Infact Ghazalli never said anything like that... Can you cite your reference

“”And among His signs is that He has created for you spouses from among yourselves so that you may live in tranquillity with them; and He has created love and mercy between you. Verily, in that are signs for those who reflect.” (30:21)”

Can you beat your chest and say that you are more versed in the Quran that he is? Can you say that you are a better Muslim than he is? Will you say his views and opinions about women as revealed in that quote is not informed by the many years he's spent studying the Quran? I think not!

Lol, Imam Ghazali never said anything of the kind...
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by alolatee(m): 10:26pm On May 05, 2015
joseph1013:

If you were born into Christianity I assume that's all you've ever known. Let me ask you: Have you considered Islam? What if Islam is the true religion? Does that imply you've wasted eternity? Have you consider Hinduism? Buddhism?

I think you should study the claims of other religions before believing 100% that Christianity is the one true religion.

Your analogy with football holds no water at all.


my analogy is very true and relevant.....bro....i come with another...Do you inspect your cushion chair at home before sitting on it or consider whether its weight will carry you?You just sit i want to agree with you without burdering.My friend about other man made religion, apary from christianity (which is God coming to man to save him).Other religion represents man's desire to meet with God.I conclude-Acts4vs12-There is no other way given among men by which we must be saved, except the name Jesus, I add.Don't be apostate:Heaven is real;Hell is likewise real.You are too precious to God to be lost in Hell.
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 4:44pm On May 06, 2015
tbaba1234:

You are missing the point completely and shifting the goal post....

Now, The point is simple. 98% of your beliefs are simply through rational deductions. You do not believe your mum is your mum from scientific evidence, You believe it because of testimony.

There are many other ways to arrive at truths apart from things that can be put in a test tube. That is the point.

For instance, i do not need to see God, to know He exists... I can arrive at that conclusion through simple rational analysis of the world's realities.

I can also conclude that Islam is that path to truth through its pointers to the transcendent.

You have made your conclusion about Islam from your experience with christianity.... What does the Quran ask its readers to do? It asks them to Question it:

And if you are in doubt about what We have revealed (the Quran) to Our worshiper (Muhammad ), then produce a chapter like it,........ (Quran, 2:23)

This is still an open challenge by the way... The people best placed to challenge the Quran failed to do so... This is a technical subject but you can read about it here:

https://www.nairaland.com/1898514/qurans-miracle-non-arabic-speakers

Our beliefs have proof and firm rational basis. My belief in Islam is based on firm deductive reasoning.

[b]Once again, you have missed what I've been talking about. Let's see if I can help out this time around.

I have explained to you that if an argument ever comes up about who is my mum, there is a way to find out. It does not mean that I am correct. Until it is proven, it is still my opinion. But for obvious reasons, alot of people are not interested in my proving my mum's motherhood to them. If a situation ever arises and there is a major issue about my mum's motherhood of me, guess what, no rational person in the 21st century will go over to your Imam over science. Pure hypocrisy.

That most people believe things without evidence is proof that most people are like sheeples who really do not care about what they believe.Most people, especially as observed in this part of the world are still like children in the thinking of the world. And that's thanks to religion.

Use fear to inculcate in them anything and they will believe anything.

For something as dangerous as Religion, you simply do not expect me to tale your word for it. What are the simple rational analysis of the world that make you believe God exists. You are 100% sure God exists, give us the simple rational analysis that convinced you of that. For someone like me, I simply say I dont know because those that claim God exists have not produced the evidence.

What is your quote from the Quran meant to achieve? Produce what chapter? Is that supposed to mean that the Quran is the greatest book ever? Dont even go there! The Quran is riddled with a lot of errors that makes a mockery of its claims.[/b]


Perhaps because you come from a christian background, you think all religions are anti science. There were no galileos in Islamic history. Islamic scholars wrote books on astrology, mathematics, philosophy and physics. I have a science background. I understand the philosophy of science and why an induction process does not give you certainty. The difference between you and I is that I keep science in its place.

So when you say 'theists' ... Know that we have different backgrounds...

I have told you, that there are muslims who wrote books on history, philosophy and the rest does not mean Islam is true. It means nothing! There are Christians, Buddhists, Hindus and several other people from other religions who have done such.

While some large chunks of religionists are peaceful, my best friends are muslims and christians, certain religionists use ancient outdated books gotten from religion to wreck havoc on the world. Superstitions, Terrorist acts, rape, domestic violence, child labour, early child marriage are things we see clearly in the Quran and/or the Bible that we simply can no longer tolerate in this age and time.

It does not make sense to use science for everything you are involved it and then dismiss it when it does not tally with your religion customs.

The most Islamic countries lag behind in science, in technology, in mortality rate, in human right practices. How do you explain that?


I did not give you God of the gaps, You gave me Science of the gaps... It is clear that certain aspects of consciousness lie outside a materialistic explanation. Yet, you said... 'Science will figure it out'... Dude, science does not figure things out that lie outside the scientific method. There has to be an alternative explanation outside science. That is basic.

My postulation is simple, Theism best offers that explanation

Professor Koch explains:

Well, let’s first forget about the real difficult aspects, like subjective feelings, because they may not have a scientific solution. The subjective state of play, of pain, of pleasure, of seeing blue, of smelling a rose--there seems to be a huge jump between the materialistic level, of explaining molecules and neurons, and the subjective level.

http://discovermagazine.com/1992/nov/whatisconsciousn149


This explains one of the limitations of science as it fails to account for what is not physical. That does not make science bad. It just shows its limitations.

Theism remains the best explanation to that subjective state of consciousness. This conclusion is based on what Theism brings to the table as regards that conversation not a jump that says God did it.

[b]I did not say science will certainly figure it out. I'm only saying that based on antecedents and the history of the world, there is a possibility that science will eventually do.

Long ago, people would have aid like you saying now that science cannot study anything that has to do with mind and behaviour. Like you, they will say it is out of the realm of science.

I mean, with a wave of hand, you have simply waved off the claims that science will ever know the answer to consciousness. This shows a huge ignorance of the great feats of science throughout the millennia. And interestingly, you could not prove to us consciousness via religion. Isnt that incredible!

You could not explain consciousness via religion, but you seek to stop the ongoing look-in of science into unravelling the mystery.

And maybe unknown to you, science is making progress on that. Ever read about how science is linking the brain with consciousness. With regards to Prof Koch, with respect, this man died in 1910. Hey, this is 2015. To put things in perspective for you, a 10-year girl has access to more information about access than he ever had. The world did not stop developing in 1910.Great strides about consciousness have been made about consciouness since 1910. Science does not sit on its ass and ask religion to come help out. It's always working.

And since you seem hung up on consciousness (maybe because that's the only area you think you can deride science as religion is an ever-receding pocket of ignorance, I offer you this: Scientists Closing in on Theory of Consciousness http://www.livescience.com/47096-theories-seek-to-explain-consciousness.html

What does that mean? Science may not have gotten the whole answer, but it's getting closer day by day.

It used to be impossible to communicate with someone in Canada from Nigeria. Our forefathers could not even imagine that happening. What has happened now? Buddy, dont be too quick to discard science.

Let me throw this to you: how does Islam explain consciousness?[/b]

2 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 6:14pm On May 06, 2015
tbaba1234:


How practical is it for a woman to marry more than one husband? Are men and women the same? What makes them different? Who takes responsibility for children?

[b]This is another reason why I dislike religion. It makes you have a closed mind. You really do not even attempt to look at the merits of polyandry. It's amazing.

While I do not really care about people engaging in polygamy (either man vs many women, or woman vs many men) as long as it is by mutual consent that the parties involved are satisfied with, your attempt to elevate one over the other purely because of your religion is a show of intolerance.

Let me help you out. Polyandry is actually more common and practicable than you are thinking. There is a rich history of communities that have lived successfully and are living successfully practicing polyandry.

- In the Lake Region of Central Africa, Polyandry, on the other hand, was quite common.
- The Masai, group of semi-nomadic people inhabiting southern Kenya and northern Tanzania, are polyandrous
- Among the Irigwe of Northern Nigeria, women have traditionally acquired numerous spouses called "co-husbands.
- Polyandry was widely (and to some extent still is) practised in Lahaul-Spiti situated in isolation in the high Himalayas in India.
- In Bhutan in 1914, polyandry was "the prevailing domestic custom
- The Aleut people in North America in the 19th century practiced Polyandry.
- Among the Kanak of New Caledonia in the Oceania, Polyandry is practiced
- up to 70 percent of Amazonian cultures may have believed in the principle of multiple paternity.

So you get the gist? It's been very practical since the beginning of time.

Here are a few things said about why people loved and practiced polyandry:

Polyandry, explains Dreger, is a solution to these environmental conditions, things like food scarcity or childcare insurance (it's important to have back-up husband on hand to provide socially-approved impregnation if something happens to first-string husband). The Bari people in Venezuela, for instance, have a system for recognizing two fathers of the same child, and this dual-fatherhood, according to anthropologists from Penn State, apparently gives children a better shot at surviving to age 15. The "two-dad" system is, according to Starkweather and Hames, "informal polyandry," because such societies may only recognize one of the men as a formal husband, but the important point is that systems like the one belonging to the Bari are all socially recognized.

Polyandry does occur, but often only when there are way more men milling around than there are fertile women, which has been, Hames says, the case among landowning societies way more often than polyandry has occured. How do landowning, non-egalitarian cultures deal with their dude surplus, in that case? It's pretty simple — they send them into the priesthood, tempt them into exploring the New World, or just ship them off to war. Problem solved! Landowning society can continue apace with its boring monogamy and polygyny.

I have conducted a research that shows that the males with a polygamous selection history have greater reproductive success than males with a monogamous selection history when they are forced to compete for mates in a semi-natural environment. This result is most parsimoniously explained by selection for genetically superior males, who have greater competitive ability, which supports the ‘good genes’ model for the evolution of polyandry. Thus, I provide evidence that females benefit from polyandry by producing sons that achieve increased reproductive success in a competitive environment. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3145191/

[/b]


Consent from the woman is an important part of marriage in islam, The woman must agree before she can be married. She also has the right to seek divorce if she is unhappy.

"A woman without a husband (or divorced or a widow) must not be married until she is consulted, and a virgin must not be married until her permission is sought. They asked the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him): How her (virgin's) consent can be solicited? He (the Holy Prophet) said: That she keeps silence. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 008, Number 3303)"

O ye who believe! [b]Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good. (The Noble Quran, 4:19)"

[b]It is either you dont know as much as you claim to know or you're simply being evasive.

Dude, it is permissible for a man to arrange a marriage for his young son even if he has not reached puberty; it is also permissible for him to arrange a marriage for his young daughter even if she had not reached the age of puberty. It was narrated that there was consensus on this point, but that is provided that compatibility is taken into account and that a clear and real interest is served by this marriage.

You deride Al Ghazali previously (something I will get to later) but do you know Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr and Ismaa‘eel ibn Ishaaq, if not, then you should know more about your religion. If you do, here are what they have to say:

Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said:

The scholars are unanimously agreed that the father may arrange a marriage for his young daughter without consulting her. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah when she was six years old. at-Tamheed, 19/98

Ismaa‘eel ibn Ishaaq said:

The father may arrange a marriage for a young (daughter) according to the consensus of the Muslims, and that is binding on her. at-Tamheed, 19/84

These are islamic scholars who after rigorously studying the Quran arrived at this conclusions with proof about what Mohammed himself did. If you say certain other scholars disagree, then isnt that proof that Islam is inherently flawed. How can a fundamental issue about child abuse divide muslim scholars so much and Allah could not wade in and settle it once and for all by an unmistakable act of divinity?
[/b]


DNA tests are available today due to advancement in science... How could we have determined parentage 1,400 years ago??

A woman can contribute to a home, but purely on her discretion.. She can not be compelled by her husband to fulfill what should be the husband's responsibilities.

Polygamy in Islam is a choice. It is not compulsory... My father married one wife. I hope to marry just one wife.

Equality does not always translate to fairness.

[b]Like I told you before, polyandry has been practiced successfully since thousands of years back. And it is still being practiced successfully. That islam did not think along that line simply means that it is nothing but human invention borne out of the need of that period. You should think about that more.

And you side-stepped all the questions I asked you about why Islam would want to marry vulnerable children off to people who could has well be their grandfathers instead of adoption. Whatever happened to treating these girls like your own female children? Whatever happened to the concept of establishing Orphanages?

Also touching on why Islam wants only men to marry more than one wives and stops women, you mentioned war torn regions where the ratio of women to men is more than 2:1. Accepted! What about places where men are significantly more than women? Is polyandry justified? Of course not! It's a man's world! Only men are killed in battles! We've never had instances where more women and children were killed more than men in the history of the world.[/b]


Nonsense... People have used spreading democracy to murder millions.

Again pick up the book, read it first... You can't revise what you have not read...

Ad hominems again! Are you saying these 'terrorist' verses are not in the Quran. Are you saying the Quran does not have errors?

Lol... There is no one that regards al ghazzali as the greatest muslim after Muhammed Is that a joke NO ONE... This statement is completely unfounded.. Infact Ghazalli never said anything like that... Can you cite your reference

[b]I dont know whether to be shocked or alarmed. Do you know Professor Montgomery Watt? Maybe not. He was a Scottish historian, an Emeritus Professor in Arabic and Islamic studies. Prof. Watt noted: "Al-Ghazali has been acclaimed as the greatest Muslim after Muhammad, and is certainly one of the greatest." Read his book, "Al-Ghazali: The Muslim Intellectual" to find out more. But it's interesting to me how you'd deride an Islamic great just to score cheap points.

You ask that I cite the reference and I ask you to read Al Ghazali's well-known book, "The Revival Of The Religious Sciences" where he states:

"She should stay at home and get on with her spinning, she should not go out often, she must not be well-informed, nor must she be communicative with her neighbours and only visit them when absolutely necessary; she should take care of her husband and respect him in his presence and his absence and seek to satisfy him in everything; she must not cheat on him nor extort money from him; she must not leave her house without his permission and if given his permission she must leave surreptitiously. She should put on old clothes and take deserted streets and alleys, avoid markets, and make sure that a stranger does not hear her voice or recognize her; she must not speak to a friend of her husband even in need. ... Her sole worry should be her virtue, her home as well as her prayers and her fast. If a friend of her husband calls when the latter is absent she must not open the door nor reply to him in order to safeguard her and her husband's honour. She should accept what her husband gives her as sufficient sexual needs at any moment. ... She should be clean and ready to satisfy her husband's sexual needs at any moment. "

Also, in a polemic against women, Al-Ghazālī wrote the following:

Without going into lengthy details, a summary of what constitutes etiquette for the woman is the following: She should remain in the inner sanctum of her house and tend to her spinning; she should not enter and exit excessively; she should speak infrequently with her neighbours and visit them only when the situation requires it; she should safeguard her husband in his absence and in his presence; she should seek his pleasure in all affairs and refrain from betraying him through herself or his possessions; she should not leave his home without his permission: if she goes out with his permission, she should conceal herself in worn-out clothes and choose the less-frequented places rather than the main avenues and market places, being careful that no stranger hear her voice or recognize her personally; she should not approach friends of her husband while going about her business, but feign ignorance of those who might recognize her or whom she might recognize; her primary concern should be caring for her own affairs, tending to her house, performing her prayers, and fasting; should a friend of her husband knock at the door when he [the husband] is not present, she should not ask questions or engage in conversation, so as to maintain her self-respect and her husband’s; she should be content with the means that God has provided her husband; she should place his rights before hers and before the rights of his relatives; she should always observe the rules of personal hygiene, and be ready at all times for him to enjoy her whenever he wishes; she should be affectionate toward her children, zealous to protect them, refraining from uttering profane words against them and from talking back to her husband.
Source: Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad al-Ghazālī , Marriage and Sexuality in Islam: A Translation of Al-Ghazālī’s Book on the Etiquette of Marriage from the Iḥyāʾ (Salt Lake City, U.S.A: University of Utah Press, 1984), p.124.

Do you have any idea the negative influence such views and opinions from a revered scholar would have on the Muslims minds and societies?[/b]


Lol, Imam Ghazali never said anything of the kind...

So now that I have proven to you that he actually said it, can you now beat your chest and say that you are more versed in the Quran that he is? Can you say that you are a better Muslim than he is? Will you say his views and opinions about women as revealed in that quote is not informed by the many years he's spent studying the Quran?

2 Likes 1 Share

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 6:27pm On May 06, 2015
alolatee:



my analogy is very true and relevant.....bro....i come with another...Do you inspect your cushion chair at home before sitting on it or consider whether its weight will carry you?You just sit i want to agree with you without burdering.My friend about other man made religion, apary from christianity (which is God coming to man to save him).Other religion represents man's desire to meet with God.I conclude-Acts4vs12-There is no other way given among men by which we must be saved, except the name Jesus, I add.Don't be apostate:Heaven is real;Hell is likewise real.You are too precious to God to be lost in Hell.

Good. It is not difficult to prove why a chair will hold your body together. It's secondary school physics. The proof is there for all to see. Apart from the Bible, which has been proven to be inaccurate whose original manuscripts cannot be found, how do you prove to me that Christianity is the one true religion.

I asked you a question that you didnt answer. I will ask again: Have you considered Islam? What if Islam is the true religion? Does that imply you've wasted eternity? Have you consider Hinduism? Buddhism? Can you say with assurances that you will be a Christian if you were born in China?

Please, no rhetorics. Just answer the questions?

2 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by alolatee(m): 8:24pm On May 06, 2015
joseph1013:


Good. It is not difficult to prove why a chair will hold your body together. It's secondary school physics. The proof is there for all to see. Apart from the Bible, which has been proven to be inaccurate whose original manuscripts cannot be found, how do you prove to me that Christianity is the one true religion.

I asked you a question that you didnt answer. I will ask again: Have you considered Islam? What if Islam is the true religion? Does that imply you've wasted eternity? Have you consider Hinduism? Buddhism? Can you say with assurances that you will be a Christian if you were born in China?

Please, no rhetorics. Just answer the questions?



My brother, Titus2vs1-11. Mostly the part that states the grace of God that bringeth salvation has appeared unto all men it went further to say that it teaches us to abstain from all ungodliness, wordly lusts and to live righteously, soberly in this world.My brother, in creation the nature of God is seen by all, the universe and the galaxies are all wonders for us to see.Do you know in the generation of Enoch, it was only him so was in the generation of NOAH only him was adjudged to have pleased God.Do you want to tell me there are no Christians in China or India or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia?My brother, be concerned about yourself first and get it right first, then you can have burden for the 'Iron Curtains' of the world.People were saved by this same grace that bringeth salvation so why won't i if i was a national of those nations.It is God who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above what i can ever ask or think or could imagine.Receive grace for grace to turn from apostasy unto the God who we must to do and who will judge all men...Lastly, to them that call on him he will come the second time not unto sin but unto Salvation(eternal life)
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 2:57pm On May 07, 2015
alolatee:




My brother, Titus2vs1-11. Mostly the part that states the grace of God that bringeth salvation has appeared unto all men it went further to say that it teaches us to abstain from all ungodliness, wordly lusts and to live righteously, soberly in this world.My brother, in creation the nature of God is seen by all, the universe and the galaxies are all wonders for us to see.Do you know in the generation of Enoch, it was only him so was in the generation of NOAH only him was adjudged to have pleased God.Do you want to tell me there are no Christians in China or India or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia?My brother, be concerned about yourself first and get it right first, then you can have burden for the 'Iron Curtains' of the world.People were saved by this same grace that bringeth salvation so why won't i if i was a national of those nations.It is God who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above what i can ever ask or think or could imagine.Receive grace for grace to turn from apostasy unto the God who we must to do and who will judge all men...Lastly, to them that call on him he will come the second time not unto sin but unto Salvation(eternal life)

Rhetorics! Oga, have you considered Islam? Have you considered all the available religions in the world before arriving at your answer? Do you know that if Islam is the way to God, you will burn in hell? Are you willing to gamble with that?

The China question came up because I wanted to open your mind to the possibility that you could actually have been a Christian because you were born into a Christian home? How sure are you that if you were born a muslim you would have converted? What is the percentage of people that have done that compared to those who didnt?

Have you for once considered this question: What if Christianity is wrong? Will you still continue to live the lie?

Let me ask you: why do you think the Bible is the Word of God apart from the fact that the Bible said so?

5 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by alolatee(m): 5:45pm On May 07, 2015
joseph1013:


Rhetorics! Oga, have you considered Islam? Have you considered all the available religions in the world before arriving at your answer? Do you know that if Islam is the way to God, you will burn in hell? Are you willing to gamble with that?

The China question came up because I wanted to open your mind to the possibility that you could actually have been a Christian because you were born into a Christian home? How sure are you that if you were born a muslim you would have converted? What is the percentage of people that have done that compared to those who didnt?

Have you for once considered this question: What if Christianity is wrong? Will you still continue to live the lie?

Let me ask you: why do you think the Bible is the Word of God apart from the fact that the Bible said so?


To the debate as to whether Christianity is the true religion, i use the socratic method of teaching to answer you.
Do you believe in miracles?How many religionist of the so-called religions you were mentioning ever performed or was used of their God to do miralces.The answer is definitely no.I believe in miracles which Jesus wrought in the bible as well as those God enabled ministers are doing.I am a living witness of miracles.While growing up, between 5-7 i had a ringworm which defied all care.My father applied some acid since that was the norm then on the spot.It ate up the skin in the center of my brain.It almost sank and i spent some time going to the hospital for check up.Had the acid touched my brain i would have been another mad person on the street.Up to that time and now turning a young adult, God miraculousely made me whole although no hair grew in that spot save for some, it was a miracle that i survived.Being alive is a miracle which God(Jesus) can only do.My brother, if Baal be baal, follow him.Why waiver between two opinions.Let the God that perform miracles be the true God.I rest my case, Jesus is Lord.No one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by frank317: 6:46pm On May 07, 2015
alolatee:



To the debate as to whether Christianity is the true religion, i use the socratic method of teaching to answer you.
Do you believe in miracles?How many religionist of the so-called religions you were mentioning ever performed or was used of their God to do miralces.The answer is definitely no.I believe in miracles which Jesus wrought in the bible as well as those God enabled ministers are doing.I am a living witness of miracles.While growing up, between 5-7 i had a ringworm which defied all care.My father applied some acid since that was the norm then on the spot.It ate up the skin in the center of my brain.It almost sank and i spent some time going to the hospital for check up.Had the acid touched my brain i would have been another mad person on the street.Up to that time and now turning a young adult, God miraculousely made me whole although no hair grew in that spot save for some, it was a miracle that i survived.Being alive is a miracle which God(Jesus) can only do.My brother, if Baal be baal, follow him.Why waiver between two opinions.Let the God that perform miracles be the true God.I rest my case, Jesus is Lord.No one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.

Sorry I have to come in here....

You had ring worm....
You did everything and it didn't go....
Your father uses acid (which makes be wonder what type of treatment you have been using).....
It burnt ur skin, almost reaching ur brain!!!!!!!!!
You went to hospital for treatment...
.
.
.
You grew up...
God miraculously made some hair grow on your head
Pls what's the miracle here? Some hair grew back on ur head or that God didn't allow acid to reach ur brain?

Before you answer... My neighbour's kid died from grandnut chock.. Just a seed of grandnut he playfully threw into his throat and he choked to death... He has no testimony

1 Like

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 7:00pm On May 07, 2015
alolatee:



To the debate as to whether Christianity is the true religion, i use the socratic method of teaching to answer you.
Do you believe in miracles?How many religionist of the so-called religions you were mentioning ever performed or was used of their God to do miralces.The answer is definitely no.I believe in miracles which Jesus wrought in the bible as well as those God enabled ministers are doing.I am a living witness of miracles.While growing up, between 5-7 i had a ringworm which defied all care.My father applied some acid since that was the norm then on the spot.It ate up the skin in the center of my brain.It almost sank and i spent some time going to the hospital for check up.Had the acid touched my brain i would have been another mad person on the street.Up to that time and now turning a young adult, God miraculousely made me whole although no hair grew in that spot save for some, it was a miracle that i survived.Being alive is a miracle which God(Jesus) can only do.My brother, if Baal be baal, follow him.Why waiver between two opinions.Let the God that perform miracles be the true God.I rest my case, Jesus is Lord.No one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.

[b]Did you say the talk of miracles show Christianity to be true? Like I keep saying, you need to explore more and keep talking rhetorics. Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism and a great deal of other minor religions of the world believe in miracles. It baffles me how you would monopolize miracles. Please, just do a simple google search.

As pertaining to your personal example, I understand. Personal experience could invoke emotions that make us take feelings over logic. But see, your situation is not unique. Cases of the kind of experience you described is common everywhere else. For instance, in the recent earthquake that happened in Nepal, a Baby was pulled from Nepal earthquake rubble after 22 hours. Hinduism and Buddhism are the predominant religions in Nepal. The child could grow up and attribute that 'miracle' to either of the two. Does it mean either of the two is right? No!

What saved you was not God. What saved you is Science. You went to the hospital. Why didnt your parents ask you to stay at home and invite pastors to pray? Several christians have been killed through ringworm. That should cause you to think.

Be open-minded. In your answers, you have failed to answer my questions.

So with what I have educated you on, you should consider the following:

Do you know that if Islam is the way to God, you will burn in hell? Are you willing to gamble with that?

The China question came up because I wanted to open your mind to the possibility that you could actually have been a Christian because you were born into a Christian home? How sure are you that if you were born a muslim you would have converted? What is the percentage of people that have done that compared to those who didnt?

Have you for once considered this question: What if Christianity is wrong? Will you still continue to live the lie?

Let me ask you: why do you think the Bible is the Word of God apart from the fact that the Bible said so?[/b]
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by Rilwayne001: 9:33pm On May 07, 2015
alolatee:



To the debate as to whether Christianity is the true religion, i use the socratic method of teaching to answer you.
Do you believe in miracles?How many religionist of the so-called religions you were mentioning ever performed or was used of their God to do miralces.The answer is definitely no.I believe in miracles which Jesus wrought in the bible as well as those God enabled ministers are doing.I am a living witness of miracles.While growing up, between 5-7 i had a ringworm which defied all care.My father applied some acid since that was the norm then on the spot.It ate up the skin in the center of my brain.It almost sank and i spent some time going to the hospital for check up.Had the acid touched my brain i would have been another mad person on the street.Up to that time and now turning a young adult, God miraculousely made me whole although no hair grew in that spot save for some, it was a miracle that i survived.Being alive is a miracle which God(Jesus) can only do.My brother, if Baal be baal, follow him.Why waiver between two opinions.Let the God that perform miracles be the true God.I rest my case, Jesus is Lord.No one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.

SMDH undecided
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by alolatee(m): 11:32pm On May 07, 2015
joseph1013:


[b]Did you say the talk of miracles show Christianity to be true? Like I keep saying, you need to explore more and keep talking rhetorics. Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism and a great deal of other minor religions of the world believe in miracles. It baffles me how you would monopolize miracles. Please, just do a simple google search.

As pertaining to your personal example, I understand. Personal experience could invoke emotions that make us take feelings over logic. But see, your situation is not unique. Cases of the kind of experience you described is common everywhere else. For instance, in the recent earthquake that happened in Nepal, a Baby was pulled from Nepal earthquake rubble after 22 hours. Hinduism and Buddhism are the predominant religions in Nepal. The child could grow up and attribute that 'miracle' to either of the two. Does it mean either of the two is right? No!

What saved you was not God. What saved you is Science. You went to the hospital. Why didnt your parents ask you to stay at home and invite pastors to pray? Several christians have been killed through ringworm. That should cause you to think.

Be open-minded. In your answers, you have failed to answer my questions.

So with what I have educated you on, you should consider the following:

Do you know that if Islam is the way to God, you will burn in hell? Are you willing to gamble with that?

The China question came up because I wanted to open your mind to the possibility that you could actually have been a Christian because you were born into a Christian home? How sure are you that if you were born a muslim you would have converted? What is the percentage of people that have done that compared to those who didnt?

Have you for once considered this question: What if Christianity is wrong? Will you still continue to live the lie?

Let me ask you: why do you think the Bible is the Word of God apart from the fact that the Bible said so?[/b]


Day unto day uttereth knowledge.There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard.My brother, this speaks of nature and the created things.The world cannot exist alone apart without something or somebody pulling the strings.Nature tells me there is a God and he is Jesus.Moreover, the bible for all its accuracy cannot be left out of any discussion about God.God said it, i believe it, that settles it.I don't believe the bible or Jesus because i read about him only, i believe in the bible and in Jesus because He is true that said 'For God so loved the world that he gave(How many of those religionists you mentioned gave themselves or their children or relation to save the world) his only begotten son(Jesus) that whosoever believe in him(God will not force himself on people like those religions u mentioned force their beliefs on people) should not perish(the will of God for mankind is that they would not loose their soul in hell that is why he gave his son -Jesus) but have everlasting life(There is a heaven to gain and an earth to loose for every believer). You don't need to know all the bible which is works to be accepted to heaven but the basic thing is to believe the God of the bible and not doubt his salvation.In Christ, we don't need the seven books of Moses. In christ we pray always more of a lifestyle not a compulsory prayer time and restricted to certain no of prayer time per day.We don't need to worship the created thing such as cow or an animal or the created thing:No! We worship the creator rather.
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by alolatee(m): 11:35pm On May 07, 2015
Rilwayne001:


SMDH undecided
@Rilwayne001 SMDH meaning? Ican't fathom anything about your comment.Make yourself clear please.
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 10:41am On May 10, 2015
alolatee:



Day unto day uttereth knowledge.There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard.My brother, this speaks of nature and the created things.The world cannot exist alone apart without something or somebody pulling the strings.Nature tells me there is a God and he is Jesus.Moreover, the bible for all its accuracy cannot be left out of any discussion about God.God said it, i believe it, that settles it.I don't believe the bible or Jesus because i read about him only, i believe in the bible and in Jesus because He is true that said 'For God so loved the world that he gave(How many of those religionists you mentioned gave themselves or their children or relation to save the world) his only begotten son(Jesus) that whosoever believe in him(God will not force himself on people like those religions u mentioned force their beliefs on people) should not perish(the will of God for mankind is that they would not loose their soul in hell that is why he gave his son -Jesus) but have everlasting life(There is a heaven to gain and an earth to loose for every believer). You don't need to know all the bible which is works to be accepted to heaven but the basic thing is to believe the God of the bible and not doubt his salvation.In Christ, we don't need the seven books of Moses. In christ we pray always more of a lifestyle not a compulsory prayer time and restricted to certain no of prayer time per day.We don't need to worship the created thing such as cow or an animal or the created thing:No! We worship the creator rather.

[b]Hmmm...I wont lie if I say I'm getting a lil bit exasperated. I asked a simple question and you go about rambling.

I categorically asked you not to quote to me from the Bible why the Bible and what it claims are true. What you're doing is called circular argument. It's like saying, Pa Obasanjo is Femi's father. And the person says that he knows this because Femi said so. That's not a good argument. Claims have to be verifiable by third parties.

Let me help you out a bit. The Bible as you know it is not what you think it is. It is the creation of the council of Nicea. I urge you to read up on it. Roman Emperor Constantine the Great was the one who was responsible for the Bible you took to Church today. The original manuscripts cant be found again so there is no way to know for sure how real it is. There are so many errors therein that it cannot be called the infallible word of God.

Answer the questions I asked you. Ask me questions about the Bible and Christianity and let's trash this out. There is really no need repetition the rhetorics. Please! [/b]
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 10:43am On May 10, 2015
[b]DON'T LET IGNORANCE RUIN YOUR TROUSERS

Transport yourself back in time six hundred years. Look up into the sky and see the sun. You don't know what it is but you know it gives off huge amounts of heat and light—enough to warm and illuminate the entire planet.

As you gaze at this celestial monster there is one thing you are sure of—something as powerful as that and so essential for human life could not have happened by accident—it must have had a designer. A designer who created it and put it in the perfect orbit to give the exact amount heat and the exact amount of day and night necessary to sustain all living things on Earth. At that moment, you fall to your knees and thank your god (whichever god you happened to believe in).

...

Returning to the 21st century, we have moved on. We understand our sun very well indeed. We know its chemistry and the physics that formed it and sustains it. We understand how it formed, how long it will live, how it will change over its lifetime and how it will die. And we know all of that is caused by natural, unguided processes.

We have learned so much in the intervening years that there are only a few deep mysteries remaining, such as the origin of life and the cause of the Big Bang.

But one thing has not changed. Still billions of people assume their gods are responsible for things they don't understand. It is wise to learn from history rather than repeat it. Don't be on your knees when the true origin of life is finally discovered. Get up, brush yourself off, and withhold belief until we actually know how it happened.

After all, trousers are valuable, and so is your dignity.[/b]

2 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by alolatee(m): 6:36pm On May 10, 2015
joseph1013:


[b]Hmmm...I wont lie if I say I'm getting a lil bit exasperated. I asked a simple question and you go about rambling.

I categorically asked you not to quote to me from the Bible why the Bible and what it claims are true. What you're doing is called circular argument. It's like saying, Pa Obasanjo is Femi's father. And the person says that he knows this because Femi said so. That's not a good argument. Claims have to be verifiable by third parties.

Let me help you out a bit. The Bible as you know it is not what you think it is. It is the creation of the council of Nicea. I urge you to read up on it. Roman Emperor Constantine the Great was the one who was responsible for the Bible you took to Church today. The original manuscripts cant be found again so there is no way to know for sure how real it is. There are so many errors therein that it cannot be called the infallible word of God.

Answer the questions I asked you. Ask me questions about the Bible and Christianity and let's trash this out. There is really no need repetition the rhetorics. Please! [/b]


@Mr Joseph1013, there is no way i can talk without talking of the bible.One thing i will advise you to do is to plead with you to accept the bible as the word of God.Somebody who have risen to the enviable position of being a president of a student fellowship and suddenly become apostate is baffling for me.I quote the bible because that is my life.I can't do anything outside the word.i live by the word of God and my sincere hope is to obey it to the latter.Do you know the devil has suggested to you to doubt the word and his demons are happy you are challenging the authority of the word? It is sad.I pray for a turning point for you and those who are kicking against the pricks as you do.There is no light in Islam, Budhism or any of those false religions.Jesus only holds the key to the light-John14vs6-I am the way the truth and the Life.No one comes to the father except by me.I have no better or superior arguement for the bible outside of the God of the word-The Lord Jesus.Am happy because the bible says if one falls into error(in this case a believer) and one converts him....so somebody who had believed and practised Christianity or followed Christ like you did can still come back through the grace of God.That is what i pray to God for you...not the rather part of the bible that says there is no other sacrifice that can be paid if one who had being lightend if he falls.Thanks for a time to re-Access our beliefs in Christ.

1 Like

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by AllNaijaBlogger(m): 7:10am On May 12, 2015
Was enjoying the thread. Seems tbaba1234 lost interest and ran away.

Joseph1013, not all Christians are the same
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 8:47am On May 12, 2015
AllNaijaBlogger:
Was enjoying the thread. Seems tbaba1234 lost interest and ran away.

Joseph1013, not all Christians are the same

What do you mean?
Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by joseph1013: 9:01am On May 12, 2015
alolatee:



@Mr Joseph1013, there is no way i can talk without talking of the bible.One thing i will advise you to do is to plead with you to accept the bible as the word of God.Somebody who have risen to the enviable position of being a president of a student fellowship and suddenly become apostate is baffling for me.I quote the bible because that is my life.I can't do anything outside the word.i live by the word of God and my sincere hope is to obey it to the latter.Do you know the devil has suggested to you to doubt the word and his demons are happy you are challenging the authority of the word? It is sad.I pray for a turning point for you and those who are kicking against the pricks as you do.There is no light in Islam, Budhism or any of those false religions.Jesus only holds the key to the light-John14vs6-I am the way the truth and the Life.No one comes to the father except by me.I have no better or superior arguement for the bible outside of the God of the word-The Lord Jesus.Am happy because the bible says if one falls into error(in this case a believer) and one converts him....so somebody who had believed and practised Christianity or followed Christ like you did can still come back through the grace of God.That is what i pray to God for you...not the rather part of the bible that says there is no other sacrifice that can be paid if one who had being lightend if he falls.Thanks for a time to re-Access our beliefs in Christ.

I was like you for a greater part of my years (but I must confess that I was and I'm still more vast in scriptures based on what you've written in this thread alone). The challenge however is to look beyond what you have been taught. Start asking hard questions. Knowing how to think empowers you far beyond those who know only what to think.

I mean, take a look at the image attached and this should spring forth some questions.

3 Likes

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by PastorAIO: 9:25am On May 12, 2015
alolatee:



@Mr Joseph1013, there is no way i can talk without talking of the bible.

That's sad.


One thing i will advise you to do is to plead with you to accept the bible as the word of God.

On what grounds?

Somebody who have risen to the enviable position of being a president of a student fellowship and suddenly become apostate is baffling for me.

It makes sense that it would baffle you.

I quote the bible because that is my life.

How so?

I can't do anything outside the word.

That's just pathetic.

i live by the word of God and my sincere hope is to obey it to the latter.Do you know the devil has suggested to you to doubt the word and his demons are happy you are challenging the authority of the word?

Can demons be happy?

It is sad.I pray for a turning point for you and those who are kicking against the pricks as you do.


There is no light in Islam, Budhism or any of those false religions.

How do you know that?

Jesus only holds the key to the light-John14vs6-I am the way the truth and the Life.No one comes to the father except by me.I have no better or superior arguement for the bible outside of the God of the word-The Lord Jesus.Am happy because the bible says if one falls into error(in this case a believer) and one converts him....so somebody who had believed and practised Christianity or followed Christ like you did can still come back through the grace of God.That is what i pray to God for you...not the rather part of the bible that says there is no other sacrifice that can be paid if one who had being lightend if he falls.Thanks for a time to re-Access our beliefs in Christ.

1 Like

Re: My Thoughts And Questions About Religion by AllNaijaBlogger(m): 10:54am On May 12, 2015
joseph1013:


What do you mean?


Your discussion with Alolatee is what I am talking about. Not all Christians are the same. Some can actually reason outside the bible

(1) (2) (3) ... (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) ... (130) (Reply)

The First Britsh Slave Ship To Reach The Americas Was Called The Good Jesus! / Jesus is coming soon. This thread is for faithful watchmen / Scandal: Pastor Chris Oyakhilome In South African Trouble!

Viewing this topic: LordReed(m)

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 366
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.