ReubenSandwich:


You might want to know that some posts here including yours were being copied and pasted into other forums outside of Nairaland, and answers to those being copied back here under the names of Tamaratonye1, 1000WaysToLive, Near1, Midnight378, chryssanthe, Silverseed, and FemiAjani. That stopped more than a week ago, after it was pointed it out, and since then there haven't been any posts under those names.

Wow. That’s good to know. Thanks.

I'm going to put the question a different way: Can the morals of a person who doesn't believe in the reality or existence of any God, be as good as the best morals of people who believe in one? My answer is yes. I would also say it goes both ways. The morals of a person who believes in a God can be as good as the best morals of people who don't don't believe in any. Does anyone disagree with that? Define "good morals" however you want to. Speaking for myself only, I'm thinking of morals for example as honesty, trustworthiness, integrity, fairness, and social responsibility.

Another question is whether people losing their belief in a God will make the world better or worse. My answer is neither.

ReubenSandwich:

Thank you. I’m not arguing against trust in the messengers of the God of Abraham.

I understood perfectly, what i'm saying is when it comes to moral decadence the problem stem from the complications created by Satan.

Satan established countless religions all in the name of GOD (SUPREME BEING) so when the messenger of the true God delivers God's word tens of thousands of Satan's agents also comes up with contradicting messages thereby confusing the layman who just want to take in instructions from the supreme being.

That's why Jesus said "By their FRUITS you will know" {Matthew 7:16} this quote is not talking to the faithless but faithful people who feels hungry and thirsty to ascertain what righteousness means.

So instead of concluding that morality can't be achieved with faith in God why not focus on what each school of thought says about morality? For instance think of how this planet will be if all of us are either ATHEISTS, AGNOSTICS, MUSLIMS, HINDUS, BUDDHISTS, CHRISTIANS, TRADITIONALISTS and so on.

Satan made sure that the religions are so many but there is just one group that's achieving what no other has ever achieved for thousands of years before now. That is the TRUTH.

According to the Bible when God is preparing to destroy Satan, demons and all their human agents the Holy Spirit will start working to get faithful people throughout the earth and bring them under one umbrella {Isaiah 2:2; Micah 4:1} they will use God's word as yardstick for right and wrong in their gathering {Isaiah 2:3; Micah 4:2} and the result will be settling all their racial disparities, diverting their resources into production of food and information materials, erasing the making, buying, selling and usage of weapons from their hearts and vowing never to raise weapons against anyone again. As for military services they will say FAREWELL because they will see everyone as their brothers and sisters! Isaiah 2:4; Micah 4:3


Please what better results do we expect from morality if not peaceful coexistence?

Only JEHOVAH the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob foretold this and it's happening today in the midst of His worshipers whom He is calling by another group name JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES! Isaiah 65:15

Ask anyone as in ANYONE to present what they know about morality and the positive results expected in all other schools of thought!

ReubenSandwich:
I'm going to put the question a different way: Can the morals of a person who doesn't believe in the reality or existence of any God, be as good as the best morals of people who believe in one? My answer is yes.

Does anyone disagree with that? Define "good morals" however you want to. Speaking for myself only, I'...

That means that morals is set and determined by that person. Therefore, consider this, if morals is set by this guy

https://www.nairaland.com/7395295/last-day-bizarre-tanzanian-pastor#117768710

Or this guy

https://www.nairaland.com/7396206/professor-family-beat-strip-20-year-old.

Morals means that which is good and right, (so there is really nothing like good morals for morals is always good) so I ask you, have you seen men who are good and right especially when they have been given power?

[quote author=ReubenSandwich post=117798828
Another question is whether people losing their belief in a God will make the world better or worse. My answer is neither.[/quote]

To make the world better or horrible is in the hands of people and their preferences (belief) dictates the direction in which it would go eg a person who belives in having sex with any woman or man he/she likes has led to the world to murders and strugglings and abandoned children and fights and quarrels and deceits and stealings etc.

MaxInDHouse:
Only JEHOVAH the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob foretold this and it's happening today in the midst of His worshipers whom He is calling by another group name JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES! Isaiah 65:15

Ask anyone as in ANYONE to present what they know about morality and the positive results expected in all other schools of thought!

All I can think of to say for now is that maybe some of what people are doing in all religious communities including Jehovah's Witnesses, and outside of all of them, is serving God's kingdom and part of what needs to be done to reduce the amount of disasters arising from human nature, and the damage they do.

I have my own way of thinking, different from all current schools. The positive results that I'm picturing are disasters from human nature being largely eliminated some time in the next 200 years, and between now and then the damage from them being continually reduced; and continual improvement in bringing out the best possibilities in people, in society, and in the world around us, and in reducing the harmful side effects.

ReubenSandwich:


All I can think of to say for now is that maybe some of what people are doing in all religious communities including Jehovah's Witnesses, and outside of all of them, is serving God's kingdom and part of what needs to be done to reduce the amount of disasters arising from human nature, and the damage they do.

I have my own way of thinking, different from all current schools. The positive results that I'm picturing are disasters from human nature being largely eliminated some time in the next 200 years, and between now and then the damage from them being continually reduced; and continual improvement in bringing out the best possibilities in people, in society, and in the world around us, and in reducing the harmful side effects.

Well what we are expecting from 1914 is the worst condition on planet earth, things will continue to get worse by the second and only in the midst of JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES will those trying to do what is right will remain due to the presence of Jesus' spiritual brothers known today as the Governing Body.
All other religions will massively turn against their leaders and then atheism will take over the world politics and then they will start to hunt the JWs that's when our God will prove Himself.
But before then things will continue to get worse globally!

One topic that keeps coming up in these discussions is people saying that even if people can have good morals without believing in God, the original source of those morals is some religions, and the more people turn away from those religions, the worse people's morals will be. Other people are saying that religions are not and never have been the source of the best morals. In my view, the best moral behavior comes from people learning to live the way that religious teachers and scriptures have sometimes taught people to live, but the belief systems that people call "religion" today are mostly hiding those teachings from people and repelling them away from them, and often used as excuses and camouflage for all kinds of cruelty, violence and oppression. Disclosure: I also think that ways of thinking that people think of as "rational," "critical," "enlightenment values," "modern," "freethinking," and "scientific" are often used in the same ways, and actually not any better in any way than religious beliefs.

MaxInDHouse:

But before then things will continue to get worse globally!

That's one thing we agree on!

ReubenSandwich:




Thank you. Do you have any other ideas about what anyone who wants to can do in their everyday life to promote reason, critical thinking, education, rationality, humanism and real empathy?

I wish to reiterate what I wrote earlier, we have to drop religious dogmatism, fanaticism and superstitious beliefs. These beliefs block people's from thinking.
Other things one must do is to drop reliance on wishful thinking, cognitive biases and every form of emotional thinking before one can be able to reason clearly, to gain critical thinking, to be rational, etc. This is just the first step. All these are not easy but it's possible. Amongst everything I listed above, the only one that should be retained but should be balanced with rationality is emotional thinking but the rest blocks our ability to think clearly.
There are so much one can do after taking this first step but for now, I wish to stick with this.

ReubenSandwich:


What you said above, engaging people respectfully. That’s setting a good example for others, and I see that as a way of helping to improve society. That’s one reason that I don’t think these discussions are entirely fruitless.

I'm happy that we both agree on this.

ReubenSandwich:








LIke I said, I'm curious about your reasons for thinking that arguing and debating with people about their beliefs in an Internet forum will help solve some social problems. As I'm understanding it, your reasoning is something like this:
- One reason for the problems is some religious beliefs.
- Therefore, people turning away from those beliefs will help solve those problems.
- Thereore, arguing and debating with people about those beliefs, in an online forum, will help solve those problems.

Am I understanding that correctly?

Do you have any other reasons for thinking that arguing and debating with people about their beliefs in an Internet forum will help solve some social problems?

I see some possible agreements and common interests between us, which I'm hoping to discuss, but for now I'm curious to see if I'm understanding your reasons for thinking that debating with people about their beliefs, in an Internet forum, is a way of helping to solve some social problems. I think that it can be, but not for that reason.

(later) Your story get k-leg!

Lol! Even though I alluded to some personal anecdotes, I'm not fully in support of eroding religious beliefs, but I'm in support of eroding religious dogma and fanaticism.
Borrowing from the reply I just sent earlier, I still insist that these arguments are the first step to so much possibilities of solving social issues. With these arguments, we get to debate on issues which unfortunately centers mostly on religion. We're like representatives of the rest of the populace, the religious majority and the non-religious minority, we get to question each other on that which we believe in and don't believe in, because these beliefs affect all of us in many ways.

I'll give you an example of how these debates are very important; a man on nairaland who goes by the moniker 'DTruthSpeaker' believes that people who don't believe in his God and his book deserves to die or are evil people, he represents a large number of Nigerians and Africans who believe these things and make non-believers suffer for it. So for people like us that do not agree with him and thinks his beliefs are false, ridiculous and dangerous, we question him on his claims and let the readers of the threads think whether it's right to follow DTruthSpeaker's beliefs. And if probably, our counter-opinions to DTruthSpeaker's beliefs gains prominence in people's minds, it can open up the path for redemption for non-believers that suffer for DTruthSpeaker's beliefs.

But it's just one example.

Dtruthspeaker:


The atheist chant when counter-attacked!

This is one of the clever ways you use to elude arguments that you know fully well that you've lost and also elude when people point out the bullshits you love doing. Shifting the goalposts. Mtchew.

Dtruthspeaker:


You said all these about 20 posts back and you saw and went off point and started changing posts.

So my work was already done and the case closed.

What's even your problem? You made two claims:
1. That your God destroyed the Summerians and Babylonians
2. That there's verifiable evidence for your God or at least, a god.

I'm asking you to provide the evidence for your claims and you're dodging it, wetin dey do you na??

AuthenticKing:


LolI'll a man on nairaland who goes by the moniker 'DTruthSpeaker' believes that people who don't believe in his God and his book deserves to die.

And now you are a Liar! Show where I ever said this! Liar!

Which is the first problem with having a reasonable debate with you people. YOU PEOPLE ARE LIARS AND LOVE TO LIE. And every reasonable person knows that Lying is not part of a debate, but atheists became atheists because they lie first to themselves, so how will they not lie to others?

ReubenSandwich:
Wilgrea7, AuthenticKing, if you are practicing good behavior in these discussions, I would see that as a way of helping to stop the cruelty, violence and oppression from happening, and helping to reduce the damage. I’m still hoping for you to post some other ideas besides debating about religious beliefs, about what people can do in their everyday lives if they want to, to help stop the cruelty, violence and oppression from happening, and to help reduce the damage.

I've touched on those ideas in my recent reply to you but religion plays a huge role in our lives so it unfortunately is the focus of discussions on this section which happens to be a religious section.

Dtruthspeaker:


And now you are a Liar! Show where I ever said this! Liar!

Which is the first problem with having a reasonable debate with you people. YOU PEOPLE ARE LIARS AND LOVE TO LIE. And every reasonable person knows that Lying is not part of a debate, but atheists became atheists because they lie first to themselves, so how will they not lie to others?

And he's denying what he's known for doing on nairaland. Chai!
Well, for the sake of formalities, I had to go search for a few evidence of you saying this.

Dtruthspeaker:

OF WHICH WE ALL KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THE TRUTH OF WHY YOU PEOPLE NEVER ACCEPT IT. WHICH IS BECAUSE YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT YOU ARE GUILTY OF ALL CRIMES ALLEGED AND THAT YOU CAN NEVER QUALIFY FOR AMNESTY AND PARDON OR EVEN PAROLE.

So you guys just come to lament your disqualification and seeing that you are guilty criminals under our Laws, therefore you are here to recruit to yourselves more members.

Dtruthspeaker:

And thirdly, even here, most atheists here have proven that they are evil by their ease and willingness and even pleasure in the doing of that which is evil.

This is even flowing from the fact that it is also proven beyond doubt that even ordinary people are given towards doing that which is not good even though they have some fear of retaliatory harm, which at least slows their willingness. So how can a person who does not care about his own direct harm, with the same desire for being wicked, therefore not be more evil than the regular ordinary folks?

The way they are wicked and very wicked even in here has already settled this.

Dtruthspeaker:


Meanwhile he would not allow you control him as politicians have proven eg Buhari, Putin, bandits, murderers, unknown gunmen, atheists etc

Dtruthspeaker:

don't think any reasonable person would see a cobra near their compound or even inside it, ithat he would not pick up a big stick to kill it and throw it away.

That is how atheists should be treated.

And there are so much evidences littered on nairaland of you condemning people who don't believe in your God and your Bible.

You're a deluded bigot.

AuthenticKing:

And there are so much evidences littered on nairaland of you condemning people who don't believe in your God and your Bible.

You're a deluded bigot.

AND NOT ONE OF MY POST SAID "people who don't believe in his God and his book deserves to die".!

SEE THE LIAR THAT YOU ARE!

And every one knows that all liars are wicked and the wicked deserves to die!

Dtruthspeaker:


AND NOT ONE OF MY POST SAID "people who don't believe in his God and his book deserves to die".!

SEE THE LIAR THAT YOU ARE!

Ogbeni, get out!!! I would only leave it for reasonable people to read and even go through many of your posts that I didn't paste here and find out whether I was right with my assertion or not. As for you, I'm done with your nonsense.

AuthenticKing:


Ogbeni, get out!!! I would only leave it for reasonable people to read and even go through many of your posts that I didn't paste here and find out whether I was right with my assertion or not. As for you, I'm done with your nonsense.

I had already left you a lone, you wicked thing until you wickedly called me in AND THEN LIED AGAINST ME! EVIL THING!

Dtruthspeaker:


I had already left you a lone, you wicked thing until you wickedly called me in AND THEN LIED AGAINST ME! EVIL THING!

Lol! As I wrote before, my comment is left for reasonable people to judge.
With all the discussions I've had with you and observing your manner of discussing on this platform, I've seen that you're in a deep end with your dogma, fundamentalism and bigotry.
I'm only taking the hassle of replying you for the sake of people sitting on the fence between reason and dogma. Reasonable people already know you for who you are. Mtchew.

AuthenticKing:
Nairaland might actually be the bedrock to promote reason, critical thinking, education, rationality, humanism and real empathy ...

I thought that might be a common interest between us, but after browsing through your posts to other people, I don't believe that you are seriously trying to promote reason, critical thinking, education, rationality, humanism and real empathy. Even in your responses to me, I see no reason to think that you are. It looks to me like just an excuse that you made up for what you're doing here, and not what you are really aiming for.

Wilgrea7:
The goal is to get people to think, should I say differently, and more intuitively and logically.

I thought that might be a common interest between us, but after browsing through your posts to other people, I don't believe that you are seriously trying to promote better ways of thinking. Even in your responses to me, I see no reason to think that you are. It looks to me like just an excuse that you made up for what you're doing here, and not what you are really aiming for.

ReubenSandwich:


I thought that might be a common interest between us, but after browsing through your posts to other people, I don't believe that you are seriously trying to promote better ways of thinking. Even in your responses to me, I see no reason to think that you are. It looks to me like just an excuse that you made up for what you're doing here, and not what you are really aiming for.

How you see me is something that's entirely out of my control. So i won't try to convince you otherwise.

But out of curiosity... What made you arrive at that conclusion?

Wilgrea7:
But out of curiosity... What made you arrive at that conclusion?

I'm thinking that maybe my idea of better ways of thinking is different from yours.

(later) I'll put it a different way. You don't seem to be interested in any topic that interests me. You don't even seem to be interested in discussing the topic of better ways of thinking and how to promote them.

(later) Most of what I see you doing in your posts doesn't look to me like promoting better ways of thinking. Like I said, maybe my idea of better ways of thinking is different from yours.

ReubenSandwich:
I'm going to put the question a different way: Can the morals of a person who doesn't believe in the reality or existence of any God, be as good as the best morals of people who believe in one? My answer is yes. I would also say it goes both ways. The morals of a person who believes in a God can be as good as the best morals of people who don't don't believe in any. Does anyone disagree with that? Define "good morals" however you want to. Speaking for myself only, I'm thinking of morals for example as honesty, trustworthiness, integrity, fairness, and social responsibility.

Another question is whether people losing their belief in a God will make the world better or worse. My answer is neither.

Comparing the morality of an atheist, to the morality of a theist, is often a tricky task. Mainly because we have theists who are moral, and theists who are grossly immoral.

The issue I've been trying to point out, is not whether one is objectively more moral than the other. It's when someone could be doing something morally abhorrent, and still think they are right, simply because they believe a God told them so.

If you've noticed, a lot of the theists who act in some morally acceptable way, especially christians, often reference commandments like "love thy neighbor as thyself".

Because morality is, always has been, and always will be a human affairs thing. Human affairs, and well being is the major thing taken into consideration when talking about morality. A God has little, if anything to do with it.

Your second question also misses the point. Belief in a God is not an umbrella term you can use to classify all theists in respect to morality.

Some religions believe in a God who supports good moral behavior among humans. Some believe in a God that supports the exact opposite. For the latter, losing their belief can be a good thing for society. The former doesn't necessarily pose any problems.

ReubenSandwich:


I'm thinking that maybe my idea of better ways of thinking is different from yours.

(later) I'll put it a different way. You don't seem to be interested in any topic that interests me.

I find it a bit weird, that you'd accuse me of not trying to promote different ways of thinking, simply because we're interested in different topics. Even as far as to say I only use it as a made-up excuse.

That being said, what in your opinion, would you consider "a better way of thinking"?

Wilgrea7:
I find it a bit weird, that you'd accuse me of not trying to promote different ways of thinking, simply because we're interested in different topics. Even as far as to say I only use it as a made-up excuse.

That being said, what in your opinion, would you consider "a better way of thinking"?

Sorry, I added some more to my post above while you were posting.

You don't seem to be interested in any topic that interests me. You don't even seem to be interested in discussing the topic of better ways of thinking and how to promote them.

Most of what I see you doing in your posts doesn't look to me like promoting better ways of thinking. It isn't because of the topic. it's because the way you discuss it doesn't look to me like promoting better ways of thinking. Like I said, maybe my idea of better ways of thinking is different from yours.

Wilgrea7:
The issue I've been trying to point out, is not whether one is objectively more moral than the other. It's when someone could be doing something morally abhorrent, and still think they are right, simply because they believe a God told them so.

I see that. I also see people who don't believe in any God doing equally abhorrent things, and still thinking that they're right for some other reason, so I don't see what it has to do with believing in a God or not.

Some religions believe in a God who supports good moral behavior among humans. Some believe in a God that supports the exact opposite. For the latter, losing their belief can be a good thing for society.

I've never seen any improvement in anyone's attitudes and behavior from losing their belief in a God. The only thing that changes is the targets of their harmful attitudes and behavior, and their excuses for it. Sometimes the new targets are the people they previously identified with, and sometimes their attitudes and behavior towards other people are even worse than before.

ReubenSandwich:


Sorry, I added some more to my post above while you were posting.

You don't seem to be interested in any topic that interests me. You don't even seem to be interested in discussing the topic of better ways of thinking and how to promote them.

Most of what I see you doing in your posts doesn't look to me like promoting better ways of thinking. It isn't because of the topic. it's because the way you discuss it doesn't look to me like promoting better ways of thinking. Like I said, maybe my idea of better ways of thinking is different from yours.

You've not answered my second question.

What, in your opinion, would you consider to be a “better way of thinking"

Wilgrea7:
You've not answered my second question.

What, in your opinion, would you consider to be a “better way of thinking"

I’m only interested in finding out if there’s any possibility of interesting conversations between us. I’m not interested in debating about the reality or existence of any God, and if you have any other interest here besides that, I haven’t seen it.

One moral issue that I don’t think is resolved by the existence or non-existence of a God, and which I think urgently needs to be addressed, is people ignoring, denying and excusing the harm in what they’re doing and in what they’re promoting. Another is people excusing themselves from trying to improve their own character and conduct and the way they live their lives, in ways that will help improve the lives of people around them and around the world. Neither of those has anything to with whether or not a person believes in the reality or existence of a God.

ReubenSandwich:


I’m only interested in finding out if there’s any possibility of interesting conversations between us. I’m not interested in debating about the reality or existence of any God, and if you have any other interest here besides that, I haven’t seen it.

So what I've noticed so far, is that you've failed to give any example of what you would consider a better way of thinking.

You've only stated that things like belief in a God are of no interest to you, which is completely fine. But I don't think that's any reason to say the people who engage in these discussions are not interested in "better ways of thinking".

Statements like this make a claim to some sort of objective way of reasoning, which is difficult to back up.

Having a different interest from someone else doesn't automatically mean they're somehow subpar in terms of how they think.

This is the religious section, where people come to debate topics related to a belief in a god/gods, or lack thereof.

If that isn't your interest, then that's completely fine. But it's no reason to say the people who take interest in it are somehow not utilizing sufficiently good thinking methods.

ReubenSandwich:
One moral issue that I don’t think is resolved by the existence or non-existence of a God, and which I think urgently needs to be addressed, is people ignoring, denying and excusing the harm in what they’re doing and in what they’re promoting. Another is people excusing themselves from trying to improve their own character and conduct and the way they live their lives, in ways that will help improve the lives of people around them and around the world. Neither of those has anything to with whether or not a person believes in the reality or existence of a God.

You still don't get it.
The focus of this section is to debate religious beliefs, Wilgrea7 and I has shown you so many examples of how the belief in God contributes so much to people making excuses for their wrong actions, they use "God" to cover up for these things and get away with it. Of course, people make other excuses for wrong actions regardless of whether they are religious or not but it has more credence when people cite holy books as the reason for these actions, that's the major point here.
I also went further to cite other ways people make excuses for wrong and backward actions aside religious/superstitious beliefs such as reliance on wishful thinking and emotions and cognitive biases but you ignored it by simply saying that I'm not promoting what I claim to promote. That's not a way to have healthy discussions.

I understand that you have some preconceptions before you joined this discussion but implying that we are not having reasonable discussions just because we are not discussing your way is not right. Why not try your best to understand our position before making dismissive statements such as the ones you did up there?

AuthenticKing:

Wilgrea7 and I has shown you so many examples of how the belief in God contributes so much to people making excuses for their wrong actions, they use "God" to cover up for these things and get away with it. Of course, people make other excuses for wrong actions regardless of whether they are religious or not but it has more credence when people cite holy books as the reason for these actions, that's the major point here.

I think that's a good point, and I was thinking that too at one time, but now I don't think that makes "God says" any worse than some other popular excuses. My point is still the same. I don't think that people losing their God beliefs is doing anything to help solve any social problems, and I don't think it ever will.