₦airaland Forum

truthman2012:
They are the people that kill by slaughtering and they will tell you their religion is a religion of peace.

Satanists.

True! And they are running rife even here on nairaland. But you know that oftentimes Satanism and those people are interwoven.

She was slaughtered. No mention of ritualistic scenario or if she was robbed.

I deduce say na dem dem....Those ones who just finished starving....


Its just an assumption o before they slaughter me too electronically.

Let me check for more clues.

dalaman:
I may not know what 24361*5262262 is but I know for sure that it can never be 20. How do you that your own version of God created the earth? What irrefutable evidence do you have to provide?

Again I tell you my position is not to prove anything to you but to trigger your thought process so you can find out for yourself if you really desire it.

dalaman:
I am not confused. Admitting that you don't know something is not the same as being confused. Do you have any irrefutable evidence to show that the God of the bible created the universe? Is there any irrefutable evidence to show that everything evolved from single cells? There is no such evidence anywhere. So I do not know is the most honest position for me.

Herein ls your confusion. You say you do not know yet you argue and try to refute even what you do not know instead of craving to know.

So its safe to say you are in a quagmire that you do not have a clue how to come out of it.

dalaman:
Some atheist accept the theory of evolution and some don't. I personally do not know and I am always ready to admit it. It is not a position of evolution or creationism. There is the I don't know category and some of us fall into it. There is no absolute evidence to show that evolution is true and as such I do not accept it. Creationism has no evidence at all to support it only claims and words of mouth. So I personally belong to the I do not know crowd based on lack of evidence for both creationism and evolution.

So am I right to infer that you are confused or Blank?

Do you have any laid down plan to find out or you have someone you are absolutely sure can give you answers?

Or you are just floating. Pray tell.

dialfa:
so?

Nothing o! Just that I don't deal with minions of someone I Just cast out from a sick person a short while ago and he ran away whimpering like a scared little puppy. He even begged me to spare him because he knows he has bee judged already.

Your Master is pathetic and so are the rest of you.

dialfa:
Genesis 4:21?

You mean 3:21 where yahweh was running helter skelter trying to cover up his evil machinations. This is how xtians deceive the gullible. Before yahweh came with his animal skins, Satan has already shown Adam and Eve how to sow their own clothes themselves. So @ the bolded YOU LIED! Read a few verses previous:

Genesis 3:6

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

The difference is that even though they have become wise and skilled in cloth making, yahweh still want them to remain lazy by sowing their clothes for them so he could claim he clothed them. That is the charity of a dictator.

A good person teaches you how to do things yourself instead of giving to you and keeping you in perpetual servitude.

Smh. Everyday something new pops up to challenge and ridicule a God whom they call useless and crazy. I wonder why?

dalaman:
It is not an atheistic postulation period. Evolution is a scientific theory and not an atheistic theory. There are more theist that believe in evolution than atheist. The Catholic Church including the pope supports evolution and says that the creation narrative in the bible is only symbolic. Both theist and atheist accept evolution. It is a scientific theory and has nothing to do with atheism or theism.

You are a proud Atheist yes? And you stand tall to say Atheists do not believe in the science of evolution neither do they believe in Biblical creation.

Dont dodge this question again as u enjoy doing.

WHAT DO ATHEISTS BELIEVE AS THE ORIGIN OF MAN?

"Thou wast created." Ezekiel 28:13, 15. "Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth." Ezekiel 28:14. "Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty ... every precious stone was thy covering ... the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. ... Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." Ezekiel 28:12-15.

Answer: Lucifer was created by God, as were all other angels (Ephesians 3:9). Lucifer was a "covering" cherub, or angel. One great angel stands on the left side of God's throne and another on the right (Psalms 99:1). Lucifer was one of those highly exalted angel leaders. Lucifer's beauty was flawless and breathtaking. His wisdom was perfect. His brightness was awe-inspiring. Ezekiel 28:13

But he has lost all this due to his desire to be like God. Now his assignment is to deceive as many as he can.

dialfa:
He created Himself

I knew you were a satanist.

dalaman:
I repeat get your facts right. Homosexuality exist in gorillas, golden monkeys, orangutan and chimps. It is not true that only bonbons practice it. Homosexuality exist in almost all.mammalian species. Google is your friend. As for evolution the fact is that more theist believe in it than atheist. Some of the highest proponents of evolution are theist. The postulation that humans evolved from hominid apes is a scientific postulation and not an atheistic one.

If it is not an Atheistic belief then which is your belief?

dialfa:
See the bolded. Why did yahweh not do it? why punish and rant and get angry when Satan did the right thing?

Why would I disprove the nazarene? His useless life and criminal death are enough proof to any wise person that he's not to be followed.

Calling you moronic would be an insult to the word. Obviously you did not understand my last post.


Also note that man did not make his own clothes . The bible says God sewed animal skin together and covered them up...Genesis 4: 21.

Satan did not cover them up GOD DID!

its obvious you are a satanist so listening or taking anything you say seriously is akin to stupidity.

Enjoy your luciferian life.

dalaman:
If you want to make arguments make sure you know what you are talking about before you begin dishing out false information. Scientist not atheist say that humans evolved from.hominid apes. There are more theist that believe in evolution than atheist. The Catholic Church believes in evolution for example. Most ape like animals like monkeys and chimps practice homosexuality. Gets your facts right. Even with God in the question you have failed to show us how morality is objective. Which moral system as advertised by the theist should we adopt? Is it sharia? Why or why not?

Nobody forced you to respond to my post but if you must get your head together and your education and facts straight before you do.

The only Ape specie that engages in honosexuality is the bonobo or pygmy chimpanzee so did man come from thd bonobo since some crave homosexuality.

Oh I forgot Atheists do not believe in science and science talks about the big bang and evolution and the same Atheists do not believe in Creation.

So for the Atheist how did they come to be? Did they just magically appear? I ask this because u are not pro science and not pro creation.

But wait I headd you arguing your "GOD DOES NOT EXIST" Theory and your " GOD IS NOT THE AUTHUR OF MORALS" Theory using the same Scientific research you claim not to believe in.

So which are you? Confused? Delusional? Unstable? Or just BLANK.

dialfa:
@op, see xtian confusion.

garden is real when it suits them. it is not a physical place when it doesn't suit them.

op the truth is that god was god of confusion and his followers are showing the trait. he is a god of lies which was why he told his naked servants that look like mad people that they are perfect. Which kind of person will see a naked and his wife roaming about and instead of clothing them keeps telling them they are perfect? isn't that being a pervert?

Satan saw this evil and intervened and told them. He also gave them the wisdom to make their own clothes and cover themselves.

So to answer your question, there was no such thing as a garden of eden as yahweh would like us to believe. Just two lonely couple wandering about like mumu in the middle east until Satan saved them. All other rantings are sour grapes by an angry and shameless god.

First of all its known as CHRISTIAN and not XTIAN.

Second of all I do not know where you got thd delusion that Christians are confused on the existence of Eden or lack of it.

Thirdly when you were born, how did you come out? With clothes? When you were born in the innocence of birth did you come out from your mama and then try to cover up your genitals because you felt embarrassed?

Even in real life someone had to open your eyes to the fact that being naked today is wrong but without that info you would see nothing wrong with it.

If you are an Atheist you just helped me to prove the reality of the origin of morality but if you are not and a satanist then instead of Arguing or trying to disprove something as mundane as Eden why not try disproving Jesus.

johnydon22:
This is the juncture i leave it for people reading to decide the case based on the discussion above.




A genocide has one definition, so if a God commands it, it doesn't make it any less genocide.

You see you are even the one championing subjective morality. To you genocide is wrong but when it is being carried out as an express command of God it somehow ceases to be a genocide and becomes right?

And this sounds right to you ?

How is a genocide wrong in one instance and then at the other instance it becomes right if there is an objective moral value?

this is the same question i asked you concerning torturing children: how is torturing children right for correction and wrong for fun? is both not still same disturbing act of torture?

If genocide is objectively wrong then in what ever instances or excuses it may come with - it remains wrong.

Coining out excuses to redefine what you would agree is wrong to make it right goes further not only to reveal moral subjectivity but also dishonesty in it's application for religious ideas.

If per say the Israeli's where not allegedly under a direct command of God [the one you believe in] their actions would be very wrong and disturbing to you but here since it is directly an action based on the charges of your own concept of God [who as you recognize the compass for your morality] there was need for you to justify the action and recognize it to be right - something you obviously wouldn't normally do.

But here you actually believe some genocides are right while some are wrong...

That goes a very good way to paint out Religious morality to the readers here... because you have just shown Genocide is not wrong to you, the only difference is you need God's approval to do it..

you are arguing for is not Objective morality but only a morality that excludes every other human idea but relies only on the subjctive idea of your own god concept whose moral ideas are still in fact that of humans.

Surely enough Islamic militants and Boko haram are very right since their actions are in direct submission to the supposed will of God.

Isn't the israeli tribal deity Yahweh till one of the thousands of God concepts on earth with varying subjective moral ideas?

here effects of an action on the society, human well being or others does not matter, what matters is just do what ever god wants.

This surely should make sense to you.

that is not morality that is just sheepish conformity, and blind conformity to an authority is the greatest enemy of truth.

You have totally shown subjectivity of morality by agreeing that a genocide championed by god ceases to be a genocide and therefore not wrong

this is one of the instances when i recognize religious ideas as detrimental to human well being and survival therefore a sinister idea that deserves to be abhorred.

you've totally justified an absurd act here with God and reveres a gross abhorrence cus of religious inclination and subjectivity

My work here is done, i rest my case... Have a good one

All you just said is just a dance in a hoola hoop. If you say morality is subjective what happens when you take God out of the equation same way you Atheists are doing and you have absolutely free anything goes morals and you remove laws. Will you say that homosexuality or beastiality is right? And that we would still be better than animals?

I ask this because the last time I checked you Atheists claimed we evolved from Apes but how come even apes do not practice homosexuality but humans do?

channelz:
I get your point kind of.

Genesis 3:24[b] So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.[/b]

This verse got me wondering. I guess some animals were already roaming outside the Garden of Eden before the expulsion or simply put: Garden of Eden wasn't physically present on earth. Right?

It was present on earth otherwise where would God have put man whom he formed from the dust of the ground?

The best way to prove this is to check the logic and purposd behind the creation of this garden and run this side by side with the fall and redemption plab of God and you will see the answer to your question.

dialfa:
So the garden is not real?

The garden is real and was used as a type of Heaven. The whole idea of redemption is to take man back to Gods original plan and place.

If you ask me for its location then I will point you to Noahs Flood as we have it told that the whole earth was flooded so this means the garden in itself was also most probably washed away.

Our concern today as believers is no longer in the garden but in heaven because if I believe man sinned and fell short of the glory of God and can see evidence of that through thd often barbaric and genocidal nature in man then this garden must have also existed.

channelz:
Appreciated.

But I meant, if man was expelled from Paradise or Garden of Eden, why do we have animals around us?

The garden of Eden as you know it isnt an isolated place. Remember that before Man disobeyed God said man should subdue THE EARTH and replenish it so this speaks of not the garden alone but the earth in general. Plus animals were not restricted from roaming much as they do today.

The garden of Eden talks about a paradise derived from righteousness and not a physical place. Same way we have the second Adam in Christ so shall we experience Heaven if we live and die in Him (Another Eden)

channelz:
Let's put the Cain and wife riddle aside for now.

Who can explain this:

Only animals were not expelled from Paradise

Animals were not expelled because they do not have the ability to choose right from wrong as man did. Animals just existed to fulfil mans purpose while man existed to fulfil God's purpose.

Animals just live and cannot reason around their actions if they be right or wrong and when they even do its still man that teaches them through training what is right what is wrong but to the animal it still does not see it as right or wrong even when taught as it simply obeys because its owner is happy and knows that it it disobeys the owner will not be happy.

This is why even when a man teaches a dog what is right and wrong for it to do the same dog cannot teach other dogs the same thing since as far as they are concerned they aim to please and not to obey.

dalaman:
Stop asking irrelevant questions. Please read their line of argument and read yours. You are just talking off point.

What made you feel my argument is off point? I see theirs as irrelevant and off point.

Still boils down to individual morality.

Why do I do what I do and you do what you do. I may be a caveman and you an intellectual but one thing binds us and its individual morals. But why and how do we even have the bedrock of morality?

I say potato and you say its a round legume does it change the nature and taste of the item?

johnydon22:
Distinct societal effects.. he thinks today's life better because he lives in today's world, bring someone from the jungle world such a person would still maintain the jungle ways are better.

Isn't it obvious that these are just societal effects on an individuals mind?

If you are left in your original state of stupendous simplicity and later put into a society like Nigeria, you'd end up in jail.

Cus you'd think apples on the streets are just meant to be picked and consumed.

You dont understand. Jungle days or today WHY DO WE EVEN CARE? WHY DO WE EVEN BOTHER?

dalaman:
You don't know if genetics can not explain it. You just stated it without knowing if its true.

If you claim it's God then you will have to show me that it is your version of God and not the muslim or Hindu God. You will then also have to explain why you God chose to make babies laugh when tickled and cry as soon as they come out of their mothers wombs. I bet you you can't. God did is will just be your final answer. God did it has never given any satisfying answer anywhere and at any time.

Like I said, my aim is not to tell you that God is responsible....you need to discover that for yourself because Atheism does not believe in God or any gods or higher powers so you have to figure that answer out for yourself. But alas you do know that there is something out there beyond your explanation and control and so can only point to something science cannot....A higher being.

Feel free to do some research and see if Genetics can explain it.

Be it God or Allah or someone or something else, if you really desire the truth you will find it.

God bless you

KingAdegoke:
Lolz nothing to learn from a question.

society!!! humans are naturally meant to live like in the jungle, but we got so smart we decided to form alliance. the human race. for that alliance to work some will have to be ahead of some, rich and poor, good and bad etc.

that defies the order of jungle. this time we do it with deception. you go for an interview you pretend, you want to fvck a girl you pretend you love, you want to steal money you give loan and call the addition bill interest" you need something which someone has in abundance you can't get it except the jungle way(force), it's not yours lol. we have given fancy names to things that are clearly unnatural. morality is there to ensure these things are kept in check.

morality is bad and at same time good. hey, who wants to go back to jungle period not me. I like the deception type.

So what made you feel todays life is better than the jungle ways? Why do we even Care? Why why why? Why not remain in our original state and see nothing wrong with it but are able to tell right from wrong and with what standard?

dalaman:
I don't know. Next thing you'll tell me that it is God that made it that way.

No I wouldnt tell you its God bro but I want to open you up to some deep thought and not just some random detest of the idea that God exists.

If you cannot explain or understand why a baby laughs when tickled and cries when in discomfort and not vice versa then how can you conclusively say there is no God?

If a baby of 1 week old can already choose to cry or laugh who then taught the baby that? Genetics cannot prove it because its not in the genes so what can?

KingAdegoke:
morality is not in our DNA. morality is relative. subject to environment and knowledge.

if you were born as a cave man you'd have the cave man morality. if you were born in Isis territory you'd have the morality of a killer being. knowledge(environment, circumstances, education, religion etc) makes a man.

learn that.

Each has their own idea of morality agreed but why do we even care to have one? Cave man or intellectual whh do we even care?

Learn that.

johnydon22:
We have the ability of choice because there is no innate choice precoded for us to thread. a given society determines the moral boundaries aimed at the collective continuation.



This is untrue. what molds and shapes a mind are usually societal factors. Religion, organisations, social circles, social ties.

A child born in the bush men society of the Kalahari differs in moral ideas from one born in the U.S.

Laughing is not a moral choice just like blinking these are impulses and involuntary response to stimuli just like the knee jerk reaction.

Neurological impulses are different from moral or behavioural choices which is in direct coincide with societal interactions.

Like i said above; You do not choose to blink or sneeze these are innate human characteristic, involuntary and automatic. But you choose to kill a chicken.



We are talking about human morality [actions based on choices towards others] not neurological impulses, emotions are neurological impulses.

You do not always control your neurological impulses but you can control how they affect you.

Our emotions are rather accumulated in the neurological evolution not necessarily DNA. . This is a brain thing not the Deoxyribonucleic, that more so determines physical traits not neurological.

You just posted assumptions and speculations and you know.

So a boy born in the bush would poop on himself continually and see nothing wrong with it? My question is a simple one.

Why are we even teachable? Be it by society or whatever?

From the time of the Greeks, there have been many philosophers who have sought to prove that it is possible to have a universal morality without God. There have been many arguments presented to support this position, and in theory they may be right, depending on what one means by the word universal. They would say, all you have to have is a consensus on what is considered right and wrong behavior. Their position, with which I disagree, goes something like this:
First: If God is necessary for morality, then whatever God deems moral is moral. Therefore, why praise God for what He has done if He could have just as likely done the opposite, and it would have been equally moral. If whatever God says goes, then if God decreed that adultery was permissible, then adultery would be permissible. If things are neither right nor wrong independently of God's will, then God cannot choose one thing over another because it is right. Thus, if He does choose one over another, His choice must be arbitrary. But a being whose decisions are arbitrary is not worthy of worship.

Second: If goodness is a defining attribute of God, then God cannot be used to define goodness. If we do so, we are guilty of circular reasoning. That is, if we use goodness to define God, we can't also use God to define goodness.

Third: If one doesn't believe in God, being told that one must do as God commands will not help one solve any moral dilemmas.

Some philosophers, therefore, come to the following conclusion: the idea that a moral law requires a divine lawgiver is untenable.

What should be our response as Christians? We should point out to people who side with the preceding position their lack of understanding concerning both God and the nature of man.

God is the creator and sustainer of all things. We would not even be self aware, let alone aware of right and wrong, if God had not created within us His image, and therefore the ability to make moral distinctions. The truth is we have no reference point for all this discussion about morality except as God reveals it. For us to argue with the source of morality is for the clay to argue with the potter.

Some philosophers say that for God to define what is right or wrong is arbitrary. God is not arbitrary; He is the source of all life and therefore the source of all truth. We have no basis to even understand the concept of being arbitrary except in reference to an unchanging God. That which would be circular reasoning or arbitrary in discussions about ourselves comes into perfect focus as we bring the dilemma close to the universal, absolute focal point for all creation, God Himself.

The second problem with these arguments is that they fail to recognize the nature of man. If man were not fallen, i.e., not corrupted by sin, we would have limitless potential to create from within ourselves a universal moral code. But, we are a fallen lot, every last one of us, and therefore incapable of fully knowing what is good (Rom. 3:23). We are even incapable of carrying out what we do know to be good (Rom. 7:18-21).

So the question of right or wrong has everything to do with the origin of our belief, not just the substance of it. No matter how sincerely I believe I am right about some moral decision, the true test is in the origin of that belief. And God is the only universal and absolute origin to all morality

Is morality located only in the actions we see? If so, it will be very difficult to recognise the distinctive features of the moral vision of a Christian or the moral vision of a Hindu, Buddhist, Jew or Muslim. If we view morality in relation to the person as a whole, rather than just as the actions we see, however, then moral vision becomes more significant. What a person does will no longer be separated from why (s)he does it. Just like when you said you will not stop your kid from performing acts of Beastiality if the state permits it as law.....this is your moral identity based on who you are and explains why you said that.

But all we do just simply still asks the questions...Why do we even care? Why do we hate? Why do we love? Why do we have emotional reactions when we do not have a clue where emotions emanate from?

This shows that there is some form of encrypted design in us that nobody can explain but how? This can only be explained by how we think we emerged.

Evolution? If its evolution then science would have located the machinery for emotions by now or why we do what we do in the first place and not just move around without a care in the world

God? Its more plausible that someone yet unknown to us made us in such a perfect manner and we cannot understand or explain it same way its only the baker or cook that know his or her secret ingredient and you will keep playing the guessing game because you are not in on the secret

johnydon22:
You and i certainly have different ideas of Moral ideas cus morality to me are actions for both you, others and collective societal good in general, i like the bolded word choices which still shows it falls back down to subjective ideas based on such a person's need.

if there is an involuntary innate moral drive then they wouldn't be choices, if there is then there is no innate drive.. you do not choose to blink or sneeze.

Morality is a matter of actions towards others and our society: actions that directly affect individual or societal well being.

We each are the same in a manner of speaking, we each have potentials to great good or terrible evil.

Our choices in our actions determines our moral tilt.

Wrong! Why do we even have the ability of choice in the first place? Who determines individual moral boundaries?

There is something in us right from birth that gives us varied identities and mold us.

Question: How is it that a new born baby laughs when tickled and cries when in discomfort? Why do they not laugh when in discomfort and cey when tickled? Who taught them about choices at 1 week old? Do they even know what choices are?

If by some chance their reactions are emotionally triggered, where did these emotiona emanate from when they are not DNA encoded?

johnydon22:
For societal continuity...

if you were the only person on this planet, there wont be such a thing as any moral codec or values because there is nobody to direct your actions towards.

When you are the only person in a room, you can do what ever you want only when you are two or more people in a room that you feel it becomes in appropriate to fart.

It is a societal foundation

I beg to disagree. Morality is beyond right or wrong or the ability to teach or learn. Morality cannot be separated from your identity which is why one is born an introvert and another an extrovert.

Morality is like a spiritual DNA much like our physical DNA . It helps shape who we become at the end of the day yet its not found in our genetic code. Its why we all differ in opinion and yet have the ability to choose. Its why we even bother to care about ourselves.

So even if we are alone in this world we would still care for ourselves and be able to make moral choicss for our personal wellbeing.

Dalaman when you were born...you cried and when your mom tickled you, you laughed.

Why did you not cry when tickled and why did you not laugh when born?

Who taught you which was which as a new born baby?

I am still waiting for the answer to that question bro.

hopefulLandlord:
Which of the 5000 different gods?

Each with one or more religions and each religion with even more subdivisions and so on

If you really desire to learn the question you should be asking is;

Why does morality even exist in the first place be it right or wrong?

What triggers this indivual quest for morality and why does each agree that morality in itself isnt crazy even when that same morality varies from place to place.?

Because morality is based on individual choices and preferences, why is it we have a desire for these choices and preferences in the first place be it Sodomy, beastiality, e.t.c and how are we able to prefer one to another if we had evolutionary savage origins?

dalaman:
Both are true when it comes to Allah. He is the creator and will damn all the unbelievers eternally.

Are you or were you Muslim before becoming an Atheist?

hopefulLandlord:
It probably is encoded in our DNA, and society as a whole influences it
.
.
Is there a scientific proof to that effect? I don't know if there's one
.
.

Well if you do not know if there is proof do not speak about a probability.