₦airaland Forum

Now that i know your childish creationist and mechanical method of evangelism, am i now ready to accept Jesus as my lost and personal servant?

bennyann:
See them ooo. Yeye people.
They've started with their jokes again.

How did you know I'm joking?
Do you now think that Jesus can't appear to me?

Jesus appeared to me last night. He particularly told me that OP was going to deliver a message to me, and that i should take it as a personal msg.

Thank you Jesus, now I'm ready to forsake my foolish ways, i renounce you Satan and I'm the lord's now.

Jesus come into my ass, sorry into my heart now, come in to pump the blood into my brain, so i can become more rational and intelligent.

Thank you Jesus!

I'm now born New atheist!

kingzizzy:
This was done in 1967. All Igbos moved. Nigeria came to the East to fight for 3 years to bring Igbos back into Nigeria. Nobody is repeating that again. Now, Nigeria must agree to Biafra so that next time we move, you Nigerians will not come to the East to fight again like you people did last time.

Go check the history of that war. Nigerian government wasn't disposed to all out war against biafra at the outset.
Because biafrans were still considered fellow Nigerians.

Ojukwu mistook this disposition for weakness on the part of Nigeria. Ojukwu then took a foolish and greedy advantage of this. Proceeded on his campaign to Lagos.

At this point, Nigerian government, had no choice than to descend on biafra the way she did. The rest is now history.

If it ever become possible that biafra confine themselves to SE states, and refrain from claiming anything beyond onitsha Bridge, nobody will give a damn.

Dear my fellow Biafrans.
I support your struggle 100% but my problem is your approach.
I would want to suggest the following procedures and i can assure u its going to work out successfully. if you can unite and follow the following 10 steps then i can tell you, welcome to the Republic of Biafra in advance.

«««STEP 1»»»
withdraw all your services from Nigeria and render the Nigerians as you are the backbone of the country.

«««STEP 2»»»
Withdraw your kinsmen who are public office holders e.g Ike Ekweremadu, deputy senate president, Peter Obi the D.G of S.E.C

«««STEP 3»»»
Reject all the ministerial nomination from the so called Nigeria.

«««STEP 4»»»
Endeavour to reject Federal Allocation.
You are very industrious people you will be better off without it

«««STEP 5»»»
Stop all form of importation through the Nigerian sea port so that Nigeria will crumble without your Tax

«««STEP 6»»»
Recall all your sons and daughters from all parts of Nigeria to relocate to home untill this fight is over then Nigeria can beg them to come back as expatriate.

«««STEP 7»»»
Lock up all ur shops in idumota, Alaba international, Kano main market, and every other market even in the remote villages accross the country.

«««STEP 8»»»
Go beyond closing of the Niger bridge stop all Nigerians from buying or selling in Onitsha Main market or Ariaria market in Aba.

«««STEP 9»»»
Make sure u make ur Visa very hard for Nigerians.

«««STEP 10»»»
This fight can be achieved without Violence just like south Sudan. Finally, make sure you don't fight it with weapons.

Igbo kwenu!!! hee!

»»I am Cossy Diva Orjiakor««
and i just want To Make Common Sense.

plaetton:
Oh. And I mistakenly thought we were having a genuine discussion of current events.

It's obvious that you are just another Lilly livered Igbo hater.
It eats you soooo deep, as deep as your personal insecurity and inferiority complex about Igbos and the word Igbo itself.

I am not surprised that Kanu's courage reminds you that you are perhaps half or a quarter of a man, considering that you have and see nothing in your life worth fighting for or agitating for.

They deliberately don't teach you dimwits history in school, for the good reason that they don't want you to ever understand events and issues in a broader historical perspective other than a narrow , stomach infrastructure perspective. Example is your shameful " political prosperity" nonsense.

As a Yoruba that I assume you are, you are ignorant of the struggles of Obafemi Awolowo against your current slavemasters
,and how his struggles and agitations paved the way for whatever benefits your parents and you enjoy in this contorted federation.
Cognitive dissonance wouldn't also allow you to remember that Obafemi Awolowo was the first Nigerian to face trial and be convicted and jailed for treason in Nigeria.
No one has held that fact against the entire Yoruba people.

Now, since you are Yoruba, and don't see anything wrong with Nigeria, and therefore have nothing to struggle for, I urge you to simply ZONE OUT, and desist from disparaging those of us who see plenty to fight against and agitate for.

I very well understand the psychology of little people like you.
Kanu will continue to stare you and your in the face as the giant of a man you can never rise up in 10 of your lifetimes.

Hate Igbo , despise them all you like. But we know it is only your own deep down personal insecurity that you are marketing online.

Cry on boy.... Kikikikikikiki

plaetton:
You can can fire as much invectives at Kanu as you wish.
He is obviously 10x the man you could ever be, even if does absolutely nothing for the rest of his life.

The point is that you , as a youth , have never in your generation had a leader of any sort. Therefore, you are the least qualified to speak about leadership , its qualities and what it means. You have absolutely zero with which to make any form of comparisons.
There are no text book manual of what a should.look like or method for his struggle.
The fact that you and I are having this discussion means that Kanu has already succeeded beyond his own expectations. That's the point that eludes you.

By their choice of words regarding Kanu, it is obvious that only only people bereft of courage that tend to despise him.

Sorry boy, I'm conscious not to fashion my life, after bull headed and inordinate intransigent folks.

From Kaduna Nzeogwu to Ironsi to Ojukwu and now to Kanu, all liars, power drunk, hypocrites and cowards.

Let me remind you, Ojukwu was whipped back from Ore, on his way to Lagos, during the foolish campaign. Is ore or Benin part of biafra land?

Nzeogwu executed a coup, wherein no single notable Igbo leader was killed. But northern leaders were desecrated. Ironsi pampered the felons, until Ironsi's sore did festered.

You guys have offended innocence, and trust has become a commodity you can never be accorded.

plaetton:
You speak as if you are ignorant of history. Every revolutionary idea starts out as a grand heresy, and its champion, a delusional heretic.
Anything worth having, is worth fighting for.
Like I said before, Biafra resides in the heart of every Igbo person. This latent feeling is there and has always been there, embedding deeper with every instance of institutionalized injustice against the Igbo people since after the civil war.
Kanu is not Biafra, but only a provocateur, a rekindler.
Kanu is not the leader of Biafra, but a brave symbolic of its symbol and tenacity.

Let me ask you. I don't know how old you are, but when was the last time Nigeria, any part of Nigeria , had a youthful leader that fought for something, anything at all ?

Kanu is a refreshing emergence and presence in a population, especially the youthful population, that had been betrayed and cowed by one set of oppressors after another.
Kanu's brave and exemplary fight is for everyone in Nigeria, every oppressed person in Nigeria.
Youths like you should be able to look beyond periphery and see Kanu's fight for what portends for Nigeria.
It is either Nigeria comes out better from it, restructured for more regional independence, a more equal, more just and progressive nation , or pls give me Biafra.
It is as simple as that.

It's pity. You neither have a near grasp of what freedom is nor what dynamics of revolutionary idea or act is.

It's pitiably pathetic, for a Kanu, to be an inspiration for you. And to shove Kanu, as likely symbol of leadership for myp generation, will be the most insulting thing to say to me.

By my age and education, i belong to the youthful class in the Nigeria of today.

I personally bemoan the lost capacity for rational and progressive thinking, that now afflict youths, who crave the primitive and crude idea from Kanu.

Boy, you live in the 21st century world, it amounts to pathetic case, to find direction in the delusionary path, that Kanu has charted.

PSTFURO:
I suppose u know what a rainbow is. Or check ur dictionary. And since u are a majorly senses driven person , when ever u see it in the sky that's it.
1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. ...........Or if you want to know more about the Bible & what it says. Then let go of your ego and b ready to learn. u can make a request.

May FSM grant you sense, to pursue rational and intelligent way of engaging in public discussion.

What's in rainbow that authenticate your Bible as literarily true, you went Arabian and Corinth desert.

plaetton:
Nonsense.

For your information my dear friend, Biafra is deeply imbedded in the heart and soul of every Igbo soul since the civil war.
Call it neo-biafra or whatever suits you, it is real a real phenomenon.
Ipob, which started out as somewhat of a child's play, has rekindled and re-energized that latent nostalgia, thanks again to the high-handedness and murderous brutality of another Fulani feudal lord in power.

As for you, Fxxx your political prosperity.

We are very happy and proud to dream and agitate freedom from slavery and serfdom.
Keep your political prosperity.
Keep swallowing cow dung, be happy as a favoured serf, as long as political prosperity( whatever the fxx that means) is repeatedly dangled before you.

BTW, how is it going with your political prosperity ?

As per your last statement regarding war.
I feel ashamed to even address it.
Men shouldn't be talking to cowards.

First, why do you think war is necessary to protect or force Nigerian unity?
Do you think Nigeria is a united country?
Can you die to protect the so-called unity of Nigeria ?
If you are not willing to take up arms to fight and die for this feudal oligarchic contraption, then you should desist from speaking of war.

And yes, we IGBOS are very very very very PROUD to have faught, suffered losses and died for our freedom of self-determination.
We are even PROUDER that we are able to Rise from the ashes of war to wax even stronger.

Only an ignorant Igbophobe, and there are many, would still under-estimate the tenacity of IGBOS in the pursuit of goals, especially a goal as noble as self-determination.

Kikikikikikiki..... Hmmmm.

Only if you know and understand what freedom means.

The very method of the pursuit, of the mirage called biafra, from its sickly conception, by its progenitors and the present neophytes, betrays shallow thinking.

I suppose the leadership now provided biafra illusion, by a disillusioned Kanu, is the new narcotics, for another round of misadventure.

PSTFURO:
If that is what u mean then , I want to put it to you that the Bible is beyond literature books or fiction it is true in its reality not an imaginary writing but an inspired collection of reality and truth eg. the origin of the rainbow u see today, the sepereation btw water (sea) and lands, etc. I wish I am not talking to a blind, un-objective critic. I just hope to see factual proves of yours u know I want to learn from anybody.

Let's see how functional your visual sense is. The rainbow you mentioned, what did your Bible say it's?

bennyann:
No.2 reminds me of akiintom

Kikikikikikiki....

kingzizzy:
You should go and study more about Nigeria's history. In 1967, Igbos returned home in their millions to face Biafra. It was you Nigerians that came to the East to fight for 3 years to bring Igbos back into Nigeria. Now, you are asking Igbos to repeat what did not work last time?

.

Your ignorance of common history is odious to a kindergarten pupil.

Did Ojukwu tell you, that he was driven back from ore (a town in Ondo state), on his arrogant and mischievous campaign to Lagos?

PSTFURO:
I would like to understand what u mean by literally true

Check the dictionary meaning of "literarily" as it concerns literary works.

PSTFURO:
The issue on the floor is not the need for epistolic comprehension nor its summary but the questioning of the authenticity or validity of the Bible. When it comes to that we shall address it explicitly. God bless.

OK. Do you claim that the bible is literarily true, as far as the age of the earth is concerned?

kingzizzy:
I will never understand people like the ignoramus that started this thread.

If you think Igbos are bad, why do you want to do 'one Nigeria' with them??

The same Igbos have been trying to go their way since 1967, you Nigerian came and fought a war to be with Igbos!

If you think Igbos are bad, support them to get Biafra so they can leave you alone.

Haba!

This is the manifest foolishness and pettiness of the neo-biafrians:

Without noise, your biafra can happen at snap of fingers. Let all the Igbos in every nooks and crannies of Nigeria, move to the SE geopolitical zone, and remain there.

Nobody will begrudge you for that.

Staying in Nigeria that you called zoo, and making noise from there, is the grand definition of illusionary quest.

Religious Theism is Not Universal in All Human Cultures

by Austin Cline
Updated February 13, 2017

Almost as popular as belief in gods and religions is the belief that theism and religion are "universal" — that theism and religion can be found in every culture that's ever been studied. The apparent popularity of religion and theism seems to give religious believers some comfort against the skeptical critiques of atheists. After all, if religion and theism are universal, then there is something odd about secular atheists and they must be the ones with the burden of proof...

RELIGIOUS THEISM IS NOT UNIVERSAL
Well, not quite. There are two fundamental problems with this position. First, even if true, the popularity of an idea, belief, or ideology has no bearing on whether it's true or reasonable. The primary burden of proof always lies with those making the affirmative claim, no matter how popular that claim is now or has been through history. Anyone who feels comforted by the popularity of their ideology is effectively admitting that the ideology itself isn't very strong.

Second, there are good reasons to doubt that this position is even true in the first place. Most societies through history have indeed had supernatural religions of one sort or another, but this doesn't mean that all of them have. This will probably come as a surprise to people who have simply assumed, without question, that religion and supernatural beliefs have been a universal feature of human society.

Will Durant has done a great service by preserving information about skeptical attitudes towards religion and theism from so-called "primitive," non-European cultures. I have not been able to find this information elsewhere and it runs contrary to common assumptions. If religion can be defined as the worship of supernatural forces — an inadequate definition, but one which serves for most purposes — then it must be admitted that some cultures have little or no religion at all.


ATHEISM AND SKEPTICISM IN AFRICA
As Durant explains, certain Pygmy tribes found in Africa were observed to have no identifiable cults or rites. There were no totems, no gods, no spirits. Their dead were buried without special ceremonies or accompanying items and received no further attention. They even appeared to lack simple superstitions, according to travelers' reports.

Tribes in Cameroon only believed in malicious gods and so made no efforts to placate or please them. According to them, it was useless to even bother trying and more important to deal with whatever problems were placed in their path. Another group, the Vedahs of Ceylon, only admitted the possibility that gods might exist but went no further. Neither prayers nor sacrifices were suggested in any way.

When specifically asked a god, Durant reports that they answered in a very puzzled manner:

"Is he on a rock? On a white-ant hill? On a tree? I never saw a god!"

Durant also reports that a Zulu, when asked who made and governs things like the setting sun and the growing trees, answered:

"No, we see them, but cannot tell how they came; we suppose that they came by themselves."

SKEPTICISM IN NORTH AMERICA
Moving away from outright skepticism of the existence of gods, some North American Indian tribes believed in a god but did not actively worship it.

Like Epicurus in ancient Greece, they considered this god to be too remote from human affairs to be concerned with them. According to Durant, an Abipone Indian stated their philosophy thus:

"Our grandfathers and our great-grandfathers were wont to contemplate the earth alone, solicitous only to see whether the plain afforded grass and water for their horses. They never troubled themselves about what went on in the heavens, and who was the creator and governor of the stars."
In all of the above we find, even among supposedly "primitive" cultures, many of the themes which persist today in people's overt skepticism about the validity and value of religion: the inability to actually see any of the claimed beings, reluctance to imagine that something unknown caused what is known, and the idea that even if a god exists, it is so far beyond us as to be irrelevant to our affairs.


https://www.thoughtco.com/atheism-and-agnosticism-s2-248347

My own anger against the Igbo leaders, is their insidious and mischievous mute, on the senseless behavior of neo-biafrians, who are mostly fetuses or infants when the civil war happened.

It's more pathetic for them this time, because, if war should occur ( a rarity) again, their loss will be infinitesimal, compared to 1967.

Again, with all these childish ranting of neo-biafrians, they are effectively clogging the wheel of their political prosperity.

THE NORTH SHOWS LEADERSHIP.....

* When Terrorist Nnamdi Kanu set up a pirate radio station in April 2015, and started insulting President Buhari and northerners, calling them all manner of unprintable names, no state governor from the Southeast called for the arrest of the cantankerous rabble rouser, instead, as it later turned out, Nnamdi Kanu was just a front being used by Igbo politicians to intimidate, blackmail and subvert the President Buhari administration!

* When IPOB grew and became a platform on which every mentally deranged Igbo youth stood to insult the person of PMB and his supporters, we have not seen nor heard any Southeast governor or prominent leader call for caution!

* We have heard and seen from certain thugs, militants or terrorists from the South/South and Southeast worst statements of threats and insults against "parasites", usually a euphemism for northerners. But while all those threats and insults lasted, never have we heard or seen any governor from down that side rebuking or ordering the arrest of those miscreants!

* We have seen how the Southeast hired and commissioned a morally bankrupt hate merchant like Femi Fani-Kayode to be spewing hatred and insults on daily basis against President Buhari and northerners, to the point that an Igbo newspaper, DAILY SUN, gave him a column where he wrote hate-filled articles against PMB and the north, yet not once have we seen or heard any Southeast governor or prominent politician from that region condemn Fani-Kayode or even call for his arrest!

As a matter of fact, northern Nigeria has suffered incalculable insults, denigrations, and all manner of mischief from all such hate mongers since 1966 up to the conversion of Boko Haram to "Boko Haram", and yet there seems to be no letup on the undeserved attacks and insults against the north and its leaders. What you need to be a "hero" in some quarters is to demonstrate that you are an imp like Femi Fani-Kayode, Ayo Fayose, and Nnamdi Kanu with undying thirst to fan hatred and mischief against PMB, and this visceral hatred against PMB by these sons of Lucifer is simply based on where he comes from, and we all know where their largest fan base is!

In spite of all that, it is condemnable that the Northern Youth Coalition chose to toe the path of IPOB, Femi Fani-Kayode, Ayo Fayose and all the ragtag groups that speak for Terrorist Nnamdi Kanu by calling on the Igbo to leave the north within three months. It is understandable, anyway, the anger and frustration a group of people may feel when they are the subject of hatred and ridicule by people with overrated self importance, but in times like this, it is always expedient to keep a cool head and show leadership in just the same way Governor Nasir el-Rufai showed how venerable monger power he was, by asking that those northern youths who asked that the Igbo leave the north be arrested!

However, patriotism in a diverse, multi-ethnic, and multinational country like Nigeria should not, and cannot be a one way traffic. As much as it is wrong for northern youths to ask for the departure of any ethnic group from the south from the north, it is equally much wrong for any group from the south to claim monopoly of sectional bigotry. I have seen hypocrites celebrating their full scale hypocrisy by condemning what those northern youths coalition said whereas they are well known as ardent supporters of IPOB and their allied groups. Tit for tat ain't good but not everybody can endure persistent, unrelenting insults and regional blackmail.

El-Rufai has shown that in the midst of needless provocations, and dearth of leadership among the provocateurs, there is no leadership in the northern part of the country. And this is the same el-Rufai every slowpoke that adorns themselves with IPOB flags love to label as Hell-Rufai on social media.

Copied from Babatunde Jose, Esq.

IGBOS AND NIGERIANS: In their confusion, infusion and frustration arising from pride and over estimation of themselves leading them to a series of saboteur maniac syndromes.

Igbos broadly divided other Nigerians into three broad categories. Those they hate, those they deride and those they fear. Those they hate are the yorubas whom they call traitors, tribalists and cowards. Yet no race in Nigeria have been more tribal than the lbos.

There are historical facts to prove this. If something is ten and igbos are not allowed to take 15, so that the rest of us can share minus 5, lgbos will cry marginalisation and label the rest us tribalists. However there is no race in this country that have been more accommodating of the lgbos than the Yorubas, there is no single igbo leader that did not grow up in the South West or is a beneficiary of Yoruba largesse.

Zik went to CMS GRAMMAR SCHOOL, Adolphus wabara went to AHMADIYA COLLEGE AGEGE, Ken Nnamani went to LOYOLA COLLEGE IBADAN, Ojukwu and Ekwueme went to KINGS COLLEGE, Okpara went to YABA TECH while Phillip Emegwali went to AQUINAS COLLEGE, AKURE. Even my brother Anadu went to IMADE COLLEGE OWO etc All major Igbo politicians cut their political teeth in the West. Their major religious leaders cannot thrive outside the West. Pastor Muoka, Pastor Ezekiel of Four Square and Okonkwo of TREM are examples.

I remember that after the civil WAR, Igbos who came back to ILE IFE were allowed TUITION FREE while the YORUBAS in NSUKKA were rusticated. Example is Pastor Adeboye. Yet lgbos reserve their greatest hatred for the Yorubas for reasons being that the yorubas refused to be dominated by the lbos to confront the North.

As to the label of cowardice, had there been any war between the yorubas and the lbos in which the lbos defeated the Yorubas? In the whole ancestral history of Ndigbo, which war has the forefathers or great forefathers fought? Any empire in their history? Yet the yorubas have worsted the lgbos four times in the political history of Nigeria.

As to the label of treachery, had there been any agreement the yorubas signed with the lbos and they reneged? The answer is no. Yet the yorubas have records of Igbo treachery on the two occasions they formed alliance with them. In 1964 to fight the federal election, the yorubas formed an Alliance called UPGA with the Ibos to be led by Okpara because major Yoruba leaders were in jail. There was an agreement that the election must be boycotted. The Igbos sabotaged it, went and contested election while the West kept to the agreement.

In 1979 the West went into alliance with the lbos and formed PPA - PROGRESSIVE PEOPLE ALLIANCE. Again Igbo sabotaged it so that they can produce Speaker house of Representatives. Who then is traitor? The second category are the Eastern minorities made up of present Rivers, Akwa lbom, Cross Rivers and Bayelsa. The igbos see them as subhuman with tidal brain. Until the creation of Rivers State by Gowon, no OGONI man can sleep on the hospital bed in Bori GENERAL HOSPITAL . As at 1977 only UYO ,PHC and CALABAR had electricity light. They were so underdeveloped by their Igbo overseers that you will think that you were in the Congo jungle.

Until Diette Spiff, there was no Ikwere named Street in Port Harcourt. To show how deep the derision is, the present Biafran agitatators changed the name of RIBISI (Phc) to IGWOCHA as if the IKWERES do not exist.

The third category are the Hausa Fulani. The igbos pretend to hate the Fulanis but the truth is that the Igbo man is subservient to them. Ignore the noise. There are historical facts to justify this. Zik served under BALEWA, EKWUEME served under SHAGARI and EKEREMANDU zoned the PDP presidency to the North because he wants to be the VICE PRESIDENT to a Northerner.

After the civil war and OJUKWU was granted amnesty for his rebellion against constituted authority, he returned to Nigeria and he joined the Hausa fulani party (NPN) of those he accused of genocide against his Igbo people. It is Igbo tragedy that they hate and deride those who grow and sustain them while they cringe to those(the hausas) who kick them like balls. Igbos are the only race in nigeria that celebrate failure.

In 1982, the igbos celebrated the defeat of biafra by welcoming ojukwu with fanfare on his return from asylum haven been granted amnesty by the igbo overlords- the hausa fulani. He revelled in the fanfare and promptly married FFK left over- forgotten the over 3million lgbos that died in the war and with many of them languishing at OJI RIVER CAMP.

The second celebration is the release of kanu with the most humiliating bail conditions ever granted an accused in the annals of Nigerian justice system. A bail conditions targeted at the entire Igbo race and granted by an Hausa Fulani judge.

I could not believe that with all the noise, such bail conditions will be signed. But he signed and in his eagerness to leave kuje he abandoned his two conspirators in kuje. The bail conditions wiped out the Identity of the ibos and EKEREMANDU was made the enforcer of the conditions. FFK is a polemist like Femi ARIBISALA etc. They have the capacity to argue both sides of the same point.

The igbos regard him as their hero just like Ayo fayose the Eze gburugburu the second. I hope very soon the by Igbo will not start blaming fayose as they blamed Awo for everything that went wrong with their prosecution of the biafran war. I rest.
#Akin writing
from PH.

PSTFURO:
[b][/b]

Their is nothing wrong in expressing your doubts but I suggest it should be expressed with caution and direction from your creator hence, nobody knows it all. And it is limiting to explaining every thing within the five walls (sight, smell, feelings, tasting,hearing) of science with the aid and worship of technology shouldn't get into our heads. Hence, science is just modern compared to the originality of spirituality. Spiritual things sometimes are difficult to explain, since the reality and rudiments of the spiritual world is beyond human comprehension. They are more real than what u can see with your two eyes. I have been there before....... Don't be fooled by atheists my friends.

Its not our duty as Christians to make arguments on the Bible contents with u, which it warned us not to do (1Tim 1:4, 2Tim 2:23, Titus3:9). And I hope that u shouldn't allow yourself to believe doctrines of devils (1Tim 6:4).
However, the Bible said in Gen. 1:1 in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The first statement of the Bible made a short statement of what happened b4 (Genesis) the restructuring of the earth from verse 2, mind u the earth was already in existence b4 God started the restructuring of the earth in Verse 2. God did not give detailed information on that and He best knows why, besides it is not our place to question Him. It is not the reason why you'll condemn Gods word and his people , be careful u don't ignorantly say things your innocent children will suffer for. U should also know by now that the Bible is a spiritual book and not a scientific book to be proved by science nor those who don't have relationship with the spirit of Christ behind it.

Moreover, I suppose you believe in the reality of a supreme divine being, Why not ask him if He does exist let Him show Himself to u and if the bible is His inspired book let Him open your eyes to know better. This plea is beyond religion. Just Try it...I did.

[b]

Their is nothing wrong in expressing your doubts but I suggest it should be expressed with caution and direction from your creator hence, nobody knows it all. And it is limiting to explaining every thing within the five walls (sight, smell, feelings, tasting,hearing) of science with the aid and worship of technology shouldn't get into our heads. Hence, science is just modern compared to the originality of spirituality. Spiritual things sometimes are difficult to explain, since the reality and rudiments of the spiritual world is beyond human comprehension. They are more real than what u can see with your two eyes. I have been there before....... Don't be fooled by atheists my friends.

Its not our duty as Christians to make arguments on the Bible contents with u, which it warned us not to do (1Tim 1:4, 2Tim 2:23, Titus3:9). And I hope that u shouldn't allow yourself to believe doctrines of devils (1Tim 6:4).
However, the Bible said in Gen. 1:1 in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The first statement of the Bible made a short statement of what happened b4 (Genesis) the restructuring of the earth from verse 2, mind u the earth was already in existence b4 God started the restructuring of the earth in Verse 2. God did not give detailed information on that and He best knows why, besides it is not our place to question Him. It is not the reason why you'll condemn Gods word and his people , be careful u don't ignorantly say things your innocent children will suffer for. U should also know by now that the Bible is a spiritual book and not a scientific book to be proved by science nor those who don't have relationship with the spirit of Christ behind it.

Moreover, I suppose you believe in the reality of a supreme divine being, Why not ask him if He does exist let Him show Himself to u and if the bible is His inspired book let Him open your eyes to know better. This plea is beyond religion. Just Try it...I did.

[/b]

Their is nothing wrong in expressing your doubts but I suggest it should be expressed with caution and direction from your creator hence, nobody knows it all. And it is limiting to explaining every thing within the five walls (sight, smell, feelings, tasting,hearing) of science with the aid and worship of technology shouldn't get into our heads. Hence, science is just modern compared to the originality of spirituality. Spiritual things sometimes are difficult to explain, since the reality and rudiments of the spiritual world is beyond human comprehension. They are more real than what u can see with your two eyes. I have been there before....... Don't be fooled by atheists my friends.

Its not our duty as Christians to make arguments on the Bible contents with u, which it warned us not to do (1Tim 1:4, 2Tim 2:23, Titus3:9). And I hope that u shouldn't allow yourself to believe doctrines of devils (1Tim 6:4).
However, the Bible said in Gen. 1:1 in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The first statement of the Bible made a short statement of what happened b4 (Genesis) the restructuring of the earth from verse 2, mind u the earth was already in existence b4 God started the restructuring of the earth in Verse 2. God did not give detailed information on that and He best knows why, besides it is not our place to question Him. It is not the reason why you'll condemn Gods word and his people , be careful u don't ignorantly say things your innocent children will suffer for. U should also know by now that the Bible is a spiritual book and not a scientific book to be proved by science nor those who don't have relationship with the spirit of Christ behind it.

Moreover, I suppose you believe in the reality of a supreme divine being, Why not ask him if He does exist let Him show Himself to u and if the bible is His inspired book let Him open your eyes to know better. This plea is beyond religion. Just Try it...I did.

A summary of this epistle, may attract response. When you eventually consider doing that.

An2elect2:
Didn't see those dates in my Bible.
Thanks bye

But you saw Solomon temple, that Christian liars claimed that it authenticate bible tales.

If it's where donkey spoke, you will see it, even when your eyes are shut.

An2elect2:
Where is the "dating of the age of this earth" stated in the Bible? Never seen it.

It's in wherisdam!

http://biblehub.com/timeline/

IamProdigy:
The fact is you have not said anything...that can make Christians argue with you....

Amidst that what's your belief/religion...I hope ure not floating on this earth saying there is no God?....

...for only a fool says there is No God"..everything around us speaks volumes of this reality!

Goodmorning

Only a grand fool, says FSM doesn't exist. You denying that FSM is your creator, is the most fuckery thing to do.

[quote author=IamProdigy post=57340243][/quote]Because a believer of Yahweh (one of the polytheistic gods in Arabian zone), isn't different from a believer in unicorn!

The Christians, erroneously push "Archaeological evidence" from some landmarks, mentioned in the bible, as one pinnings for innerant claims for the bible.

Specifically, the scientific dating of the artifacts, from some of these sites, are relied on by Christians, when boasting about how "accurate" their Bible is.

But when you confront the same Christians, with the dating of age of the earth, as it shows that the biblical claim is ridiculously false, they immediately declare that scientific dating is unreliable, or outrightly false.

Looking at these bunch, who in one breath approved of scientific dating as authentic, when it dated the biblically claimed artifact, But immediately reject the same thing, because it confirms the fictional claims of Bible.

One can only conclude that, the Christian apologists, are suffering from aggravated Hypocrisy.

What's real, is what exist in fact(s). The suspicion that there lie, an immeasurable unknown, becomes a valid premise, on which this assertion (the immeasurable unknown) is based, if we consider the awesome magnitude of what is now known, compared to the realities of the early humans.

The human sensors, are dynamically adaptive to the stimulus, that we consciously and subconsciously, expose them to. What are known for fact, are actually product of ratified assemblage, of individually ratified observations.

Take for instance, the early men, saw their environment in its ordinariness, but when their curiosity was stimulated, as to what CAUSED the existing things in their environment, their curiosity center(CC) , connected the imagination center (IC).

Each answer that their IC gave their CC, created another question for the IC. This back and forth mental quest, created the neural pathway, that gave rise to the idea of God, that has since then morph, to what we have today.

Now, depending on how sensitive the cognitive wiring of an individual is, this neural pathway of God idea, can interact with other parts of brain, to the extent that imaginative motions (dreams, vision, trance etc), can begin to embody the images of God idea.

When this mental activities, are sufficiently accorded meaning and somethingness, especially if such individuals, progress in manner that exclude other possible explanations, for what stimulated the CC ab initio, Such individuals will progress to having such dreams, become their personal prophecy or confirmation bias (Anecdotes).

At this stage, theses individuals, will commit God idea, to a God, that exist in "facts" (illusionary reality).

The futility in this type of "reality", is that conclusion is founded on assumptions rather than observations. And when this conclusion fails in the face of TEST, the assumption that created the conclusion, goes back to the brain to seek refuge at the centers of cognitive dissonance, rationalization, denial, obfuscation etc.

What's is REAL therefore, is subject to what can be observed, and testable. For only reality of this nature, makes the world, a better place in a progressive fashion.

Vokog:
I am not saying some people who blow themselves up aren't indoctrinated. I agree certain Quranic verses if read out of context can incite people to act in certain ways. But you should consider the factors that would influence anyone to just decide to be radicalized in such manner. As much as there are bad verses in the Quran, there are also good verses that completely contradict those bad verses. So it's not really about the verses, but more about the environment and the ideologies that exist within that environment and how vulnerable the would-be terrorists are to such kind of ideology. Now, the vulnerability of such individual depends on a lot of factors. Factors like anger and hate as a result of something experienced. A perfect example is a Syrian witnessing the death of a loved one as a result of western air strikes. Another factor could be the perception of his religion and culture being under attack by the west. I am not even a muslim, and I am already convinced that Islam is currently under attack by the west. Another well documented reason for which people join ISIS is that ISIS pays them salaries and also pays their families salaries. This happens in ISIS controlled areas in Syria.

But then again, even with these factors present, a radicalized individual would need weapons. So the question is, where do they get the weapons from? The earliest, most overt, although subtle delivery of weapons to ISIS was after the US left Iraq after the war of 2003. They left Iraq and deliberately left their weapons and armoured tanks for the blossoming terrorists to take control of. In intervening years, the CIA has used Saudi Arabia as a proxy to supply more weapons to ISIS and also Al-Nusra in Syria. Clearly these guys are behind ISIS, if they are, then they are systematically helping to promote whatever ideology that's successfully radicalizing people. I mean, they did this during the infamous Operation Ajax.
These guys are fucking psychopaths and it's a shame Muslims allow themselves to fall prey to their malicious and insidious devices.

These are the mental conditioning pills for Muslims....

Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.

Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (fighting Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost." Those who reject Allah are to be killed in Jihad. The wounded are to be held captive for ransom. The only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test.

Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand" for Allah is with you,"

Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' If so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.

Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. This verse tells Muslims that there are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' to describe Hell in over 25 other verses including 65:10, 40:46 and 50:26..

Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His cause" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "rows" or "battle array," meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9), which defines the "cause": "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.

Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of'Adn- Eternity ['Adn(Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see verse 9). It uses the Arabic root for the word Jihad.

Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such. Other verses calling Muslims to Jihad can be found here at AnsweringIslam.org
Hadith and Sira

Sahih Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Sahih Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.

Sahih Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause. Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today. (See also Sahih Bukhari 3:125)

Sahih Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'

Sahih Bukhari (52:44) - A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward)." He replied, "I do not find such a deed."

Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet said, Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet...

Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious

Sahih Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah

Sahih Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."

Sahih Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."

Sahih Bukhari (52:73) - "Allah's Apostle said, 'Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords'."

Sahih Bukhari (11:626) - [Muhammad said:] "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes."

Sahih Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..."

Sahih Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"

Sahih Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'"

Sahih Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)."

Sahih Muslim (19:4294) - "Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them."

Sahih Muslim (31:5917) - "Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: 'Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?' Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: 'Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger'." The pretext for attacking the peaceful farming community of Khaibar was not obvious to the Muslims. Muhammad's son-in-law Ali asked the prophet of Islam to clarify the reason for their mission to kill, loot and enslave. Muhammad's reply was straightforward. The people should be fought because they are not Muslim.

Sahih Muslim (31:5918) - "I will fight them until they are like us." Ali's reply to Muhammad, after receiving clarification that the pretext for attacking Khaibar was to convert the people (see above verse).

Sahih Bukhari 2:35 "The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty ( if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise ( if he is killed)."

Sunan an-Nasa'i (Sahih) "Whoever dies without having fought or thought of fighting, he dies on one of the branches of hypocrisy"

Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power." Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad's men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.

Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us" The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.

Tabari 17:187 "'By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.' And they returned to their former religion." The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah. The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: Cutting off someone's head while shouting 'Allahu Akbar' is not a 'perversion of Islam', but a tradition of Islam that began with Muhammad. In this passage, a companion recounts an episode in which he staged a surprise ambush on a settlement: "I leapt upon him and cut off his head and ran in the direction of the camp shouting 'Allah akbar' and my two companions did likewise".

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.

Saifur Rahman, The Sealed Nectar p.227-228 - "Embrace Islam... If you two accept Islam, you will remain in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship." One of several letters from Muhammad to rulers of other countries. The significance is that the recipients were not making war or threatening Muslims. Their subsequent defeat and subjugation by Muhammad's armies was justified merely on the basis of their unbelief.

Violence

Does the Quran really contain over a hundred verses promoting violence?

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, most verses of violence in the Quran are open-ended, meaning that they are not necessarily restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text (although many Muslims choose to think of them that way). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.

The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God. Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Islam apologists cater to these preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally don't stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.

Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy, along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.
Quran

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to claim that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous - the actual Arabic words for persecution (idtihad) - and oppression are not used instead of fitna. Fitna can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. A strict translation is 'sedition,' meaning rebellion against authority (the authority being Allah). This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief. [Editor's note: these notes have been modified slightly after a critic misinterpreted our language. Verse 193 plainly says that 'fighting' is sanctioned even if the fitna 'ceases'. This is about religious order, not real persecution.]

Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home).Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward " This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is this Arabic word (mujahiduna) used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad, which would not make sense if it meant an internal struggle).

Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle. The targets of violence are "those who disbelieve" - further defined in the next verse (13) as "defy and disobey Allah." Nothing is said about self-defense. In fact, the verses in sura 8 were narrated shortly after a battle provoked by Muhammad, who had been trying to attack a lightly-armed caravan to steal goods belonging to other people.

Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, as it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."

Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy." As Ibn Kathir puts it in his tafsir on this passage, "Allah commands Muslims to prepare for war against disbelievers, as much as possible, according to affordability and availability."

Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."

Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence at the time of Muhammad was to convert to Islam: prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars. The popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

[Note: The verse says to fight unbelievers "wherever you find them". Even if the context is a time of battle (which it was not) the reading appears to sanction attacks against those "unbelievers" who are not on the battlefield. In 2016, the Islamic State referred to this verse in urging the faithful to commit terror attacks: Allah did not only command the 'fighting' of disbelievers, as if to say He only wants us to conduct frontline operations against them. Rather, He has also ordered that they be slain wherever they may be – on or off the battlefield. (source)]

Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people." Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even "heals" the hearts of Muslims.

Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. Verse 9:33 tells Muslims that Allah has charted them to make Islam "superior over all religions." This chapter was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.

Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and - in this case - on Christian soil, according to the historians).

Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It explains why today's devout Muslims generally have little regard for those outside the faith. The inclusion of "hypocrites" (non-practicing) within the verse also contradicts the apologist's defense that the targets of hate and hostility are wartime foes, since there was never an opposing army made up of non-religious Muslims in Muhammad's time. (See also Games Muslims Play: Terrorists Can't Be Muslim Because They Kill Muslims for the role this verse plays in Islam's perpetual internal conflicts).

Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."

Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer?

Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).

Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. [Note: This parable along with verse 58:22 is a major reason that honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.12).]

Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"

Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness with it." - The root for Jihad is used twice in this verse - although it may not have been referring to Holy War when narrated, since it was prior to the hijra at Mecca. The "it" at the end is thought to mean the Quran. Thus the verse may have originally meant a non-violent resistance to the 'unbelievers.' Obviously, this changed with the hijra. 'Jihad' after this is almost exclusively within a violent context.

When a group of religious zombies, are guided by a 7th century hogwash, in 21st century, why wouldn't terrorists emerge.

dalaman:
. Case closed. God is all these things, yet he'll have to rely on the incompetent and discredited KingEbukasBlog to let people know all these without creating a nairaland account and letting people know about it himself? I laugh in Hebrew.

Kikikikikikiki...... The apron wearing crusader is here again.