₦airaland Forum

There's a post on the front page right now talking about how people were killed while worshipping in church in Anambra, and what do I see? A bunch of people using that opportunity to mock religion.


What is wrong with you guys? Are you too socially inept to empathize with the victims and their loved ones? Must you push your agenda at every single opportunity? And why are those comments receiving likes? There's nothing remotely cool about not recognizing the time and place to make your point.


This is incredibly low-hanging fruit that you guys are picking here. It achieves nothing, it just makes us look like a$$holes. We should try to be better than that because we are more than our beliefs. We are people first and so are the victims of that attack.

9inches:
So you believe nothing is morally right or wrong? See, if Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Lenin had believed that there was a moral standard outside of themselves that rested in God, and not their own preferences, perhaps over 104 million lives would've been spared.

Wrong, because Hitler was clearly opposed to atheism. Likewise, you've conveniently forgotten the part where I said that Nazis were evil in my opinion. You've also conveniently forgotten the religious violence we've faced throughout history. Look at Islamic terrorism in recent times, aren't these supposed to be people with 'objective morality'?

9inches:
You're buttressing my point - moral law does not change, societal laws do.

What do societal laws have to do with the way attitudes towards women and in extension, blacks? The changing attitudes are caused the change in societal laws. LGBT discrimination dropped to a minority BEFORE the law could have was passed. In fact, in a democratic system, your argument is completely wrong.

9inches:
Mind you that we are talking slavery of a different kind here, not a systematic oppression of one ethnic group or race by another. The ancient slavery was one of conqueror to conquered and there was nothing that resembled the racist transatlantic slave trade we all know. Ancient slaves served their owners as administrators, financial agents, physicians, secretaries, house servants, cooks, farmers, etc. In addition to the verses you quoted, Apostle Paul in Gal. 3:28 writes, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile (Greek), neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” In the ancient world, a man setting his slave free and submitting to a woman would have been an outrageous and humiliating thought. Therefore, Paul’s ultimate mission is to see women, slaves, and all races treated equally. But in order to accomplish this, some measure of submission to culture was necessary. In thesame way, Paul encouraged wives to submit to their husbands so that their husbands may come to know Christ, and in time, understand their calling to mutually submit to their wives and to empower women.

I thought you said the Bible didn't condone slavery? Let me ask, which is worse: Rape at knifepoint or rape by sedation? Rape at knifepoint may be more traumatic but does that justify condoning rape by sedation? Why not just speak out against rape? Why not just speak out against slavery? Would you like to be subjected to treatment of slaves even back in Biblical times? Would you like it to happen to your son? Then stop being a slavery apologist.

9inches:
What does that make it, objective or subjective?

Subjective.

9inches:
Moral law does not change, societal laws do.

I disagree, women weren't allowed to vote in civilized countries until the 19 century. Since then, not only laws but attitudes have changed towards the treatment of women.

9inches:
It wasn't approved/sanctioned either. Peter told slaves, “Be submissive to your masters with all respect, not only to the kind and gentle but also to the overbearing. For one is approved if, mindful of God, he endures pain while suffering unjustly” (1 Pet. 2:18-19).

Peter and the other apostles knew that slavery was wrong, but they also knew that it was better to conquer evil with good (Romans 12:21) than to commit evil in order to achieve good. That’s why Peter asks what good it does for a slave to commit evil against his master and then be beaten in return. At least when a slave is beaten for no good reason and does not respond with evil (in imitation of Christ, who endured similar abuses without retaliation), he will stand blameless before God (1 Peter 2:20). Loyalty to a master was also a common way for slaves in the Roman Empire to earn their freedom. After serving a master faithfully, a slave would be released as a libertus.

I still don't see where it condemns the act. Ephesians 6:9 and Colossians 4:1 show that although early Christianity wanted fair treatment of slaves it never once condemned the practise of owning and trading people.

johnydon22:
Christian deists? How does that work?

Kind of like how Bill Gates is an atheist who subscribes to Christian teachings (the good ones). Likewise you can be a deist who subscribes to Christian teachings.

These people generally reject the mythology.

9inches:
So there is absolute morality you mean?

No, I'm just saying that we may generally have similar moral leanings. But the specifics are never the same.

9inches:
You see why I said you cannot live that out. Tell me again why we have the law courts and police. Does "fundamental human rights" sound subjective to you at all?

You act like laws don't change and the constitution doesn't get modified all the time. We all want to uphold human rights, but to the average Nigeria for example, these rights shouldn't extend to LGBT people. That's exactly what I said about the specifics being different.

9inches:
Slavery is bad. It has never been good.

But it was never condemned in the Bible or Quran. In fact, the Old Testament gives specific instructions on how to go about slave ownership. How then did you conclude that it's a bad thing?

Paulpaulpaul:
Because I chose to be and owe you NO explanation

Your best defence for the atrocities in the Bible is "the Quran has stuff like that too". It really shows that you are victim of religious indoctrination and that you haven't put enough thought into your faith.

9inches:
My point is, your judgement and morality are just like your personal opinion- yours alone. Therefore, it is not binding on any party with opposing views. One can then deduce that where there is no moral absolute, there is no real justice. Truth be told, in reality, you can't even live a worldview such as yours out.

The most absolute morality stems from the generally accepted views of society, which change with time.

And no, my views cannot and should not be binding on others in a democratic society. I can only strive to convince others in order to gain majority approval.

Now let me ask you a question, what do you think of slavery? Is it good or bad?

Paulpaulpaul:
What I said does not mean that the Bible is incomplete, abridge or inferior. I said that to open your eyes to what translation can do to written text. But then, word like that also abound in the Qur'an eg.

“When the sacred months have passed, then kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them. Capture them. Besiege them. Lie in wait for them in each and every ambush but if they repent, and perform the prayers, and give zacat then leave their way free.” 9:5


“When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks.” 47:4

“When your Lord revealed to the angels, ‘Truly I am with you. So, keep firm those who have believed. I will strike terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved. So, strike them at the necks and cut off their fingers.’” 8:12

“Men are the protectors and maintainers of women because Allah has made one superior to the other and because they spend to support them from their means. Therefore, righteous women are obedient and they guard in the husband’s absence what Allah orders them to guard. And, as to those women from whom you fear disobedience, give them a warning, send them to separate beds, and beat them.” 4:34

“Oh you who believe, fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you and let them find harshness in you.” 9:123

If the Bible is just as bad as the Quran, then why are you a Christian?

KingEbukasBlog:
No no my brothers . Nothing or non existence there means material . Immaterial is seen as nothing or non existent from the materialist point of view .

God is an immaterial being .

This makes no goddamn sense. You either exist in some form or you don't.

Ok, Spiderman is immaterial. Go and test that. Leprechauns are immaterial. This is a completely meaningless concept where there's no way to prove anything, it is unempirical and a total waste of time to consider.

KingEbukasBlog:
This is just one problem you have . I'm always careful to note out positions that certain people hold on a particular concept and not generalize but you just don't seem to care . And stop pontificating for crying out loud

There are 3 concepts of creation and one of them disagrees with non-existence as the default of reality

If non-existence is the default for reality then God must have started to exist as Johnny said earlier, how then did this happen? If existence is the default, then why is a creator required?

KingEbukasBlog:
What if ? Lol

So how does this preclude infinite regress ? What did the 1,000,698,006th form of the universe take ? Oh wait ! What did the 2,405,569,382,687th form of the universe take ?

Do you think these things through , because apparently you don't .

It doesn't preclude anything but the existence of God. I'm humble enough to say that I don't know. Rather, you dream up a God concept and try your best to find evidence to support it.

The Universe existing in some form stretching through time is far more likely than even a single omnipotent being.

johnydon22:
If nonexistence is a default state then God himself would also have to be nonexistent at some point. So if anything at all can exist then nonexistence cannot be assumed to be the default state.

Exactly, there is no argument for God that is not self-refuting or doesn't contain a non-sequitur. Kingebukasblog has brought up many such arguments and none of them have stood up to scrutiny.

KingEbukasBlog:
God is the Necessary Being , without God nothing will exist be it abstract/mathematical objects or an eternal universe . Omniscience , omnipotence are attributes of God .

For the last time , stop projecting your opinions on others . Because you believe God has to have certain attributes does not mean everyone has to agree with you for them acknowledge the existence of God .

God comes from the notion that non-existence is the default of reality. What if the universe in some form has always existed?

Arabic is not compulsory. I don't care for the preferential treatment of Muslims in this country. But the NERDC website shows that Arabic is optional.

I don't know who is perpetuating this false information but it's clearly to push an agenda. Don't be fooled.

http://www.nerdc.org.ng/eCurriculum/CurriculumSTructure.aspx

KingEbukasBlog:
Because your opinion does not disprove anything . You claim that God has to be omnipotent and omniscient and I said that there are theists who don't regard God as omniscient or omnipotent . So if there are people who acknowledge God without these attributes , how then is opinion worthy of consideration ?

Who are the people saying that? What percentage of atheists/theists believe that?

Seriously, if a definition of God cannot be agreed upon then the theist position is even more senseless.

God must be distinct from an evolved species and from a natural to be called God. If not, then the word is basically meaningless and there's no merit even considering it as a hypothesis.

KingEbukasBlog:
https://www.nairaland.com/3944605/oh-atheists-me-out-quandary




There are theists who don't even believe that God is omnipotent or omniscient .




Consciousness is immaterial .



There are theists who reject the First Cause and there are atheists who acknowledge the existence of the First Cause but reject its deification .



Which reality ? Everyone has his own reality . Stop forcefully projecting your reality on others , thats bigotry .

Why do you keep telling me that there atheists who believe x and there are theists who believe y like that's supposed to have any bearing on my opinions?

Rather, you should try to stop making ignorant blanket statements only to try to defend them by saying "some atheists believe it". That is not the impression you gave with your general statement.

9inches:
It seems to me you are saying there is moral absolute somewhere from which your judgement was made against the Nazis. In a world where morality is subjective, it would be callous of you to call eugenics or gassing of jews evil when they were all convinced it would better their society.
Secondly, if you were born into a Nazi society, would you have done anything different than what they did?

Not even a single nazi officer would have been successfully convicted if the judges agreed morality is subjective.

I clearly stated that the Nazis were evil based on my own judgment and morality. Read what I wrote carefully.

9inches:
Does evil exist and do you think the holocaust was evil or not?

I think the holocaust is evil based on the standards of morality that I was brought up with and the ones I have acquired through reading and interaction. I also believe it went against basic empathy.

And I believe that something is evil if it's detrimental to the well-being of a fellow man whether directly or indirectly this also extends to reasonably empathic treatment of animals.
But I also feel that evil is relative, and my definition is far from exhaustive. How do you measure 'reasonably empathic' treatment? So while I believe in the existence of evil, I realize that life is not black and white and that morality has a lot of grey areas. These grey areas coupled with cultural differences make the specifics of it subjective.

To clearly answer your questions.

Yes, the holocaust was evil in my opinion.
Yes, evil exists in my opinion.

KingEbukasBlog:
Atheism simply rejects the deification of anything . To be lucid : an atheist does not want you to call anything God/god .

This means that an atheist is not necessarily saying there is no creator of the universe , its just saying don't deify it ; don't treat it as a God . Its just a being , let it be what it is .

That's false, that is not what atheists are saying.

Speaking for myself, a God has to be

1. Omnipotent/omniscient: If not, it could just be a hyper-advanced alien species.

2. Conscious: If not, it is indistinguishable from a natural law.

3. The First Cause: If not, it is either a product of natural laws or requires an entity which would be more qualified for the role.

All this is based on the baseless assumption that non-existence is the default position of reality.

Hier:
If I remember orographic very well. There is this annotated diagram with a leeward side and a wind ward side. The windward site if am correct blow cool breeze and all of that. But here is the fraud in the diagram. The sea is supposedly overseeing or overlooking mountain. Most of the places where I experience such, there are no large water body so to say. And neither are there high elevations around. I have many things to say about the odds in the supposed orographic rain formation thing.

The more information I have about the locations you experienced what you did, the better I can explain. You could simply be on one side of the elevation.

Hier:
Lemme ask, before rain falls, according to water cycle, there must have cloud formations brought about by evaporation and all of that. Evidently, the sun did a great job. But my worry is despite all the evaporation for almost 5-6 month of dry season. One rain didn't fall all through. Just curious though

I just talked about how different wind bring different seasons. The moisture caused by evaporation is simply not enough to affect the dry northern winds before they blow over.

Hier:
How does our dry season on earth affect or prevent the clouds
from reaching its critical mass. Still on doing my curious weed
homie *deeply sip weed* Heavenly weed

Dry season doesn't prevent anything, rather, it only exists because the clouds haven't reached critical mass.

It really isn't rocket science.

9inches:
E.g The Nazis?

Yup, the Nazis formulated their own moral code. It was rejected by most of the world which is why they were seen as evil and fought against.

Ranchhoddas:
What?

That was just a joke.

Even without the women, though. I like the environmentalist, pacifist, and bohemian nature of Wicca. The rites and rituals, the symbology, the Wiccan circles, they look very exotic to me. It's a very rich religion.

Ranchhoddas:
Do we have Wiccans in Nigeria?

Oh....

Oh crap.

jonbellion:
streaming is not expensive na
Just $7 a month and you get a month free trial also
It's cheaper than buying the album but at least it's legal and it helps artists make revenue though i buy some albums i really enjoyed. Remember that if everybody pirates copies of legal content your favourite artist or actor won't make money you continue acting and i don't think you would like it if you were being pirated. Your hard work and sweat. Piracy has eaten into Nigeria and Nigerians sha

I hear you bro but I'm poor as sh!t.

Wicca... Babes choke for there.

Hier:
loooooooool. you mean there are mountains within the city. okay, lemme let that slide, did your geography teacher explain to you why rain only fall in the rainy season and people go about looking for water and digging their wells to farther depth in the dry season when it could have rained.

More so, incase you see your geography teacher, genius. Ask him why rain fall at night when the sun is not shining

It's obvious that the Nigerian educational system has failed you.

1. Yes, hills and elevated surfaces can occur within and nearby to a city.

2. Different winds bring different seasons in equatorial areas such as Nigeria. The North-East Trade Winds bring the dry season (they blow over the Sahara), the South-Western Winds bring precipitation (they blow over the Atlantic).

3. Condensation can occur at any time, rain will fall once the clouds reach critical mass regardless of the time.

Don't let religion stop you from attaining knowledge.

HajimeSaito:
So who exactly were these "people of other faiths?" Virtually all the major abolitionists of the slave trade were what you would call "born again" Christians in this day and age. Men like Granville Sharp, William Wilberforce, Thomas Clarke, John Brown etc some of whom even died to end slavery were all devout Christians. Your handful of brain cells won't even let you acknowledge the truth. What a shame.

Where in the Bible is slavery condemned? Who instituted the slave trade in the first place? Christians.

You still conveniently forgot freethinking abolitionists such as William Lloyd Garrison and Robert Ingersoll. Ingersoll was even open to giving blacks equal rights with whites.

Of course Christian autism won't let you acknowledge that. Accept that your religion fu.cked up and your Bible is not the source of morals for society but rather society is the source of morality.

HajimeSaito:
Erm, NOBODY enslaved my ancestors, least of all Christians. Pagan black Africans had been happily enslaving and eating themselves for thousands of years before the first Christian missionaries set foot on African soil bringing education and hospitals along with them. Maybe if you stopped wallowing in self pity and victimhood your brain might actually start working the way it was designed to work.

You're ignoring the point that Christians too adjust their morality s time changes with your retarrded vitriol.

Has religion stunted your emotional maturity so much that you would defend slave traders? Christianity couldn't stop slave-trade, it took the joint effort of people of different faiths to abolish that sh!t but yet your religion has blinded you to the truth. Morality evolves with society and right now, the asinine Judeo-Christian myths you hold so dearly are only holding us back.

HajimeSaito:
You mean, the history books are wrong? Even those written by your fellow atheists?

Was there a teacher named Yeshua who got himself killed four being a public nuisance? Yes.

Was there a Jesus who preached to the Gentiles and performed miracles? A resounding no.

HajimeSaito:
Atheism is all about moral ambivalence. The atheist makes up the rules as he goes along. He doesn't subscribe to a moral code, so he simply does whatever he feels he can get away with.

Christians happily enslaved your ancestors but back-pedalled after a while, but it's atheists make sh!t up as we go.

Who are you kidding?

I'm late to the party but this may be greatest write-up I've seen on Nairaland. I hope this made or will make the front page.

11/10 post. You've outdone yourself, OP.

UyiIredi:
The same with me though I am a deist.

I can only imagine what an ex-Jehovah's Witness might have to go through.

spacetacular:
Still makes no sense! If they built their lives around the church and the same church preaches what they are against or detest why not build their lives around those things or people that they have now embraced?

They can still have their relationship with family without being in church can't they?

I don't think it's based on the reasons you just gave. I feel it's due to deep uncertainty and fear of the unknown. Some actually remain so they can constantly riddle teachers with questions when the opportunity presents itself in the guise of opening the minds of the religious while they PRETEND to still be Christians.

So why ask those questions IF they are so sure of their convictions?

Because in this hyper-religious country we live in, going to church is socially profitable.