₦airaland Forum

hopefulLandlord:
The morals Christians preach today have been greatly influenced by science, enlightenment and common sense. That's why you'll notice there are things Christians consider normal today that were considered abnormal and heretic/blasphemous before and "normal" Christian behaviors of the next centuries would be seen as heretic by present christians!

There was a thread on FP about MFM in UK and US allowing women to wear trousers. this is the same church that preaches against such in Nigeria with fire and Brimstones. Deeper Lifers see the immorality in Winners and Christ Embassy's dressings but all of them would not only swear morality is absolute and objective but they would claim that they have the objective morality aligns with them. The Yahweh of deeper life who dictates objective morality says women shouldn't wear tight fitting clothes, cover their hair, not wear makeups, not use wigs/attachments while the Yahweh of Christ Embassy who also dictates objective morality says its okay for women to wear tight fitting clothes, leave hair uncovered, use makeups, fix hair and wear wigs
If that doesn't scream of subjectivity I wonder what will

This "god of morality" is nothing but an empty man made symbol that believers use to hide their own subjectivity, their own moral values and their own intentions so they then can judge others with impunity from a pretended "superior and objective moral standpoint" as if they weren't the ones actually judging everybody else. They just PRETEND they aren't the ones actually dictating and imposing what is moral and what isn't. Also, there is absolutely NOTHING objective about some invisible immaterial guy in the sky with superpowers that works in mysterious ways dictating "moral values". Its easy to scream "Objective morality exists" just like its easy to scream "Unicorns, Minotaurs, Yahweh, Allan, Vishnu exists" but demonstrating it exists is the hard part. any damn fool can claim anything

Ergo: Theistic morality is subjective morality presented as objective

You've done justice to the nonsense Butterflyleo was saying about Christian objective morality.

The various sects within Christianity do not even have the same view on morality. A deeper life views a lady not covering her hair and applying too much make up as immoral but a christ embassy doesn't see it as such.

A woman can not preach or become a priest in a Catholic church , it is immoral but she can be a pastor and preach living faith church.

Butterflyleo:
You will not bait me into an argument about subjectivity and objectivity.

Listen carefully since you fail to reason logically as you should.

You say morality is set by society right? And I asked you, WHO MAKES UP THE SOCIETY? IS IT NOT INDIVIDUALS?

Before those laws are set, WHO INTRODUCES THEM? Is it not individuals?

"Society" is not a living thing. Humans in that society are the living things.

Individuals present INDIVIDUAL ideas of morality before any is adopted by a society. THE SOURCE FOR SUCH MORAL THOUGHT OR MORAL ADOPTIONS COME FROM INDIVIDUALS.

This is common sense.

Obgeni, keep your dishonesty aside and learn to stand for something. You always claim that atheist say that morality is subjective and you say it is false. Now that you have the chance to show that morality is objective you ate crying and talking complete nonsense. Is morality objective? Show us how it is or keep quiet.

Butterflyleo:
Why do you rape common sense so abusively?

INDIVIDUALS MAKE UP SOCIETIES AND LAWS ARE MADE BY THOSE INDIVIDUALS FOR THEIR SOCIETIES AND NOT SOCIETIES MAKING THE LAWS FOR SOCIETIES.

THIS IS WHY MORALITY IS INDIVIDUALIZED BASED ON SUBJECTIVITY!

You cannot say subjectivity isn't personal when even the definition clearly says so

subjective
adjective
based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.


subjectivity
noun
the quality of being based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Are you trying to rewrite the dictionary with your denial of the rather obvious truth regarding subjective morality?

WHAT CAME FIRST? PEOPLE OR SOCIETY?

WHO MAKE UP SOCIETIES? PEOPLE OR SOCIETIES?

WHO MAKES THOSE MORAL LAWS IN THE SOCIETY? INDIVIDUALS OR SOCIETY?

Every so called law begins with the INDIVIDUAL and not the society. There is ALWAYS an INITIATIOR and that INITIATOR is ALWAYS an INDIVIDUAL and that is why subjective morality IS PERSONAL and INDIVIDUALIZED.

Keep denying what even kids know is true.

Moral laws and values are set by the society and not determined by a single individual that is why no matter how much you want to marry 4 wives you can not do it in Sweden.

We ate talking about subjective morality and I have already defined it for you. Subjective morality does NOT mean you have the right to do what ever you want as you LIED. That is not what it means, it simply means morality varies from society to society and is not set in stone. Morality is not objective if it is there will be universal acceptance and all moral values will come about the same way and be accepted by all.

The fact that you can marry 4 wives in Kano legally and morally and can not do same in Sweden shows that morality itself is subjective.

What have you been on about sef? That morality is objective? You always love blabbing that atheist believe in subjective morality bla bla bla.

How have you shown that morality is not subjective? Is morality objective? Show us how morality is objective or just keep quiet.

Butterflyleo:
You are still not getting it.

People make the law effective or not.

The reason why we have criminals is simply because PEOPLE SEEK THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL LEVELS OF MORALITY which despite it being against the moral laws of the society, THEY STILL GO AGAINST IT FOR SAKE OF THEIR INDIVIDUAL COMFORT.

I am not arguing against morality but showing you how easily people personalise it thereby making it subjective and thus making them criminals.

My point is that subjective morality is individualized and when push comes to shove would not care about the moral laws of the land but if they can be circumvented or taken advantage of, then their comfort INDIVIDUALLY comes first and not the laws of whatever land.

Talking about Saudi or no Saudi I am not arguing about what can or cannot be done there, I simply showed you how subjective morality holds no foundation because it is selfish and self determinable depending on ones needs and how pressing they are.

You are actually the one confusing yourself in all this.

Your definition for subjective morality is wider than you originally thought and the mere fact that it is subjective clearly shows you that IT IS PERSONAL and not necessarily societal.

Morality is subjective itself that is why it is NOT the same all over the world. It is a criminal offense to own and rear pigs in Saudi Arabia bit it is not the same in Texas in the United states, that alone shows that morality is subjective, if morality were objective all moral principles will be obtained and applied the same way throughout the world.

Moral values are NOT the same the world over and are subjective because each societies have different moral values and see things differently.

It has nothing to do with personal or individual preference. No matter how much you want to rape you can not do it legally in most societies.

But I can marry 4 women in Kano state in Nigeria, something that I can never do legally and.morally in Sweden.

Subjective morality is NOT individualized because morality it self is subjective that is why it varies from society to society and in time in history, what is wrong in society A might be right in society B and what is wrong 50 years ago might be right today. That is what makes morality subjective and not your unnecessary commentary that is neither here nor there.

Butterflyleo:
It is all about you because you set the premise of Jesus not existing and the bible being a myth.

How can you separate yourself from this when you set the premise?

How can you say its not about you when you are the one calling him a hypocrite? Can there be a claim of such without you? Can you make such a claim without a premise? You cannot.

But here you are doing a very hypocritical thing.

My beliefs about Jesus has nothing to do with calling a Christian out for failing to do that which he professes?

So long as I see him doing that which is contrary to what he professes, I can easily point it out to him and call him out for his hypocrisy.

superhumanist:
It is like cognitive dissonance has driven them mad. Their lashing out is the only way they can rationalize and get those saying the truth about their religion to shut up.

The worst part is that they are still at it. The other idiot has been shouting die , die, die since yesterday and nobody is dead. Isn't that enough evidence to show him that who ever he is praying to to kill us is impotent and can not help him? Die, die, die since yesterday, tomorrow he'll still be chanting die, die, die like a deranged robot.

Butterflyleo:
You disappoint me and disappoint yourself with such pride.

There is a difference between believe in Jesus and believing that he exists.

You do not only have no belief in him you also claim he does not exist.

If you simply lacked a belief in him then your words would hold water as it would mean he actually said them and lived in such a manner but you chose not to believe in them.

However you went a step further to say he never existed. This immediately erases his life and his words from your mind.

Based on this premise, whatsoever anyone believes in or says about Jesus ceases to exist to you and you cannot use the nonexistent to Judge the existent. That is logic expressed for kids.

You cannot plant corn on a non existent farm land. You do not even have the corn to plant to begin with yet you are claiming the corn you planted did not grow well.

You cannot say I drank a cup of water when you claim water does not exist. So where did the water I drank come from?

You see, lies flow freely from you. It is NOT about me no matter how much you try to make it about me. It is about the Christian because he is the one professing. I do NOT need to believe anything to show a Christian that he is a hypocrite. Remember I am NOT judoing, I am only pointing out the hypocrisy. Saying I am judging is your own making because you want to use it to tell more lies. Once I notice that he is falling at that which he professes I can easily show it to him. It has nothing to do with my belief. If you tell me that this is the manual that guides your life and I should go ahead and read it, after reading it I realize that you are not living according to what the manual says, I can easily point it out to you and call you a hypocrite. My belief or lack of has nothing to do with it.

Your entire logic is based on your penchant for lies.

These idiots will not go and fight the fulani herdsmen that are killing them always. They are here killing each other. Idiots!

adjoviomole:
I know some of you have heard about the book " the 7 books of moses". If truly their is no God then their should be no evil or dark powers. To ascertain this fact, I call on the fearless atheist on this forum to endeavour to get this book and to also do what are in the book. To those who dare to, make sure you show us picture evidences of your what is in the book you want to do.

Note this, you are solely responsible for anything that happens to you be it good or bad.
All atheist take up this challenge and prove to us that God truly does not exist. It's high time we start practical challenges. God bless you.

What is this?

Butterflyleo:
You are fond of first baiting with calling me a liar before you type your usual long epistles which hold no water.

What the person professes should only bother those who profess same with him and not someone who says his words of profession do not exist.

It's a lie, it's doesn't have to bother them, all the need to do is show the person that he isn't measuring to the standard he is professing. Again you are the only person that is throwing this silly logic and it is predicated on lies.

I am glad you are seeing the illogicality in my talk about the murder claim when there existed no weapon as proof. That illogicality you are seeing is actually how your words and accusations of hypocrisy towards Christians looks like
You say Jesus does not exist and the bible is a myth yet you suddenly remove the myth tag you placed on the bible and use its words to judge someone when you feel like it and expect to be taken seriously?

Your penchant for lies will keep exposing you. Again I do NOT need to share the same belief with a person to show him that he is NOT measuring to the standard he has set for himself. I can point out a Christians hypocrisy without believing in Christianity at all. If a Hindu comes and meet me and tells me that the verders tells him not to eat beef because it is sacred and divine but I see him always eating beef, I do not need to believe that beef is sacred or divine to point out that he is failing at the standard he has set out. I do not need to believe in Jesus to show a Christian that he is not doing as Jesus says so long as I can read the instructions given out to Christians on how they are to act. Your logic is puerile and lame.

You also suddenly cause Jesus to exist so you can use his words and life to judge another who subscribes to him despite you claiming Jesus does not exist and you feel you are making sense to yourself?

What you are doing is called selective perception. You have absolutely no foundation to stand on to lay your accusations yet you imagine you had one by selectively giving authority to the bible whenever you feel like it despite your premise that calls it a myth and you selectively bring Jesus into existence in order to use him as a template despite claiming he never existed.

If you were in a law court and you were a lawyer on what grounds would you present your case, on existing foundations to your case or on non existent foundations? Remember a lawyer would always make an opening argument. So what and where would your opening arguments come from when your foundation for a case never existed?

As a judge what would you be looking out for in order to make a case credible? A case with existing facts or a case which have no existing facts?

These are your non existent facts

1) Jesus does not exist

2) The bible is a myth.

Your non existent facts threw your case out even before it began.

All this long and unnecessary commentary over nothing. This is not a law court and there is no judge here. Pointing out a person's hypocrisy is not a trail case. A person comes and says I believe in Jesus as his standard and will do everything Jesus tells him to do.

I see the person doing other wise, I can call him out and point out his hypocrisy regardless of my beliefs. He believes it and professes it but is acting other wise, I don't need to share his belief to point that out.

As I said earlier Muslims call out Christians on their hypocrisy and Christians do that despite not believing each other at all.

Your penchant for lies will make you to keep throwing meaningless and empty logic.

Butterflyleo:
Its either you are blind to your own illogicality or you are willfully forcing yourself to deny it.

You have a premise. Your premise clearly unequivocally states that the bible is a myth and Jesus never existed and a premise is explained as a PREVIOUS statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion

Since your premise states the above, where is your conclusion going to come from since your premise has nullified any hopes you had for a conclusion. Its like an accuser claiming somebody WAS MURDERED with a murder weapon that does not exist. What Judge would entertain such nonsense?

You are a LIAR and LIES always flow freely from all your statements. The problem is that it is NOT about me but about what you as a person profess. You profess something but fail to live up to that which you profess how does someone pointing your hypocrisy has anything to do with his beliefs since you are the one that is failing to measure up to the standard you profess? What kind is lame and lying logic are you displaying? Your lies will make you enter into the bush someday. I DO NOT need to share the same belief as you do to point out your hypocrisy. Christians do NOT share the same beliefs with Muslims but Christians always point out the hypocrisyof Muslims. Muslims disagree with Christians and do not share the same beliefs as Christians but it doesn't stop them from pointing out their hypocrisy. The ONLY person that is saying that you must share the same belief with someone for you to point out his hypocrisy is you, and that logic is not only ridiculous but very lame and founded on your penchant for lies.

You say he was murdered yet you claim his murder weapon does not exist. So how did you know he was murdered since no such weapon that did that exists? What would you based your judgement on? A weapon that exists or one that does not exist.

If such a weapon that should prove the murder does not exist then there was no murder but a deliberate fabrication by you.

This is simply logical assessment anyone can see.

I am tired of this your lame and twisted logic that has no real.life application. See the nonsense you are saying. That a person killed another with a murder weapons he claims does not exist. It is only in your lying imaginations that such can ever happen. What will make another person say that he saw someone kill someone with a murder weapon he claims does not exist? What will make another person say such? You are obviously not reasoning at all but applying lame and faulty logic that is just embarrassing you and showing your penchant for lies.

Butterflyleo:
You always so easily miss the very obvious.

How would you know what he professes and how would you claim it is worthy of being used to point out his failure despite your claim that his belief does not exist?

You set the premise so your premise nullified every judgement you would have inflicted on him and your premise clearly says that the bible is a myth and Jesus never existed.

So I ask you, can you use a myth or a non existent Jesus to judge anyone?

A man constantly claims he loves a woman and that she means the world to him , instead of seeing him doing what lover do like providing for her, protecting her and making her happy, I see him doing the opposite by beating her, stealing her money, cheating on her constantly and disrespecting her.

Which standard do I need to agree to to call him out for not doing what he says? Tell me the standard.

A Christians says that Jesus is his standard and he points to the words of Jesus as his guide, Jesus tells those that believe in him to love their enemies for example and I see a so called follower of Jesus doing the opposite. I can simply point out to him that he is not even obeying that which he says he believes in. He is not even measuring up to HIS own standard. My belief has nothing to do with that. I can point out his hypocrisy based on his own beliefs. Mine has nothing to do with it. You are just deliberately trying to spin it because it exposes you as someone that stands for nothing.

Butterflyleo:
You need to first have a standard that would show how he wouldn't fail. So which do you have?

It's a lie, I don't need to. All I need to do is to point out that he has failed in that which he profess. Your logic is so lame.

Butterflyleo:
It means you FIRST had a belief in some level or some standard. So which do you have?

Which standard do I need to have to show a person that professes love to another but is totally failing at it?

Butterflyleo:
Morality isn't predetermined because man came before it. First you say it isn't fixed and is fluid next you say it is not able to be changed when it changes from society to society and Individual to individual. Its clear to see all over the world which is why we have sadists, rapists, serial killers, shooters, poachers, human rights abusers etc in every society. That is why laws are even broken because morality IS ALTERED individually to suit our comfort individually which unfortunately could also be against the law.

Morality isn't set in stone simply means it evolves and it is not fixed. I made a mistake, wanted to say it means it is not preterdermined and it is changeable.

We have rapist, poachers, human right abusers in every society and they are immorality people. They are NOT doing what is moral according to the laid out moral principles of those societiesthat is why they are outlawed and seen as criminals. What exactly is your point? That morality doesn't evolve or what? What is your point?

It can be circumvented and done legally. I can take advantage of my fundamental rights and my respect for the fundamental rights of others which is why it was HIDDEN in the first place. Location and non proximity to human population could be my crack in the wall of the moral law of the land.

Besides a certain member of the Royal family in Saudi Arabia Prince Adel Al-Otaibi was arrested some time ago for trafficking pork meat in Israel. He was supposed to have a moral foundation in Saudi Arabia but his INDIVIDUAL COMFORT prevailed and he left Saudi for Israel to embark on what is prohibited in his own country which he should be upholding as a member of the royal family.

This further shows that your claim that morality cannot be changed is erroneous and INDIVIDUALS do so all the time simply because they have no foundation to theirs and like you, are being subjective about it.

By the way, pork trafficking is also illegal in Israel and only acceptable by law in the Christian minority but he not only broke the already known laws in Israel for his own INDIVIDUAL moral comfort but probably also went near Christians to get supplies which also went against his religious morality and made him also focus on his INDIVIDUAL comfort.

You are just dancing and chasing your tail for nothing. As long as you are in Saudi Arabia you CANNOT rear pigs legally. It is immoral to rear pigs in Saudi Arabia but it is legal to do that in Texas. All this your empty talk as no nearing on what am saying. You can not rear pigs in Saudi Arabia legally and morally because it is against the laid out moral laws of the land. You can do it in Texas because it is not against the laid down moral laws of the land. Anything else you say is unnecessary commentary that has nothing to do with what am saying.

Butterflyleo:
How on earth do you even miss things that are so obvious in black and white? My God!

Your definition



BELIEVE SOMETHING is right there before you.

There must be a first belief prior to any belief being seen as MORE NOBLE BELIEF.


Before you say someone is against or acting opposite or does nor believe what he first said or believed, then you must have knowledge of what he first said or believed and hold it as true enough to be used as a yardstick to judge such a one.

Besides you also have the word PRETENDS in your definition. So how can you know he or she is pretending and a hypocrite if YOU do not also hold HIGH the beliefs you claim he has or is pretending against

So do you hold high the words of the bible or Jesus?

You are a joke. So if I see someone professing his love for a lady but his actions always show that he doesn't and I call him out. Does that mean that I have to believe in a higher standard before I can do that? What lame logic are you displaying?

Butterflyleo:
Simply put, IT HOLDS NO FOUNDATION aka NO ANCHOR aka IT IS NOT FIXED ( You used the same term).

Morality is not fixed simply means it is predetermined and not able to be changed and not that it has no foundation.

I need to remind you again that before there were SOCIETIES there were FIRST people. The law did not come first, PEOPLE CAME FIRST. It is people who make the law effective or ineffective and the law is useless without people.

Even you cited the example of a hidden pig farm in Saudi Arabia. Did I not know it was morally against the law of the society yet I INDIVIDUALLY still went ahead with it because IT IS SOMETHING I AM COMFORTABLE WITH?

Remember in my last quote I talked about circumventing the law or using the law to my advantage? That is what your comment just supported too.

I work the law, the law does not work me. Man works the law and the law does not work man.

Meditate on this and you will realise the harsh truth.

You can not do it legally and that is what matters. Ignorance is not an excuse to bridge the law. Not knowing that it is wrong to rear pigs in Saudi doesn't make it immoral there. That is my point. No matter how you want to rear pigs there you can not do it legally or morally.

Butterflyleo:
This will be my first and obviously final response to you because I know that if I do not respond to you, you just might choke yourself out of the frustration of my continually ignoring you. So this reply is for the good of your health. Go ahead and heave a sigh of relief.

Now to the issue.

You make so many illogical comments its alarming.

Behold below.




Do you see anything in that definition?

For anybody to say another is a hypocrite then there must be A FOUNDATION to that claim and that foundation must be seen as an authority. If it isn't an authority then it would simply be either a delusional comment or a defamation of character.

There must FIRST be an existing standard before ANYONE can claim to have A HIGHER STANDARD of beliefs and there must be an existing noble belief before anyone can claim to have A MORE NOBLE BELIEF than is the case.

Do you believe in the standard of the bible or its credibility? No

Do you believe Jesus existed? No

So where is the foundation for your claim of hypocrisy using the same Bible and Jesus whom you say are myths and never existed?

I should not be teaching you simple logical approaches to things but you forced my hand.

Like I said, this would be my first and last response so screengrab it and frame it on your favourite wall section at home.

I am glad I added sense to your nonsense.

You are a LIAR! You picked just one definition of hypocrisy out of many and made a useless commentary on it. From Cambridge

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/hypocrisy


a situation in which someone pretends to believe something that they do not really believe, or that is the opposite of what they do or say at another time:

How does this fit in with your nonsense commentary?

Butterflyleo:
The same Bible you claim is a myth is suddenly being used as an authority by you to point out hypocrisy? Amazing!

The same Jesus you claim NEVER EXISTED you are now calling someone a follower of? And claiming that person failed? And claiming that person was taught by the same Jesus who never existed?

I repeat, your hypocrisy is blinding.

The bible I do not believe in is used by me to point out the hypocrisy of a chrosyian that BELIEVES in it. My belief in Jesus matters not so long as a person that believes Jesus exist and claims to follow him can not even do that which he claims to believe in.

Whether I believe Jesus exist or not matters not because many believe he exist and are his followers. I simply point out to them that they should learn to stand for what they claim they believe in. Some of your analogies are so lame and ridiculous.

My beliefs have nothing to do with a person that can not stand for anything.

Butterflyleo:
Morality isn't set in stone simply means it holds no foundation so ISNT SUSTAINABLE and can be altered AS THE SITUATION DEMANDS and this is why a homosexual who cannot practice it in Nigeria would fly to another country where it is legal and do so but come back to Nigeria and pretend that he isn't gay.

Your statement is far reaching and beyond your rather myopic view. If this was a legal argument, you would be clearly shown how extremely wide and far reaching your words are as against what you claim.

I just gave you one example through which it is far reaching.

The law isn't made for man but man for the law. If there were no men there would be no law so we are the ones who make the laws effectual or ineffectual.

What is attainable in one country may not be INDIVIDUALLY acceptable to everyone so people always look for what makes them comfortable. If someone derives his moral pleasure through killing, and he finds a way to circumvent the law or use the law to his advantage so he can derive his pleasure, HE WOULD INDIVIDUALLY do so regardless of whatever moral laws are prevalent in a land.

You really need to learn to do some deep thinking prior to making some rather ambiguous statements.

Am tired of your empty talk. Morality isn't set in stone DOES NOT mean it hold no foundation. It simply means that it morality evolves and it isn't fixed. That is what it means.
And that is the reality of morality. Whether you want to kill people as an individual has NOTHING TO DO with the morality of the society. You can NOT DO what you want that is outside the established moral codes of conduct of a society and be termed moral. So long as it is outside what is morally established by the society it becomes immoral. You can set up a hidden pig farm in Saudia Arabia but that doesn't mean you aren'tdoing an immoral thing. It just means you've been able to hide and do what you want. It doesn't make it immoral. As long as the society is concerned you are doing an immoral act and if caught you'll face the consequences.

Butterflyleo:
But you are acting opposite atheism when you run to the bible and Jesus and use them as your yardstick despite claiming they are myths and do not exist?

Your hypocrisy is so blinding.

I am not using the bible as a yardstick. Just using the bible to point out your hypocrisy. You claim be a follower of Jesus but you always fail.to do that which he taught you. That only makes you a hypocrite that stands for nothing.

Butterflyleo:
Smh you cannot even see that your very words echo and support mine. Look at your words below.

Subjective morality simply means that our morality is based on our society and our interactions with it. [b]It also simple means that there is no predefined morality like religious people believe, but that morality is fluid and is not set in stone[/b].

You simply said there is NO SET FOUNDATION To morality for those who have subjective morality.

When you say IT IS FLUID you mean it can be adjusted to suit INDIVIDUAL DEMANDS or COMFORTS.

So if I leave Nigeria and go to Netherlands then I can adjust my morality to suite those in Netherlands FREELY since my morality has no root and no foundation so I simply embrace whatever catches my fancy morally in Netherlands.

Thanks for supporting my words unawares.

Your lies are making you mad seriously. I said morality is not set in stone but in your usual lying ways you lied that I said there is no set foundation. Can you see how shameless you are and how you always twist and make things up to delude yourself?

Saying that morality isn't set in stone simply means that it varies not that it has no set foundation as you lied. You are shameless. Morality varies from.society to society that is why a man can marry 4 wives in Kano but will be jailed and seen as an evil person if he tries it in Sweden.

Saying that morality is fluid means it changes from period in time. Back in the days incest and slavery were considered normal in many societies, today they have been outlawed, that shows the fluidity of morality.

If you go to Saudi Arabia your morality will have to be based on that which the Saudi society has established. You can not go there and do your pig business because it is against their moral principles. You'll be arrested and jailed if you try it. You can NOT do what ever you want in any society you find yourself. You will always have to do what is acceptable withing the moral acceptable standard that is set by that society. No.matter how you want to rear pigs you will not be able to do it in Saudi Arabia.

MuttleyLaff:
Quote and emboldened my remark contextually
Was there or not, an advanced warning?
Was there or not, stipulated consequences for intentionally disregarding the warning?

It doesn't matter, it's nice to know that you consider it OK for a person to wish another person death because his beliefs was ridicule after warning people to stop.

It's a necessary evil, served as a deterrent
and the intention is to discourage anyone else of the pleasure of wanting to do what you did or similar.

How do you know it was a deterrent? How did it deter anyone? He truly wished us death and would have been happy if his wishes came true. But seems wishing people death over religious squabbles is fair game to you no wahala.

You cant pick and choose what Jesus taught or did not teach
Give you guys, an inch, you turn into a ruler, walking all over someone, abusing and taking advantage.

You guys should learn to stand for something. You can not claim to be what you are not and display ridiculous hypocrisy and expect anything but mockery.

Butterflyleo:
The same illogicality at work here.

You are not standing for what you believe in yet you say someone else isn't.

If you actually stood for atheism then you would base your words of condemnation on atheism and not on the bible or Jesus whom you claim do not exist and are myths.

If you truly STAND for atheism then do so all the way and do not jump from atheism to the bible and Jesus whom you already set as a premise that they are myths and do not exist.

Your lies are beginning to frustrate you

Learn to stand up for something. You can not claim you believe in something but always act in the opposite direction or against that which you claim to believe in because your hypocrisy will always be shown to you. I know you don't like it but learn to stand for something.

Butterflyleo:
Here you are clearly lying yet claiming Christians are liars. It reminds me of the twigs and thorn bushes talks earlier with buda.

You cannot claim anyone erred when the subject of their error does not exist to you. Where then did you manufacture their error from?

Are you now a theist to judge a christian by their own book? A book you also claim is a myth and a figment of many human imaginations?

What is your foundation for judgement? Surely it is not atheism as I already earlier showed.

How can you claim anyone is hateful or bitter or angry when as an atheist your very morality is SUBJECTIVE which clearly means that anyone is free to do WHATEVER MAKES THEM HAPPY.

So if cursing makes you happy then feel free to let it loose which is something you enjoy doing a lot too when you curse and insult with every comment you make toward me which even though I know you want to rile me up with them so you can turn around and do exactly what you are doing now by judging me with the same book you claim is a myth and the same Jesus you claim does not exist.

If this isn't hypocrisy then nothing else is.

What is the foundation for your judgment and condemnation despite saying the bible is a myth and Jesus does not exist.

My words in bold is not an afterthought by you but a Premise. So where and how did you manufacture an offence when you have NO FOUNDATION?

More empty cries because your hypocrisy and emptiness has been exposed.

You tell lies too much and always try to twist things just to make empty points.

Subjective morality DOES NOT mean anybody is free to do whatever they like or what ever makes them happy, that remains YOUR own definition that is a LIE.

Subjective morality simply means that our morality is based on our society and our interactions with it. It also simple means that there is no predefined morality like religious people believe, but that morality is fluid and is not set in stone. So you lie when you say that subjective morality means doing whatever makes you happy, it remains a lie.

I can claim someone is angry, bitter and spiteful simply on the basis of empathy. Somebody wishing me death or saying that he'll kill me is against our survival instincts and empathy as human beings. Besides the society I live in which sets our moral standard sees it as wrong. Wishing somebody death or threatening a person with death is considered as a bad thing by the society in which we live and which we derive our morality from, it is also against the rule of the forum we are interacting on.

As for the Jesus comment, I was just trying to tell christians here to stand up to something. You can't claim to stand for something and then always show that you stand for nothing at all. It makes you an empty hypocrite.

Butterflyleo:
You are still pretending to be unable to see your illogicality right?

You say someone is being a hypocrite for not abiding by what Jesus taught DESPITE you claiming that Jesus himself is a myth and does not exist.

How can you claim such a person is a hypocrite when your premise clearly stated that the "subject" of his hypocrisy does not exist?

You cannot eat your cake and have it. You cannot blame someone for an offence that does not exist. How did it even become an offence when the premise for such an offence does not exist?

If there is no law there is no offence so if there is no Jesus then there is no hypocrisy per his alleged teaching which since Jesus does not exist to you then where then did his teachings come from to exist and be disobeyed?

This is a very simple logical approach you keep denying.

My above simply logical presentation is actually showing that you are being a bigger hypocrite.

All this empty cries because you are a shameless hypocrite that refuses to stand for anything.

Again, it matters not what I believe in, but when you claim to believe in something make sure you stand for that thing, it is very simple.

Butterflyleo:
You are wasting your energy on me and your insults because by now you should realise that they do not faze me.

I am simply pointing out your own illogicality to you. Something you claim Christians are but you also cannot see that you are very much the same if not worse.

Wishes hold no power to an atheist because they are just words. So when such wishes still upset you then it shows that your atheism is yet incomplete and you still have residues of spirituality in you.

Also you say Jesus taught Christians how to behave. However such comments shouldn't be anywhere near your mind because you have repeatedly said here on nairaland that Jesus is a MYTH and NEVER existed so how can one who never existed TEACH anyone anything.

I am sure your illogicality is quite clear now to all even if you still end up denying it as you always do.

You can't point out any illogicality at all.

My point that you DELEBRATELY refuse to acknowledge is that I was only pointing out your lies. You claim atheist are bitter, angry and full of hate and I have shown you that your own Christians are more hateful, angry and spiteful that they even wish atheist death. They don't only wish us death but some have threatened that they will kill us if only they were close to us in real life. That is the subject but as usual you won't want to touch it, you'll prefer to continue with your dance of shame.

It matters not if I believe the silly wishes someone has for me about death, what matters is the evil intention he has in his mind. You are deliberately chosing to misunderstand that point.

It matters not what my beliefs about Jesus are, as a Christian you can not be talking about Jesus and refusing to obey what he teaches you, it only shows that you are deluded and have nothing to stand for.

Just pointing out the emptiness and hypocrisy of Christians. I know you don't like it but it must it must be done.

Butterflyleo:
At the words in bold, he definitely wouldn't see the illogicality of that whenever he does it.

I don't have to believe in Jesus to point out his silly hypocrisy. He claims to be a follower of Jesus only to be doing nonsense he did not teach him.

Even your Jesus said that you should love your enemies and pray for them. He said you are not to resist evil people. No where did he say you should wish anybody death because he mocks your beliefs.

You guys should always try to stand for something.

As I always say, you can't give what you don't have.

MuttleyLaff:
You behaved badly
You jumped on flamingREED's back, calling him colourful adjectives under the sun
Ridiculed his faith and labelled his God impotent

Are you afraid of death?

It is fair game, considering a prior warning about what will happen to anyone persisting in refusing to toe the line was given
You saw and read the warning before responding to it
It's like you had a death wish
You're like pesin wey go rub soak hinself in petrol, go stand beside barbeque, dey smoke cigarrette

"Igi ganganran ma gun mi loju, atokere la ti n wo"
loosely translated means
"Keep your distance from danger or potential curse"

flamingREED quote that you replied to was addressed only to HardMirror
Why you jumped on it, bothered not only to mention it but also to abuse flamingREED, I am still trying to grasp

Please stop dragging in Jesus, whom you dont believe exist

It's OK since you said it's fair game. I actually do not care about his evil wish, just pointing out the intention he has in his mind.

He claims to be a Christian, even his Jesus did not teach him that nonsense. My belief in Jesus has nothing to do with the fact that he is shameless and a hypocrite. Even the Jesus he is getting mad for did not teach him that nonsense.

Butterflyleo:
The reason why I am responding to your comment is because it is a no brained and common sense should prevail on you in this scenario.

1) you are an atheist and WISHES hold no value to you as they are not empirical and DO NOT WORK same way you assume Prayers to be wishes and hold no value and do not work.

2) Even if anyone WISHES you death VERBALLY, there is no existing supernatural force or power available anywhere to work on those wishes and make them effective . This is your atheistic worldview so I see no reason why MERE WISHES should upset you. Or do you still have residues of spirituality left in you despite being an atheist?

I believe that for that comment to irk you so, you obviously still have remnants of spirituality left in you even when you would still deny this by your reaction to such WISHES show otherwise.

Will you keep quiet and stop throwing empty words around.

You claim atheist are full of anger, hate bitterness and all and I and othersjust showed you how Christians have wished atheist death because of the hate, bitterness and anger they have in them. You must truly hate someone for you to wish that person death. No matter how atheist disagree with the theist here non has ever wished any of them death.

A person has actually threatened me with deat, saying that if I were close to him he would have killed me and nothing will happen because I mocked his sweet Jesus.

That a person will wish another person death only shows the height of bitterness, hatred and anger in the person. It doesn't matter if I believe it or not, the person wishing truly believes it, and will truly want it to happen, all the Christians that have wished atheist death here truly want it to happen and if it had happened they would have been happy luckily their stupid wishes will never happen but it only shows the evil intentions they have in their minds, that alone is enough to show you the type of people they are and the type of hate, anger and bitterness that resides in their minds. It is the evil intention they have that irks me not their empty words that I know will never happen.

You guys can not give what you don't have. So just let it slide.

Even Jesus did not teach them that nonsense. So I really don't know what you are on about. When you pick a gun to shot make sure you don't use it to shot yourself on your foot.

Joel Obi and Onazi made the list abi? Two totally useless players with nothing to offer.

MuttleyLaff:
It was a drastic move,
but then drastic moments, call for drastic measures.

In Lagos metropolis, you cant be doing butter or phonetics with area boys,
they only understand you, when you speak their language.
In this matter, in order to subdue, some languages when used like in this case, are better understood than others

You went out of your way spoiling and looking for a fight
Sorry, you got stung, after stirring up a hornets' nest.

"Shut up you idiotic terrorist wanna be.
Your deluded wish will continue to go unanswered because you are just talking to your self.
Your God is imaginary and there's nothing he can ever do.
Stop displaying your terrorist credentials like a deranged person."
- dalaman ©

"Mark my username
and never quote me again to challenge my faith or I'll wish you miserable death each time."
- flamingREED ©

What were you expecting, when you quoted flamingREED's above double quotes warning addressed to HardMirror
and not only taking panadol for another's headache but replying back to it, using bitter and abusive language.

I guess, it equally, is only the atheist that ignores warning of another,
to stop quoting them and challenge their faith, else unrestrained release will be unleashed

More like, death wish loading, when advanced warning, is not paid attention to or is intentionally disregarded.

So a person is justified to wish another person death for insulting him and his beliefs? Really? Remember a Christian here once told me that if I were anywhere close to him in real life he'll kill me and nothing will happen, he said I should be happy for the anonymity of the forum, yet we are the bitter , angry and the ones filled with hate

So wishing a person death because he mocked your beliefs is justified abi?

Ogbeni you are a joke. You guys can't give what you don't have because even your Jesus did not teach you that nonsense.