₦airaland Forum

Richirich713:
God

Are you saying it is wrong because God said so?

If yes, then isnt morality subjective to God's command?, what if God commands you to kill your child like he did with abraham, would it still be wrong then?

Richirich713:
Murder is wrong cuz it's the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

By whose's standard is it unlawful?

kilokeys:
OP is a baby philosopher...

we have 3 stages in human behaviour


antecedents

behaviour itself

consequences


why cause pain?, why kill in the first place?

you havent actually communicated!, what is your message here?

This is the go to question for the theist who is arguing with the non-believer, it is often said, "if you dont believe in God, why don't you go about raping and killing people". it is a very childish question but i want to turn the tables around and pose the question to theists.

Why is murder wrong?

Let me reframe it like this;

Is murder wrong because it is just wrong or is it wrong because God says its wrong?

if the former is the case, then it means God is not needed to have morality, but if you say the latter is the case, then it means morality is arbitrary(and not as objective as theists makes it sound).

So which is it?

Well in my humble opinion, as long as there is a God, murder is not wrong(yes i said it), why?, you might ask!, its follows from this simple logic:

- Everything that happens is God's plan
- God's plan is ultimately good
- Killing someone is part of God's plan which in essence is ultimately good.

If killing someone would send the person to heaven to spend an eternity with God, then why is murder wrong?, and the killer could ultimately repent before dying so everybody wins!

On the otherhand, if there was no God, then murder would be the greatest evil because it would follow that since this is the only life we have, then ending it abruptly would be the greatest pain you can inflict on someone and even yourself because the rest of your single short life would be spent behind bars.

I can already hear rebuttals to the argument saying God specifically said it in the bible that one shall not kill, but God himself killed far more people than the devil did in the bible, so drowning everyone on earth can be regarded as being Godly.

Pidggin:
So you think imaginary characters composed the Bible and over three billion Christians are all imagining things? Why has the bible survived the test of time, it's been a best seller through every generation. What is your perception about an author whose book has broken all known world records so far?

Breaking records is not a prerequisite for truths and facts, and science is not a democracy, what is true is not determined by votes or the number of people that believes in it.

2000years ago, 99.5% of people in the world believed the earth was flat and they did that for longer than 2000years, did that mean they were correct?

The evidence for God and satan is as good as the evidence for the flying spaghetti monster, the chinese teapot and santa-claus, if you disagree, i would gladly love to see your evidence!

Pidggin:
I am saying it not trying, that's the point of this thread, i'm glad you are catching on

I am not a big fan of the theist/atheist arguments, it doesnt lead anywhere especially when both sides are just ranting and not listening to the otherside, but i ask a simple question, how can i be confused by something that is imaginary and does not exist?

The truth is theists have no case, the evidence is glaring, there is more evidence that the earth is flat than there is evidence for a 6000year old earth.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_against_a_recent_creation

I would suggest sane people refrain from arguing with these young earth creationists, its very similar to arguing with someone that the earth is not flat.

Pidggin:
See how devil has totally confused some people

How can nothing reasonable create something reasonable. Then we should have a world made of unreasonable matter but we have otherwise

Even if we are to believe nothing created something then something developed life, what is the need of spirituality?

How did reasoning and spirituality enter this world, according to athiesm?

My theist love, are you trying to say the devil has confused me?

ChemicalReaction:

Dear Nairaland Athiests, why and when did you decide to dump religion
Please share with me

I am curious as to why you want to know!

Well, there wasnt a "when" i dumped religion, i slowly evolved out of it.

Why?, well for starters, there is no evidence for the claims made by religion, and frankly, its just illogical...

DoctorAlien:
The story of evolution and the 4-billion-year age of the earth is as ridiculous as the thinking capacity of those who still believe such a story, even after being presented with the considerable flaws associated with the dating methods, and the multiple assumptions on which such fables are based.

On the crime scene fact-data-evidence story, remember that a suicide can perfectly resemble a murder, and that many innocent people have been incarcerated based on the conclusions reached by "infallible" crime detectors.

Atheist logic:

I don't believe what someone who was there 2000 years ago said happened then.

I believe what someone who is alive now said happened 13.8 billion years ago.








Makes perfect sense.

First of all, someone stabbed in the back and his money and atm cards taken could be a suicide?, Really?

Secondly, which exact flaws are associated with dating methods? What i have noticed is that theists would make up anything just to counter reality

Third, even if the dating methods are flawed, atleast it makes an attempt to use experiments and measurement to accurately predict the age of the earth!, whats your alternative?, the word of some goat herders that lived over 2000years ago who ddnt even know the earth revolved around the sun and thought stars were just dots in the sky, really, dude?

OLAADEGBU:
Someone said: "If you believe the earth is 6000 years old then you deny science."

Response:

If you believe the earth is millions or billions of years old, you "believe" science. You don't "know" the age of the earth. You "trust" what you've been told by fallible men and fallible dating processes. Your convictions rest entirely on faith. See www.EvolutionVsGod.pcom

If you are an homocide detective and you are called to a crime scene, on reaching the venue, you see a person who claims to be an eye witness and he says the victim was shot in the head, then you walk into a crime scene and asks your partner what happened, then he says his theory is that the victim was robbed and stabbed, you ask how does he know, was he there?, then he explains, the body had a knife to its back, a wallet was lying next to the body, on the floor, and all the items in the wallet seemed to be lying on the ground except for money and atm cards.

You examine the body but no gun wounds, but there is a knife stuck at the back of the body!

Who would you believe, the all knowing eye witness who claims was there and saw it happen or your partner who used facts,data and evidence to draw conclusions without being present at the murder?

Ferruccio:
[color=Black][b]

Atheists/Evolutionists Vs Christians
______________________________________________

Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."


Evolutionists always manipulate reality to try and do away with creationism. For example, when you ask an evolutionist how they come up with the age of the sedimentary layers in the earth, they will always tell you they date them by the fossils found in those sedimentary layers. Then when you ask them how they come up with the age of the fossils, they say their age is determined by which sedimentary layer of rock they are found in. But how can that be? How can the rocks date the layers, if the layers date the rocks? That's what's called "circular reasoning." One minute they say the rock determines the age of the fossil, the next they say the fossil determines the age of the rock.


Charles Darwin said "It is a truly wonderful fact" that all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other"" "The Origin of the Species p 170.


The evolutionist agrees with Darwin and says all life on earth evolved from primordial soup, which then somehow formed into many different species like birds, animals, plants, fish etc; and those birds, animals, plants and fish evolved into many different types of species themselves. For example, they believe a bird later formed different types of lizards, horses and dogs. They also believe that plants created everything from vines to trees to flowers, and fish evolved into dinosaurs, apes and humans. If that"s true, then I have to ask the evolutionist why is it for the last 6000 years of recorded history that not a single new species has ever been created? Scientific fact is, we still have many of the old species among us, and we know of many that did in fact become extinct. But not a single bird has been found that used to be a fish. And not a single bird has been found that is related to a lizard. If life truly evolves like they say it does, why did it all of a sudden stop dead in its tracks 6000 years ago?[/color][/b]

I really dont understand why people are even answering you.

You said evolution vs creationism, you quote one verse from a book written 4000years ago, and then spend the rest of the time attacking science.

Why would sane people take you seriously?

tartar9:
But its still a theory,which could just be wrong

Just the same way the heliocentric theory(that the earth revolves around the sun) could also be wrong because its just a theory...

VictorRomanov:
Newton's law wasn't dispproved. It was only extended.

Evolution on the other hand hasn't been proved. Usually, for a theory to be accepted, it has to be tested many times over and would always hold true any all cases. It could be re-produced with controlled conditions with the principles of the theory. In the case of evolution, scientist considered it to be a law, before looking for theories to explain it. Which isn't the usually process.

Like I mentioned earlier, strongest arguments against evolution don't even emanate from africa. So don't bring the backwardness of africa into this. Make ur point with superior logic and arguments.

Amongst scientist, there are arguments and disagreements regard fossil records, missing links, big band theory and the theory of natural selection.

You understand little about the scientific process from what i can gather...

I would try to give you a description of what you are trying to say;

A scientific theory is NOT a wild guess. It must be consistent with known experimental results and it must have predictive power. As new knowledge is gained, theories are refined to better explain the data. A law is a mathematical relationship that is consistently found to be true.

So you see, no amount of proving can turn a theory to a law. Infact theories are not disproved, they become obsolete or refined, i would give you some examples...

1. 2000years ago the predominant theory is that the earth was the center of the universe and the sun and moon revolves around it, at that present time, the theory was correct because it explained all the known facts and data until new data surfaced, then it became obsolete, New theories grew in its stead like the heliocentric theory(where the earth revolves around the sun), presently the heliocentric theory is so concrete that nothing seems to shake it off

2. We have already discussed Gravity, General relativity explains all the facts of Gravity.

3. The theory of Natural Selection is what you have issues with but the fact of the matter is Evolution occurs, its is a fact, a child organism is different from the parent organism, Now aim is to explain how organisms fit into their environment so well, and 150years ago, two theories came onboard to explain it;

The theory of evolution by use and disuse: this was profounded by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, i cant go into the details, but after the discover of heredity, Lamarck's theory became obsolete and obviously could not have been the main driver for the diversity of living things.

References : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism

The theory of evolution by natural selection(i am sure you know about it): this was the crown jewel of biology, the "ha ha" moment and it survives to this day after 150 years of scientific discoveries and breakthroughs. it has passed every single test thrown at it that it is as concrete as the heliocentric theory.

References: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection


The truth is anybody who disagrees with it either doesnt know much about it or doesnt want to know anything about it, either ways it would be advisable to sit down, clear your mind from all biases, and really study it. you would be amazed at the elegance and its predictive power, and you would understand that it wasnt a conspiracy, rather it is the truth.

NB: Many religious people accepts evolution, even the catholic church as said God used evolution to create living things, are these people somehow less religious than you are?

VictorRomanov:
My brother it is called Law of Universal Gravitation. Not a theory. Besides the strongest cases against evolution are made by scientist in the so called developed world, not in africa.

My brother you should take some time to read. I believe atheist pride themselves in it.

I think you should take your own advice, this is exactly my point, school is not for teaching, it is for training, training you to be able to search, acquire and organize information.

Isaac newton profounded his law of gravity some 400years ago, but it was incomplete, he explained how it works and not what it is.

Albert Einstein changed that about 100years ago by putting forward the "THEORY" of General Relativity. This is the most indepth and well explained description of Gravity that we have to date. Newton wasn't wrong he was just incomplete, Einstein extended the knowledge.

These are things you would know if you knew what you are talking about.

I wont argue with you whether evolution is true or not, lost hope for the future of Africa with people who say things like that, just one amazing thing about science, it is true whether you believe it or not.

Many Nigerian theists are very backward sorry to say...they come up here and argue blindly with confidence that evolution is wrong, something that would be extremely laughed at in the developed world. Sincerely our backwardness and lack of ability to learn and adapt is killing us and our intellectuals.

Some come with the notion of "its just a theory", So is the Gravitational theory(the general theory of relativity), but i dont see anybody jumping up of a building because its just a "theory"!

VictorRomanov:
Is evolution a proven scientific fact or still a theory? It's called THEORY of evolution for a reason

promise10:
YES! And no matter how a lie is refined, defined and presented as the truth, do you think it can stand the test of time??

i have read this evolution, and discovered it to be a lie. A very big lie, bro.

That's why i hardly refute it, because i have no gain in refuting a lie. As for me, evolution has nothing to refute.

Even if, i become an atheist tomorrow, i see it as a great dishonesty to believe in evolution.

Exactly, a lie cannot stand the test of time!

The Theory of Natural Selection has been around for 150years and the evidence for it keeps getting stronger and better and more convincing, infact it is in a position as concrete as the earth revolves around the sun.

Many other theories about the "Fact of Evolution" like the theory of use and disuse by lamarck has been proven to be wrong long ago and nobody talks about it.

So its either you accept it or not, but mind you, you not accepting it, still doesnt change the fact that Evolution did infact occur and is still occuring.

Pidggin:
Why haven't Eskimos developed furs to protect them from the blistering cold environment where they have lived for centuries?

Where are the fossil evidence to show that dinosaurs evolved?

Show us evidence of progression of elephants and why has the transitional process stopped (if it ever existed) they are still a bit too clumsy for proper movement, don't you think they should have transitioned into a slimmer version by now? Thanks to evolution

Several findings have showed the discovery of new species with characteristics not found in any other specie, how is this possibly a result of evolution? And don't tell me it occured in spurts because you will end up contradicting yourself. How can evolution which is supposed to occur gradually in every specie, suddenly occur in spurts in some certain ones

Your god Charles Darwin never found the missing link until his death


Coelacanth, after 350million years has still not developed a leg to walk on, by now they should be walking on land with you and I

Are you aware that scientists have declared the Archaeopteryx fossils with feathers as forgery?

If evolution was true all species should have transitional links not only few Hehehehe

The most modern laboratories cannot still create a living cell, lol how can organic life be created from inorganic matter? No scientist has been able to do this when the smallest living cell contains more than 60,000proteins of hundred different configurations. The complexity of a single cell shows the handy work of a master designer, it did not happen by chance


Charles Darwin (your god) had no concept regarding the complexity of DNA. He did not know that this was the key to identity


Scientists have proven that 80% of the life forms in his tree of life did not evolve from the predecessor

Do you know one thing about science, it is true whether you believe it or not!, but let me ask you one question!

If you believe that God can override nature to create living things as described in the Book of Genesis, then what reasons do you have, other than your religious beliefs, that God could not have created living things through a process of evolution?

Pidggin:
Evolution is a baseless theory

This babe cracks me up everytime...following the footsteps of winner01 and kingebukablog i see...

Anyways to the OP, continue to live in fantasy land...

felixomor:
Sorry its religious when u say "u will be excommunicated for doing or not"
Sorry its religious.
No other animal gets excommunicated for sleeping with another's wife. Life goes on for them. Its survival of the fittest.

Truly, this is suprisingly ignorant...So Animals have wifes?, apparently i did not know.

Stop saying "survival of the fittest" when you dont even understand the meaning of the phrase, survival of the fittest is about the organisms with the right features suited for a particular environment would thrive and reproduce, it doesnt mean kill or be killed, thats just another one of the ignorant things in your post.

Lastly, Humans are higher cognitive group of mammals that are very social, and we have culture, we depend on the society to survive, so if we want to survive individual, we have to work together for the society to be strong as a unit. Now if we have one individual, going around killing people, raping children and stealing food for people, he obviously is going to be stepping on lot of toes, he cannot be allowed to remain in the group because he would risk the stability of the group. Animals like wolves would gang up and kill that individual, chimps, gorillas would do the same, hyenas would pursue that individual out of their pack, while we humans would lock them up in prisons.

felixomor:
And in case u dont know, u do good because u were raised in a religious home with religious parents who inculcated religious morals in ur upbringing while ur personality was being moulded.
Otherwise, u would av been something else.
So stop trying to act as though u knew when ur personality was formed and as such.
Thats why u do good.

Remove those morals that were brought by religion to mould society, what u have is animal kingdom and tarzans.
Period.

Another ignorant thing to say, you mean people from a different religion from yours would not have any morals?

Please, in one post, you have said alot of ignorant things, If Morals come from Religion, why are 95% of all in-mates religious?...Think before you spill out some ideas.

felixomor:
Wether social or not, animals kill each other.
Lets not dwell too much on that.

And I hope u know "good" doesnt just involve not killing.
"Good" also involves not sleeping with another man's wife. Or u want to also argue animals follow that?

And if u say people are naturally good and evil, then some babies are going to be bad, no matter what.
That sounds religious to me.
Then how would u explain very bad people being transformed and coming to live a good life after certain experiences?
Does it mean their nature changed from "bad" to 'good"?
That also sounds religious to me.

What is it about "Do not do unto others what you would not want them to do unto you" that you dont understand?

When i say Good and evil is natural, i mean we all have the ability to do good and evil, its the choices we make that makes us who we are.

You might ask, what stops anyone from just doing bad, and the answer is what i have been saying all along, when you dont act right in a social group, you become excommunicated and your survival chances drop drastically.

Which one come be religious inside?

shadeyinka:
I think I have may be I'm not too explicit.
1. Man is limited on earth because of the combination of limitations in ability, knowledge and control.
The rest will be speculations of what Adam may or not be able to do outside the earth.
2. I have said that Satan is not the direct cause of natural evil. It is the activated law of sin and death. Man lost control and the earth became WILD!
3. On other planets, they are not under control therefore, they could run wild until man decides to tame it.

People blame Satan for all mishaps forgetting that Satan can only suggest. When you obey, certain laws take effect. It may be too late to reverse the laws of "entropy"

Ok cool, i agree your theology holds up but lets agree to disagree on the foundation.

honourhim:
Atheists are good indeed. Story story. Leave that story abeg.

Back to the issue.
The money you got through fraudulent means you are using it to be good to your family and other people around you . The position you acquired through crooked means you are using to be good to people. To the beneficiaries of your evil practices you are good.
Who defines what is good and what is not?

Sometimes i wonder how you guys reason, didnt you read my post?

Do not do unto others what you wouldnt want them to do unto you.

If you like being defrauded, then it is ok to fraud.

If you would dupe your family member, then feel free to dupe others.

Smh

felixomor:
U say animals dont kill themselves?
For real?
Well, let me not digress.
You still have not answered any question.
U only beating around bush stating ur perceived observations.
U still have not said why you do good?
And if u say its natural to show kindess to our kind, why then do evil exist among people?
Or are those people not natural?

1. I said animals in a social group dont just go around killing themselves, thats what it means to be in a social group

2. People are naturally good and evil, now as animals in a social group we want whats best for the group to prolong our survival, if an individual is acting in a way thats not beneficial to the group, that individual is excommunicated. So in other words being good helps the social group and the social groups helps in the survival of the individuals.

I am sure you have heard of the saying, there is strength in unity.

felixomor:
Introducing evolution only makes it complex for u.
Animals live by survival of the fittest.
Kill or be killed.
That way, there is no reason to be good to anybody except urself.
Unless, u believe in a reward for good, which ur answer doesnt state.
U see why the answer to the question is not as u put it.

Is it that you cant read or something?, what did i say just now about family members?, look i am not here to argue with you...The fact that u said that about animals sef shows how ignorant you are, Do you want to tell me that animals in a social group just kill themselves like savages?, wolves, elephants, buffalos, lion, chimps, gorillas are all social animals and they have unity in their group. We has higher animals with a higher cognition show they same kindred spirit for our kind(except a few exceptions) and we are the first species to extend our compassion not only for our social group or species but also other species as well.

Please stop being intellectually dishonest just because you want to counter me by all means.

shadeyinka:
There are always solar flares on the sun and some planets have recorded storms etc. Since it affects no human, it cannot be called evil.

Replication of events occurring in uncontrolled barren planets and stars on the earth where man is supposed to rule is the evil.

In his unfallen state, I believe that if man could travel to other planets, he would control it. Like making Mars to grow crops...(this is just a speculation o)

Mar 4:39 And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm.

Man should have being like Jesus if not for his fall

Still havent answered my question though.

Before mans fall, did God give man the power of the earth or the universe?, and if he did the universe, why is man so limited to the earth?

Since what we term Natural disasters on earth is a normal occurence in the universe, why does it happen where no human inhabitants are if satan is the one causing the destruction?

felixomor:
Just listen to urself while u r calling someone a disgrace but giving a half baked answer.

"Be good for goodness sake" Indeed.
And u think u av answered the question?
U would av just said u cant answer or better still resist commenting.

What else do you want me to answer?

Do you need heaven to be good to your family members?, if the answer is no, then why cant you view the human race as your very large family?, and treat them exactly how you would treat your immediate family.

Simple as ABC...

NB: since most atheists accept the fact of evolution, they tend to see all living things are more connected than we might think and tend to feel a family bond towards them, that in no way means atheists are better than theists, it just shows where our compassion lies.

honourhim:
Who defines what is good and what is bad?
A fraudster believes he is smart. An armed robber believes he is smart. A politician who wins elections thru violence and dubious means believe he is smart. What you call good may be regarded as bad by another person and vice versa.

What benchmark do atheists use to measure good and bad.

Very simple, do not do unto others what you would not want them to do unto you.

Tell me, do you need the reward of heaven to be good to your family members?, if the answer is no, then its very simple, view the human race as your family members and then you understand why atheists are good.

If you are good only because of a heavenly reward or a hellish punishment and not because of your own accord to be good, then you are a sorry lot and a disgrace to the human species.

Just be good for goodness sake.

shadeyinka:
It is good that we are now on the same page.



My definition of Artificial Evil to a large extent excludes harm caused by human errors whether intentional or not. I wouldn't strictly call accident as a result of drunk driver Artificial Evil.

I have limited my term "Artificial evil" mainly to faults, weakness of mechanical, electrical, chemical devices and machineries resulting in harm.

Natural disasters and Artificial Evil are very similar I think:

Hot molten magma is contained under pressure under the earth crust. Over time, a tiny fissure occurred on the earth crust which produced a weakness in the containment. One day, volcanic eruption occurred through the crack and several villages were submerged.

Now compare with:

Butane gas contained under pressure inside a gas cylinder in a kitchen. Over time, a tiny fissure occurred in the hose and gas piping which produced a weakness in the containment. One day, in the course of cooking, gas escaped through the crack and the explosion wiped out a families life investment.





God created a perfect world and handed it over to Adam. Adam was sovereign over the earth and was supposed to bend the earth to his will. However, he disobeys the Manufacturers instruction and thus lost his authority and at the same time lost his control over nature. It is not God s fault, it was Adams fault.

We live in a world guided by several kinds of laws:
Physical Laws, Natural Laws, Spiritual Laws, Moral Laws etc

Violation or otherwise of any of these laws have consequences. Adam violated the law that protested his environment and the result is what we see. ..a trojan running the code of death

.


Now, God is going to reset the world but only after the Harvest.








The disaster is not the virus. Deliberately, I used the word Trojan. The Trojan was not aimed at the earth; it was aimed at Adam himself. Adam lost the Power and his sovereignty over the earth to Tend (control and dominate) the Earth. Death (the law of diminishing returns) came into effect.

So, you see its not that Satan is directly responsible for calamities but the "Law of Death", which I referred to as the malicious code is running. All Satan did was causing Adam to activate the law of death over himself and the earth.




The Bible is not a science textbook. It is a chronicle of experiences of a people relating with God and effects of obedience and disobedience so that posterity will learn. So, not everything except that necessary for edification, rebuke, correction and instruction will be put in it

I have given some bible proves that the earth will be restored but only after the harvest.

So how do you explain the same natural events we term as "natural disasters" happening in other places of the universe where obviously no human inhabitants are?

From your write up, God gave man the power to control the earth, and man in his foolish lost it, what about the rest of the universe?, did God give man the power for that too, and if he did, why is man limited to only the earth?

Buharimustdie20:
They reject the theory that life evolved from water but totally believe that man was created from clay and the rest of the organisms came by wishful thinking
JSoE
Seun
COLDHARDTRUTH
WINNER01 and other theists, oya come and defend yourselves

I dont think this is enough reason to call theists stupid, many atheists dont accept evolution too, accepting evolution is not the yardstick for cleverness!