₦airaland Forum

I recognize that there have been similar topics addressing this theme but usually authored from non-Muslim’s understanding of peace.

Islam as we all know is famously dubbed by its adherents as "the religion of peace". A title that is often met with disapproval, disagreement and often debate by many outside the Muslim faith.

But it could even be argued that it is specific bad elements that rock the boat of peace and that is down to the individuals not Islam. However what diagnosis is to be given when we look at the foundation and spread of Islam?

I had for some time often wondered: Can an expansionist, monotheistic religion with a history of militancy be called the "religion of peace"?
Of course my own reasoning was affected by how I understood peace to be.

Which leads me to ask: How Is "Peace" defined in Islam?

Password.

sauer.

cowgurl: @Emofine & Afam.
Now am getting the 'blame me part' from ur comments but as an adult now, the interest to learn my dialect is 5% cos I just don't see it as a priority right now.

Cowgurl that’s not how I intended it to sound – I’m even in your position; I definitely know how it feels. I just meant it’s no more your parents responsibility but yours rather. That’s why they can’t be held accountable forever although of course it would have been easier if they imparted the language to you when you were a child. So I do agree your parents are to blame for the current situation you're in right now but that doesn't absolve you of your own responsibility. The onus now rests on you as a young adult. You not speaking your language is down to your parents but you not learning your language is down to you. But it’s up to you if you want to learn or whenever you choose to learn.

cowgurl: The thing is, before now, I've never been told why am to blame in all this, I just get scolded embarrasingly and I do not find it funny but from ur post n Emofine's I now undastand why it's now my responsibility to learn and thus I take the blame but still hold my folks accountable cos it's convenient/easier for one to learn his/her dialect when he/she is younger (IMO).

I understand. Perhaps they’ve always thought it to be your responsibility and not initially your parents. Or maybe some people don’t understand that in order to pick up a language it has to be communicated as it’s not inherited lol.

@OP Lol I undertsnad where you're coming from and yes your parents are to blame or were to blame rather because as you get older that responsibility to resolve this inability to communicate in your dialect lays strictly with you...

Imoni me wadoo...

mkmyers45: ive been gud..how r u? Wats gud?

Good to hear...I'm doing good myself also.

Menyo we

Cure.

mkmyers45...long time...how you been?

Obiagu1: The Edoid groups could become an ethnic group if they follow Ijaw model. However, I don't understand any of the languages in the group so I can say if they are similar in anyway. It could be beneficial to the group in Nigerian context.

What's the Ijaw model?

davidylan: How? Do you understand what the point of the Higgs Boson is? Most of you dont... the only reason you care about it is that you falsely believe it is another step towards solidifying your decision to throw God out of your equation.

I admit I do not understand this discovery in full detail but I am not an atheist and neither do I mark such discoveries as that in which automatically obviates the existence of “God”.
Not every comment made is a subtle reference about “God”.

alj harem: My sister, this mentality is wrong.

Would every single tiny local government be called a tribe one day ?

No. What is wrong is for a stranger to decide what another’s identity should be. We are not “tiny local government”. We are not a “sub-group” of each other. We are particular ethnic groups although we share similarities (and the degrees of similarities vary from group to group). Collectively we may qualify as “Edo” group but we still have our individual identities and that is not wrong of us to acknowledge.

And I sincerely question the background research as to this topic if the OP believes that all those aforementioned groups actually have the “same language”.

Furthermore shouldn't such a decision be decided amongst these particular groups mentioned?

Mr Anony

The Ten Commandments are not a moral framework but a legal system.

So a legal system can be breached in order to excerise morality (aka loyalty to god).

***

Hmmm as you have said earlier we are “going around in circles”. You've read my views and I've read yours. However I will admit that I did garner something from our dialogue and I somehwat have a handle on your narrow viewpoint. However I doubt you understood mine.

Again @ Mr Anony

It may interest you to know that the three major monotheistic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam all tend to describe (at least functionally) the same God
The point is that it is not possible to have multiple gods existing and have any true morality. It must be one God hence the christian worldview is appropriate for defining morality.

The authorities governing the Abrahamic faiths do not functionally describe the "same God" most especially with Christianity. Albeit the ten commandments is in the holy scriptures of all Abrahamic faiths.
The Christian god is not in harmony with the Muslim one. Islam doesn’t recognise the trinity.
So you being a Christian can you accept the moral framework that may govern Muslims and Jews upon your basis that the Abrahamic faiths “all tend to describe (at least functionally) the same God”?

Mr Anony

Killing in itself is not morally evil, murder on the other hand is morally evil. The difference between judicial killing and murder is the authority/license to kill, This is why an executioner is not judged a murderer neither is a soldier judged a murderer by law no matter how many people they kill.

Thus I asked you earlier: if God ordered you to “kill” would you oblige?

And to that this was your response:

Since God has already commanded me as a christian not to commit murder and If Jesus Christ is the living example I base morality on, It is absurd to think that god will demand that I commit murder. Why would God ask me to commit murder? This would be contradicting His nature and hence he would not be God.

So I guess you’ve made the distinction between killing and murder albeit one of the laws in the Ten Commandments states “thou shalt not kill”...or until told otherwise...is it?

Or is the Ten commandments not a moral framework but a "legal system"?...

Boring? On the contrary I find this news quite exciting and intriguing.

Mr Anony

I am not at all suggesting that the nature of God is good but that the actions "he" ordered (in accordance to the scripture) were not always good actions. “He” of course had reasons for ordering such actions. But killing or attempted killing are not good or even moral acts to endorse although certain situations may make it acceptable to employ such an extreme action.

Abraham didn’t kill his son (although he still attempted to) but the Isrealites under God’s alleged instruction committed genocide. Are we to unreservedly accept such as a good act simply because they were given a license to kill by God?

And is it not possible for an alleged good God to employ evil for the sake of doing good?

okeyxyz: This is the way it is:

Morality is a set of values for profits, it promises profits/gain for abiding by it's values or loss/failures for disregarding them. that's the short of it. So if i gain nothing by practicing morality, then i cannot consider such values to be moral. secondly, moralities are relative, each system is separate from the other. There is also an ultimate morality which considers all other forms of morality and helps you to profit from them. That is the morality of god. I know, almost everybody professes god, but truth is very few actually know god(but that is a matter for another thread)

Now, loyalty is the discipline to follow your moral code. in other words, there can be no loyalty without morality. In practice, you can not separate one from the other. You can define them separately, but they don't work separately. your loyalty must first be justified by a moral system.

Thank you for your contribution. I think in my prolonged dialogue I went off on a tangent deviating the topic for the sake of hammering a few points.

Ptolomeus: Nothing before morals and ethics.

Hi Plotomeus do you worship a god?

The “same” or similar?
Portuguese is similar to Spanish why don’t we thus force a sole identity on them? Ah of course because they are pretty much nation states and Nigeria is a heterogeneous country thus the desire to summarize groups most especially minorities.
As regards to your question we all (as well as some other groups) are classified as "Edoid" hence the similarities in language and culture just like the Portuguese and Spanish for example. We are an “Edo” group collectively and some of our histories tie but we still hope to maintain our individuality not out of spite or malice for each other but for our own convenience and wish. I think outsiders should respect the identity we choose to wear not what they think or hope we should be. Notwithstanding we are still siblings but not siamese and we acknowledge each other.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRLMF8I6X0k

sylve11: Oh how I loff the Isokos! The Urhobos and them rest of Nigerians! One love Nigeria!

megwo

Ajufinz,

Thanks for the patronizing suggestion but I have no urgency in asking Jesus himself when it’s recounted in his “word” aka the bible.
But I do not mean to purposely tread on anybodies sensibilities or even faith although I admit sometimes I'm guilty of both and to that I sincerely apologies but it was not my intent.
However it is an insult to my own sensibility and belief to accept this message of Christ's redeeming blood through his alleged sacrifice.

I am made to feel guilty for indirectly supposedly causing the death of another and thus I am indebted to this person.
By accepting this “gift” there is blood on my hands but that is ok because this blood apparently absolves me of my sins – which ethically is supposed to be my own responsibility and not offloaded to another.
Even before accepting this "gift" I am made to believe that I am responsible for Christ’s death even though this figure died way before I was born (and if I was consulted in this decision or had a say at all I would have been against Christ’s death and would have even lent support in stopping this human sacrifice).

But the most strangest thing of all is that this often told story of a life being sacrificed is somehow blunted by the temporary death and resurrection of the same life offered. Now I do wonder if Jesus had no foreknowledge of his resurrection or if his death was to be permanent would he still have willingly offered himself as a sacrifice.

tbaba1234 + Mr Anony

But the thing is not everybody worships a universal God...there are countless gods that are not in harmony with each other and they have many subjects who loyally adhere to them. Different gods, a different system hence morality differs and even for the non-believers who don’t rely on the moral teachings of any religion/god.
In fact when it comes to holding a belief I suppose then the greatest moral is thus loyalty to one’s deity as already agreed upon by certain fellows of faith on this thread.
However if God asked either of you gentlemen to kill would you oblige?

Mr Anony Morning...

God is good. If Abraham ended up killing Isaac, then it would contradict God's nature, but you will agree that it was simply a test and God had no intention of having Isaac killed in the first place therefore God remains good.
You are mistaking God's nature and purposely misreading His actions...

But this is the thing - the goal post keeps on changing. Yes I can agree that executing Isaac didn’t seem to be the intention of God. It was however as many people have put it - a “test” although I shall come to that later.

However if we are to be indicted on even what we think according to the bible – i.e whatsoever a man thinketh in his heart he hath already committed (apologies for my poor paraphrasing here but I hope you understand the point I’m trying to convey).
Thus lust of the imaginations equates even to committed fornication so what about attempted murder?
Abraham did attempt to kill his son on God’s say so but he won’t be indicted even though he had thought about it (although I’m sure he really didn’t want to do it) but rather given merit for having obeyed God because at that significant moment murder had become sanctioned thus “moral”.

And now back to this act being accorded as a “test of faith”. I am sorry to say but what type of test is this that involves emotional abuse and manipulation? This is one of the reasons I was disagreeable with the word "impartial" when it comes to such a God.
Why would an "impartial" God asses people’s loyalty to "him"? What do these tests ultimately serve if they add nothing to the world? Perhaps it could be said it reestablishes one's bond with their god? Or maybe to even massage God's ego....Or perhaps for the history and literature buffs we may say to project the preview of God sacrificing his own son...

But if for example if Abraham was told by God to kill a man that was threatening his clan that would of course be understandable but it doesn't still make murder right (and even here the impartiality of God would still be questioned) even though it was the best thing to do at that crucial time thus my earlier comment....whatever god say's is "good" is not the same thing as it is "good" to do whatever god says because murder for example or attempting to murder is not by any standards "good" although it may be employed in extreme cases where it may be the only option to provide the best solution.

Please don't make the mistake of reading more meaning into a story than is presented.

But there is more meaning to this story than presented .i.e a foreshadowing of Christ’s sacrifice.

I am sorry but at this point you may have to give instances that prove God to be partial

He supported a chosen populace in wars, gave these elect permission (which I suppose will be said to be moral since the commands were apparently the word of God) to wipe out nations, land grab, kill innocent women and children because unfortunately for them they were born into the wrong nation, kill even babies (which only makes me wonder if this God is really a Pro-life), do as they so please with the virgins found in those conquered states, enslave other people – and might I add none of these were a test of any faith so what was this “good” God’s intentions here?

These were commands that were required to be executed. These events recorded in the Old Testament are made ok because they were sanctioned by God who has supposedly provided our moral template but it’s quite ok to break these moral codes if God ordains and afterall loyalty to this deity is supposedly the greatest morality there is and should be a believer’s priority even at the expense of undermining particular moral codes set out by this same God..so by doing right by "him" we may simultaneously end up "sinning"...but I suppose leniency may be given at God's discretion.

@OP Reply: They're all fine...including Chimezie

jamace: Compare notes on our beliefs.

You know I'd actually would very much enjoy such a discourse

Chimezie198: Lolz kedu maka ndi enyi gi ha?

*blinks* in English?

Bin PM u sometime ago. U got dat?

Sorry o but no be my fault...my own PM seems to be faulty I don't see any of the emails in my inbox

@OP *whispers* ask him if he don't mind dropping me his email here for a sec...

Odinma

@OP Have a catch up with him.

@OP Ask him how he's been...

gendebs: U are too right to be wrong. Will u be my girl friend as promise

...and what if a male got the answer first?
I can be your friend girl instead

@OP Kick him/her/it out the room then run to embrace Chimezie and reply...I dey oooo

Love the funky hairstyles of the wodaabe people

@OP Nice thread concept

Deep Sight: 1. Which newbie has a permanent viagra inspired er.ection for bashing religion on NL?

a) Tudor b) logicboy c) buzugee

logicboy

2. Which atheist famously declared that time and space do not exist?

a) thehomer b)Idehn c)jayriginal

Iden?

3. Which atheist insists that something happened existed before the big ba.ng, and yet says there was no time before the big ba.ang?

a) thehomer b)Idehn c)jayriginal

jayriginal?

4. Which muslim is now winning a reputation as the most sensible muslim on NL?

a) maclatunji b) tbaba1234 c) Olabowale

tbaba1234

5. Which muslim could be suspected on being part of the current Boko Haram insurgency?

a) maclatunji b) tbaba1234 c) Abuzola

Abuzola

6. Which Christian is largely viewed as a roaming random fanatic?

a) Jesoul b) chukwudii44 c) Frosbel

Frosbel

logicboy01: See this apologist.

The compass points are not corners. They are directions.

see your mouth...

apologist? on the contrary I was merely acknowledging archaic literature

abi na fight?