₦airaland Forum

Carrlls: If a religious person bad mouths homosexuality but it is not "hate speech" for a sodomite to bad mouth religion?

Note to half - wits; I sad bad mouth, I didn't say anything about committing or promoting violence
[img]http://www.keyforex.info/pet.gif[/img]

The difference is that the religious person is condemning a person’s nature whist the “sodomite” is castigating an institution. “Bad mouthing” is infantile and wrong on so many levels anyway but often times it’s retaliation to an institution that some feel discriminates against them for their very being which they cannot help. I understand it’s painful when people insensitively hurt another’s beliefs but knowing how painful such attack can be I wonder if believers can at least sympathise with those “sodomites” that are condemned for their nature. Some religious people have argued that no one is born a homosexual, well whilst that debate remains on-going . . . . there is no debate about the fact that no one is born a Christian or a Muslim so if it’s so easy to shed this quoted “unnatural” behaviour is it thus easy for a Muslim and a Christian to depart from their faith which they accept as integral to their being?

I concur with Calloti's post.

Image123: They wanted to be like God, to be worshipped. It's not a disenchantment with God, they wanted to be Him. That you offend in school doesn't mean you're tired of your school.

Ok. I’m no expert on the Bible even though I’m an avid reader and that’s why I ask many questions even though I may be wrong in some of my assertions.

However what I do know according to the Bible is that it was Lucifer who wanted to be like God not “they” other angels who supported Lucifer in his rebellion. “They” supporting Lucifer is what I was more curious about. Why would they dare God in such a way? Were they not content already? Why would they need to support Lucifer if heaven was already sufficient? . . .maybe Lucifer seduced them with offers. . .maybe some wanted a promotion in their ranks. . .maybe some were loyal to Lucifer. . .which either way I look at it . . .it strikes me as rather inconsistent for some entities in a perfect realm to have such intentions, to have a mind of rebellion highlights perhaps heaven or at least the former heaven was not perfect. There was an actual battle in heaven. How can such a perfect atmosphere breed rebellion?

Snowwy: @emofine,
I believe in giving offering of any possession of mine I have been blessed of God with so like you say it is not about the money....it is about giving of what you have that God blessed you with, money, land, and any other possession.

Yes I know. I think some people translate giving what you have as having to be solely cold cash but unfortunately some churches encourages this notion. There was a young artist who offered her talent to her church and young IT students who designed the website for the church. They were'nt exactly balling in it but the significant services they rendered could and should constitute as an "offering" imo.

Bello555: From the massive and expensive structures of churches these days, one seem to wonder, were did all that money come from?

If we stop dropping of offerings and tights in churches, can the church run its affairs? That is every individual or company willing to give monies should go to orphanages direct to give them this assistance because i think they are the ones that need it most. And you will get more blessings than if dropped in the church. Most churches simply use these monies to run both church and personal affairs.

I'm not a church attendant but from a neutral standpoint I doubt that donation or offering has to be solely monetary, services can be offered also. However if the church received no assistance whatsoever be it monetary or otherwise then most likely such a church or any other edifice wouldn't stand. I've seen churches with members below a double digit population and they have survived due to the services each member has offered which wasn't necessarily monetary but I gather that "money" seems to be a key word and life support for some churches but certainly not all. So if anything I would say a church would not survive without the people.

But no doubt some "churches" certainly have a healthy economy outside the state.

There has been a few mentioned variables that some claim can affect an individual's spirituality or capacity for it; melanin, culture, even intelligence has been suggested as possible factors that can affect one's tendency to be spiritual.

If culture - which is an engineered environment - possibly influences an individual's likelihood in developing a form of spirituality or not . . .how about the natural environment?

Is there a correlation between spiritually inclined people and their relationship/proximity to the sun?

Are the inhabitants of regions with greater sun intensity more likely to be spiritual?

odumchi: I think it's mainly an issue of "sizing you up". It's like being the new kid in class. No one knows how you're going to turn out to be, and the older guys try to make a powerful impression on you. I've witnessed this myself a few times and I equally agree that it's wrong.

If you would like to participate in a discussion, you are free to despite what anyone says. Be bold and stand your ground.

Well said

Mustay: It's a mind thing. . .The funny thing about internet is invisibility. That a person registers today doesn't mean he's not being following a forum for years. It's just a matter of choice to register at his own time.

True.

mkmyers45: People and things reflect the image/thought of thier creator.

Hmmm....interesting

tbaba1234: I can only address this from an Islamic standpoint:

Your statement suggests that God is all good so much so that if he could create a world without evil and suffering he would. Otherwise he would himself be evil to prefer that humans experience evil and suffering.

Lol on the contrary. I was not at all suggesting God was capable of only good quite the opposite actually. I’ll admit my piece was primarily a response to those who declare that God could not have created evil.
But my favourite name of God and perhaps the most apt is - ‘the Severe in Punishment’

1. The primary purpose of the human being is not happiness rather it is to know and worship God. This fulfillment of the divine purpose will result in everlasting bliss and happiness. So if this is our primary purpose other aspects of human experience are secondary. The Qur’an, states: “I did not create either jinn or man except to worship Me.” [Qur’an 51:56-57]

But what if one is not “happy” nor finds joy in worshipping God?

God also created us for a test, and part of this test is to be tested with suffering and evil.

So God created evil in order to test us? Not because he had evil intentions but He wanted to see if our intentions were evil?

3. Having hardship and suffering enables us to realise and know God’s attributes such as ‘the Victorious’ and ‘the Healer’. For example without the pain and suffering of illness we would not appreciate the attribute of God being ‘the Healer’. Knowing God is a greater good, and worth the experience of suffering or pain as it will mean the fulfillment of our primary purpose.

Very interesting.

Let me finally ask you this . . .what’s the difference between a secular person who is good without no instruction from a higher source and a believer who is good due to instruction from a higher authority?


As always I appreciate your in-depth response tbaba.

Image123: God 'threw' them out of Heaven. They did not fall because of a dissatisfaction of Heaven.

Yes I know they did not fall "because of dissatisfaction of heaven" and I was not implying that.

However I was contemplating why they chose to oppose God when they were in an abode that was apparently perfect and sufficient.

Maybe they became disenchanted or perhaps seduced by Lucifer, I was merely speculating and offering a suggestion. It's not something I would peddle as fact because I’m not certain however their betrayal may have served to highlight that heaven was not at all flawless.

Yield: What do you see?

https://ownyourlifecoaching.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Glass-of-water.jpg

As a curious individual I declare the cup is half empty. Since I now know how the cup appears when it’s only "half full" why stop there….if you’re only satisfied with what you can see how do you engage the imagination?

“God that made the world and all things therein” ~ Acts 17:24

If a creator created evil does that necessarily make the creator evil?

If a creator’s creation created evil does that make the creator the indirect author of evil?

If God did not create evil then did he not intend for humans to have “free-will”?

How did the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” come to be?

If god didn’t create evil then "he" is not responsible for the duality of nature and most of all "he" thus didn’t create “all things therein”.

But if God only created good who then created the most evil habitat known as hell?

Image123: emofine?

Well how great could God and “his” heavenly habitat be if a third of the angels in the original cast sided with Lucifer in his heavenly coup against this awesome entity and attractive abode? Why risk such luxury if everything was perfect before?

They must have been disillusioned before teaming up with Lucifer.

snthesis: although u are derailing my thread - i'll try to answer u.

Splendid. Much appreciated.

firstly, man was made higher than Angels which also applies to demons/satan etc.
secondly, God will not give us a challenge more than we can handle.
thirdly, God didnt fail Man, Man failed Man- Man was never overcome by Lucifer rather we let ourselves down each time we fall into temptation.

So God offloaded "his" burden on "his" precious creations because Adam and Eve were clearly capable of handling this devious creature in their childlike innocence?

Let’s not even stop there.

This God also placed a prohibited tree in the midst of the Garden of Eden under the curious gaze and care of his model creations.
So in this alleged utopia there is an enemy of God and a forbidden item – I wonder what could possibly happen if you combine the two.
Let’s not forget there’s also the serpent.
So in this supposedly perfect habitat there is a “subtil” creature? How does a creature with less than perfect intentions manage to get a pass in an alleged perfect realm?

Thus far in the scene we have two innocent most prized creations of God. A vengeful enemy of God. A cunning character in the form of a serpent. And last but not least, an attractive prohibited tree.

Are not the events to happen thereafter undoubtedly the most predictable?

Surely anybody could have guessed what would happen next talkless of God. Well of course God knew, that’s why he had salvation on standby from the very beginning.

Does this not appear as a set up? Is it not possible that such events was engineered by the master creator?

maclatunji: emofine with her questions.

Lol sorry o. I don't mean to antagonize or interrogate anyone but that's just my nature to be inquisitive and that's how I learn. I hope I haven't offended anyone's beliefs in the series of my questioning sha.

Hmmm interesting. Personally I love the hijab (not much a fan of the niqab however).

Off topic - deols I love your profile pic by the way .

Interesting. I've often wondered about this as well until a kind Muslim quelled my query.

First let me make it known that I’m not an “atheist” so I hope this thread is not exclusive to atheists.

Secondly I’m not after “proof” supporting the legitimacy of the biblical god.

I’m only here because of my curiosity and there was a certain thing that I hoped the arrogant author of this thread could help me understand.


After the fall out with Lucifer, God banishes this villain from heaven and places this dangerous anti-hero on the same plane as his beloved creations – Adam and Eve – thereby exposing them to a potential threat. If God couldn’t abide in the same abode with Lucifer because of his treachery, surely his creations may not have wanted to host God’s antithesis either.
Whats more, if Lucifer had beef with God and was banished from heaven what better way to attack god but through his creations. What type of loving parent will kick out an adversary from their presence and dump them in the same space as their innocent child?

Ptolomeus: When we speak of the beginning of a religion, we are not talking about the "birth of a god", but the birth of a cult, therefore, no "god" is prior to another ...

---------

Before the introduction of the foreign bible in the land of my ancestors, those who saw the sun before me knew very well that killing, stealing, coveting, dishonouring parents etc was a vice. They knew all this before the bible reached their side.

My forefathers did not worship the devil they worshipped Orise.

My forefathers did not sacrifice humans they performed rites.

My forefathers were not uncivilized they had a moral based structure in their community.

Yet somehow they were lacking and qualified as sinners because their god had a native name and the context in which they worshipped their god was “wrong” so urgently needed salvation through a Jewish persona which clearly betrays that they were the least of the "one true god's" priority yet they were urged to adopt this being as their alpha and omega.

There are clearly tactics in conversion. How do you persuade people to drop their beliefs, label it as “devilish” and adopt another?

If historians had to revise their opinions of Africans at the time how much more Africans about Africa.

mkmyers45: Anyway right from the name 'Woman'. Women have been relegated to a sub-role so potraying God as a 'weak woman' will be termed abberation. its only natural that men's ego is even applied when refering to God in all his complexity. esp A nigerian religionist will probably fight you to death if you term God 'she'

I wasn’t actually advocating that “God” be termed “She” I was just analysing the purpose and effects of terming God as “He”.
Besides there are matriarchal societies to consider….so how does an authoritative figure such as god (corresponding to monotheism especially the Abrahamic faiths) get mapped out into such societies?

its only natural that men's ego is even applied when refering to God in all his complexity

Why?

buzugee: i dont even think this has anything to do with ego. it is what it is. the woman was created for the man. its biblical. dunno why emofine is fighting the natural order of things. she may need an exorcism

Worry about your own demons

@buzugee


Well of course the property of a man and woman is different, doesn’t mean that in which you may have an advantage in grants you superiority and vice versa.

buzugee: Why you cant learn to play your position ?

Why won’t you think outside the book box?

My dear sexist fiend, these are the roles people and “god” have been programmed to assume. One could very well subvert these definitions or better yet divorce from the conditioning. I’m not trying to relegate or empathise with a particular sex so don’t get tetchy with me because I’m picking apart your ego construct.

There is hierarchy in creation.

In creation the order has a feminine disposition. So it’s rather ironic that the creator in which you call Yahweh allegedly ordained man as the pinnacle creation even though nature by form and expression is feminine unless the identity of the creator or god was manipulated to propel the ego and promote a particular demographic. In this similar fashion that’s how some used the ambiguity of this entity to promote their “race”.

As People deliberate on the masculine characteristic of this uncertain god one may also consider the feminine metaphors attached to our immediate environment as an equivalent. We use expressions such as: Mother Africa. Mother Earth. Mother Nature. Mother Universe.
It’s certainly not random. The earth has masculine and feminine qualities but within the feminine comes the male and female even when you were at your most basic level in the womb you were expressed in the female form. Women are your balance not your subordinate. You can start hyperventilating if you want.

you are an anarchist. thats what you are. somebody pass me the sword. OFF WITH HER HEAD

LOL

In my father's village there's a saying . . .a man that uses a weapon to fight is not a man

buzugee: you know God created a being in his image and the being he created was a man. so obviously that was his image. but he just took pity on the man and thought, hmmm make agro no go catch this man so lets make him a woman so he can enjoy himself .

What does the the term "image" mean to you?

So God (at least the one you adhere to) has a gender? Or does God have a correspondent?

hope you see the heirachy in that

Wasn't the published article an all male affair?

Hence isn't all this from a masculine perspective? Thus wouldn't such be biased?

I got 2 quick questions.


1)If Muslim men are only permitted to marry up to 4 wives how comes the Prophet Muhammed (shall I say PBUH ) had more than 4 wives?


2)Is exorcism present in Islam?


I apologise if these questions have already been asked.

buzugee: so because God is refereed to as a 'he' you feel alienated ? *shaking my head*

It's because you're shaking your head you fail to recognize my objectivity.

“What do images of God tell us about the place of men and women in the world?”

In certain theological constructs God is believed to have no gender (at least in how we understand gender to be) albeit this being is usually referred to in pronouns that favour a particular gender. In many accounts the idea of God and the identity attached to this being exerts much masculine relevance.

One proposed reason as to why God has been in relatively recent times identified as “He” since the popularization of monotheism is perhaps due to the belief that the chief pronoun is masculine thus the employment of such language was solely analogous. However there are gender neutral terms which could instead be employed thus not having to risk alienating a particular demographic. Or could no equivalence be achieved with the inclusion of neutrality?

The projection of God as a “He” makes it seem as though man is the closest that there is to God - granted, more so as an authoritative figure than physical form. Thus how does one translate God's authority in a majorly matriarchal society?


Why is the feminization of God considered as idolatry and not vice versa?
Does the employment of such grammatical gender of a celebrated deity affect how believers regard both men and women?
Does monotheism propel the male ego?

Is balance imperfect?

Have you ever considered that Hermaphrodites may actually be the the closest to the original state of mankind?

Hermaphrodites may actually pose as clues as to who we were.

Dobet Gnahoré - Abiani.

@Ta Xasa

Have you noticed that when an African narrates African history it differs to that of how others tell it interesting. I really enjoyed our dialogue, nice meeting you.


@Morpheus

I actually agree with you regarding the language diversity of West Africa and I may include Cameroon. Thanks for that info.

jamace: ^^^What does it mean? What tribe/dialect?

It's just an Isoko expression similar to a gasp that conveys shock.