₦airaland Forum

[quote author=Mr_Anony]In my worldview, God by nature is way too holy and abhors sin of any kind. God's law is written in our hearts and this is our conscience and it is a mechanism that makes us feel guilt when we do wrong and joy when we do right. No one teaches us these things.
We are not born with an idea of commensurate penalty. This is what comes from society. Evil is evil and good is good irrespective of how much or how little we punish or reward it.
For instance adultery/cheating is wrong by default anywhere you go, humans by nature are monogamous and want exclusivity with their spouses, marriage is a legal agreement that helps solidify this nature of ours. Now there are different levels of punishments for adultery in different places and according to how permissive the society's law is, we train our conscience whether to take it seriously or not, this doesn't mean that adultery is ever morally right.[/quote]Ok, God's law and Morality the same. How does God's law affect the wellbeing of the ppl that follow Morals?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]What you have just described is a consequence and not a moral law. You are repulsed at the punishment for rape and not that rape itself breaks God's law.
I'll show you what I mean:
If Nigerian law says stealing is wrong and the punishment for stealing 5 naira is 40 years in prison, I am not repulsed by the law against theft, however I may be repulsed that the punishment is 40yrs in prison
If on the other hand, Nigerian law says stealing is right and if you steal 5 naira you get 40 years in paradise, then I am repulsed at such a law for condoning stealing. the consequence in itself is not repulsive in this case[/quote]In your worldview, what's the difference btw God's Law and Morality.

Most morals do come with the idea of a commensurate penalty.

A Kafir is one that doesn't agree with Islam, not the truth

As long as it does not conflict with constitutional provisions. Which it doesn't.

Beaf: Crap argument, dude.
The constitution does not say anywhere that the CJN position is earned by rank.
In fact, to utterly destroy the foundation of your argument, the constitution, Section 231 Sub-section (3) says this:

Further, it says that it is based on recommendation of the NJC and the agreement of the President and Senate; simply put, both the President and the Senate can veto the NJC until they get the guy they want. To forestall that, nothing stops the President from demanding that the NJC submit a basket of names from which he can pick one.

The President appoints the members of the NJC and exercises power over them (3rd Schedule, B - Council of State, 6v).
Guess what? The Federal Judicial Council (which includes the Attorney General) advises the NJC on recommendations for appointment (3rd Schedule, E - Federal Judicial Service Commission, 6v).

The circle of obfuscation completes itself. Init? Please hail GEJ on his appointment of the first female CJN.
In a labyrinthal arrangement, the President simply chooses a CJN, sends the name to the Federal Judicial Service Commission, who "advise" the CJN to recommend the name. The CJN "recommends" the Presidents choice and life goes on. Check out the quote below (3rd Schedule, I - National Judicial Council):

Seen?
Please hail GEJ wella for appointing the first ever female CJN. History has been made, especially in the battle for womens rights.

Yes, but for the integrity of the judiciary, the convention in courts is to place priority in rank/senority.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Your argument is like saying that a legal system employs evil for the sake of doing good everytime it punishes lawbreakers. If this is the case, then no law can possibly be good.

There is a part of our moral psyche that believes good should be rewarded and evil punished. Without any consequences, good and evil will become meaningless.

About acts of "genocide", by what standards do you judge it to be genocide? If a million people commit a crime should they not all be punished? Is it justice to overlook their crimes simply because of their large number?

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.

If God is ultimate judge, creator and moral giver who in His judgment, commands the death of criminals (a.k.a. sinners) You legally cannot dictate to Him what the extent of His judgment should be however you may question His fairness; if He is being partial and if His moral laws are contradictory.[/quote]DANGEROUS!!

[quote author=Mr_Anony]The thing is that your question already assumes morality as separate from any authority. This I don't agree with.
Our morality comes from obedience to God's law (our conscience). Our morality simply has no meaning if it is not defined by any laws.[/quote]But is it useful, does it have any value to humans?

Beaf: GEJ can nominate any qualified person for the post, but chose to nominate her and give us our first ever female CJN.
My last post contains the letter GEJ sent to the senate. Please read it (and follow through with the relevant sections of the constitution that are quoted).

By the way, why do you think you should see GEJ in her profile, is he her husband or dad?

Why are you this biased??! The most senior justice traditionally becomes the next CJN.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]@Enigma,
you are a gem. Thanks for showing me Genesis 18:25. You may not realize the full importance of that verse to me. God bless you.

@Kay 17,

It is not an either or situation. God's will defines our morals. We are born with our conscience, Morality is not necessarily something we are learn i.e. For instance, we do not necessarily access empathy via our intellect.
Besides our intellect also comes from God. It can be argued that our intellect is rooted in our conscience or at least is tied to it because before we do anything of our freewill, we must first justify it within ourselves.[/quote]Do you think Morality has any usefulness?? Or its just an exercise of obedience to an authority?

More reasons why we should be open minded.

@tbaba

A man whose God is the Sun, does worship a real/true God by everyone's standards.

@Anony

Is it that man's intellect is insufficient to grasp morality OR that God's wishes are morals?

1. There are many Gods, many 'moralities'.

2. IF objective morality is from God, and actions don't have an inherent moral value separate from God, then had Abraham disobeyed that order to kill his son, he would have disobeyEd God, therefore committing an immoral act.
IF there was objective morality, and God's order was a test, the right answer would be disobeying God.

Uyi Iredia: Higgs boson or not God exists and His existence easily noted by a simple inference to cause & effect. God is the single, independent cause of all that exists because Nature given the laws it follows (which could have been different) does not exists in a vacuum (i.e all by itself). Anybody who cannot agree with this simple logic is stubborn despite the evidence.

The ish is if causality is a principle within the universe itself, what is the basis for an external cause??

Its a simple test for finding a universal God, by scanning across religions and cultures, one discovers there is a multiple of Gods and personalities that are being worshipped, revered, praised. It conclusively shows no universal God.

Humans as sentient and thinking beings, it wouldn't be strange or unusual for us to grasp knowledge, to understand concepts and our world. To claim a moral giver in form of a universal God contradicts that idea and concepts man has on evil. For example, God's instruction to Abraham is seen as barbaric by most peeps, yet at that moment it was God given order, leading to an uneasy conclusion that human sacrifice is good!

Is there?!

tbaba1234: I would talk as a muslim.

First of all, there is no objective standard for morality without a God. Without God, morality is decided by two things:

i. social pressure

ii. Evolution

i. Social Pressures- Here the society in which we live in, decides what is moral.. This changes from generation to generation; If killing 6 million jews is the in-thing, society convinces itself it is correct. So your moral compass here is determined by your loyalty to your environment. For instance, What was considered immodest 20years ago is no longer considered immodest.

ii. Evolution: This is also contingent on changes; Everything that promotes your genes is good.

None of these are objective standards for morality...

Humans do have an inherent good, this is called the fitrah in Islam. A natural inclination towards God. Without God, this natural inclination is affected by the environment and social conditions.

So God decides what is moral... What is the implication of this?

It means that the laws given by God are to be obeyed.

So what then is our relationship with God?

In the Quran, God introduces Himself as 'master, owner, sustainer and nourisher of all that exists'... This means that nothing belongs to us, He owns everything and that includes us, our parents and our children. Everything you have is a gift from him, so you are grateful for whatever you are given. And you do no despair too much over what is taken away from you because you recognise that it does not belong to you.

Now put yourself into that mentality, you own nothing, not even yourself...

Abraham is instructed to sacrifice his son by the owner of Abraham and his son. This was a test of the faith of Abraham; Killing your son is a horrific act but the master, owner of that son is the one that instructs Abraham, he could take the son away at anytime anyways. In the Quran, God’s names and attributes include ‘the Just’ and ‘the Wise’. Any argument against the instruction from God on this basis will be an argument from ignorance. Allah says in the Quran:

..... You may dislike something although it is good for you, or like something although it is bad for you: God knows and you do not.’ (Surah 2:216)

To your Question

God defines what true morality is... Loyalty to the creator does precede your perception of 'morality'.

Funny thing is: there is no universal God, therefore no universal moral content.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]No my friend it is not possible to separate morality and good/evil. Morality by definition is the distinguishing between good and evil. Society is not the creator of morality, If I was born on a desert island, I can argue that I would still think it evil to harm another human being if I met one. Morality tests in infants have shown that babies as young as six months already have moral inclinations. This goes to suggest that morality is universal and not a tool of sorts developed to suit our purposes. You can check out these links.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1275892/Were-born-moral-Babies-tell-good-evil-months.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/magazine/09babies-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all


This part of your post i fail to grasp. You seem to me to be describing some utopia which I cannot relate to the points made in this thread[/quote]Morality and good/evil might look indistinguishable, but morality is society's opaque view of good/evil. Tribes in Borneo due to their poor diet, seek out to hunt humans. This action helps their survival and in the eye of the community, its justifiable, it is not an evil. What morality do babies understand? The definition that suits their selves?? What does "naughty" mean? Why is a disregard for authority evil?

Moral contents are always going to be subjective.

tobechi20: Atheist depend on science and logic.
As long as scientist cant prove dat God exist, atheist acpt blindly.
Since science cant prove ghost, Atheist wil say ghost dnt exist even though some hav seen ghost.
Since science cant explain dreams, atheist wil tel u it doesnt exist even though some are dreamers.

Atheist are those that belive in science.

Christian blive in GOD, GOD AND GOD ALONE

Good to clarify this. Christianity is anti science?? Church vs Galileo

When two bodies of water flow, side by side; they don't mix??

First, its possible to distinguish btw morality and good/evil. Morality engages the right vs the wrong, its a cultural insight as to good/evil. Society is the creator of morality subsequently subcultures like religion. The necessity lies in its usefulness not ceremony, and all societies perceive that need.

Good/Evil deal with the level of agreement and harmony with the environment and Nature. Perfection points to a conflictless world, btw man vs man, Nature vs man.

That every single time two rivers meet side by side they don't mix??

truthislight: kay17
u need to do better than this,
ma man, when i read ur post i always get excited,

but u just posted that the bible said that the "earth is flat"

Try and read Isaiah 40.22. ( = earth a circle)

Bro, i do expect more from u. (honesty)
its a virture u know.

At least, lets be honest, who knows?
Dishonesty destroys the mind.
Peace

Of course, just taking a single dimensional reading of the Bible

[quote author=Mr_Anony]For anything to be a true standard for morality
1. It must be all-powerful or at least more powerful than man i.e. must be powerful enough to punish evil and reward good.
2. It must be omniscient i.e. must be able to properly know and understand everything and every motive
3. It must be all-seeing i.e. must be able to see a case from every possible angle. No evidence should escape it.
4. It must agree with man's conscience but must be able to determine when man deviates from the dictates of his conscience.
5. It must be impartial and must deliver justice irrespective of persons.
6. It must not waver and must not change with the wind i.e. what was once evil will not suddenly become good and vice versa(note this is different from it's permissiveness)
7. It must essentially be singular i.e. it must be of one mind and purpose and must not be self-contradicting.

It is to the extent of which a legal system satisfies these criteria that we can say it is a just law. Do you agree?

The criteria I have laid out are the characteristics of my God. Any other god must have these same characteristics to be an objective standard for morality.



I don't see any major difference; either way you would be good by doing whatever God says[/quote]The absurdity of placing a moral agent as the writer of moral rules, who writes the rules for this agent??

When the revelation was made, was it refering to the Rhone rivers??

Someone would say God is not bound by logic and TuiRN around to say the Universe was created by God!! ?

joe4christ: Just reading your post i could not help but laugh at your ignorance, do u really think your not believing God would stop or dethrone him from being God almighty?
Your shallow mind cannot comprehend this God, his ways are far far higher than ours, just as the galaxies in the heavens are far from the earth so are his intelligence far from ours.
The day you find this mighty God by logic that day he cease to be God, do you think such a mighty king does not have a standard and he's so unprincipled that a mere mortal would find logically?
You must be kidding me, if the lord should speak to you audibly about the mysteries of life and the answers to your questions do you think your mind can even comprehend it, when you hear the thunderouse voice of the king of kings do you think your your strength would'nt fail you?

Let me tell you, God almighty defies logic, he only chooses to reveal himself to those he chooses to reveal himself to, if you must get to know him then you must seek him in truth and in spirit and he will be glad to not just reveal himself to you but likewise reveal hidden things of the kingdom to you.

Nough said!

Knowing fully well that the mind is very powerful, it creates both the real and unreal. Considering that, wouldn't it as a Christian to say God is incomprehensible and then enumerate his emotions and intents? If a being is incomprehenisble, then it is unknowable. If a man worships an unknown being, then its madness.

Drawing inspiration from a book that claims the earth is flat, that animals talk, that a man walked on water, and the strangest theory on genetics.

tobechi20: CHRISTIANS BLIV IN GOD, BIBLE and christ witout doubt

scientist wait 4 1 man to make som logical assumptions. If he can proue it and ansa al questions, it bcome a law e.g dalton atomic theory.
Later, some discovery make d theory imposible e.g bombardment of atom by radioactivity makin atom 2 consist of proton, nutron and electron.
Scientist naw change the theory to new atomic theory.
2mro, it might change.

Logic boy and co just accpt d theory wit their heart witout seeing any.they hav neva seen an ape turn into a man.they cant xplain d colour of electric curent. Yet they bliv wat other prof wrote centuries ago--FAITH

Though I'm not a psychic, but I know you know Christianity and religions that rely on faith are helpless and uncertain about reality and you wish science shared this fatality.

However your assessment of scientific theories and workings is shallow, too simplistic. Its known to Science that its findings are not absolute truths, and that a constant effort must be made to separate truth from errors. It has a self corrective mechanism.

Emofine raised a great point with Abraham and Isaac story. God instructed Abraham to kill/sacrifice Isaac to him. At that moment, that was a universal good as the standard is God's wishes. Also at the altar, God's intervening instruction to stop the sacrifice was another good.

So the content of morality changes. Same as seen in the religious orders in the Old and New Testament.

[quote author=izi-n-bizi]Its interesting how people are scared of the concept and call it mysticism etc; as though it is not to be ventured. This is extreme deceit and the height of materiality because the little minded can not comprehend beyond physicality and the scope of his visual/mental limits - very typical of Africans. So you see that Spirituality advances development as you are not bound by the visibly known but you believe, associate and devout to the power of the unknown within you (essence). Therefore, one's potentials are not determined by material or mental awareness/knowledge but by the potential of the infinite powers of his Essence.[/quote]What if we have no essence but subjected to hedonistic desires?

Is an essence prevalent in all life or just sentient beings?

[quote author=izi-n-bizi]Moderator and Seun please we need a thread on Spirituality.

Spirituality is a personal and conscious quest for the complete realization of one's essence.
Man is not Spirit, Man is soul and his quest to transcend materiality and fellowship with Spirit is the core of Spirituality.
It is an internal awareness of the content within, it involves a cognitive process of soul search; a discovery of your constituent.
The concept is humbling and there is immense power in true realization of essence .[/quote]Buddhists and you find spirituality to be a search in the mind, while others see it as a parallel universe

Is it those rivers in particular?