₦airaland Forum

^^^

Mazaje wasn't asserting there are gods, but that polytheism is as valid as monotheism. . .

If God is life, then he can't be the origin of life, for the same reasons we can't be.

There can't be an Almighty, because it implies he has no limits.

Refreshing. . . Wished that didn't finish.

We have so much demonized ourselves, and yet we claim we are Africans. We are actually lost

Great to have you here fatima! Almost everyone is a closet atheist at home. Nigeria is not a bright place for a skeptic. Do you have a twitter handle

LOL! Since the word "atheist" is causing lots of trouble, let's break it down to see what an atheist is all about. An atheist is one without a faith ( a monopolistic tool of religion), without a religion and its resulting dogma. He could be focussed on a finding a morality which is based on reason, rather a deity's wishes. He is likelier to think of solutions for his problems, rather than pray.

Such a man would rely and have full confidence in his strength, his goals would be towards the perfection of humanity. He would indulge himself in man made sciences and the full exploitation of technology.

OR he would be a nihilist. . .

@Mactunji

God creating from nothing is a contradiction and a logicial impossibility. The concept of property is human. So be careful with its use.

Also, from general religious views; God is said to be life, he can think, communicate and of course conscious. The question of the Origin of Life still stands.

If God is more complex than a simple cell; who badly needs to be created?

Sorry for being a latecomer! However on Deepsight/Aquinas proofs of God, first the proofs are burdened with semantics; the Creator and the Creation both beg the questions for the justification of according both entities these undeserved qualifications. With that, the origin of the Creator is to go unquestioned and why the universe is a Creation is also unanswered.

The only reason for the First Cause has no Cause is simply and solely to avoid infinite regress. That's arbitrary! That could stop at the Universe, so why introduce God?! So Deepsight if infinite regress is not the main justification for a lack of cause for God, pls what is that quality that God has which exempts him from having a Cause?

Another logical flaw was claiming that God was the origin of existence. That would imply that prior to existence there was Non-existence?! Was God non existent before creating existence?! That's an absurdity. Existence is eternal and all that exists had existed ever since at least in potentiality. We both don't agree to creation ex nihilio, right?

Doesn't God have all the right attributes to function as a "Creator"?? The intent to create, the intelligence, power, inherent knowledge, will power; this delicate and rarest cocktail in your view is the foundation of all that exists; thus are we destined to exist? What are the odds? If God lacked at least just one of these attributes, would we exist?

Amended constitution? What amendment?? first? Second? Third? Fourth?

The American State presented itself as a secular state to the world. (Treaty of Tripoli)

The underlying assumptions upon which this alien thing is found, is that human intelligence is unnatural. The architectural masterpieces such as the pyramids, lighthouse at Pharos , etc is not proof of aliens.

We don't understand sufficiently what these aliens are about, their appearance, evolutionary history, intents. . . We get to assume their spacecraft are like those in sci fi literature and movies, that all sentient beings tend to have 2 feet, stand up right, wear helmets all the time.

And like religion, this alien thingy feeds off mystery.

To some religions like Christianity; propagation is like the muezzin's call. Outlawing that is removing a fundamental ritual and duty.

The Islamic states can't claim to protect its people from INFORMATION! If they are free societies, then information should be accessible all.

Also if islamic laws are made on the whims of the majority of the muslims, then its not a country to live. If majority of the Swiss don't want minarets or Korans or Islam, that's enough to start a jihad right?

Muhammad's main grievance with the Meccans was preventing from worshipping and destroying the idols at the Kaabah

The important issues to iron and be clarified are always abandoned. That's what Faith is. . Empty.

Its not right for a Christian to be gay. Because its contrary to the bible.

^^^
Science as a tool of discrimination against Negros?? That's an absurd argument. Science is more or less the body of knowledge acquired through the scientific method (hypothesis, theory, evidence). To put science at the level of religion, as a system in finding the truth and as an ethical basis is absurd and untrue. Science's relevance is only in finding the truth. Ethics is developed upon the needs and desires of social man.

Darwin a racist?? His use of "Race" in his times were wide enough to cover species of life and throughout his discussion in his book, he made it clear that advantageous traits were the defining factor in surviving in the struggle for life and that new species emerge as a result of these traits and preexisting species (Race) were sustained by that too. The Origin of Species didn't focus on human evolution, but on his theory of natural selection among life. Insisting his use of Race was in reference to human evolution, WHICH he didn't mention; makes no sense!

19th century Europeans didn't believe Negros were equal to Europeans, of course by that they are racists. These beliefs were built in Christian theology, where there are favoured peoples and others are cursed. Where genocide against perceived inferior Canaanites were justifiable. Where Abraham Lincoln didn't think Negros and Whites deserve equal political and civil rights. People didn't think that Africans were homo sapiens and referred to them as preAdamic peoples.

Didn't he claim whites and Negros are from the same ancestors?? He also went against the general view that blacks weren't homosapiens, but it was variations that accounted for the differences. His use of savages was a usual term in his time to refer to tribal and unadvanced societies. For his time, he was a liberal, more liberal than Lincoln.

Yea, he looked down on Africans and inuits and Brazilian natives as primitive BUT he never reduced them to a level below homo sapiens.

Thomas Huxley wrongly believed evolution culminated to the Victorian man.

Hamza wasn't threatened physical, but struck the pagan. Boko Haram followed Muhammad's example, after "oppression" (like burning of a single koran) they can freely retaliate. Besides Muhammad robbed unarmed caravans, ordered a genocide. Sold off noncombatants (women and children) to slavery and kept the profits. He killed helpless black women because they were animists, burnt and destroyed fields and farms during sieges.

So Muhammad is not much different from Boko ha

I don't see any justification in Boko Haram acts or Muhammad's conquest and killing of black animists.

All I'm saying is Isalmic states are for muslims, not for pagans, Christians or Jews. They are not designed to meet and satisfy the needs of multiculturalism. It biased and discriminatory to other faiths. since its foundation is on Islam and religion is a conscientious sphere, it becomes malignant tool of oppression.

Matters which are opening up to reforms, such as extensive women rights, abortion, homosexuality atheism, independence of science would be closed and perceived narrowly from a conservative islam point of view.

I'm not against Islam or its prophet, I'm against Islamic States, because they are more or less machines of terror.

The number of muslims (boko haram) and muslims (collateral damage) was definitely more than the two people that died in Mecca. Besides Hamza "brushed" a pagan at the Kaabah.

Boko Haram has rejected the sovereignty and laws of Nigeria and have adopted/guided by Sharia. But the Nigerian State doesn't recognise that.

Lol! This is outrageous. Jews had their leaders, own societal structures and territory within Medinah, the sole link between cooperation between the Muslims and Jews was the treaty and as such an agreement btw TWO states. Wherein both states keep their laws. The treaty is similar to those struck by the Muslims with other tribes and clans,

Deutoronmy 20 provides for cases of war and in particular cases of siege warfare NOT treason.

Also, treason is applicable to particular persons not blanket punishment like selling into slavery women and children.

Christain citizenship

Now the idea of second class citizens is an invention of some. Also noteworthy is the fact that you can't use today's political ideals as lenses to look into history. In the Islamic empires and Jews  were infact encouraged to judge by their books (see Quran) so no sharia was imposed on anybody, and it is only logical that state laws were applied in matters between Muslims and non Muslims. Also the taxes christains payed was minimal and less when compared to what 'first class' citizens - Muslims, had to pay in form of zakaat. And these taxes on christains and Jews were meant for the protection and other social packages they enjoyed under the state, and infact in war times it was the Muslims who have to go out and defend the teritories and not the chriatain and Jews

Its oppressive to subject and bind people to the most unfamiliar laws, its like judging a pagan in a Christian court and under Christian laws. Its ridiculous. Citizenship is the bundle of rights enjoyed as a result of participation in the affairs of the State. Participation is both a duty and a right, Christian and Jewish exemption is as a result of being distrusted. The Islamic state didn't feel they were loyal enough to enjoy the privilege and duty of being honoured as a protector of the State. Also these second class citizens paid jizya which is discriminatory and indicates submission to the Islamic state. Refusal to pay triggers punishment such death sentence. At times they are excessive.

An Islamic State can not be a proper platform for multiculturalism, its abides to arachic laws and inflexible to change. Its too violent also.

Banu Qurayzah

The Muslims were Under siege from outside forces, madinah was surrounded by the non Muslim forces. In madinah when the Muslims first arrived they had signed a treaties with the major tribes in madinah to live in peace and defend against external aggressors. Now banu qurazah, a Jewish tribe in madinah plotted from within to defeat the Muslims, and ally with the external forces camped outside madinah. Now in any country that is treason and punishable with the harshest punishment (just this week Eric holder said any american that plots to kill Americans can be executed by the government). So banu Qurayzah were purnished for their treason and not because they were Jews.

Yes, almost all States in the world penalize treason with death. However in Bani Qurayza's case, they had a treaty with Muhammad's State; that is they were not under the Muslim rule or law, it was an agreement between states. And violation of such treaty results to war not a genocide! Treason as defined under Muslim law is inapplicable to them, since they were not under the State.

Moreover, the Bani had SURRENDERED, were unarmed and at the mercy of the Muslims. They were more or less prisoners of war, and treatment under Muslim hand was barbaric!

@Tbaba

The Prophet showed approval of such barbaric law to kill all the full grown men and sell off all children and women into slavery. That's not the Buddhists or adherents of Jainism do. It was mindless murder and was unjustified!

All they require to conduct a jihad is to claim oppression. And a jihad as you have pointed out is not one necessarily of self defence, it could be a retaliation. So BH could be said to be willing to avenge the death of their founder and ready to form an Islamic state.

^^

Just like the Prophet, BH was oppressed and now they are retaliating.

also,regarding those muslim countries you are talking about,there are laws which must be respected.in those countries,no one would come into your house and ask you how many times you have prayed a day if you dont want to pray 5 daily prayers as muslims do.so really faith is a personal choice in the heart.the problem comes in when the choice of the heart becomes a political tool.the issue about conversions in muslim countries or even the world over isnt about personal freedom.it is about politics and the society.many christians want to proselytize in muslim countries not to "save" people but to politicize the issue and win converts into christianity and then use that to cast doubt in the mind of the people and use that politically.in muslim countries that is not allowed.also,when you have a regime that takes its legitimacy from being an "islamic regime",you cant expect it being undermined or rather conversions being used to create confusion in mind of people to instigate doubt.if people convert for the reason of "saving" themselves,then why do christians politicize it in muslim countries"

Laws don't stand in isolation, they also go through rational scrutiny and moral assessment. Where laws are described as good or bad and where it derives bits of legitimacy. The murderous laws of Hitler's regime which dwelt on the dehumanization of sections of society lost its power in law and precedent after the fall of the Nazis. Up until today, Nazi laws which involved cruelty are considered illegitimate, because they violated a basic common morals.

Same in this case, an individual is entitled and should be free to choose and freely exercise all the elements of his faith EXCEPT where it threatens a foundational human right of another (life). In the event of the State involving itself in matters of individual conscience, it becomes tyranny. Like the Soviet State.

Being a Christian involves an inherent duty to propagate the good news and failure to do so has it celestial pains. In other words, incidents of the right to thought, involves spreading and propagating it.

If the Islamic State needs to bar free thought to exist, then it doesn't tolerate free thought and its necessarily tryant. And claiming to protect its people from other faiths and ideologies suggests a totalitarian State holding its population in mental prison in order to maintain its legitimacy. Probably there shouldn't be Islamic states because of the individual sacrifices his mind for its legitimacy.

@Tbaba

The Christians were however worse than the Muslims in religious tolerance. But Islamic states didn't give Christians and Jews full rights of a citizen. They were seen as inferior subjects, they had no representation or access to the highest levels of government. No christian is known to have headed an Islamic State. Their laws were held in abeyance upon conflict with Sharia. Sharia governed matters btw a kaffir and a believer.

Besides the Prophet executed 700 Jews of Bani Qurayza, in Medina. "Upon the Ottoman victory over Christian Serbs at the battle of Kosovo in 1389, the Muslim army beheaded the Serbian king and scores of Christian prisoners"

"In 1456, the sultan allowed the grand mufti of the empire to personally decapitate King Stephen of Bosnia and his sons—even though they had surrendered and, seven decades later, the sultan ordered 2,000 Hungarian prisoners beheaded"

"An Eastern Orthodox Patriarch has also been beheaded"

Can he deconvert without liability?

Most All Islamic States (plus Ottoman empire) are not peaceful or religiously tolerant. Why would muslims expect others to make such compromise?

@Enigma

You hang a man for another man's crime. I expected you to take out a passage in Darwin's own book which suggests racism, and inferiority of Negro. "Descent of Man" is very likely to provide that evolution is a religion and a conspiracy and represents every misconception Ola has about science.

That's not good enough.

I will use a rational approach. But I have bias toward the Supernatural. Reason does also.

@Enigma

Is your quote from the book??

In the preservation of races, what do you think he meant?

@noetic16

You are confused. Aren't you suggesting there are other Gods other Yehovah??

If you have no proof for your god, what is it you believe??

Besides why is belief so important? The Truth need not be accepted with faith but proof.

Plz provide what's racially offensive in the title and the book itself.

^^^

I don't think there is a RACIST suggestion, Races seems to cover all life.

Intelligence in form of what??

Aliens??

I don't believe in any god, because its a bad concept which holds an idea without any substance. Until a better definition comes up, I'm don't think any irrationality exists.

Nope, an atheist need not be omnscient to disprove or deny the existence of god. God is whatever the theist says he is. . . An atheist can't go off searching for what he has no idea of.

The theist's definition of God is what's under scrutiny, as a result arguments used against a deist's god are not the same used for a christian's god.

^^

He kept on telling stories and respawning superstition. Ppl don't use "Juju" in the open, its used only in the bedroom or kitchen where there is no one.

^^^

The Muslims had been attacking caravans, there is little reason to believe Abu Sufyan's caravan was attacked solely because it was transporting weapons. Besides why was the caravan unguarded while carrying military hardware??

Pls could you provide the facts of the battle, so we could clearly see the difference in facts