₦airaland Forum

JEITO:
God is the source of life.

So also is Zeus, and other Aztec Gods, they too lay claim to being the source of life. Or are they the Gods you describe?! You are still unclear

MrAnony1:
Yes I heard you clearly and my point still remains that it is logically incoherent to create man to do evil. It is about as illogical as saying that you designed something to malfunction.

No, that's a twist you got yourself into. Because you defined good and evil with the most absurd meaning. Good meaning conforming with the intents of the design and Evil being straying from the intent of the design. So a machine such as an AK 47 that doesn't kill people well enough is definitely an evil machine!!

Yes and I also remember saying that "one is saved by repenting from their sins, believing in the Lord Jesus Christ (who forgives and cleanses us from sin), forsaking sin and living righteously (with the help of the Holy Spirit)."

So that establishes my claim that the Christian is a typical hypocrite.

MrAnony1:
I get your point but you are wrong to say that man is an automaton in respect to his impulses because he cannot consciously choose his desires. While it is true that man is influenced by his desires, he is not controlled by them. A man is able to choose whether or not to succumb to a desire.

If it were true that man could not choose whether or not to act upon his desires, but his actions were driven by whatever he desired, then we couldn't possibly have a sense in which there is right and wrong or justice/injustice because every man would simply be an automaton in respect to his impulses. A r[color=#000000]ap[/color]ist for instance wouldn't be responsible for rape because he didn't have conscious control of his desires. There would be no such thing as moral responsibility.

Now, you have said earlier this:

Christianity DOES NOT teach that man is incapable of choosing between right and wrong. It teaches that no man is capable of choosing the right all the time and never choosing wrong.

What drive is responsible for the above? Because it definitely cannot be desires, since desires do not control humans.

MrAnony1:
No I don't. What is it?

It is Immanel Kant's philosophy on objective morality, that it is accessible via reason. And uncreated because of some contradiction issues. Try reading it up.

I will prove that God has no actual identity, that it is no one at all. That it is an empty term without an idea. An abstract without meaning nor basis.

JEITO:
hmm...ok! If I could ask: is there a substance inspiring this conviction? Eg a proof of his non-existence?

I will prove it. The starting point is, who is God?

spotit:
no, he didn't say that...he just pointed out perfect universal harmony that doesn't make sense to devious souls

Without learning a thing or two from animal morality?! You are a cheap liar though

spotit:
no you're the incredible laughingstock here already

I was not the one with the idea that humans should borrow moral systems from animals

paulGrundy:
14years is too small they should also be rounded up and sent to a correction centre for 5years extra.

paulGrundy:
ARE YOU GAY?
Anyway a correction center will help them drop their dirty habit.

Mere prejudice.

SmellMyFart:
You must've heard about the like poles of a magnet repelling each other and unlike poles clinging to each other. Same goes in the electrical field with respect to charge.

In nature/biology, man is a living organism and so are animals. If this practise is right, why haven't any animal be it domestic or wild indulge in such act? I'm not trying to juxtapose man with mere animal cos it's certain we're the greatest of all organisms but in situations like this, the most silly evidence can be useful.

I strongly doubt if man is a magnet or should rightly be compared as such. Yet man is a free willed being and can do whatever he wishes. Besides how many animals enjoy a meal of pounded yam and good vegetables?!

Don't make yourself a laughingstock here.

JEITO:
I have noticed the animosity with which atheists generally, react to anything that has to do with religion. Often making a meal out of it..

Well, I won't dwell on that; I just wan to ask this question to all atheist:

Does the fact that you don't believe in God for whatever reason, rule out the POSSIBILITY of his existence and Power or influence?

If "yes", who made you the judge over what is right or wrong and am I as a religious person not entitled to my own opinion/freedom of worship?
If "no", why then do you refer to/ see religious people as gullible and also fight against the public expression of religion or religious tenets?

My answer is "yes". However my belief is a confirmation of my conviction, it would be a contradiction to have doubts over my convictions.

SmellMyFart:
True. But save for religion which might bring us at loggerheads, nature and science has got nothing to do with religion but they too detest the practise. Do you still think it's right?

Science has nothing prescriptive to say neither does nature. In fact, to each and every man, nature means something differently.

AdeniyiA:
The can't i tell you, it's beyond them.
Their publications are just figment of their imagination, unfounded, unverified and unproven. Investigative journalism is lacking in Nigeria, they are just after money through quick sales
Even Nairaland as a forum hardly puts anything that exonerate TB Joshua or tell the good things happening in the Synagogue on front page. the reason?, Bad news sell faster, travels faster, brings in more money and attracts more traffic than good and uplifting ones.
Not their fault though, it's just what the society wants, check out the music industry how meaningful songs are being relegated to the background and sacrificed on the altar of meaningless ones

And where is the evidence for the explosives?

The laws of physics visibly acted and on its own sufficient proof. Buildings ordinarily do not collapse as a matter of course. Structural defects in buildings are always the cause for collapse. The publications are not unfounded nor unproven, the building collapsed and the only plausible explanation is a structural defect in the building. To claim it was a demolition job is a long stretch and very absurd. It is equivalent to insulting the intelligence of the audience.

striktlymi:
It is worrying that TBJ is the only one trying to provide explanations and evidence to back his claims while those who are busy accusing him, base their attacks on silly emotional rants. It's high time the opposition stopped the ranting and provide us with solid evidence to prove TBJ wrong.

Such evidence is best provided in a law court.

Times have changed, individualism is on the raise AND society's greatest enemy is the individual. My idea is that human rights is a bundle entitled to the individual. So for human rights to be correctly understood, it must be understood around the individual.

SmellMyFart:
Ok. Probably the western lifestyle has gotten the better of you.
My personal reason for tagging this practise as "abominable" is because the Bible condemns it, Nature condemns it and Science isn't an exception.
Do you think you'd be here to ask this question if your dad never married ya mum?

SMF's opinion is subjectively weighed by his belief system, same can not apply to an atheist or a Hindu -- someone with a different belief system.

LordReed:
You will agree with me that some of these customs are loosing ground. Based on that more and more women are seeing that their roles as mothers and wives need not limit their abilities to succeed. What I want to see more of is women leaving this "oh pity us we are women" when it comes to the doing. You can't have that attitude and expect men to take you seriously.

As long as that is not a general trait in women, I think that point becomes moot.

LordReed:
Understand my point. Women need to stop feeling like victims where they have opportunities to make a difference. In Nigeria there is no law against women running. for political office, there is no workplace that pays women less than men for the same job. If you are going keep going on about how women are degraded when you have no barrier when are you going to show you can do it? Men will not stop being men in order for you to become the shining stars you are, it is your work that will stand you out.

As I said earlier there are still barriers. Our customs relegate women to a secondary role to men. Women are taught and made to believe men are superior to them through our traditional institutions namely family.

Emmaomotob:
Is it the society that says men should work in quarry? Is it the society that says men should mostly defend the country and still provide food and protection for their RIB BONE and children during war? Is it the society that says women should be emotional, which naturally enables them to care for their offspring and husband? Is it the society that says men should use their superior strength and intellect to fend for his family? Is it the society that eqiped men with high level of testosterone in order to face the daily aggression of life?Is it society that says women should play shit in football and have considerable poorer outcome in things they and their males compete in? Is it society that says men should have soft spot for women? Come off it! Its all the beautiful works of nature. No wonder the west is loosing their morals, since there are working against the immovable rocks of nature, which guarantees joy to male and his female. Nature, like God, don't force you, it is when you move against them that you know the consequences. Pride(positive) is to man, submissiveness is to woman.
If it were not so in animals, you might have been right.

I will list out each faulty assumption you make;

1. Women are not rational

2. Women can not fend for their families

3. Women are intellectually inferior to men

4. Women are physically weak

5. Women cannot play football

6. Testosterone makes one human being more superior than others

7. Women do not have a soft spot for men

All these assumptions (rickety) form the foundation of a moral system which you glorify and sadly lament its collapse. It has to collapse because it has no bearing with reality.

LordReed:
It is not an insult because that is reality. Will you give assignments to subordinates who are capable or to those who will not be diligent? Are you insulting a subordinate by not giving him/her assignments you know he/she will not carry out?

In my particular situation it is well pronounced because the women outnumber the men in my organisation by a factor of nearly 3 to 1 but when you want to count the effective workers the men suddenly leap up the statistics. I am not saying women everywhere are lazy, don't get it twisted. I am saying that when it comes to proving women are capable, you women do yourselves in by not utilising the opportunities at your disposal. Using my organisation as an example again, with women outnumbering men I thought I was going to be wowed by an organisation that has the balance in favour of women but no wow-factor is shown by the dominance of women in number.

EDIT: My point here is this. It is not until women are made leaders before they can show they are capable. Given the chance to grow into leadership positions women need to demonstrate that they are capable of doing the work. Men will not roll over and play dead simply because you clamour for leadership or play the "we are disadvantaged card".

I didn't see this post, but fortunately I have stumbled on it. I'm struggling very hard to understand the goal of this post because you carefully mentioned that your experience is not the general case. Hence it is useless for the purposes of this discussion. Women are handicapped by gender, just like slaves are economically handicapped. Laws and customs constitute the pillars for this victimisation, not biological traits. It is not a woman's anatomy that deprives her from 'leading' men into prayers, nor depriving her from driving, nor having a high power career at the expense of family life, nor owning properties nor voting nor stereotypes you canvass etc

Joshthefirst:
The source of life is the source of life. I have no time for your gameplay.

There is no game other than the one you play! What does the above mean other than a game?! "The source of life is the source of life" is the most ridiculous response I have ever received. I will make my question clearer, is God life?? if yes, why say God as a form of life has a source?! Doesn't that contradict the Uncaused God doctrine you hang over your neck?

paulGrundy:
I don't know if am to take this seriously, or as a joke.

But its true!! For a godless man to stand by his conviction and remained stateless, rather than pay an allegiance to any state. As an aside, modern day Christians are merely fair weather fans.

BANGERLEE1:
Have you ever wondered why some guys have all the luck
when it comes to women? It's no secret that certain
archetypal males have been proven over and over to be
irresistible to women — and it's not simply because of their
good looks or a well-defined six pack.
The truth is that women tend to be attracted to certain
personality traits and so, naturally, they flock to the men who
possess them.
Below are seven of these "ideal types" of men that women are
drawn to, and an explanation as to why these men are so
appealing. But don't freak out or permanently alter your
personality if you don't fit into any of these categories exactly
— women will see right through that.
Ideally, you should exude some traits from each of these
different categories; in fact, you probably already do. With a
quick perusal of the list below, you should be in much better
shape to understand what women are looking for, and most
importantly, to make sure that you fit the bill.

1. The Romantic Guy
He believes in classic romance. He is constantly bringing her
flowers and chocolate and lighting candles during dinner. He
calls her often to let her know he is thinking about her and
looks into her eyes and tells her how he feels.
Why he is so irresistible: A woman loves to feel appreciated,
and the romantic guy makes this happen. He uses romantic
gestures to show her he is thinking about her. As an added
bonus, she feels free to reciprocate and act on her own
romantic tendencies.

2. The Confident Guy
He is totally secure and sure of himself. He is assertive in
public and gives off an aura of power and control (within
reason of course, as the "cocky guy" is not on this list). In a
relationship, he doesn't get jealous of other men; he doesn't
feel threatened by his girlfriend's male friends or co-workers.
Why he is so irresistible: Women are attracted to
confident men. Consider this: If you think you are great, she
will probably be influenced to think the same. The confident
man doesn't seek approval from women, and this makes them
want him even more.

3. The Artistic Guy
The artistic guy is spontaneous and lives for the moment.
Often, he will use his creativity to woo her, such as with a song
he has written about her or a painting he has made for her.
Why he is so irresistible: Every woman wants to feel unique
and special. There is no better way to make her feel this way
than to use her as your muse or your source of inspiration.
She is intrigued by the artistic guy's creative mind and
especially by the way he incorporates her into his art.
Charismatic, rebellious, smart, and considerate men all get the girl

The Foreign Guy
He comes from a faraway exotic country; he might have a
cute accent or a unique way of seeing the world. His social
customs and everyday behaviour can be a little quirky, but he
always manages to come off as uniquely charming. Note that
you don't have to actually be foreign to fit into this category. If
you are well-travelled or speak many languages, you might
be able to pull off the charm as well as any sweet-talking
foreigner.
Why he is so irresistible: Charisma, charisma and charisma.
There's not much more I can say about this one; it's just that
mysterious je ne sais quoi that is so alluring. Women often
choose this kind of guy if they are curious about the world,
but most of the appeal comes down to a fascination with
dating someone from another culture
.
5. The Free Spirit Guy (aka
the Bad Boy)
The free spirit guy goes where the wind takes him — and the
wind usually takes him on some kind of wacky adventure. He
might ride a motorcycle, or he might skip work to take her on
a last-minute road trip, but this guy doesn't worry too much
about the consequences; he just sees where his own devices
take him.
Why he is so irresistible: Every woman wants a bit of a rebel
(within reason, of course). She loves his carefree attitude and
hopes that it will rub off on her too. The bad boy spirit adds an
element of youthfulness to the relationship and she loves to
try taming him — although she knows she'll never actually
succeed.

6. The Intelligent/Witty Guy
He instigates conversations that are intellectually stimulating
and listens to what she has to say in response. He makes her
laugh with his clever sense of humour and could make a
conversation about Gordon Brown seem interesting. He can
shoot the breeze with her for hours and it will never get
boring.
Why he is so irresistible: As time goes on, your hairline may
recede and your buff body may soften, but if you can keep
her interested, you've won half the battle. An intellectual
connection is a big part of what sustains a relationship and if
you can show her that you've got that, she'll be hooked pretty
quickly.

7. The Considerate Guy
He holds open her car door and pulls out her chair. He foots
the bill for dinner and makes sure to offer her dessert. He
always asks her out with reasonable notice and picks her up at
her door. He is generally sensitive to how she is feeling and
when she is ready to go home.
Why he is so irresistible: Surprised? You probably think that
nice, considerate guys never get the woman, but consider this:
Once a woman has gone through her share of the bad guy, the
rude guy and the not-calling-her-back guy, she will likely re-
evaluate her priorities. It takes a bit of maturity on her part to
realise this, but eventually most girls come around and realise
that they want a guy who will treat them well in the long
run.
a word of caution
Don't take any of these character types to the extreme or try
to be someone you're not — it will be obvious.
The key to success here is to keep in mind why women like the
character traits outlined above and what kind of gestures they
appreciate. Then, mix them up and see which of these traits
and gestures you are most comfortable with. With just a little
bit of effort, you'll be able to find more than a few irresistible
qualities within yourself — and accordingly, she'll be easily
wooed by your newfound individuality.
Now isn't that worth your time?

Sadly, No statistics is back up the hefty claim.

majorgr:
As a Christian, u are not under the world's counsel and government system but under the Kingdom of God governmental system. You see, in our kingdom, there is what is called health care scheme, which is better than any health scheme the world can provide. It is called HEALING! If there is a case of impotency, God will heal it and rectify the faults you just hav to bring ur husband to the point where his faith can allow access to the Healing powers of God. I just witness such a starling situation, after many years, a lady who culdnt conceive is now pregnant bucuz of her confession of faith!

But the secularists are not impressed with the healthcare system catering for the Christian body. Ebola, Hiv, Cancer, etc still plague the church, where is the healthcare system for it?

striktlymi:
Um, you won't see those mentioned explicitly in sacred scriptures but they are all implied. In my view, they are 'biblical'.

I don't think they are implied.

striktlymi:
The question here should be: was there ever a marriage to start with?

In my view, a number of factors must be considered before someone can truly claim that he or she is married.

1) The union must be one entered with full consent.
2) The couples must be able to consummate the union via the conjugal act.
3) The couples must have attained the age of reasoning.

Without those 3, there is no marriage. A man who is impotent would have defaulted on at least one of the above. The lady would be right to ask for a dissolution of the union as divorce does not come to play here.

It begs the question: who defines marriage, God or the State?

Joshthefirst:
The source of life is the source of all things, logically defined as God.


Logically.

Is the source of life equally life or some substance other than life?

MrAnony1:
So you say.


You are absolutely wrong on that. Multiplication equations like 5x8=40 and 6x6=36 e.t.c. were true long before any human being existed and will still be true long after all humans are gone. It is logically incoherent to say that something is both a human construct an objective.


Do atheists and buddhists believe in the existence of objective moral values and if so what are these values based upon?




I see. Now I get your question. You are asking that if morality is based on one God, why do we have different moral systems such as are Sharia and Buddhist systems? Before I answer this question, I must ask whether you are willing to grant that it is possible for some moral systems to be wrong?

Morality depends on God's nature. (Please note that I didn't say God's opinion)

Do you know what Categorical Imperative is?

MrAnony1:
Evil by definition is that which we ought not to do. What you are saying is that it is possible to design a thing to function as it was not designed to function . . . .and that is logically incoherent.

This was what I said:

Kay17: Remember that earlier you said we are to do good, because we are designed to do good; so using the same logic, IF we were designed to be evil, equally we should do evil.

How exactly did you arrive at this statement from what I said?

Because you have earlier confirmed that no man is sinless and is pushed to sin by his desires.

MrAnony1:
So in these men there are two contending desires one to sin and the other to be righteous but the desire to sin is greater hence they sin. Did I get you right?

Yet the key factor is whether or not both desires are in their conscious control. If a conscious latch is lacked over sinful desires, man becomes an automaton in respect to those impulses.

MrAnony1: Please explain to me exactly how someone who knows that it is wrong to steal yet chooses to steal but did not desire to steal or was unable to act upon his desire not to steal.

I think you have made a false assumption here which is that sinners don't desire to sin . . . . . or you believe that the bible teaches this and God punishes them for being forced to sin against their desires? Please cite bible references that convinced you of this.

Ok. .

Assuming men through their sinful desires are driven to sins which they consciously resist and are aware of. Wouldn't it be unjust to punish them for actions they hardly have conscious control over?

The funny thing is the so called National heroes were always bickering cowards. Awolowo couldn't stand against the Military, too much of a coward. Same with Ojukwu. Ahmadu Bello was a plain hearted tribalist and Islamist. They all lacked vision, they couldn't see beyond their doorsteps.

paulGrundy: I don't know if am to take this seriously, or as a joke.

Being stateless is an option not a joke.