₦airaland Forum

[quote author=Mr_Anony]You see Martian, that stance will only be true if they once believed that a god used to help them but has now disappeared so they now have to help each other. It doesn't follow from a premise where they believe that such a helper god has never existed in the first place.[/quote]Huh? really?

If I have always known that no one is going to help me and others, it wouldnt logically follow that I would see myself and others as the ones that have to do the helping? Is that your point?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Oh good, you said:
"Evolution and sociology explains a lot. Our intelligence is evolutionary. We inherit some instincts from our ancestors and we also hone them with relationships with other people in the society"

I hope you do realize that unless we all have a one particular common ancestor, our "inherited instincts" will differ greatly and hence will not be binding on everyone. [/quote]Is that some christian biology? As a species, we share some common traits. There wull be differences due to adaptation to different environments and other sociological factors.



It seems that I have answered your question

You have been served

Smh

[quote author=Mr_Anony]stop dancing around and taking swipes at christianity. Just answer the question. Tell us how a law can exist without a law giver[/quote]Did i not explain with evolution and social relations? See the artful dodger doing his dodging again!

MacDaddy01: If truly the law is in our hearts, then there is no need for the bible in the first place. Your above commment is nonsensiscal and self-refuting.




There is no moral law-giver. You are entering into creationism

[size=14pt]Evolution and sociology explains a lot. Our intelligence is evolutionary. We inherit some instincts from our ancestors and we also hone them with relationships with other people in the society




[/size]Huh, so god makes a law binding? You might want to reread your bible and see what would happened if we accepted the moral authority of your god.

We would be stoning gays and murdering unebleievers.

wiegraf: Even if one didn't come pre-packaged with some sort of morality, and that is debatable, he should accept christianity's code why? The code of ethics of a religion which believes in talking fires and espouses the death penalty for those who work on sabbath (the current discrimination against homosexuals is usually attributed to an OT verse so it counts, many simply enjoy cherry picking when it fits their needs). A religion based on faith. One, crucially, often crippled by dogma.

Sam harris points out that if you whisked an european from about 1000 years ago to today, even doors that seem to magically open when you approach them will dazzle him, let's not even talk of exploring the solar system. However, mention christianity, its still pretty much the same thing. There isn't much you could tell him that would surprise him so long as he could read and had access to the bible during his era. If he were a christian, he might even be pissed with what he'd view as the church making concessions (as it's constantly being proven wrong) on various issues. A religion from a bygone era where slavery, mysoginism etc where morally acceptable (in fact favored, eg with the way women were treated. who let them out of the kitchen?).

How are this religions ethics, man made as far some members of other religions and the irreligious are concerned, outdated or from rival deities to other religious denominations, be more acceptable then a group of ethics arrived at by a consensus and accepting a few basic principles which objectively aid the survival, success, quality of life of sentient life: basic rights for all sentients?

Too much sense.


You have scared Anony away!

obadiah777: in the bottomless pit chained down by one of the muscled angels

haha

obadiah777: life goes in cycles. during that era He and Frosbel owned this section. they were the top dawgs.

lol


True talk bro. Where were the atheists and skeptics then?

Joagbaje: ... and he answers a lot of peoples questions, with The bible

not bad....


I see, so the tithe preaching was not the major part of your ministry. Good.

ijawkid: Lol......

Mayb he was good @ his tithe preaching......

lmao

[quote author=Mr_Anony]That is the point I am challenging. If the individual is the central focus of humanism, then altruism cannot possibly exist within it's framework since all acts of the individual will be judged based on how best the individual is benefited. The best you can get in a secular humanist worldview is mutualism.
Altruism can only logically exist in a theist worldview[/quote]@bold
The $tupidity in your comment come from two fundamental errors;
a) "Benefit" means different things to different people. I would die for my children, you would. My children are my future and a benefit to me and my legacy and not to yo.

b)Humanity recognizes the individual but everyone is an individual and an individual action can affect other individuals. The acts of the individual is will also be judged on its effect on other individuals if it does effect others. If the action of the individual does not affect others then,the action is for the sole individual to judge


Anony Debunked for good this time!

lets see how you come back from that one!

Yes, how did Joagbaje win the 2011 religion section poster for last year (2011)?
https://www.nairaland.com/816588/joagbaje-voted-religion-section-poster

I am sorry, if i am coming across as hateful but it is just surprising as i thought that chistians had dignity and a tithe preaching logic acrobat would not be voted into such a position/award!

There are many christians who I would have accepted without question but Joagbaje? Seriously? What happened to Pastor AIO, Anony, Enigma etc?

Joagbaje: Yes of course and beyond that . There's actually a father to children relationship spiritually speaking. jesus often address his desciple as his children even though many were older than him.

John 13:33
Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you.

Paul did thesame too

Galatians 4:19
My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

The only reason for calling them children is because he assumed position of a father

Likewise John

1 John 2:1
1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

1 Corinthians 4:15
After all, though you should have ten thousand teachers (guides to direct you) in Christ, yet you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the glad tidings (the Gospel).


Philippians 2:22
But ye know the proof of him, that, as a son with the father, he hath served with me in the gospel.

It is not a law. It's based on relationship. Afterall it is not the person who gave birth that is parent but the person who raise the child.

As usual a tithe-preacher will twist scriptures to further his mission of deceiving his slave church members.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lol, actually the bible tells us that God has written His law upon our hearts. That's where our moral code comes from. What you are doing is to accept the Law but reject the Law giver.[/quote]If truly the law is in our hearts, then there is no need for the bible in the first place. Your above commment is nonsensiscal and self-refuting.


[quote author=Mr_Anony]Please tell me how you can logically say that we are born prepackaged with a set of moral principles yet when asked how come this is so? i.e. who or what laid down these principles? your answer is that no such moral law-giver exists.[/quote]There is no moral law-giver. You are entering into creationism

Evolution and sociology explains a lot. Our intelligence is evolutionary. We inherit some instincts from our ancestors and we also hone them with relationships with other people in the society

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Now the next thing that springs from this is why should such a moral-code which has no author be binding?[/quote]Huh, so god makes a law binding? You might want to reread your bible and see what would happened if we accepted the moral authority of your god.

We would be stoning gays and murdering unebleievers.

CrazyMan: For respect I guess

Which dirty respect.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]lol, so you have no moral code? You don't have the right to judge another person's morality.
If you are going to judge another person's walking style, then you must provide your certificate for walking.[/quote]Praise be to the Spaghetti Monster!


You are showing your true colours! Everyone knows how to walk. Surely, even a 5 year old can tell that something is wrong with someone limping.


Humans already have a basic set of moral principles that come prepackaged. These morals become better defined when we interact with others in society and use logic plus science to hone them. What we have achieved so far as a species is to identify moral universalism.


So when asking me for my moral code, all I can do is laugh because you are trying to force a discredited christian world view of the bible/.christ as morality for all humans into reality

razznaija: 86 views and just two comments.

lmao....many of them do it!


If any pastor wants me to call him daddy, he better buy me a private jet

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Sweet![/quote]

[quote author=Mr_Anony]perhaps you may want to start by giving us the details of this atheist moral code of conduct by which you judge these "MoGs"[/quote]This is where you debunk yourself with wickedness. Do I need a moral code, God or the bible to know that killing, stealing or beating someone for no reason is wrong?


Surely, if you need a moral code to know these things, you must be awicked christian bigot like I said all along.


It is like asking me where my certificate for walking is. Do I need a cerificate for something that is naturally a part of me?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Please educate me on the complexities of humanism.

By the way, I hope you do realize that there are such things as christian humanism, islamic humanism, humanistic judaism, early greek humanism etc.

My case today is with secular humanism where the human being is at the center. My challenge to all is to show me how altruism/self-sacrifice as having high moral value logically follows from a morality based on the self[/quote]Most religions have human being at the centre. Tell me, is christianity about self salvation or collective salvation? Christianity is between man and Yaweh.

The Coming of the Kingdom

20 Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; 21 nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’[a] For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you.”




As for Humanism, you are foolish to forget that while it starts at the individual, it also realises the effect of individual actions of society.


Altruism comes from individual actions that creates a better effect on society.


Simple commonsense but you wish to call humanism another form of satanism. Feel free to indulge in your slander like a pig in its own dirt

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lol your comprehension ability is poor. No one is saying that John Gray is a humanist[/quote]Did I say that he is a humanist or a voice on humanism?

Why should Grays opinions be of significance?


Many here have pointed out the issues with such a stance.

Gray is now the leading voice of humanism and science for Anony and Enigma.


Keep the fallacy going!

[quote author=Mr_Anony]LOL typical of you to pull out your C.V. By the way I thought atheism was simply disbelief in deity, are there other things to know?

Perhaps there are rules of atheism or a code of conduct or an atheist creed/initiation rituals or is there now a school of atheism where one goes to study to become a professor of atheism?

You amuse me.[/quote]Yes it is a simple disbelief in God. But humanism? Not so simple for you as you keep failing on its premise


The point is that you can never accuse me of knowing nothing about christianity or islam but can accuse you of being ignorant about humanism

A nice thread for you,Mr Anony;

https://www.nairaland.com/1022069/atheists-humanists-no-morals-mr

I want to know since you have compared secular humanism to satanism and have also said that atheists do not have the moral ground to judge pastors or MOGs.


[quote author=Mr_Anony]First of all, not every pastor is failing. But then, the reason why pastors can fail is because they have a code of conduct by which they are judged by.
An atheist/agnostic has no such code of conduct. How can a man fail if he doesn't first rise?[/quote]

[quote author=Mr_Anony]lol....You have done nothing but lie and spread nonsense on this forum about christianity and islam. Two things you know nothing about.

My friend, accusations can go both ways. We can either argue logically or resort to ad hominem. I see you prefer the latter to the former.[/quote]Epic fail. Christian (catholic) for 22 years. 2 years anglican. 3 years in a baptist school. 1 year working with an islamic leader


I know a lot about islam and christianity.



Unlike you, who knows nothing of humanity and atheism. Tell me how humanism is closely related to satanism? Liar

[quote author=Mr_Anony].....bla bla bla says the other bigot in the room[/quote]lol and how am I a bigot?


Stop projecting your hate. You have done nothing but lie and spread nonsense on this thread about atheism and humanism. Two things you know nothing about.

deols: LagosShia's initial reply is superb. I see no reason to comment further.

where's d Op?

LagosShia: ^

i have provided you an answer to the best of my ability.if you like,appreciate my effort.if you dont and you want to argue,talk to yourself.the answer has been given to you.if you like accept it,if not feel free to say whatever.i'm i going to argue with you over what you do not believe in?

it is becoming more evident that you're jobless and may be useless,who has nothing to do other than creating threads as traps to gain attention and get involved in endless arguments.you initially pretend you want to find out.when the answer is provided you argue upon what you did not know.if you knew and you dont accept others "lying" to you,then why did you ask questions in the first place?

MVS. Muslim Victim Syndrome. When debunked into a corner, cry that the opponent is jobless, useless and a pretender that is only out to attack your religion.


You give a foolish answer and expect me to swallow it like sheep?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]I never implied that Ayn Rand was a humanist, my point was that Ayn Rand's position is the kind of stance that should logically follow from an atheist worldview. All I am saying is that humanism does not logically follow from an atheist standpoint. So far, none of you has shown me a logical link.

@Martian, I am not trying to paint secular humanism in a bad light. I am just saying that it doesn't follow from an atheistic premise so I call it blind faith.
Perhaps you can solve this puzzle for us by showing us this logical link. Once you can do that, there'll be no need to argue further[/quote]You are a bigot. You hold bigoted views towards atheism. You are sick. Ayn Rand? You realise that as smart as Ayn Rand was, she was also a bit crazy.

If you watch American politics, you would realise that it is ironically Capitalist, God-fearing conservatives that like Ayn Rand not atheists.

LagosShia: 1.) in Islam Muhammad (sa) was sent to all mankind,so that at least to some extent should be enough to answer the question.

What a foolish answer. How was Muhammad sent to all mankind? How is your foolish claim not the same as the christians and other religion that claim that their central prophet was for all mankind?

Muhammad was an illiterate who had problems with the Jews. Eve if he was sent to all mankind were are the West African prophets? were Africans too foolish for Allah?

LagosShia: 2.) the middle eastern region was chosen as the place to complete and seal the divine message.

How convenient for middle eastern people. What does that say about the omnipresence of Allah? Choosing one piece of land to spread his message all around the world instead of appearing to everyone in different lands.

The problem still remains. There were other sophisticated civilizations for Allah to hose, why Arabs and the Jews only? Black or chinese not good?

LagosShia: 3.) we are told that God initially chose the israelites (from whom jews descended and also some arabs) to carry on the divine mission in worshiping God.

How does this answer the questions of no prophets from West Africa or Asia or the Americas

LagosShia: 4.) the Quran does mention for instance the story of Luqman.he was guided and enlightened by God.the same goes about Zhul-Qarnain.now the issue of identifying who Zhul-Qarnain is,can best serve to answer your question.Zhul-Qarnain is someone the arabians were not familiar with but the Jews were.thus the jews knew him but the arabians did not.later on when trying to relate who Zhul-Qarnain was,the arabians were lost because they did not know him.ofcourse,thanks to knowledge we now can relate Zhul-Qarnain to Cyrus.

More blabbing about Jews and Arabs. Surely, even you can not talk of other people in your religions history?

LagosShia: 5.) Islam teaches us that there are 124000 prophets sent to all of mankind.these prophets were teachers who came to educate and purify the souls of their communities.so no matter how small or insignificant a nation was they had someone sent to them so proof is placed over them.ofcourse over time those messages could have been lost or corrupted with myths and fairytales,and thus you have a comprehensive seal to the divine messages with the revelation of the Quran and the prophethood of Muhammad (sa).

Holy Quran 10:47
"And for every nation is a messenger. So when their messenger comes, it will be judged between them in justice, and they will not be wronged"

You have proven that the Quran lies. What messenger went to south america where islam and judaism are almost non-existent? At the time of islam many nations or geographical areas were not even accessed or found by the outside world

LagosShia: 6.) the greatest impact of the divine message through the israelites and later the arabians was centered around the middle east.that region experienced a lot of happenings.

more nonsense about Arabs and Jews. You are really starting to sound like a slave rather than a West African

LagosShia: 7.) if you examine the hindu,buddhist and zoroastrian religions,you find that the message in their scriptures does point to Tawheed which is the central doctrine of the Quran and the Bible.so many Islamic scholars do not rule the possibility of these religious figures to have being prophets sent by God Almighty to those nations.

Lies. You must be really brainwashed to even believe that hinduism or bhuddism borrowsfrom the Quran when they have a far different teaching than islam and both are older than islam. Unless islam has an atheistic or pluralistic view of God,then you are talking nonsense.

LagosShia: 8.) people best relate with their environment.when the arabians are taught about nations and men who are close to their backyard,they relate to the story better.the Quran is not an historical text.it is more than that.the Quran/Islam came to reform the previous revelations/religions (i.e. judaism and christianity).so if you want to start given stories about people in south america (people in the middle east then did not even know about south america),it is like telling us stories about Jupiter.such amounts to people perceiving the stories as fairytales.

People relate best with their environment. Why then do Asians not have an Asian prophet in Islam?

LagosShia: 9.) this is what the Quran says:

Holy Quran 40:78
"And We have already sent messengers before you. Among them are those [whose stories] We have related to you, and among them are those [whose stories] We have not related to you. And it was not for any messenger to bring a sign [or verse] except by permission of Allah . So when the command of Allah comes, it will be concluded in truth, and the falsifiers will thereupon lose [all]."

You force the Quran to be truth. Which messengers did they send to South America?