₦airaland Forum

Namdio:
First, yes (but more on that later).

Please, do tell me more. This discussion just got interesting.

Namdio:
Yes, I think Atheism is a religion, though not in the traditional sense of a supernatural god who they worship. An atheist's god is facts and figures.

Before we continue, I want to remind you that this discussion we are having is framed in the context of the existence, as well as the worship of supernatural creator deities commonly addressed as gods. As I mentioned earlier, I'm looking at what is logical, and more importantly -- factual, not what might/could be.

=================================

Now, let us look at some standard definitions of Atheism:

atheism
/ˈeɪθɪɪz(ə)m/

noun
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

The above definition is Oxford's. Observe the bolded phrase. Atheism is defined as LACKING belief.

A Theist would say: I have a belief in the existence of God.

An Atheist would say: I don't have a belief in the existence of God.

Here's another definition from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

"The term 'atheist' describes a person who does not believe that God or a divine being exists.
https://iep.utm.edu/atheism/

A person who "does not believe" can also be said to be "lacking belief" in the existence of a God or gods. In both events, belief is absent.

Consider this entry from Britannica:

Instead of saying that an atheist is someone who believes that it is false or probably false that there is a God, a more adequate characterization of atheism consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is to be someone who rejects belief in God for the following reasons (which reason is stressed depends on how God is being conceived):
https://www.britannica.com/topic/atheism...of-atheism

Atheism begins when one is skeptical of claims made by God believers that there exists an undetectable supernatural creator, who willfully interacts with the world he created (theism in a nutshell). There are many kinds of atheists, but this is the singular idea that binds them all together. If you reject belief in something, then it simply translates to you not having it. Just in case the picture isn't clear to you yet, let's look at one common definition of Theism -- which is the opposite of Atheism:

theism
/ˈθiːɪz(ə)m/

noun
belief in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe.

Theism.
A-Theism.

The prefix a- signifying absence.

A-theism: without-belief in the existence of a God or gods. Therefore it doesn't even qualify to be called a belief system, talk less of a religion.

=================================

Now, given that the singular idea unifying atheists is their "lack of belief" in a God or gods, it then becomes absurd to posit spurious arguments such as: "An atheist's God is fact and figures". Sorry dear, but atheism is not synonymous with worshipping facts or figures. Have you met the spiritual atheists? They may reject theistic gods who are claimed to interact with humanity such as Yahweh and Allah, but they also believe in stuff like Karma -- and there's no facts or figures supporting such phenomenon. It's a BELIEF.

Namdio:
They don't believe in supernatural and mythological gods, but they believe in facts and figures.

For the record, when something is established to be factual by virtue of the provision of empirical evidence, it ceases to be a matter of belief and becomes a matter of knowledge. Take for example, the phenomena of thunder and lightning. In the ancient times, thunders were believed to be growling noises made by the gods because they were angry and throwing tantrums. It was a natural assumption to make because nobody really knew why thunders occurred, so the ancient people created myths to explain it alongside other "supernatural" occurrences at the time. But now we know that thunders are a result of atmospheric instability and other processes involving the buildup of electricity in moving clouds, the nitty gritty of which you can source from any reputable scientific journals on the internet.

Namdio:
Some, Atheist consider themselves better than others because they don't believe in things that can't be proven, but ignore the fact that there's a lot of evidence all around.

It's easy to claim there is evidence of something. The issue is actually presenting it. Mind you, no rational or honest individual can deny hard empirical evidence when it is presented before him/her. For instance, you'd find it mighty difficult to catch two people arguing that if you throw a cup out the window, it will just float in the air and won't go down. Everybody knows that gravity and its effects are real.

As for the bit about atheists considering themselves superior to others, I think that's an amusing statement you made. I usually hear it from Christians when they get locked into an argument with an atheist and they've manoeuvred themselves into a corner where they have nothing to say. I can't deny that humans generally are competitive in nature. We just are. We want to look and feel better than others. Personally, I can't help but feel better than a Christian when I hear him/her discussing ridiculous things like a talking donkey, or a talking burning bush etc. while keeping a straight face . If you've met any atheist who seems like a bully with a chip on his shoulder, I'd say you should blame his ego on the Christians or God believers surrounding him.

Think about it. These are people who believe that the entire universe, as gargantuan as it is, was made for them alone. The narcissism and entitlement of theists cannot be evidenced in more glaring fashion. They identify themselves as children of the Most High, All Powerful, Wondrous God, who rules over the entire galaxy. From their oh-so-glorious pedestal, they look down on atheists and spit on them, condemning them to be unfortunate simply because the atheists reject the truth. You have others looking at him with pity. To them living without God is like living on the streets with no food or shelter. Here comes Evangelism and Proselytizing. The Christian wants to "save" the atheist and win him to Christ.

The truth is that lack of belief of God never occurs to most atheists as they carry on their daily lives. What you see is simply feedback of atheists being heckled by Christians in their families, schools and offices. Understandably, the atheists can't make any sense out of the outlandish claims made by the religious adherents, and then the gauntlet is set and the request made:

Show us the evidence.

The average theist doesn't have any. All he has are speculations, logical fallacies, appeals to emotion, No True Scotmans. The more seasoned theists who encounter atheists in discussions more often weave decent arguments using sophistry and circumstantial evidence, which sounds smart to the ears, but is insufficient in proving many of the claims made by theistic religions.

Namdio:
A lot of religious people consider themselves better because they refuse to believe in facts when the facts speak for themselves.

That's a weird idea. I fail to relate and/or see how a person can think himself better than somebody else because they reject facts. I think I get what you were trying to say but you put it in a very simplistic manner. To the theists, any fact that doesn't tally with the teachings or doctrines of their Holy Bible is false, irrelevant and at best, misleading.

God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
- Romans 3:4

Their Bible is the ultimate source of all things "true". One need look no further than their collective crusade against the Theory of Evolution. Then you have the flat-earthers. Have you ever wondered how many scientific facts exist that Christians believe in -- which directly contradicts their holy book? I think that's an important question right there.

Namdio:
Belief in nothing, is still believe.

No, that's just a badly dressed word salad. And I'm not hungry.

Namdio:
If I could prove to you empirically that God exists would you believe?

Which God exactly? There are many gods you know.

Namdio:
While I can't talk about what God was thinking when He requested for Isaac, I do know, the future is not fixed. Every moment we live we influence it. If someone gives a bad prophecy we can work hard and change it. Being omniscient means he is all knowing, he knows the end of a particular course of action, if you act in a particular way consistently you'll get a particular result. This will be your end.

But it is our responsibility to choose which end we want. Abraham could have decided to carry on and sacrifice his son, but he didn't. There are some times when parents scare children very badly and they refuse to relate with them for a while. Most times things go back to normal.

Does God know what I'll have for breakfast when I wake up later today?

Namdio:
I understand where you're coming from. Trying to speak with someone about what is happening now and here and having them be talking about things that don't seem to help is very frustrating.

But it does, doesn't it?

In your case it didn't, as I'm still yet to get the point you tried to make in your first reply to me. Were you trying to assert that atheism is indeed a religion?

Namdio:
...The point of my rumination was not so that it would be used in exchange for what is normally used, it was to view things from a different pair of lens...

Look, I think it's nice that you seek to be creative with words and learn new meanings from them. As for me, I prefer to stick to the literal interpretations of known terms. Don't get me wrong, I can and very often appreciate the brilliant use of language in poetry and literature. But I don't believe such endeavor serves well in a discussion that aims to establish facts.

MaxInDHouse:
Tolerance is when the most powerful person is warning the most powerless because He has no option than to send them to non-existence if they will continue to hurt themselves and good people around them!

Usually, when someone issues a warning, s/he does it to caution and/or dissuade another person from doing something by pointing out consequences which may follow if the person goes ahead to do it. Hosea 13:16 reads more like a judgement, or at best, a prophecy, not a warning.

Namdio:
Silence is a sound, the same way nobody is a person (even though the definitions say otherwise).

After all people wouldn't say all I heard was silence. Or Nobody listened.

If silence wasn't a sound how could you hear it?

If Nobody wasn't a person how could it listen?

While everybody didn't listen feels very awkward, I feel it carries more weight than nobody listened.

After all the former tells you that all the people didn't pay attention while the latter says a non-entity did.

It's just a few things I think about, don't have to accept it.

But I'll end with this

In mathematics the definition of a set also includes the empty set, which is meant to contain nothing. An empty set is also an item within the set.

So in "Everybody didn't listen," even that which is nobody didn't listen

I don't mean to come as across as antagonistic but to me this is just an exercise in obfuscation. In your first sentence, you accept the fact that the words you are using have already been defined, and yet you wish that you and I casually discard these definitions just so you can ruminate on pointless oxymorons and pretend that they are factual. If we start divorcing every word from their meanings, then where do we draw the line on what is or isn't sensible?

MaxInDHouse:
The most tolerant personality ever: the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob!
Exodus 34:6
Psalms 103:8
Proverbs 14:29

You forgot Hosea 13:16

16 Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.

Your God isn't even Pro-Life. So much for the Christians' anti-abortion movement. Lol.

Dtruthspeaker:
I see you suffer criminal bias disease and therefore things like righteousness and just is and judgement can not be known by you.

Judgement? Yeah, right. Your God judges and condemns humans for committing acts that he KNEW they would commit before they were even conceived. Why don't you tell me more about your sense of just-is (sic)? Lol.

A perfect God created defective beings and placed them in a chaotic world, with complete foreknowledge of what they were capable of doing, no matter how horrendous or damaging it was to the world he created, as well as the inhabitants therein. It was all a part of his Divine Plan™.

The men that defiled and raped Jacob's daughter Dinah in the Bible -- your God saw their hearts and knew their intentions before they committed their evil acts. Guess what your God didn't do. Lol.

Buliwyf:
There is nothing I hate more than dumb arguments. And this one is one of the most stupid arguments I have ever read. Dude, if you can't contribute something intelligent just keep quiet and listen to others instead of this tiresome nonsense masquerading as wisdom.
This your argument has been debunked a thousand times here.

Morality comes from societal teaching about how best to treat one another and maintain social cohesion. That is why humans see it as evil to kill their neighbor in the same group but won't mind raiding, murdering and raping people in other groups if it will help them survive. There are cultures where it is ok to share your wife with a visitor while that is immoral in Christianity and, if you were brought up in those cultures, your sense of morality will be shaped by that. I could go on and on and on.

Before writing something think properly and ask yourself if the others haven't thought of already.

Lol. You even had the patience to type a response. Contributions from the religious side of the discussion here on this thread just reek of wilful ignorance that a quick trip to Google can easily fix.

Imagine not being able to take swallow again

Dtruthspeaker:
You said the Lie and that is what set me off.

If you really think your God isn't intolerant, especially considering his actions and temperaments in the Old Testament, then maybe you haven't read your Bible properly and honestly.

I can already tell that you suffer from cognitive dissonance.

Dtruthspeaker:
You People ma!

I see.

Well, I only said the truth. Didn't know it would hurt your feelings.

Dtruthspeaker:
No one asked you.

And humous man are still the same old very disobedient, very annoying, rebellious and stupid people who never learn that it is very stupid and destructive to fight your Creator.

You will lose every time!

Who shit in your tea, sir?

tsdarkside:
actualy atheist is a religion too....

they have priests....
they are called scientists....

Lol. If atheism is a religion, then I guess silence is a sound .

If you ask me, the God of the Old Testament is intolerance personified.

0neal:
Using my newly acquired redpill lens to read this thread just makes me laugh

Well, it's nice to know that you were tickled by some of the comments here, but for what it is worth, your grandstanding about your precious philosophy is infantile -- to put it mildly. And I doubt anybody here is significantly impressed with your "newly acquired redpill lens", nor do they care to know what special "wisdom" you've gleaned from it.

0neal:
It baffles me a 37 year old lady is still living in delusion lala land, when studies show at that age fertility is declining and even child birth comes with certain risk.

Then, prepare to get yourself even more baffled, because it is clear that you are out of touch with what's really going on in the world around you.

It's curious that you know so much about me to think that I'm living in la la land. I'll begin by pointing out to you that your statement here cloaks an implicit assumption (which even you may not be aware that you just made), that asserts EVERY woman wants to get married EVENTUALLY. Note the two words I have taken the liberty to capitalize. Not every woman cares for the married life. Women exist who aren't equipped for marriage, or interested in having children. Irrespective of similarities in age, gender, colour, etc., human beings have different objectives of which they ascribe momentous value to, and these objectives are fueled by their various distinct personalities*. You obviously know this, and yet I have to spell out such obvious platitude to you because of your specious assumptions.

Sometimes, the problem with social ideologies that play up to the interests of one exclusive gender like the Red Pill or Feminism is that the followers of these ideologies or movements usually have the tendency to presuppose that collective needs and interests are shared by ALL members of the opposing gender. This tendency gives rise to spurious arguments which often read more as shallow mind-reading from amateurs that claim to know what other people are possibly thinking, or what they want in their own lives.

Quite tragic and paradoxical, that your "newly acquired redpill lens" is giving you tunnel vision.

*Olivia E. Atherton, Emily Grijalva, Brent W. Roberts, Richard W. Robins. Stability and Change in Personality Traits and Major Life Goals From College to Midlife. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2020; 014616722094936 DOI: 10.1177/0146167220949362

0neal:
Outliers and exceptions are statistically insignificant, I know some people might say "what if she doesn't want to have kids or marry" but majority of ladies are aiming for marriage and family, so her situation/opinion/advise is cancerous to the larger percentage of ladies who it is advantageous to their biological proclivity to be in a marriage relationship at their prime when they are able to attract the best of suitors.

I'm not sure whose posts you are addressing in this floating rejoinder, so I almost ignored it. The only reason I replied to you is because you made a statement in this reply that seems to have been targeted at me and one of my posts. If that's the case, then I think you need to start over and read all my submissions on this thread very carefully.

Women have different needs when it comes to getting married. Some get married because they want social acceptance -- they feel people will have more respect and admiration for them if they do. Others do it for financial security and so on.

My advice was targeted to Stargurl20 specifically -- it wasn't intended to be a general advice for all young ladies. Stargurl20 wants to get married, but not to a person she can't connect with on a personal and emotional level. I can relate to her situation and I know that there are other girls like this. If Stargurl is as she describes herself in her OP and her subsequent posts, then it makes sense to conclude that she will understandably be depressed in a relationship where she feels no meaningful emotional connection to her partner. And when I inquired of her, she admitted that societal pressure is one of the reasons she is unhappy about not being married.

The only thing cancerous here is the fact that there are people like you coercing and shaming young impressionable women to pair up and reproduce on time, even if they aren't mentally or emotionally prepared, because the "majority of ladies are aiming for marriage and family". This leads to the impulsive need for young women to "put a ring on it" and merely assume the best. And you wonder why divorce rates are high in the country.

I've not tried to discourage anyone from getting married. You are the one having misapprehensions about what I've said here. The import of my posts are manifest to those who can read objectively, and without aid from some fancy new lens. You can't force everyone into the same fixed marriage expectation model.

Michelle70:
No, the mods are not bots, they too have something to do.

You see those porn guys, even if u block them for 80yrs, they could create 3more accounts in 10mins and post porn

True. Probably the most effective measure to take would be to retrieve the IP address of the perpetrators and blacklist them, preventing further access to the site. It might seem a bit extreme but it would surely yield results. Then again, this process might be feasible only if it's a single user creating all these spam accounts, and/or he is using a single device.

In any case, I'm just a casual reader and it's just something I thought up. I have no actual background or experience in web programming.

edit: I just saw lebron7 already beat me to the response about blocking IP addresses.

Anybody familiar with the MBTI personality type indicator on this thread?

Don't allow irrational fears to consume you. This guy is trying to play infantile mind games -- using your deeply held religious beliefs to bamboozle and manipulate you into becoming his spouse. I wish for once that people would just use their heads and grow some self-esteem.

At any rate, I'm not surprised. It's just typical of religious fundamentalists to be running scared of imaginary dangers and calamities.

Hell exists

Ok. So....?

Christianity in Nigeria is no more than a clutch for people who seek meaning for their existence in a complex and chaotic world. As with other religions, it is just a spiritual placebo -- "the opiate of the masses" as rightly described by Karl Marx. This is very true, especially for people who are mostly dissatisfied with their lives. They use their religion to justify their identity, and to some extent, suppress any tendencies to engage in acts that are deemed to be morally reprehensible.

A problem arises, however, when Christians assume moral superiority over non-believers, due to non-believers being castigated as morally bankrupt by their Holy Bible. Thus, religious intolerance is born -- which in turn breeds divisiveness and sometimes lack of empathy for people who dare to reject God. This is a serious problem, especially when you consider that it is in our nature as humans to compete with others. It's our innate desire to achieve higher status than other individuals.

heendrix:
Most people take decisions without inquiring or getting to hear from God first and when it's gets all belly up, they turn to accuse God and say He failed them. Marriage is a the first institution created by God and thus a serious one at it and not the type of thing you just jump into.

Perhaps you weren't paying attention, but the OP already said that, whilst being active in the church, she had always been praying to God to give her the right partner. So I don't think it was something she just decided to "jump into":

Advice21:
I was brought up in church, my family has always lacked money but we never put our hands in any wrong thing, I was in the choir, I always prayed to God asking him never to let me marry the wrong person, I have never intentionally hurt anyone, I always seek good for other people, so why did God allow this calamity befall me.

pansophist:
false equivalence. If one said he likes goat meat, it doesn't mean that he hates chicken. You don't miss two things that are unrelated just because you want to prove a point. Gold digging is not a treatment you give to someone you don't find attractive, you simply let them go. Golddigging is a moral failure

If what you wrote makes sense to you, then perhaps it also makes sense for a man to convert a woman he doesn't want something long-term with as a sex object.

I just quoted you to say that I like your signature

You have made some unjustified assumptions in your post, for which I would request that you cite some evidence, or at least provide relevant examples to support your claims...

--------------------

Jman06:
People's idea of love is always about infatuation based on bodily attraction.

This claim is bogus because you have framed it to seem as though ALL humans share similar inclinations to a particular belief or idea. It's an example of the fallacy of generalization. In fact, my subjective view of love, submitted in my previous post blatantly contradicts your assertion.

Jman06:
When such infatuation is coming from a woman, it becomes worse because it hardly sustains a long term relationship as women lack the capacity to make the sacrifices required to sustain such relationship.

This paragraph is particularly curious, but I will refrain from jumping the gun here. What are these sacrifices required to sustain a relationship and why are women incapable of making said sacrifices?

--------------------

Jman06:
So, they easily fall out of "love" and that explains why we have too many divorces and broken homes, especially among the woke western societies today where women have been made to believe that their "love" mattered in marriages.

I already alluded to this in my previous postings, by pointing out that relationships based on flimsy attraction to shallow features won't last as long as relationships based on genuine connections -- feelings fostered by friendship, acceptance, trust, respect etc., so you are just preaching to the choir in this instance.

Jman06:
See them. Always trying to have others make the same mistake they made.

How do you define a "mistake"? The way I see it, that epithet can only be ascribed to an action that is acknowledged to be flawed or regrettable by the subject itself. Can you really have any say on what others besides yourself consider to be regrettable?

Jman06:
To the wise girls reading my post...

Lol. Are you THE authority on wisdom now?

Jman06:
...my point remains that you must not be fixated on the so called "mutual affection" or the women's definition of love if you want to get married and on time.

I wasn't aware that there's a standard definition of LOVE approved by, and recommended for, ALL women. Perhaps you have citations for that claim?

Meanwhile, I've noticed that the majority of posters on this thread appear to be conflating love with infatuation. These two concepts aren't exactly synonymous. With love, there is also respect, and trust, and friendship, and communication, and acceptance. Any relationship built on these principles will last much longer than a relationship built on specious and misguided desires which are often mostly characterized by attraction to shallow features. For example, you can't just decide to spend the rest of your life with someone simply because he makes you laugh or he's a good-looking stud, or maybe because he's a walking encyclopedia or a walking bank.

Something else I find absurd is your casual rejection of mutual affection as a prerequisite for marriage. If you don't find such an idea appealing, it's perfectly fine. What's not fine is you trying to dictate to others what they should feel going into a marriage.

Jman06:
Until then, you need to adapt to the biblical principle of " men love your wife and women submit to your husband".

If you insist on making the implied assertion that a woman should marry a man who loves her, even when she feels no attraction towards him, you will have to explain (for the sake of those women who place high value on meaningful connection to relationship partners) how long you think such a union, which isn't based on mutual attraction that is meaningful, will possibly last.

Kaycee7:
The few you watched in Japanese, did you find the dialogue to be exaggerated and cringe worthy as well?

It was the voice acting I was referring to as exaggerated and cringe-worthy. Especially with the females. Perhaps it's done for comedic effects, I don't really know.

Well, he is. According to Gnostic Christianity.

Kaycee7:
You watch the Japanese with sub or the English dub?

I usually don't go out of my way to choose but most of the anime I've watched are dubbed in English.

Baddestguyp:
hmm...
I think it's a matter of the shows you watch...

It's repititive if you're watching Isekai...
Same as the sexual objectification of women...there are many shows that don't have these or misogyny

I'm aware that it isn't all of them. But from my experience, it seems to be the majority.

Stargurl20:
You look beautiful.

Thank you.

Baddestguyp:
.....
not a fan of anime even till now? Why?

It's just not my style. I find the voice acting in most anime that I've watched to be exaggerated and cringe-worthy, coupled with dialogue that often comes across as juvenile. Some of the stories are also very repetitive and boring for me. Also (and this is just my opinion or observation), the industry is rife with misogyny and sexual objectification of female characters. Hell, even Death Note is replete with countless examples of misogyny in its writing.

Stargurl20:
Hm...
May I know your age?

I'll be 37 in December.