Lols, the were still dey mention me. When your life is miserable offline, you'd turn Nairaland to a home. You can keep on crying in my mention 😂😂😂😂😂

A001:
Lols, the were still dey mention me. When your life is miserable offline, you'd turn Nairaland to a home. You can keep on crying in my mention 😂😂😂😂😂

For like 10 minutes now you’ve been saying the same thing. It seems you the lifeless one bwahahhaha

😂😂😂😂😂 He can't stop mentioning me. This one don mad finish 😂😂😂😂

A001:
😂😂😂😂😂 He can't stop mentioning me. This one don mad finish 😂😂😂😂

He can’t stop repeating himself like a broken clock on my Thread.

Hin don craze finish bwahahahah

A001:

Ask Google. Direct your question to believers in god.

You said it, not a theist

jaephoenix:

You said it, not a theist

Quote where I said so. It seem you dey ment, mentioning me unnecessarily on a stupid thread I don't follow.

A001:

Quote where I said so. It seem you dey ment, mentioning me unnecessarily on a stupid thread I don't follow.

Are you dumb?

Tell us how a god can exist, you’ve gone empty.

Seun, please Nairaland is long overdue for a block button. Some members of this forum have a mental disorder and constitute a nuisance on this forum.

A001:
Seun, please Nairaland is long overdue for a block button. Some members of this forum have a mental disorder and constitute a nuisance on the forum.

Why don’t you ignore them and stop posting on their threads if you are not a fellow nuisance like them?

A001:
Seun, please Nairaland is long overdue for a block button. Some members of this forum have a mental disorder and constitute a nuisance on the forum.

lol, why are you allowing that guy to wear you out?

You are mentally strong enough to just ignore him

jaephoenix:

You said it, not a theist

You can't find the post? Keep quoting me with different monikers manufacturing lies in your head.

Workch:
lol, why are you allowing that guy to wear you out?

You are mentally strong enough to just ignore him

Are you empty?

Workch:
lol, why are you allowing that guy to wear you out?

You are mentally strong enough to just ignore him

A block button is needed to block the mentally unstable fellow for life.

A001:

Quote where I said so. It seem you dey ment, mentioning me unnecessarily on a stupid thread I don't follow.

You said this on this thread, didn't you?

Yet, he can't back his claim with my post that says God can exist or only one one God exists. I'm sure tomorrow, he will use another term he doesn't know its meaning to describe agnostics.
Looks like youre the psychotic guy here

A001:

You can't find the post? Keep quoting me with different monikers manufacturing lies in your head.

Huh?
Dude, I don't have another moniker.
Are you off your rockers?

jaephoenix:


You said this on this thread, didn't you?

Yet, he can't back his claim with my post that says God can exist or only one one God exists. I'm sure tomorrow, he will use another term he doesn't know its meaning to describe agnostics.
Looks like youre the psychotic guy here

I said so and you can't quote where I said so. You must be high on cheap drugs. Aro patients have invaded Nl.

A001:

A block button is needed to block the mentally unstable fellow for life.

Maynman is an atheistic version of dtruthspeaker.

I ignore both like parasites

A001:

Who cares? Yesterday, the dimwit called agnostics monotheists. Today, it's agnostic theists.

Yet, he can't back his claim with my post that says God can exist or only one one God exists. I'm sure tomorrow, he will use another term he doesn't know its meaning to describe agnostics.

I don't have the luxury of time to be engaging a foolish poster that calls himself an atheist yet bears "divine light". It's plain stupidity.

Mr A001 Please who wrote the above posts.
Are you now seeing you have mania?

jaephoenix:

Mr A001 Please who wrote the above posts.
Are you now seeing you have mania?

I can see your education is a waste. I told you to quote where I said "God can exist" and you quoted the same post below where I asked you to back your claim with a proof. Didinrin, it's obvious you've a brain disorder.

A001:

Who cares? Yesterday, the dimwit called agnostics monotheists. Today, it's agnostic theists.

Yet, he can't back his claim with my post that says God can exist or only one one God exists. I'm sure tomorrow, he will use another term he doesn't know its meaning to describe agnostics.

I don't have the luxury of time to be engaging a foolish poster that calls himself an atheist yet bears "divine light". It's plain stupidity.

You both are a disgrace to atheism. When una escape from your mental asylum?

A001:

I can see your education is a waste. I told you to quote where I said "God can exist" and you quoted the same post below where I asked you to back your claim with a proof. Didinrin, it's obvious you've a brain disorder.


You both are a disgrace to atheism. When una escape from your mental asylum?

Your post was nebulous, to say the least. I don't have time for you, this fine morning. Have a good day

jaephoenix:

Your post was nebulous, to say the least. I don't have time for you, this fine morning. Have a good day

You're dumber than the religious people you criticize. A stupid person like you has no moral right to condemn any religious person because you're as foolish as them making claims yet when asked to provide proof, you're bringing irrelevant comments.

Workch:
Maynman is an atheistic version of dtruthspeaker.

I ignore both like parasites

Workch is the more deluded version of dtruthspeaker.

I use to think you had something, but just realised you are as empty like a typical theist especially monotheist.

Maynman:

We know things can be created because we have seen things been created. I don’t know how the universe came to be, I shouldn’t use my human logic to qualify it.
There may be things that can be created and not exist and things that can exist without been created. What if there are other concepts different from “create” “exist”?
When we say something is alive and dead, what does it really mean?
Is our definition of alive and dead concept valid somewhere different from here? I don’t know.

Bro, religion dates far into man's distant past. The first humans have a better understanding of these things than we whose religious histories have been majorly lost, and what we now call religion generally is a metamorphosis.

First, we need to understand that no one invented religion. It was actually in our roots. The first ancestors worshiped something or someone. Then, several generations afterwards, that something or someone became less known since everything at the time was passed down through oral history.

Then cane a generation that does not know what to worship but know they must worship something or someone as their fathers did, resulting in a mutiplicity of gods as everyone worships what he seems fit.

Generations later, some people are asking 'Is there really a God? Is there really an Afterlife?' if we have traceable records, I'm 100% certain we'll find the first Atheist who ever lived. This means the human race didn't take off in Atheism and then plunged itself into religion as we have it today. The Agnostics are themselves confused because they don't know what to believe.

The whole argument would have been easier if we have ancient records of things from the earliest man but the very lack of this is the reason why we all have disagreements.

However, even if such ancient records exist, many would still doubt such records. There are those who'll call them Fabrications. And of course, there are those unscrupulous elements who'll try to do mischievous forgeries and scripts for some personal gains at the expense of others.

Logically looking at it all, the begining wasn't atheism. That's fact. The first humans were theists. That should point us to some truths. They evidently were theists because they knew or even saw what they worshipped.
They also knew why they were worshipping him, it or them. They've passed the concept down to the entire human race who have now lost the identity of what was worshipped, and now the confusion.

Except we can prove that Atheism was the first thing humans ever did before veering into religion, we cannot safely void this kind of reasoning.

FxMasterz:


Bro, religion dates far into man's distant past. The first humans have a better understanding of these things than we whose religious histories have been majorly lost, and what we now call religion generally is a metamorphosis.

First, we need to understand that no one invented religion. It was actually in our roots. The first ancestors worshiped something or someone. Then, several generations afterwards, that something or someone became less known since everything at the time was passed down through oral history.

Then cane a generation that does not know what to worship but know they must worship something or someone as their fathers did, resulting in a mutiplicity of gods as everyone worships what he seems fit.

Generations later, some people are asking 'Is there really a God? Is there really an Afterlife?' if we have traceable records, I'm 100% certain we'll find the first Atheist who ever lived. This means the human race didn't take off in Atheism and then plunged itself into religion as we have it today. The Agnostics are themselves confused because they don't know what to believe.

The whole argument would have been easier if we have ancient records of things from the earliest man but the very lack of this is the reason why we all have disagreements.

However, even if such ancient records exist, many would still doubt such records. There are those who'll call them Fabrications. And of course, there are those unscrupulous elements who'll try to do mischievous forgeries and scripts for some personal gains at the expense of others.

Logically looking at it all, the begining wasn't atheism. That's fact. The first humans were theists. That should point us to some truths. They evidently were theists because they knew or even saw what they worshipped.
They also knew why they were worshipping him, it or them. They've passed the concept down to the entire human race who have now lost the identity of what was worshipped, and now the confusion.

Except we can prove that Atheism was the first thing humans ever did before veering into religion, we cannot safely void this kind of reasoning.

Maybe The first human were deity worshippers, they were also illiterate and not educated.
Should we be like them?

How can atheism be the first? you need to have various gods, then some people reject the gods, some even acknowledge their own gods but reject others,that’s we have monotheism.

We can say our human ancestors were polytheists, and from polytheism evolve to monotheism.

Maynman:

Maybe The first human were deity worshippers, they were also illiterate and not educated.
Should we be like them?

How can atheism be the first? you need to have various gods, then some people reject the gods, some even acknowledge their own gods but reject others,that’s we have monotheism.

We can say our human ancestors were polytheists, and from polytheism evolve to monotheism.

I think we can get somewhere with this.
Frankly speaking, no one has the records of what the first humans worshipped. Our ancestors who were polytheists were still a later generation. Yet, we can still make judgement on their basis because at least they're theists, and we can safely say that theism was handed down to them by their predecessors.
For the first humans, we cannot talk about education because they wouldn't have needed it. These set of people would definitely see, touch and know whatever they were worshipping for them to have passed it down to all human race. We're the ones who need education because we don't know what they knew. All our religious education or research should be geared towards knowing what they knew. Or towards seeing what they saw.

This is very strong because they wouldn't pass down religion without having a cogent reason for doing so. I'm very sure that the first humans who passed it down didn't do so as a fabrication because there'll be nothing to gain from such. If atheism was the root, then we can discard religion because, if the first humans saw nothing, the human race would worship nothing, and it would be very difficult for anyone to convince anybody to worship something that does not exist.

FxMasterz:


I think we can get somewhere with this.
Frankly speaking, no one has the records of what the first humans worshipped. Our ancestors who were polytheists were still a later generation. Yet, we can still make judgement on their basis because at least they're theists, and we can safely say that theism was handed down to them by their predecessors.
For the first humans, we cannot talk about education because they wouldn't have needed it. These set of people would definitely see, touch and know whatever they were worshipping for them to have passed it down to all human race. We're the ones who need education because we don't know what they knew. All our religious education or research should be geared towards knowing what they knew. Or towards seeing what they saw.

This is very strong because they wouldn't pass down religion without having a cogent reason for doing so. I'm very sure that the first humans who passed it down didn't do so as a fabrication because there'll be nothing to gain from such. If atheism was the root, then we can discard religion because, if the first humans saw nothing, the human race would worship nothing, and it would be very difficult for anyone to convince anybody to worship something that does not exist.

We also don’t know for sure if the first humans(homo sapiens) worshipped anything.
It could have been a later invention, the burying of dead people didn’t start with the first humans.

As you said, Since the first humans invented their own thing to worship, why don’t we also invent our idols to worship?

Different humans from different areas of earth had something they were worshipping, they did not pass it down to “human race”.
So from the start there would have been various deities worshipped. Sango worshippers worship their own, ogun worshippers do their own even though they are in the same tribe. They would have been polytheist from start!

if there are no gods there are no kings.
They use gods and religion for control.

Because first humans were worshipping deities doesn’t mean we should also do, there are so many things that they do that we don’t do now. Why is the deity worshipping the only one we want to emulate?

Early humans were illiterate and uneducated, they were inventing deities out of ignorance. Some even said their god is the one that causes rain and thunder. If we take a trip back to the first humans with all our gadgets and modern inventions, they will call us god too and they’ll also have their “cogent reasons”.
What these ancestors knew then is not up to what we know now in 21st century, so you think if they have the knowledge we have now they would have invented deities?

WE ARE MORE ADVANCED THAT THEM.

You’ve so many hasty generalisation in what you saying.

Maynman:

We also don’t know for sure if the first humans(homo sapiens) worshipped anything.
It could have been a later invention, the burying of dead people didn’t start with the first humans.

As you said, Since the first humans invented their own thing to worship, why don’t we also invent our idols to worship?

Different humans from different areas of earth had something they were worshipping, they did not pass it down to “human race”.

if there are no gods there are no kings.
They use gods and religion for control.

Because first humans were worshipping deities doesn’t mean we should also do, there are so many things that they do that we don’t do now. Why is the deity worshipping the only one we want to emulate?

You’ve so many hasty generalisation in what you saying.

No, that's not my point. Let me come more elaborately.

I'm using logic to see why humans are practicing religion.

So, I was trying to find the answer from the first humans who ever existed.

Logically speaking, if the first humans worshipped nothing, that's because they saw nothing to worship or better still, they saw nothing worthy of being worshipped. Therefore, Atheism would be the order of the day, not theism.

If atheism was handed down by the first humans, then, it would be very difficult for anyone in any generation to invent religion. It wouldn't be easy at all to force people to worship something that they know does not exist.

I think you're getting my drift. Atheism wasn't the root, theism is. Theism therefore couldn't have been ab invention. Whatsoever is the root, whether theism or atheism wouldn't be an invention because those first humans would know exactly why they were doing what they were doing. This EXACT knowledge is lost on us, hence, we need education about the roots.
The roots carries originality. Things at the roots would be as is. Whatever came afterwards is an invention.

If religion was in our roots, then, the first humans knew what they were worshipping. They probably even saw at the time what they worshipped. If Atheism was in our roots, then, the first humans knew there's nothing to worship. There'll be no need for anyone to even invent religion. All of us would be Atheists, and the concept of religion would then be alien to us. We'll see anyone who follows that path as a fool. But, strikingly, the reverse is the case. Religion has been in the roots, atheism came later. We might have lost the very import of the entire religious concept of the first humans but they evidently worshipped something or someone they knew about.
Furthermore, all rekigons have deferring concepts and practices but they have amazing comon grounds.
The common ground is in something or someone beyond the sky. All or at least most theists believe that there's an all powerful being or beings somewhere beyond the sky. This concept has survived many generations.
Normally, we should just have seen the sky as it is without reading any other meanings to it. But the human mind has been shaped to conform to that ideology until you grow to question it.
This ideology is in itself a pointer. Why look up? And, you see, this ideology is as old as religion itself. It wasn't an invention. And, I believe the first humans have a clear understanding of these things before handling down religion to the entire human race.
If Atheism is the root, then, we wouldn't even be talking about these issue today. Whatever was in the root carries some evidences along with it.

FxMasterz:


No, that's not my point. Let me come more elaborately.

I'm using logic to see why humans are practicing religion.

So, I was trying to find the answer from the first humans who ever existed.

Logically speaking, if the first humans worshipped nothing, that's because they saw nothing to worship or better still, they saw nothing worthy of being worshipped. Therefore, Atheism would be the order of the day, not theism.

If atheism was handed down by the first humans, then, it would be very difficult for anyone in any generation to invent religion. It wouldn't be easy at all to force people to worship something that they know does not exist.

I think you're getting my drift. Atheism wasn't the root, theism is. Theism therefore couldn't have been ab invention. Whatsoever is the root, whether theism or atheism wouldn't be an invention because those first humans would know exactly why they were doing what they were doing. This EXACT knowledge is lost on us, hence, we need education about the roots.
The roots carries originality. Things at the roots would be as is. Whatever came afterwards is an invention.

If religion was in our roots, then, the first humans knew what they were worshipping. They probably even saw at the time what they worshipped. If Atheism was in our roots, then, the first humans knew there's nothing to worship. There'll be no need for anyone to even invent religion. All of us would be Atheists, and the concept of religion would then be alien to us. We'll see anyone who follows that path as a fool. But, strikingly, the reverse is the case. Religion has been in the roots, atheism came later. We might have lost the very import of the entire religious concept of the first humans but they evidently worshipped something or someone they knew about.
Furthermore, all rekigons have deferring concepts and practices but they have amazing comon grounds.
The common ground is in something or someone beyond the sky. All or at least most theists believe that there's an all powerful being or beings somewhere beyond the sky. This concept has survived many generations.
Normally, we should just have seen the sky as it is without reading any other meanings to it. But the human mind has been shaped to conform to that ideology until you grow to question it.
This ideology is in itself a pointer. Why look up? And, you see, this ideology is as old as religion itself. It wasn't an invention. And, I believe the first humans have a clear understanding of these things before handling down religion to the entire human race.
If Atheism is the root, then, we wouldn't even be talking about these issue today. Whatever was in the root carries some evidences along with it.

Religion has nothing to do with gods. Look up the origin of the word.
The first humans might have worshipped themselves as subjects do to their kings, how does that concern theism?

Please know the definition of theism and atheism.

FxMasterz:


Bro, religion dates far into man's distant past. The first humans have a better understanding of these things than we whose religious histories have been majorly lost, and what we now call religion generally is a metamorphosis.

First, we need to understand that no one invented religion. It was actually in our roots. The first ancestors worshiped something or someone. Then, several generations afterwards, that something or someone became less known since everything at the time was passed down through oral history.

Then cane a generation that does not know what to worship but know they must worship something or someone as their fathers did, resulting in a mutiplicity of gods as everyone worships what he seems fit.

Generations later, some people are asking 'Is there really a God? Is there really an Afterlife?' if we have traceable records, I'm 100% certain we'll find the first Atheist who ever lived. This means the human race didn't take off in Atheism and then plunged itself into religion as we have it today. The Agnostics are themselves confused because they don't know what to believe.

The whole argument would have been easier if we have ancient records of things from the earliest man but the very lack of this is the reason why we all have disagreements.

However, even if such ancient records exist, many would still doubt such records. There are those who'll call them Fabrications. And of course, there are those unscrupulous elements who'll try to do mischievous forgeries and scripts for some personal gains at the expense of others.

Logically looking at it all, the begining wasn't atheism. That's fact. The first humans were theists. That should point us to some truths. They evidently were theists because they knew or even saw what they worshipped.
They also knew why they were worshipping him, it or them. They've passed the concept down to the entire human race who have now lost the identity of what was worshipped, and now the confusion.

Except we can prove that Atheism was the first thing humans ever did before veering into religion, we cannot safely void this kind of reasoning.

How do you know the first humans were theists?

Maynman:

Religion has nothing to do with gods. Look up the origin of the word.
The first humans might have worshipped themselves as subjects do to their kings, how does that concern theism?

Please know the definition of theism and atheism.

You're still talking in terms of what the first humans might have done.
This is not about theism or atheism right now. This is about what produced what we have today. We're talking about the roots and its relevance to the present to make deductions. The first question to ask is 'Why do we have religion? why not Atheism?' And then, we look into the roots to find answers. The first humans couldn't have been worshipping themselves. If they did, from whence came the conceit of a supreme being beyond the blues? Or a supposed mighty Creator of the universe?

LordReed:


How do you know the first humans were theists?

I never said they were. I was using logic to find out what they could have been because that points us to truths derived from the roots.

FxMasterz:


You're still talking in terms of what the first humans might have done.
This is not about theism or atheism right now. This is about what produced what we have today. We're talking about the roots and its relevance to the present to make deductions. The first question to ask is 'Why do we have religion? why not Atheism?' And then, we look into the roots to find answers. The first humans couldn't have been worshipping themselves. If they did, from whence came the conceit of a supreme being beyond the blues? Or a supposed mighty Creator of the universe?

Atheism is one of the answer to theism.
The difference between Atheism and theism is A. A in greek means Without.
If there is no theism there’s no A’theism.

Why can’t the first humans worship themselves among themselves? We have people that worship animals.

Where did you read this from “ supreme being beyond the blues? Or a supposed mighty Creator of the universe?” maybe it was there that it was conceited from.