striktlymi:

I am the last person to pressure anyone to belong anywhere. I am only concerned that he allows himself be tossed about or so it seems. When Uyi came back to Christianity I asked him specifically if he has gone past what made him leave in the first place. It's obvious that he hasn't.

My words may seem uncharitable but being a man is more about knowing who you are, what you want, having a firm conviction of your beliefs and sticking to it.

This is not saying peeps don't make mistakes in terms of what they believe in but when the mistake is realised, we pick ourselves up and move forward without looking back.

Uyi's case is just like a student who changes an answer to a question in an exam more than two times.

UyiIredia:

No. God is just.



Actually it happens to a variety of people spanning different religions. You may read up on near-death experiences for instance. Hindus have had theirs as Christians too, even atheists.




That is up to the person. In some cases they do. Believe me when I say that my Dad slept as a pagan and woke up the next day as a Christian after dreaming of heaven and Jesus Christ who showed it to him. Some don't eg my grandfather, who despite prayers and sermons didn't convert since nothing of that sort happened to him.


I have given them as honestly as I can.

UyiIredia: I only changed the answer twice, first a Christian, then a deist and back to being Christian. Time will tell whether I'll stick or slack.

ihedinobi2:
To avoid splitting hairs I won't talk about whether I accused you of anything or not. Rather, let's go straight to the heart of the matter.

I asked you in a straightforward manner what made you say what you said. You promptly provided an authority. What exactly was the provision of an authority supposed to accomplish?

I was asking exactly why you held an opinion and you essentially told me "because this here dude says..." Am I supposed to ask the dude to defend your opinion after that? Or are you expecting me to be cowed by the dude and end my questioning because you called him?

Kay17:

The real deal is if you are satisfied that religions are superstitions. The link was merely to show it was not an assumption I cooked up in my head (since that was the accusation)

ihedinobi2:
Why would I be? If I provided an authority that said that religions are not would you be satisfied that they're not?

UyiIredia: I only changed the answer twice, first a Christian, then a deist and back to being Christian. Time will tell whether I'll stick or slack.

Kay17:

Please do.

ihedinobi2:
Please do what?

ihedinobi2:
Why would I be? If I provided an authority that said that religions are not would you be satisfied that they're not?

ihedinobi2: @texanomaly

I'm perfectly aware of what I said, tex, thank you. Since you've taken it up, was that an offer? Or was Kay17 attempting to wriggle out of a tight spot by pretending to an offer?

texanomaly: probably setting you up for something.

texanomaly: *sighs*

Can't a girl have some fun? I like watching Kay17 work.

ihedinobi2:
Good. S/he was. It's Kay17's MO. There're few others as adept at muddying waters as s/he is.

The question I asked was simple. What made Kay17 think what s/he thought? And s/he directed me straight to a Wikipedia article. What I asked for was an argument, some cogent explanation for his/her persuasion. You do not answer that with an appeal to authority. That move is nonsense except to people who aren't given to argument. An authority does not explain why anybody thinks what they think. It only provides information people can use to form their own opinions. An appeal to authority when one is asked to explain one's opinion is tantamount to saying that one does not think for one's own self.

But it is also a slick move. If the opponent does not accept the authority, they appear obstinate and unwilling to be corrected. And that is all a dishonest debater needs to sway a sympathetic audience. The appearance is all that matters. But was there anything being corrected just then?

Now I asked Kay what I was supposed to do with the authority? Was it supposed to tell me what Kay really thinks? Kay immediately attempts obfuscation by making it seem exactly like I'm being obstinate by asking if I was satisfied that religions are superstitions?

Why would I be indeed? I had just asked him/her to tell me why s/he thinks that they are and he had given no answer. So I asked if s/he would be satisfied if I did the same? A simple question that demands a simple answer. Kay attempts another underhanded move by asking me to go on and provide an authority. Why should I? The question was essentially why an authority was useful in answering my question in the first place.

So, all Kay has done is mess around and try to muddy up everything. It does good to try to remember that when you discuss across philosophical persuasions, people's intentions are not necessarily honest or praiseworthy. Jesus warned us to remember that we are being sent into the world as sheep among wolves. Assuming that every unbeliever is merely a lost soul who does not know the love of God has wrecked and is wrecking many a believer even right here on Nairaland. That sympathy many of us are dousing ourselves with in bucketfuls has continued to result in many of us breaking the Scriptures.

What good has it done us? How many of these "lost souls" we feel so much pity for has turned to Christ because of our pity and our speed to defend them against "overzealous" Christians? Have we not found ourselves increasingly questioning the Scriptures and finally denying them altogether? Has our sympathy not tended to result in more of us leaving Christ rather than bringing lost sheep in? Not meaning to sermonize to you, Tex, this is just something that's been weighing on me and that I have finally found expression for.

Let Kay17 come and show exactly why religions are superstitious beyond what wikipedia says. After all, I doubt very much that s/he would consider the Bible's own authority as equally compelling.

Kay17:

Such an unfair assessment. You succeeded in creating a devil out of nothing (as Christians typically do.) The wikipedia article reflected my thoughts o superstitions and religions; and by answering your accusation that I developed the idea all religions as superstitions as unfounded assumption, I found the wikipedia article relevant. Rather than address and repute what the article said, you 'run' around chasing ghosts! the ball is in your court, why do you think religions especially Christianity isn't a superstition? ?

ihedinobi2:
Do you know what an accusation is?

I don't care what an article says, Kay17. Articulate your own arguments. Or are you incapable of original thought?

sonOfLucifer: @mizmycoli this is religion section. We login to fight here. We desecrate holy temples, exhaust the spirits of reason and logic with tired arguments. We slay all who believe in the other. Satanists, agnostics, paganatheists, confusians, atheists, catholics, bornagainsts, we dont care. We fight. That's all we know.

And Lucifer help us, if the day ever comes when we all live in peace, when satanists share holy communion with the christians at the lord's table, when agnostics finally pick a side, when pagans and muslims share a glass of wine......

Kay17:

I ADOPT THE CONTENTS OF THE ARTICLE! So what do you have to say in the contrary?!

sonOfLucifer: @mizmycoli this is religion section. We login to fight here. We desecrate holy temples, exhaust the spirits of reason and logic with tired arguments. We slay all who believe in the other. Satanists, agnostics, paganatheists, confusians, atheists, catholics, bornagainsts, we dont care. We fight. That's all we know.

And Lucifer help us, if the day ever comes when we all live in peace, when satanists share holy communion with the christians at the lord's table, when agnostics finally pick a side, when pagans and muslims share a glass of wine......

ihedinobi2:
Alright. I'll be back later for it.

Macelliot:
Can Satanists eat the Holy Body of CHRIST?

Kay17:

Really?!

Macelliot:
Do You believe that can Happen.
That will only happen when all Creations Satanists, agnostics, paganatheists, confusians, atheists, catholics, bornagainsts, Lucifer, Demons, living things, non-living things returns in submission to the Holy, Eternal Living Almighty Lord God the FATHER and CREATOR of All things.

masonkz:

So I guess it's all subjective then, or maybe everyone should wait for the day they have such dreams too.

What I fail to understand is why billions of Asians/Indians haven't had these revelations that Christians in other parts of the world are having. or maybe it's just ok if a good proportion of the world would be burning in hell, since they never knew the Christian God.

oh well

striktlymi:

Like I mentioned in your come back thread, have you gone past what made you leave Christianity?

Mee234:
Changing answer to a single question only mean you are not sure. You should choose one after all it is still "choose ye this day". Only you need to make up your and choose. Once you make up your mind about your answer, you validate and your point of reference should be those who answer this same question in the past and the text they are using.

UyiIredia: If I didn't do you think what I experienced would have been enough to change my mind? I find this question insulting. You trivialize my change of mind whether you intend to or not. I recall stating that there where things I wouldn't state because they are personal (that includes the soul-searching I did),

striktlymi:

...and you don't consider your second post insulting to your person, especially when it gives the impression that you are still confused?

UyiIredia: One wonders if you actually apply this to your spending.