The Noetic Interview: Questions On Humanity And The Quality Of Goodness

1. You FALSELY claimed that the word "heaven" in that verse refered to the abode of God. . . .  , yet u fail to contextually explore the meaning of that word in greek or hebrew like u claimed. . . . .what does that tell?

2. the 50 men as prophets still went to search for Elijah simply for the same reasons I stated in my initial post. . .did u bother to read it?  

3. u fixed a date to the era of Elijah but could not fix a date to the events of 2 chronicles. . . . . .what EXACTLY is your point?  

4. Yes there are two jehorams. . . . .  .did i not connect the jehoram in question to Elijah?. . . . .did u read my post at all?


I added it on examining  the link u presented. I am honest enough to admit my err. .  .I dont appreciate u shamelessly copying from websites, providing sources but not proffering analyses. . . . .am I debating with a website? 

From what i understand according to the piece,the old man would be judge according to his deeds and not why he dnt accept jesus christ as lord and personal saviour,and the only way the old man can also excape hell is by not associating partner with GOD,just like the way ABRAHAM was to GOD

I'm surprised that Ifa practitioners don't have a front seat in hell too.  Why are they in the back row?  It seems that even in the afterworld as in this world all things african must just dey for back sha.  Why now?  It's not fair. 

It is not the shareholder part that is doing me, it is the front row seat.  How come the front row is only reserved for Buddhists and Atheists and muslims?  Why them?

You didn't even include Satanists.  I don't think Ogaga4luv would be content to sit at the back. 

In addition to what Deep Sight has said, didn't God Himself state that He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy, and He will have compassion on whom He will have compassion? (Rom 9:13-16).  Even though it has been expressly stated in John 14:6 that Jesus is the only way, can we not conclude based on the Romans text that God can always use His discretion from time to time?  God is not a programmed being, is He?

It's just like in the court of law.  Even though there are clearly spelt-out consequences for every offence in the constitution, we still see lawyers debate and present their points from different angles, and the judge ultimately uses his discretionary powers to pass judgement.  A student-lawyer friend of mine always says that in law, the man isn't guilty if the mind is not gulilty.

Looking at it from another angle, could John 14:6 really mean that, no one comes to the father expect by living a life which Jesus expects of everyone - a life of love, a life of doing good always?  Would that not still be the same as "accepting Him"?

I originally thought Noetic only reserved that kind of language for atheists and muslims.  I didn't know he addressed other christians like that too.  I guess that as long as you so much as ask a question about his inventions you are going to feel the scathing force of his rhetoric. 

Deep sight,

I appreciate you style of writing and your vast knowledge, it shows you have read extensively and deeply. Your introductory style is strikingly similar to Lobsang Rampa. I suspect he has some influence on your views and writing style, please correct me if i am wrong. I used to be a fan until i found so many inconsistencies in his postulations.

Anyway i think you will make a good author.  

Noetic, are you running away?

I agree. this debate doesn't seem "healthy" enough for noetic.

I dont remember mentioning the bolded anywhere in my post. Accepting/rejecting the gospel is at the discretion of the listener. This debate has not in any way addressed that rationality of the gospel. . . . . .I will disregard the above as a helpless rant.


1. Before we proceed we need to have a substantial and acceptable definition of what it means to be morally upright? ,  . . . . . dont use vague words, they are very misleading considering your dogmas. . . let me give u a simple definition, if u disagree with mine, dont bother to tell me why, just define urs.

moral uprightness refers to . . . ,  . , abiding by Godly principles instigated by convictions in the form of one's conscience regardless of any religion.
I will answer your concerns based on the above definition.

2. This gospel is a message and the recipient has two simple options, either to receive or reject it. The basis of the recipient receiving it is irrelevant, but if we must debate it, it necessarily does not have to be in form of a dogma. . . . .it varies from person to person. It is simply a matter of choice to believe or disbelieve. . . . the liberty for enquiries (physical or spiritual) remains the prerogative of the recipient of the message of the gospel.

In your analyses above the guy who never heard of the gospel . . .did not get to hear of it simply because there were no available vessels to transport the gospel to him. The definition of morality as above places him on the same pedestal before the throne of Judgement with anyone who knows Christ . . . . .the only difference is that he never had the opportunity to have the knowledge of Christ while here on earth.
By the above definition, his only exemption was the knowledge of Christ he never had. . . .As a JUST man by the works of his hands, he is considered righteous. he was NOT aware of the existence of eternity, the manifestation of the Son of God or the offer of salvation. . . . he is judged simply based on the knowledge of morality as depicted in his conscience/convictions.

The man who hears of the gospel. . .simply made a choice. He excercised his choice and chose to disbelieve the gospel. Every responsible man should learn to live by the consequences of his inactions. why would a man who rejected Jesus want to go to the heaven of Jesus?. . . . .is such a man not an hypocrite.

3. God's mercy is depicted in His ability to save a man who had no knowledge of Jesus on earth from eternal damnation.
God's judgement is depicted in ensuring that the man who rejected Jesus faces the consequences of his inactions. . . . . .this is not rocket science. . . .or is it? 

4. would Jesus have reasoned in this fashion? . . . .Jesus did not have to reason. . that was the essential purpose He came.
the 10 commandments states that we LOVE God and have none before him. . . .then love our neighbours as ourselves. . . Jesus also said that these are the greatest commandments.
Bear in mind that Jesus also asserted that He is the ONLY WAY to eternity.

In light of the above, it is pertinent to state that loving God is paramount before loving your neighbour. can u love God without knowing God? Jesus said He is God's manifestation in human form, can u then be a buddhist, satanist, deist, muslim or atheist ,  . .who has rejected the divinity of Jesus and then claim to love God or have love in them? . . .  .sounds like HYPOCRISY and IGNORANCE to me.

I understand that u might have a completely different understanding of LOVE. . . . .but the xtian love is centred around Jesus.


1. The man in your example, died before the essentials of the gospel were read out to him. He also did not get to either reject or accept Jesus before he died. . .so your assumptions here are largely unfounded.

2. His place in eternity has been covered on this thread . .  .have u been reading at all? 

3. when a man hears the gospel. . .he makes a choice. . . .he subsequently faces the consequences of that choice.


Stop using ambiguous and imported words to support an assertion u are yet to state. . . .tell me. . . . .what does it mean to be righteous outside christianity?


your concerns have been addressed in post #26

u have made this a debate and not an interview. . .so in your next post dont ask me blanket questions. ,    .present analyses to support whatever your claims are.

I willingly obliged this "interview" cos I saw his post like an enquiry form a point of quandary. . . . . .that opinion has not changed and he has not asked or said anything to provoke thoughts.

If however u think there is an underlying importance or message in his post that I am missing. . . .please feel free to post such here and educate my ignorance.
As for the thread u linked here. .  .I had rather stay out of it.

@Noetic
Kindly answer this question: How do you show love to God whom you can't see? And whilst you are it kindly meditate over the passage below which deepsight spoke off earlier. Please read it in proper context. What does it really say?

 Matthew 25:31-40:

The Final Judgment
   31 “But when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit upon his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered in his presence, and he will separate the people as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will place the sheep at his right hand and the goats at his left.
   34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. 36 I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me.’
   37 “Then these righteous ones will reply, ‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 Or a stranger and show you hospitality? Or naked and give you clothing? 39 When did we ever see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
   40 “And the King will say, ‘I tell you the truth, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were doing it to me!’

This is the same old story u and others have repeated on several threads on nairaland. what does the christian faith consist of? do u know what it means to be a christian? what is christianity centred around? . . . . , Dont come up with postulations u cannot support.

This is disturbing. . . .simply because u are yrt to tell us what u understand by christianity and what part of my posts u disagree with. Take the bull by the horn and state what part of my analysis u disagree with. . . cos I dont even know your position on these issues. . . .why dont u profer your "deep" insight and analyses on the subject of christianity?

1. How can u live a life of Christ without knowing Christ? how can u have the love of Christ without loving God?
I have never defined Christianity to simply involve giving ones life to Christ. It is important a person is saved but becoming the Son of God is a very continuos process which involves the SPIRIT of God.
a. how can u have the spirit of God,  . without the knowledge of Christ salvation?
b. what does religious dogmatism entail? can a person be saved even if such rejects the gospel of Jesus Christ? how? . . .and where did u get that from?

2. I would like u to open a new thread to educate me on how shallow my understanding of christianity is.


1. why do u enjoy making ridiculous assertions? . . .  .first u claimed that deepSight has provoked my thoughts. . .I asked u to tell me of  any insightful message in his post I missed,  .u declined. Now u are asserting that I stayed out your thread cos of dogmatism. . . .this is 

. u asked that all beliefs be checked. . . . .by what yardstick?
by what yard stick did u come to the conclusion that trinity is unbiblical? . .  . . . .your penchant claim that all others are not true Christians except u is ridiculous. are u a treu christian?. . .do u know that the word "christian" is composed from the word "Christ"?. . .how can anyone deny the salvation of the lamb and then claim to follow him?. . . this is a STRANGE gospel.

@Noetic
My answer can be found in James 1:27 which says : Pure and undefiled religion [worship] in the sight of God is to take care of widows and orphans in their affliction and to keep your self from being corrupted by the world.

Now let's have your answer and stop answering questions with questions.

Let's not forget the full context of that verse.  Cornelius was a gentile, a roman whose prayers, kindness and service to the poor went up to God as a memorial.  I don't think he had an knowledge of christian or even jewish theology at this point. 

not quite true.