How would you describe the dynamics of the religion section at present. For me I see it as something like this:

The Atheists are at the top of the pile, the tyrannosaurus Rex of the predator food chain.

They feed mainly on Christians. Some Christians try to fight back but usually have their efforts degenerate into personal insults.

The greater part of the christians look further down the food chain to get own back. They pick on Muslims and the dodgy practices of Muhamad and his ilk. Luckily for them this is a cyber world otherwise we'd be burying christians by the truckload. Many threads get locked because though the initiators of these threads can hide the owner of the website cannot hide. For his protection and self preservation he has to locked up many threads.

Then the christians (pentecostals esp.) also pick on denominations of christians other than their own. The catholics especially. Now, of all the groups, I have a fond place for the catholics. They are the only ones that don't go around provoking arguments from others. Perhaps they've already done it to death in their history etc so they're just chilling for now. CAtholics start their own threads and stay there, supporting each other. A handful of them will respond to attacks from the pentecostals etc.

The Catholics have an advantage over the protestants due to the fact that protestantism is derivative of Catholicism anyway. Protestants need to be selective about what parts of catholicism they attack or they'll find that they are attacking themselves.

Then you have the renegades. The guerillas. They jump in at any point and there's no telling who they'll be sniping at.

. . . talking about sniping, a certain M_Nwankwo springs to mind. Sometimes I think he is not around anymore then out of the blue he'll just come in with one little post and then disappear again.

Another sniper would be Chris Benogor. Only that he is not really a sniper (as in one shot sniper) but he'll come in with a furious volley of machine gun fire and then disappear again.

But generally I would say the overall tone of this forum has been set by the atheists. Most especially by a certain mr Huxley the second, the first or T Paine. His dominance is due really to a relentless, tireless avalanche of threads denouncing religion. He is Atheism's equivalent to the Apostle Paul in Christianity.

It is Huxley2, Huxley, Tpaine and Therationa. The Four Persons in one "God".

Pastor AIO:

But generally I would say the overall tone of this forum has been set by the atheists. Most especially by a certain mr Huxley the second, the first or T Paine. His dominance is due really to a relentless, tireless avalanche of threads denouncing religion. He is Atheism's equivalent to the Apostle Paul in Christianity.

Yes, I will be the first to admit that I have posted an "avalanche" of threads denoucing religions, and to be truthful, I have really enjoyed sparring with some of the theists on the forum, particularly yourself, Pastor, with whom I have had a much higher level of debate than with the likes of Davidylan, Pilgrim, Neotic, et al who have been largely dishonest and disingenious.

My goals have been twofold: 1) Expose religion for the falsehood and danger it is 2) Bring rationalism and atheism out in the open and encourage more people so inclined to engage in the intellectual cleansing of their community.

I would be lying if I say I have not learned from people here. The truth is that I have learned a great deal, and I hope people have also learned from my contributions. But the sad fact is that only a certain kind of person will have learned and be willing to reason out some of the contents of my posts. The others are hopelessly delusional and irretrievably wedded to their superstitions.

huxley2:

My goals have been twofold: 1) Expose religion for the falsehood and danger it is 2) Bring rationalism and atheism out in the open and encourage more people so inclined to engage in the intellectual cleansing of their community.

And you've found me, and will continue to find me to be an obstacle in your first goal. I don't think religion is a falsehood and a danger and I've sought to expose this to you. I don't know the extent of my success, or if I have any success at all. In fact I don't care. It is enough for me that we have the public debates.

On your second goal too I have sought to expose what you claim as rationalism to be something quite contrary to it. However I always encourage the expression of various ideologies and opinions and I quite dislike the manner in which people use religion to bully each other in Nigeria.

The way it is practiced today,i am afraid it is a great danger and a great falsehood.It has,is and always will be a tool for arresting human evolution both spiritual and intellectual.A very cynical tool at that.

Pastor AIO:

And you've found me, and will continue to find me to be an obstacle in your first goal. I don't think religion is a falsehood and a danger and I've sought to expose this to you. I don't know the extent of my success,

Pastor AIO:

And you've found me, and will continue to find me to be an obstacle in your first goal. I don't think religion is a falsehood and a danger and I've sought to expose this to you. I don't know the extent of my success, or if I have any success at all. In fact I don't care. It is enough for me that we have the public debates.

On your second goal too I have sought to expose what you claim as rationalism to be something quite contrary to it. However I always encourage the expression of various ideologies and opinions and I quite dislike the manner in which people use religion to bully each other in Nigeria.

Interesting. You know there are hundreds of different religions on the planet:

1) All there all true? In what aspects of reality are they true?

2) Which of these religions "revealed" the facts of human origins in Africa, for example?

Nice sniper abi lol

bump

Pastor AIO..you have to update the OP the actors have changed..

I lovvvvit!!!

[size=20pt]The Atheists are at the top of the pile, the tyrannosaurus Rex of the predator food chain.[/size]

They feed mainly on Christians. Some Christians try to fight back but usually have their efforts degenerate into personal insults.

The greater part of the christians look further down the food chain to get own back. They pick on Muslims and the dodgy practices of Muhamad and his ilk.

[size=20pt]Luckily for them this is a cyber world otherwise we'd be burying christians by the truckload.[/size]

Many threads get locked because though the initiators of these threads can hide the owner of the website cannot hide. For his protection and self preservation he has to locked up many threads.

Gbam! A-P-O-C-A-L-Y-P-T-O!!!
Can't wait to!!!
May they keep facing the harassments they try to perpetrate on others.
I never HATED CHRISTIANS till I encountered them on the www!
Them phocking arzzze BULLIES. . . Mtcheeeeeeeeeeeeeeew!!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhzlqpOxs7k&feature=related


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiJjow6AJEM&feature=relmfu

Pastor AIO:
The greater part of the christians look further down the food chain to get own back. They pick on Muslims and the dodgy practices of Muhamad and his ilk. Luckily for them this is a cyber world otherwise we'd be burying christians by the truckload. Many threads get locked because though the initiators of these threads can hide the owner of the website cannot hide. For his protection and self preservation he has to locked up many threads.

LOL!

So e don tay Xtians start to dey lose? Eh ya..

@OP
what do we expect when so called christians (you inclusive) attack other christians in the face of the heathen, instead of preaching to the heathen.

Joagbaje: @OP
what do we expect when so called christians (you inclusive) attack other christians in the face of the heathen, instead of preaching to the heathen.

I will question things that other christians say, and I will criticise, however I do not consider what I do to be an attack. The purpose is to edify. My loyalty is to the Truth and if you feel that the truth is paining you then you need to question yourself, not question me.

Pastor AIO:

I will question things that other christians say, and I will criticise, however I do not consider what I do to be an attack. The purpose is to edify. My loyalty is to the Truth and if you feel that the truth is paining you then you need to question yourself, not question me.

If I may say, recent experiences of mine have informed me that our loyalty to the Truth must be also extended to Grace. We must allow for weakness and failure. Had Jesus not done the same, where would we be?

(edit: in the most part, I agree with you though)

Ihedinobi:

If I may say, recent experiences of mine have informed me that our loyalty to the Truth must be also extended to Grace. We must allow for weakness and failure. Had Jesus not done the same, where would we be?

What does this mean in plain english?

plaetton:

What does this mean in plain english?

That Christians are loyal to both Truth and Grace.

Ihedinobi:

That Christians are loyal to both Truth and Grace.

Can they be seperate? Shouldn't grace, by its very nature, be truth personified?

How can you have truth and something else other than truth together? The only thing other than truth is non-truth or falsehood. Not so?

Ihedinobi:

If I may say, recent experiences of mine have informed me that our loyalty to the Truth must be also extended to Grace. We must allow for weakness and failure. Had Jesus not done the same, where would we be?

(edit: in the most part, I agree with you though)

I very much agree with you but we also need to be aware of certain tendencies in religion. If we all acknowledge our flaws and make sincere attempts to grow and edify ourselves then we can support and encourage each other in this.

If however the role of religion in someone's life is not edification but rather if it functions to fulfil a need for tribal identification or if it serves to fuel a need to feel superior or to foster a US vs THEM mentality then I cannot be in support of such activity. It would be unfair of me to extend any sort of amnesty to that kind of affair.

Pastor AIO:

I very much agree with you but we also need to be aware of certain tendencies in religion. If we all acknowledge our flaws and make sincere attempts to grow and edify ourselves then we can support and encourage each other in this.

If however the role of religion in someone's life is not edification but rather if it functions to fulfil a need for tribal identification or if it serves to fuel a need to feel superior or to foster a US vs THEM mentality then I cannot be in support of such activity. It would be unfair of me to extend any sort of amnesty to that kind of affair.

I'm in full agreement with your stand. Jesus Himself said to His disciples when they sought permission to forbid a man who was not of their own number from carrying on ministry in His Name that "they who are not against us are for us." It's one reason that I have come to hate being prevailed upon to debate with fellow Christians. I prefer to ask questions about things I am either uncomfortable with or in disagreement with. I have found that in doing so, I learn something more, something better and either I abandon a position that proves false or I appreciate more one that proves true.

plaetton:

Can they be seperate? Shouldn't grace, by its very nature, be truth personified?

How can you have truth and something else other than truth together? The only thing other than truth is non-truth or falsehood. Not so?

Grace is not the opposite of Truth. Even though Jesus is Himself both of them, Grace is neither the opposite of nor the same thing as Truth.

While Truth may be regarded as, say, Reality, Grace is Condition. Truth bare of Grace destroys. It is merciless in annihilating falsehood. In the presence of Light which is actually what Truth is, all that is in darkness is exposed and consumed.

Grace, however, "shields". It protects. It helps. Its work is to deliver the erring from their error. If Grace were lacking, Truth would destroy error along with the erring. But with Grace, error is eliminated and the erring delivered.

So, the sum is Grace and Truth operate together to deliver the erring from their error and destroy that error forever so that the erring never err again. That is actually the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Ihedinobi:

Grace is not the opposite of Truth. Even though Jesus is Himself both of them, Grace is neither the opposite of nor the same thing as Truth.

While Truth may be regarded as, say, Reality, Grace is Condition. Truth bare of Grace destroys. It is merciless in annihilating falsehood. In the presence of Light which is actually what Truth is, all that is in darkness is exposed and consumed.

Grace, however, "shields". It protects. It helps. Its work is to deliver the erring from their error. If Grace were lacking, Truth would destroy error along with the erring. But with Grace, error is eliminated and the erring delivered.

So, the sum is Grace and Truth operate together to deliver the erring from their error and destroy that error forever so that the erring never err again. That is actually the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Lord have mercy! I have to give you credit.
You christians have a way of pulling rabbits out of the hat.
So bare truth is too dangerous, it has to be tempered with grace? So grace(whatever it means) lie somewhere between truth and falsehood?
That is a new one for me o.

plaetton:
So grace(whatever it means) lie somewhere between truth and falsehood?
That is a new one for me o.

For Ihedinobi and friends, Grace means unmerited divine assistance given humans for their regeneration or sanctification.

For other people, grace means absolutely nothing or "bla bla bla god loves me bla bla bla".

By god's grace you will understand.

Ihedinobi:
While Truth may be regarded as, say, Reality, Grace is Condition. Truth bare of Grace destroys. It is merciless in annihilating falsehood. In the presence of Light which is actually what Truth is, all that is in darkness is exposed and consumed.
Grace, however, "shields". It protects. It helps. Its work is to deliver the erring from their error. If Grace were lacking, Truth would destroy error along with the erring. But with Grace, error is eliminated and the erring delivered.

So, the sum is Grace and Truth operate together to deliver the erring from their error and destroy that error forever so that the erring never err again. That is actually the Gospel of Jesus Christ

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I just love mental gymnastics that tie you up in knots.

Meanwhile the "erring continue to err" and they all blame the erring on the "god of this world". The grace of jesus or his blood can't seem to stop the erring from erring and satan aka 'the god of this world" continue to enable the erring. But soon, jesus will come riding down on his unicorn and slay the seven headed dragon who ate the angel with the head of four animals.

Martian:

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I just love mental gymnastics that tie you up in knots.

Meanwhile the "erring continue to err" and they all blame the erring on the "god of this world". The grace of jesus or his blood can't seem to stop the erring from erring and satan aka 'the god of this world" continue to enable the erring. But soon, jesus will come riding down on his unicorn and slay the seven headed dragon who ate the angel with the head of four animals.

Yup. That sums it all up.
Repeat after me...,Praise the lord.

plaetton:

Yup. That sums it all up.
Repeat after me...,Praise the lord.

halleluyah. Somebody Sreaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!!

Ihedinobi:

Grace is not the opposite of Truth. Even though Jesus is Himself both of them, Grace is neither the opposite of nor the same thing as Truth.

While Truth may be regarded as, say, Reality, Grace is Condition. Truth bare of Grace destroys. It is merciless in annihilating falsehood. In the presence of Light which is actually what Truth is, all that is in darkness is exposed and consumed.

Grace, however, "shields". It protects. It helps. Its work is to deliver the erring from their error. If Grace were lacking, Truth would destroy error along with the erring. But with Grace, error is eliminated and the erring delivered.

So, the sum is Grace and Truth operate together to deliver the erring from their error and destroy that error forever so that the erring never err again. That is actually the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is very interesting. I might have got you wrong, Ihedinobi, but I have an understanding of what you are saying that is very fascinating. Whether what I understand is what you are actually trying to say we will see.

I understand Truth to be simply what is the case. Truth has Form (whether or not we can actually grasp its form is another matter). Truth determines What is and what the relationship is between the various things that exist.


Relationship is a key word. I suspect that a more accurate word for what you were trying to say would be Justice. Justice is itself not too far from Truth. Justice is the right relationship between things and events. 2 Events. Hard work. Receipt of wages.
One should follow on from the other, and that would be an appropriate relationship. A man works hard for 9 hours. At the end of the day he receives his wages. That is fair, that is just.

If after all the hard word he is deprived of the wages and sent away emptyhanded then an INjustice has been committed. The relationship between the two events, namely that one should follow on from the other has been destroyed.


Grace on the other hand seems to flout Justice. Imagine a man working for 9 hours, another for 6 hours, and a third for only half an hour, and yet they all receive the same wage at the end of the day. Somehow this goes against what seems to us as fair.

There is permanent Grace and then there is temporary Grace. A sort of grace period where an amnesty prevails. So someone could flout the rules and appear to get away with it, but in fact it is not because Justice does not exist but rather because it's action has been delayed.

More later. . . . .

Pastor AIO:

This is very interesting. I might have got you wrong, Ihedinobi, but I have an understanding of what you are saying that is very fascinating. Whether what I understand is what you are actually trying to say we will see.

I understand Truth to be simply what is the case. Truth has Form (whether or not we can actually grasp its form is another matter). Truth determines What is and what the relationship is between the various things that exist.


Relationship is a key word. I suspect that a more accurate word for what you were trying to say would be Justice. Justice is itself not too far from Truth. Justice is the right relationship between things and events. 2 Events. Hard work. Receipt of wages.
One should follow on from the other, and that would be an appropriate relationship. A man works hard for 9 hours. At the end of the day he receives his wages. That is fair, that is just.

If after all the hard word he is deprived of the wages and sent away emptyhanded then an INjustice has been committed. The relationship between the two events, namely that one should follow on from the other has been destroyed.


Grace on the other hand seems to flout Justice. Imagine a man working for 9 hours, another for 6 hours, and a third for only half an hour, and yet they all receive the same wage at the end of the day. Somehow this goes against what seems to us as fair.

There is permanent Grace and then there is temporary Grace. A sort of grace period where an amnesty prevails. So someone could flout the rules and appear to get away with it, but in fact it is not because Justice does not exist but rather because it's action has been delayed.

More later. . . . .

I was preparing an answer just now, but I figured it'd probably be best for you to finish. Because you might actually make my answer unnecessary with the completion of your comment.

Waiting on you, sir......