Born2Freak:



Wow. I was reading through this old thread and couldn't help but notice how you consistently play ignorant and deny flaws in your bible/religion.

Born2Freak:



Wow. I was reading through this old thread and couldn't help but notice how you consistently play ignorant and deny flaws in your bible/religion.

HappyPagan:

His tactic is never to win - engaging him in any sort of discussion is like competing in an endurance race -- na who tire first go lose. I just make my points and move on.

HappyPagan:
[s]You can't be singing "This world is not my own", and build a great nation..

You can't scream "Islamization" on one hand, while building tithe collection points every 5km....


You can't bow to Mecca, and bang your head on the walls of Jerusalem, yet hope for a greater Africa.

When the BIBLE and QURAN guard your thoughts, controlling you is a mater of reading that which you believe without doubt. [/s]

Ihedinobi3:

Nwanne, thank you. I do appreciate your admission that I don't enter these debates to win anything, and that you don't enter any with me for any kind of reasoning too. LOL.

How have you been though? Two days, as they say in these parts.

HappyPagan:

We good bro. Back in PH, life's good.

Ihedinobi3:

Stay safe there. Always hearing crazy things out of that city and from the state as a whole. Not that it's perfectly safe anywhere else, but still.

Ihedinobi3:

Happy to hear that life is good with you.

HappyPagan:

Sadly, a lot more happens in the state than the violent stories that get out. The insecurity is terrible - even the police no dey help matters.


Much better. Thanks man. Hope you are good too.

Ihedinobi3:

Hello there.

I don't think it would do much good either to deny your accusations or to ask you to substantiate them, but then it is unlikely that it will do any better to simply explain how I approach conversations of the kind that I often have with atheists and other antichristians. I'll just do the latter for whatever it is worth.

In my experience debating antichristians, the Bible and Christians tend to suffer a lot of false accusations and unwarranted assumptions from their enemies. For that reason, when people claim things or make arguments or accusations with questionable assumptions, I ask them to explain their statements in the hopes that, by getting them to do so, they can start to appreciate the error of their positions. But, as I often say, atheism is a dishonest position, and I have never debated an honest atheist in my life, so when I take this option, it often leads to an end of the debate or to very bad debate tactics and accusations of evasion and playing ignorant, as you put it here. This is one reason that I don't care very much for debates with antichristians anymore: in general, the enemies of the Bible know that they are holding a false position, but they hope that the Christian does not know it, so that they can walk all over them and get them to deny their Faith in Jesus Christ. So, when they do meet Christians who know both the Truth of their own position and the falsehood of the antichristian's, it is never a pleasant experience for the antichristian (nor for the Christian, if personal experience is anything to go by).

This also applies to your claim that I deny flaws in the Bible. The point of apologetics, in general, is to defend what you believe. Even though, personally, I never feel threatened about what I believe, so that I never engage in apologetics in order to defend my Faith, it is quite unreasonable to expect that if I was debating the position of the Bible with an antichristians, I would ever admit that anything is wrong with the Bible unless I can be persuaded to do so through superior arguments. That one simply claims that there are flaws in the Bible does not automatically mean that there are. The person who makes such a claim would be responsible to demonstrate the claim as well and defend it against every challenge that the believer throws at it.

Your own comment here is an apt demonstration of everything that I have just said:

You came into this conversation only to make claims and accusations that you seem to think that I must accept as true. If, as I said, I asked you to show how I "consistently play ignorant," you may accuse me of playing ignorant of that too. If I ask you to show the flaws that are obvious to you but which I deny, you may claim that I am denying the obvious. This is what I have come to expect of atheists. For some reason, you think that whatever you say is the end of the matter and that it cannot therefore be challenged. That is why discussion with you is pretty much a travesty.

HappyPagan:

His tactic is never to win - engaging him in any sort of discussion is like competing in an endurance race -- na who tire first go lose. I just make my points and move on.

Born2Freak:



Why would I waste my time arguing with you when you lack the honesty and intelligence necessary to talk about your religion?


More qualified christian people and authorities have conceded that there are certain issues in the bible that are harmful to society. For instance , the Baptist, Anglican and catholic churches have all apologized for their roles in slavery. Before you muster any silly rebuttal just know that without those three churches, there would be nothing like christianity in Nigeria. You wouldn't be a Christian in the first place.


Priests who have gone through rigorous theological studies readily admit the many archaic and barbaric rulings contained in the old testament. Those were laws made for ancient men with archaic philosophies.


You are not impressing anyone with your dubious ways.

Ihedinobi3:

I didn't ask you to argue with me, and I didn't expect you to want to. Your posting history suggests to me that discussion with Christians is little more than an opportunity for you to pour abuse and insults on us, so I didn't answer you with much expectation that we were going to have any kind of reasonable conversation. I did mainly for the sake of other readers.

I don't think we've met, and it would be quite curious to see how you know so much about me from just my posting history.

You even know my qualifications enough to decide their quality relative to other Christians. More than that, you also know exactly how experts in theology are known, so much so that once a priest says something, all Christians must of necessity be bound by it. It's pretty amazing how great your own qualifications must be.

Regardless, as you yourself said of another, if you won't waste your time arguing with me, then don't waste your time arguing with me. It's highly unusual that you are here talking to me, if I'm not worth your time.

Born2Freak:




There remains a difference between arguing and talking. I am just stating my opinions based on what you have written so far. And so far, it is disappointing to say the least.


I will give you two pieces of advice


1. Learn some humility. You are not more Christian than the catholic church or the Baptist church or the Anglican church. You are not more Christian than the Pope. You are not more Christian than priests who have gone to seminaries and gone through rigorous theology. Even Jesus was humble enough to be baptised by someone else. There people and institutions are authorities in christianity. You are but a Nigerian Christian following an outdated version of christianity mixed with Nigerian culture.


2. Go through this thread and reread your comments with regards to criticism of christianity on: gay rights, churches not paying taxes and subverting national laws. Try and review your replies and ask yourself if they were honest.

Ihedinobi3:

I'm not entirely sure what the difference here is.

As for disappointing you, I assure you that that never crossed my mind when I made my comments here. I was trying not to disappoint Somebody else entirely. His opinion is what matters to me, not quite yours.

As for your advice,

1. I don't believe that you are competent to judge Christians.

2. I'm not responsible to make your observations and arguments for you.

Born2Freak:




Believe what you will but facts will remain facts.

The simple fact is that the catholic church, Baptist and Anglican church all have vast authority over you when it comes to christianity. This authority remains whether I am competent enough to judge Christians or not.


I have been a Christian. Catholic and protestant. Have you ever been an atheist? Be humble and think before you judge others' competence.

Lastly, even your Methodist church struggled with the issue of slavery.

Ihedinobi3:

Thank you, I believe I will. And I completely agree that facts will never be anything but facts.

Of course I have absolutely no reason or inclination to believe that the Roman, Baptist, and Anglican churches have any kind of authority over me as a Christian. I certainly won't believe it just because you said so.

As for having been a Christian, both Catholic and Protestant, good for you or bad for you, as the case may be. I don't quite see what that has to do with anything, unless you mean by it that you know something about what it means to be a Christian, in which case, I would say that while I think you may know some rudimentary things about it, you certainly don't know enough to either advise me or judge Christians.

As for being an atheist, I don't test things just because they are there to be tested. I may as well shoot myself in the head just to see what it's like. I have no interest or incentive to try atheism. What I do know about it makes it exceptionally distasteful to me anyway.

I'm not sure what your comment about the Methodist church is supposed to accomplish. I may have been born and raised in that church, but I'm no longer a part of it or of any other traditional denomination. Its purported struggles with slavery have nothing to do with me or my Faith in Jesus Christ.

Born2Freak:



You question my competence in judging Christians. But I have been a Christian.

But on the other hand, you judge atheists and yet you have never been an atheist. No experience whatsoever.


Also take a look at the denials you have made and the hole you have dug for yourself. You have denied the catholic church, the Baptist church, the Anglican church and the Methodist church.

All their doctrines have nothing to do with you and your christianity.

When you deny over 90% of traditional christianity, what do you have left?

I rest my case. Goodbye. I shall quote you no more on this thread.

JeromeBlack:
Ihedinobi3 never disappoints with his misunderstanding of the issue and his consistent denial of problems in christianity.

A fanatic is never wrong.

Ihedinobi3:

I totally agree with you that a fanatic is never wrong. Your first paragraph here is more proof of that.

JeromeBlack:




So you are agreeing that you are a fanatic because of my first paragraph that states that you consistently deny problems in christianity?

Ihedinobi3:

Oh no. I was only saying that your constant accusations of me, as though just by making such accusations they become true, are proof of your own fanaticism.

JeromeBlack:



Am I the only one saying that you consistently misunderstand and deny? No.

Your comments on this thread are evidence for my claims.

Imagine a Christian like yourself claiming that the bible is not concerned with politics. Such a clear denial of what is actually in the bible.

Ihedinobi3:

As I always say, it makes little difference that more than one hater of the Truth is commenting on the Truth. The attitude is the same. It's like expecting more a crowd of rabid PDP men to disagree with each other about how good APC is. They cannot. So, the fact that others who are just like you claim the same thing that you do about me or accuse me of the same things that you do too is of little consequence.

As for my comments being evidence of your claims, that is easy enough to say. Can you actually show how they are? That is the question.

If you know any part of the Bible that teaches believers to be involved in politics, by all means, show it to me, and I will repent my earlier stance.

JeromeBlack:



So, are you some kind of Jehovahs witness that does not get into any politics? No voting, no registering with the army, no pledges etc.



Jokes apart, I have bad news for you. The whole old testament is centred on theocracy: a Jewish people ruled by a God and kings/prophets who lead by His holy decree.

Even in the new testament, Jesus was killed due to Blasphemy laws.

Jesus said- "render unto caesar what is Cesar's". This is in support of people doing their duty as citizens of the state. The bible says that servants (slaves) should obey their masters.


But no, Ihedinobi3 the misunderstood denier will lie that the bible or christianity has nothing to do with politics.

You are the biggest liar I have seen on this religion section. In fact, to embarrass you, I am going to call your fellow Christians to judge your ridiculous claim about the bible and politics.

Ihedinobi3:


Israel was God's Project. The Pentateuch (Genesis to Deuteronomy) describes His creation of that nation and the character it was supposed to have. What we read there are the laws that were to govern that nation.

The character of that nation was supposed to be God-fearing. They were supposed to be the one nation on earth where everybody served the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the biological progenitors of the people themselves. This is just the same as America characterizing herself as the land of the free and the home of the brave. The laws were therefore written around that character. Idolatry was against the law and punishable by death. The reason was that God Himself was the King of Israel and idolatry was treason. This also means that any seduction by anybody of others into idolatry was conspiracy to commit treason and was thus also punishable by death.

Every other issue about Israel's laws is to be understood the same way.

JeromeBlack:



I wanted to ignore your comment and call other Christians to this thread but after seeing the nonsense you wrote, it is too much of an opportunity for me to pass up.


You say that Isreal was Gods project? Excuse me, so what was Africa to this same God that you are unwittingly describing as a racist? The Africa that existed long before isreal

So what happened to giving the same laws to Africans?

Are you aware that igbo culture is older than Jewish culture?

Do you just write epistles without thinking?

JeromeBlack:
1. You say that Isreal was Gods project? Excuse me, so what was Africa to this same God that you are unwittingly describing as a racist? The Africa that existed long before isreal
2. So what happened to giving the same laws to Africans?
3. Are you aware that igbo culture is older than Jewish culture?
4. Do you just write epistles without thinking?