₦airaland Forum

bennyann:
Both of you ehn

Under the oath of holyghost, bennyann, do you think that felixomoron is anything close to being a Christian?

iSpirit1:
Should you find it impossible?

Romans 5:12-21 explains that clearly.

12. "wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

6:23 says the same thing. Sin brought imperfection to the earth especially upon those who have sinned.

All have sinned and the consequencies of sin is upon all except those who Jesus have taken away their sins, those who have faith in Him.

Notice: The death of Jesus and the justification he brought is not automatically given to anyone, except those who have faith in him. There4, children are still under the condemnation brought upon all by Adam's sin.

I'll stop here.

If all these your unfounded claims were true, why do born again couple, still give birth to babies with deformity?


Didn't your God says that the soul that sin, shall die? What sin did infant commit?

MZLady39:
Well in a sin-free/perfect world, would malformations exist?

Just how did sin causes birth malformation, is what i want you to explain here.

MZLady39:

Just finding it impossible, to link sin with birth malformation.

MZLady39:
That baby born that way, unfortunately, is a result of a sin-ravaged world. We were not told that we would be born in a perfect world....because right now...in its present state....it is not.

Hmmmm... Kikikikikikiki

adepeter26:
You mean these people?
www.nairaland.com/attachments/5376575_cdatausersdefappsappdatainternetexplorertempsavedimageslordschosenacrobatic_jpegc9a5629fcd9c0154beb535f13737a31d
Rotlmao

These folks appear to be plagued with contagious lunacy!

Does any known theist on NL, tangle with these goons?

CAN is forever a can of rotten worms.

The point of life is to use your brain, to first better your life and that of your world.

And after death, to enjoy volcano of beer and bevy of bitches, in FSM Kingdom.

There isn't any relative or beneficial positivity, in religious gist on sex and sexuality.

All that region has done, on this subject matter, can be likened to a mother, who is teaching her daughter sex education, from the 18th century syllabus.

And the idea that, if it hadn't been for the religious moral codes, humans would have plunge in self destruct, is unfounded.

Sense of morality is innate, and it's subjective. Within the individuals and society, morality takes on varied meaning and implications.

This a lie from the pit of hell. Sponsored by an arch-atheist.

According to our pastor - Chris Oyakhilome - a man of God is not just a man, he's an anointed man of God. You see that?
A man of God can't sin!

analice107:
Ohhhhhhh, cry baby. Since Otem is your role model, i hope you go urinating on the bed since he does

Now i know exactly what ill you. May your help come, while it can still do you good.

Mtcheew!

analice107:
Akiintom, come and see who you are modelling your life after.

How come you're this infirmed, in understanding my instructions to you, not to quote or mention me again?

I told you the last time you stray on my mention, that your biologically and chronologically induced grandma trait, doesn't apply here, and certainly not to me.

Stick with those, that falls within your range of thinking.

Amberon:
God

Amberon:
"Homosexuality is a grevious sin according to Christianity. But other than that, morality tells us that it is totally wrong"

Certainly your Yahweh!

reiddecuti:
Be deceiving yourself.
And the scripture said about the AFONJAS

False Prophets Will Be Numerous, And Very Successful:

Mat 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
Mat 24:12 And because iniquity [lawlessness] shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
2 Pet 2:1 [NIV] But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
2 Pet 2:2 [NIV] Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
2 Pet 2:3 [NIV] In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

For more about the same people, click the link:
http://biblelight.net/false-prophets.htm

I guess your kanu-ri president of IPOB, is the only true prophet?

adepeter26:
Ẹ̀gbọ́n, n'a our Chosen brother ooo....

The equation is now balanced....I'm happy finally. The two Christian Doctors

Kikikikikikiki... Is he now the new neurologist, that want to traumatize this space?

felixomor:
For example no part of science explains why the BRAIN GOES TO SLEEP EVERYDAY.
It is only believed it goes to sleep for certain reasons.

Seen! Kikikikikikiki..... The mysterious ones again!

adepeter26:
Another doctor has said, "COGNITIVE AREAS OF THE BRAIN DOES SHUT DOWN".

Where them dae, MA summon the elders....
Dalaman, Felixomor, pastafarian, CatfishBilly, Frank317, akiintom, Spacetacular,.... Etc.... Brain doesnt sleep, it now shuts down....

Which of the mysterious medic?

Islie:
http://pmexpressng.com/christ-embassy-pastor-enmeshes-in-over-4-abortions-mess-maid/

This a lie from the pit of hell. Sponsored by arch-atheist.

According to our pastor - Chris Oyakhilome - a man of God is not just a man, he's an anointed man of God. You see that?
A man of God can't sin!

In US, Belief in Creationist View of Humans at New Low


by Art Swift

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

38% say God created man in present form, lowest in 35 yearsSame percentage say humans evolved, but God guided the processLess-educated Americans more likely to believe in creationism

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The percentage of U.S. adults who believe that God created humans in their present form at some time within the last 10,000 years or so -- the strict creationist view -- has reached a new low. Thirty-eight percent of U.S. adults now accept creationism, while 57% believe in some form of evolution -- either God-guided or not -- saying man developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life.

This is the first time since 1982 -- when Gallup began asking this question using this wording -- that belief in God's direct creation of man has not been the outright most-common response. Overall, roughly three-quarters of Americans believe God was involved in man's creation -- whether that be the creationist view based on the Bible or the view that God guided the evolutionary process, outlined by scientist Charles Darwin and others. Since 1982, agreement with the "secular" viewpoint, meaning humans evolved from lower life forms without any divine intervention, has doubled.

Americans' Views on Human Creation Related to Education, Religious Preference

Higher education levels are associated with less support for creationism and higher levels of belief in the evolutionary explanation for human origins. Belief in creationism is 21% among those with postgraduate education versus 48% of those with no more than a high school diploma. Agreement with evolution without God's involvement is 31% among postgrads versus 12% among Americans with a high school education or less.

However, even among adults with a college degree or postgraduate education, more believe God had a role in evolution than say evolution occurred without God.

Views by people's religious preferences or lack thereof paint an illuminating picture as well. More Catholics believe that humans evolved but God guided the process (45%) than believe in the creationist viewpoint (37%). Creationism is still the view that half of Protestants and other Christians (50%) hold, but it is not dominant, with 39% saying humans essentially evolved with God's guidance.

As for those with no religious preference, 57% report a belief that does not involve God, while only 9% are creationists. Not surprisingly, 65% of those who attend church weekly believe in the creationist view, while those who attend church less regularly have less consensus on the question of human origins.

Bottom Line

Most Americans believe that God had a role in creating human beings, whether in their present form or as part of an evolutionary process over millions of years. But fewer Americans today hold strict creationist views of the origins of humans than at any point in Gallup's trend on the question, and it is no longer the single most popular of the three explanations. Creationism still ties for the leading view, along with the view that evolution was guided by a divine hand. Fewer than one in five Americans hold a secular view of evolution, but that proportion has doubled since the start of this millennium.

Since the Scopes Monkey Trial more than 90 years ago, the inclusion of creationism -- and evolution -- as part of public school curricula has been an ongoing and contentious topic. Often rebranded as "intelligent design," especially as it relates to education, the creationist viewpoint has met defeat in the Supreme Court but continues to surface in curricula across the U.S.

There has been an increase in the percentage of those holding the secularist viewpoint in recent years, which aligns with the scientific belief that has been prevalent in public school teaching since the Scopes Monkey Trial. This push and pull with creationism will undoubtedly continue, as this debate about where humans came from rages on.



SURVEY METHODS

Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted May 3-7, 2017, with a random sample of 1,011 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting.

Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 70% cellphone respondents and 30% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationist-view-humans-new-low.aspx?g_source=Politics&g_medium=newsfeed&g_campaign=tiles

CatfishBilly:
Behavioural science is not a pseudoscience.
Here is a definition

What some folks who write in the public forum, don't know is that, those who lay claim to certain profession, that they learnt about on Google, are as discernable as pregnancy at third trimester, to the real professionals.

analice107:
You are just too immature to have a discussion with, seriously.
Follow after Pastafarian or even Catfishbilly and learn conversational dictums.

Hmmm... Now you just put out a post there, warning about your imagined mentality of some monikers here.

I have just said something which is what I'm familiar with. And i didn't quote you, neither did i generalize.

Here you're, getting personal with me, in the most dirty patronizing manner.

Can't you just learn the fact, that you're nobody's grandma here?

spacetacular:
The fact is that because Behavioral science has not been accepted as being purely scientific whatever they say is regarded as rubbish especially there are many ways they can use to arrive at their conclusion which unlike pure science requires strict guidelines.
.

M
Now easy........ I introduced fields of knowledge into this discussion.

I never said behavioural science, but BEHAVIOURAL NEUROSCIENCE. This field is scientific in every sense of scientific knowledge.

This is the field that has successfully stimulated vision, trance and dreams in the laboratory.

There are research works from this field that has taking our understanding of the human mind, to height so amazingly awesome.

spacetacular:
Science never said homosexuality is natural. A vote did in 1973.

And the voters were -

*pastors,
*bishops,
* cardinals,
*imams and
*apostle Sulieman?

CatfishBilly:
They also forget that there are people who are asexual.
No sexual​ urge whatsoever and they were born like that.
Is that one also not natural and a sin according to the Bible?

Bro, that must have been a curse from ancestral demon. Such a man must have come from a family of rapist.

As a punishment, Yahweh made him asexual!

If you doubt me, ask Dr olukoya of MFM.

bennyann:
Yes now. Almost every topic on homosexuality carries something like, then why do animals act like that if it isn't natural. Even animals are homosexuals.....

The comparisons are just too much. We're talking about humans for crying out loud. So I drew my conclusion from the comparisons.

Hey sister bennyann,

You see, when science says something is natural, in this case, homosexuality. It means that research works in biology, psychology and behavioral neuroscience correlate, as far as their independent conclusions are concerned.

Science is not dogmatic or studied by obscurantists. The very reason homosexuality was unlisted as mental condition.

What you Christians are thinking and writing here, in relation to the topic of homosexuality, results from emotional orgies, that's activated by orgasmic intercourse with Yahweh.

bennyann:
When you say 'by choice' , what do you mean?

?

Within the domain of scientific determinants of homosexuality, the homosexuals are not different from heterosexuals. Only in their sexual orientation are they different.

It's may also interest you to know, that amongst the heterosexuals, because of hormonal dynamics, some are meagerly attracted to the opposite sex erotically.

I know a man, who is only drawn to his wife, ONLY when they wanted to have baby. After which, he's off.

bennyann:
The lessons I've learnt on homosexuality topics here on nairaland is that, human beings are to learn the behaviours of animals and apply it to their lives.

I never knew that's how low humans have become.

Are you sure you learnt that here?

analice107:
Scientifically speaking? Are the scientist who has proven that it's not a deviant? because till today science hasn't found anything about homosexuality that makes it natural.

Scientifically yes!

I wouldn't want to litter this page with plethora of overwhelming scientific reasons, why homosexuality is not deviant sexual orientation.

There are robust biological, psychological and physiological determinants, that clearly makes homosexuality, lean heavily towards variation as against deviation.

Isn't this an outrageous claim, likeable only to saying the sun rises from west? When you claim thus:

"because till today science hasn't found anything about homosexuality that makes it natural"


A Google search on this subject matter will, convince you to the contrary.

analice107:
It's a mental condition so it's wrong.

Can i have the scientific pinnings, for this mental claim?

analice107:
Will you give your baby up for adoption to homo parents? Yes you will.

I will continue this conversation with you, on the condition that you don't bring ME into the thread.

analice107 post=56792453
:
Let me ask you, what in homosexuality do you think is right?.

What's right?

*Homosexuality is a sexual orientation variant and not deviant. Scientifically speaking.

*therefore, Homosexuality is not a sexual orientation by choice.

*Homosexuals should therefore not be demonized, stigmatized, condemned or killed.

The above are what makes Homosexuality right, and require rational processing.

Pastafarian:
no one is yet to give a convincing and logical argument against homosexuality, all we have so far is them trying to somehow equate incest and bestiality even though we've shown that both are totally different and one (homosexuality) doesn't necessarily lead to the others (incest, bestiality)

Psychological conclusions on Christian apologists, are every day being confirmed on NL.

Just check this out!

Have you observed that non of the Christian here, has CLEARLY and UNAMBIGUOUSLY admitted the fact, that they're calling Homosexuality evil, demonic and sinful, because their BIBLE says so?

CatfishBilly:
This would be a great read. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_HIV/AIDS
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_early_HIV/AIDS_cases
But I've noticed a shocking lack of reading culture in these parts, so I won't be surprised if no one reads this.

When someone here, says "i discontinue reading scientific article, the moment scientific jargons appears".

Yet, this fellow argues against scientific research.

A worrisome character per intelligence.