₦airaland Forum

The nigerians are not showing any sign that they really want to score. They have been holding their own though.

Good touch Kanu

Papilooooooooooooo

Where is the midflield?

These guys need to raise the tempo of the game and put more pressure.

Wow that was close.

Will you look before you pass the ball Olafinjana!

What is wrong with kalu uche today?

tick:
@ FBS,  my guy Bleep this coach thing for now. the guys on the pitch aint playing shit!

They are trying, its not easy playing the north africans.

blacksta:
this one has a draw written over it

OLAADEGBU:
"At the beginning God created the heaven and earth." (Gen.1:1).

You said "every[b]thing[/b]" but you unaware that God is not a thing.  Everything has a beginning and an ending but God is the beginning and the end, the Alpha and Omega He has no end and has no beginning and that is why He is called God the first Cause of all things who lives in eternity, the life time of the never dying God.

, Did any god tell you that himself or did you just ascribe all those qualities to your imaginary deity? god is not a thing yet he has some chracteristics or descriptions. I thought only things have characteristics and description? The ridicolous lengths you guys go to make sure that your imaginary deity remains beyond description is absurd and stunning. God is not a thing yet he posesses attributes that things posses. 

If you study the Bible very well you will discover that God didn't confine His wrath to the Canaanites or those mentioned in the book of Revolution Revelation.  He proclaimed the death sentence upon the whole of humanity.  We will all die because we have broken God's Law. Everyone of us is waiting on death row.  Instead of standing in moral judgment over Almighty God, we need to judge ourselves according to the Law of God.  We will find that we have a multitude of sins and therefore are deserving of punishment.  Yet God, out of love, paid the penalty for our sin so we would not have to.

I don't even know what to make of the above drivel. Honestly this is the most outlandish nonsense I have heard all week. Imagine I once used to believe in all this nonsense.  . So god a "loving" deity that is supposed to "love" all humans created every body and put them on death row because adam and eve were tempted to eat a fruit ? A friut they suposedly ate without even knowing that they did any wrong by eating it until after they had eaten it.  I thought the ancient jews used to appease god by scaficing their animals or their enemies(mostly virgins girl) so that he will not kill them off? What made him change his mind? were human and animal blood no longer tasty or did this god simply get tired of human and animal scarifice? So this god had to kill himself to save humans from himself when he was once very happy with them scarificing their animals and their children or enemies unto him? What kind of drivel is this?

OLAADEGBU:
When you write a letter, do you write the letter or does the pen write it? Obviously you do, the pen is merely the instrument you use. God used men as instruments to write His letter to humanity. They ranged from kings to common fishermen, but the 66 books (and not more) of the Bible were all given by inspiration of God. The evidence that the Bible is supernatural can be seen with a quick study of its prophecies.

skyone:
The problem with an average african is they only believe they are going to die until some tells them (herbalist) they are old and ill. So no more comment

Why do you just keep shooting blanks?

OLAADEGBU:
It is not surprising that atheists are now dropping the theory of evolution like hot potato just as they are distancing themselves from the theory of the big bang. The fact that you deny the existence of God still puts you in the same boat. To examine the evidence, there can be no doubt that God exists even our forefathers are wise enough to admit that.

You always seem to forget that there are millions of atheist that do not believe in the TOE, On the other hand there are so many christians that believe in it. What are the "evidence"? What you see around is evidence for vision and environment not evidence for god.

Every building has a builder. Everything made has a maker. The fact of the existence of the Creator is axiomatic. That is why the Bible says, "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God'" (Psalm 14:1).

Sure every god has a maker too. If everything needs a maker then god also needs a maker, Who created god? As far as I know men did. No god has ever spoken to you about his existence, all you have are men speaking and telling you about the existence of their various gods. No god has ever spoken for him self.

I leave you with the words of Dwight Eisenhower, which says that:

"It takes no brains to be an atheist. Any stupid person can deny the existence of a supernatural power because man's physical senses cannot detect it. But there cannot be ignored the influence of conscience, the respect we feel for the Moral Law the mystery of first life . . . or the marvelous order in which the universe moves about us on this earth. All these evidence the handiwork of the beneficent Deity . . . That Deity is the God of the Bible and Jesus Christ, His Son."

So god is the one that makes people to have respect for moral law The same god that told people to kill, rape, steal and destroy others in the bible? . Assertions and claims are not evidence are they?

pilgrim.1:
. See vids below as to what I mean ('martial arts masters who apparently knock people out without having touched them'):

If you watch the videos to the end the guy was only using some trick because they tried it on a skeptic who believes it was false and it failed. All the other performances were explained through natural means. If there is anything that the whole documentary shows is that psychics are frauds. They are only good in making people believe in falsehoods.

Holyfield is trying to bribe the invicible man in the sky

skyone:
Just imagine he said his mum was there and has a cousin there presently. Whatelse do you want you sounded like my 7 year old nephew. The fool confrimed it from his mum i confirmed it from the tourist conductor/ read historical books on mount camel on a pilgrimage to Isreal 2 years ago.

The problem is both of you are just mere saddist period. So i rest my case.

Why are you just shooting blanks?

Abuzola:
Backslider please be mature and stop talking shit, ok ? We are peace loving people but when you trigger us to wage war on ur people we are mighty for that, u don't expect us to fold our arms watching our brothers and sisters dwinding in Gaza and co, feel our pain and be sincere, our brothers are arrested simply becos he shouted Allah is great and was regarded as terrorist, our sisters are molested and rape in the zionist jail, u can go to youtube and see many atroities

Brothers and sisters in Zionist jails? . Islam is a religion of peace yet it teaches people to kill apostates , What kind of peace is that? Piss on allah and mohammed.

toneyb:
That's because you have to first believe there is a god to believe in jesus. the premise behind him is immoral and primitive.

According to the christian hypothesis people are supposed to believe that there is an all powerful, knowing, loving entity out there who loves humanity wants nothing more than their worship but the best idea he can come up with to save people (from himself) is by killing? what kind of nutjob thinks this is a good idea or even something that would cross the mind of a being like mentioned above? he requires the wholesale slaughter of animals(and sometimes humans) as sacrifice unto him for a few thousand years resulting in millions of deaths, alters covered in blood, and then they have to set them on fire because god likes the smell (Gen 8:20,21)?

If you actually read the OT, there is no salvation, no heaven to go to, no hell to be roasted in you are just appeasing god so he doesn't kill you and your family.You cant even make it to the Jesus story without realizing it is a stupid concept and one that was made up by primitive people. god himself fails right out of the gate making Jesus a non issue.

Jesus in a further act of "love" this god decided to come to earth (himself, his son, michael, or whatever you believe doesn't matter as none of the scenarios work), in the form of a human being as the ultimate blood sacrifice. So he has this fleshly body beaten to a pulp and then killed in a gruesome way so that people don't have to kill animals(or sacrifice themselves) anymore to him and people can be saved from his own wrath.  .

Now it gets even worse (depending on your interpretation of the bible) as now this Jesus introduces a new concept- eternal torture/punishment. In this system you have to acquire salvation through Jesus (just exactly how is still open to debate after 2000 years) where if you die before being "saved"- you are toast. A man can rape and murder an unsaved girl and she will go to hell, he on the other hand can "find Jesus" in prison and live happily in heaven for eternity. 

It'd be like your god throwing everyone in the ocean and then dangling a life jacket asking "ok, who doesnt want to drown?"

Why don't i believe in Jesus? because he isn't good enough, his father isn't good enough, the whole idea and hypothesis isn't good enough. he is nothing more than a twisted, sick, idiotic concept of a thug that was invented by very primitive minds and no one in their right mind would buy into. it may sound all good on the surface when you hear about how you are loved, protected, helped in this world and you get to go to heaven when you die, but why are YOU condemned in the first place because someone ate some fruit 6000 years ago? PLEASE.

I wasn't born evil, wicked, full of "sin" and in need of salvation (and don't even try to tell me that all the lovey children I see around me were born evil), im sorry if you've been convinced you are but I know what kind of person I am. I am humane, honest, and helpful to others. i love my family and friends, i am an intellectually honest person who evaluates my situations and makes the best decisions I can can based on the available evidence. So the christian hypothesis makes no sense, it is only a feel good hypothesis that even christians themselves fail to agree and accept some some of its basic concept because of how nonsensical it is.

Abuzola:
@Pilgrim the fact that u are more confused doesn't mean u should lie, judas was d man crucified and not jesus

Mohammed was the person that was crucified not Jesus, deluded goon, How did you know this, where you there?

Abuzola:
I hereby invite u to islam, the religion of salvation that jesus the messenger of ALLAH preached, had i know is bitter

Mohhamed remains one of the greatest guys to have ever lived on earth because he very well convinced people that there is a connection between other peoples deity(jesus) and the new deity he invented(allah).

piss on mohammed the crook and allah the imaginary know nothing and blood loving fool.

Abuzola:
thanks backslider and thats why GOD sent the last Prophet (Muhammad) with these
Quran Nisa'i 171. O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, nor say of Allah aught but the truth. The Messiah 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah and His Word, ("Be!" - and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Ruh) created by Him; so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not: "Three (trinity)!" Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One Ilah (God), Glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.

172. The Messiah will never be proud to reject to be a slave to Allah, nor the angels who are near (to Allah). And whosoever rejects His worship and is proud, then He will gather them all together unto Himself.

Suratul NIsai
56. Surely! Those who disbelieved in Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) We shall burn them in Fire. As often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for other skins that they may taste the punishment. Truly, Allah is Ever Most Powerful, All-Wise.

57. But those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah - Islamic Monotheism) and do deeds of righteousness, We shall admit them to Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise), abiding therein forever. Therein they shall have Azwajun Mutahharatun [purified mates or wives (having no menses, stools, urine, etc.)] and We shall admit them to shades wide and ever deepening (Paradise)

Bleep allah and the koran.

There is nothing that the present church is doing that is not biblical( all christians use the bible to defend their beliefs), christianity has never really been one since the beginning the founders have always had their differences, How do you expect the religion to survive in a fast changing world? christianity has to function and survive in a modern society if it wants to stay its course and continue to be a religion that draws many followes, if it doesn't change it will die off. All religions have to adapt or interpret their texts to fit in with reality. For example the moslems and facing mecca when praying, all kinds of interpretations and excuses have been provided to make it look rational for people that live in other parts of the planet. Holding on to strict doctrine is an ultimately not tenable, since the doctrine has demonstrably been changing all the time and what exists now is clearly not that which existed at earlier points in time.

jumie:
Yeah,

Christianity is not a RELIGION but A WAY OF LIFE!!!

What a way of life, what kind of way of life is this that most believers do not and can not agree to it.

pilgrim.1:
I think you're typically shifting grounds here, lol. Even if I provide you such a 'proof' or 'evidence', how does that help your own claim and position improve any nearer to its own affirmation? The basic question here is about EXISTENCE and the supernatural. That is what I've been asking you guys to consider - whether one deity is "greater or better" is a matter about qualities that are relative, and not about whether such a deity exists or not. Now when you as an atheist assumes a position to denial existence of anything that does not fit your worldview, you're making a categorical statement that requires proof and evidence. It assumes that you've carefully investigated your idea to have come to that dogmatic conclusion that God DOES NOT exist, not whether he is "greater or better".

I don't think I am . Now i will like to consider what you have said and say a few things about the existence of the supernatural. I take atheism to assert that when all the evidence for and against is weighed, the best conclusion to draw is that there is no god but theism in contrast is the doctrine that there is good and sufficient reason to believe that god or the supernatural exists. All gods are fictional constructs invented or created by clever humans for a variety of purposes usually ranging from psychological comfort, emotional comfort, hope and some times for entertainment. According to the god hypothesis or concept god has some defining characteristics. He is a person, supremely powerful,  morally perfect, all-knowing, the uncreated creator of the universe, specifically concerned with human beings, the only deity, and essentially immaterial or non-physical.

It is important to spell these criteria out somewhat more carefully. The god whose existence I deny is supposed to be a person to have a mind, will, intelligence, purposes and desires. I am not interested in debating the existence of an impersonal god, who could be identified with nature, or fate, or any other vague "something" that is supposed to run the universe. I am more interested in debating the existence of who has the qualities I have listed above. God's supreme power or omnipotence means simply this. There is no possible state of affairs which God could not bring about, if it should please him to do so.

The moral perfection of this deity will, I think, be easily enough granted. god, as generally conceived, inflicts no unwarranted harm and can never justly be blamed for anything.That god knows all things is also part of the standard definition. If god exists, there is no fact of which he is ignorant. God's status as the supposed creator of the univere should also be relatively unproblematic, but I would like to stress an important point here which is that in postulating god as creator the believer in god claims that god's existence explains something about the way things are and belief in god is thus supposed in some way to make the world more intelligible and better. God is also thought or belived to have a special interest in human affairs. He is not taken to be some kind of disinterested observer but is supposed to love humans protect those who call on him and help them by providing for them or being there for them all the time, he is also offended by their misdeeds, and to be particularly upset if some humans do not believe is his existence.

Now here is my case for atheism. Here is my grounds for thinking that there is no personal god who is the all-powerful, all knowing, morally perfect, omniscient, immaterial creator of the world who holds a special concern for the lives of humans. We should (where possible) avoid accounts of the world which claims the unusual or hitherto unknown things in order to explain what can be explained in terms of more intelligible and well-understood things. For example, suppose that I hear an odd sound in the my roof and you tell me that it is due to a mammy water who has taken up residence in my roof. Without a whole lot of evidence, your hypothesis should not be taken seriously because any reasonable person would naturally prefer an account of this noise that does not require mammy water and it makes due with well-understood things, well understood things like my faulty ventilation fan in the celing being the cause of that noise or expanding ceiling joists or loose botls and nuts or some other explanation. Suppose however, that we engage in an investigation and the investigation reveals no mammy water, but also nothing else that could easily explain the noise coming from the roof.  Then you account for these facts by saying that the mammy water is naturally shy and has fled, fearing discovery. I must say that, although this hypothesis, or this pair of hypotheses, do have the virtue of being consistent with all the known facts, it remains suspect, because it relies on something so remote from the general order of things. Assuming, as I think you will grant, that mammy water are not the kind of thing one typically runs into.

I must stress that the Principle I am using here does not mean that we are never justified in introducing novel explanations but they have to be able to be surpported. Science frequently makes progress by introducing some new kind of object, event or process, but still the appeal to the unknown or unfamiliar is generally a last resort, and the Principle I am using here is that we should shun all such accounts when there are more familiar forms of explanation available to us or in the absence of such explanation he who makes and explanation should be able to provide reasonable evidence for his explanations.

Here is what Toneyb wrote on another thread. "God qualifies as something very mysterious, unintelligible and unfamiliar in the relevant sense. God is not visible, tangible or otherwise detectable by empirical means that we know or use. God is supposed to act in space and time but without having any location in space and time himself. His essence is according to the belief, ungraspable and fully beyond the comprehension of the finite human minds and understanding and yet belief in this incomprehensible being is supposed to make the present state of the world more intelligible? Everything observable in the world is supposed to be created by God according to the belief, but God Himself is uncreated. Furthermore, events in the observable world can generally be accounted for without introducing God as an explanation. Thunderstorms, earthquakes, plagues, eclipses, the variety of natural species, and even the origins of life itself all have detailed atheistic or natural explanations(some which i do not agree to), notwithstanding the fact that theese things were once thought to be the immediate work of God.

The use of god as an explanation for anything always bound to be problematic because are always told a great deal about him, but never enough that claims that his existence can be put to the test. Mazaje makes this VERY interesting point. He said " The god hypothesis does no real explanation at all because it can be used to account for anything in exactly the same way". He gave an example of a farmer who prays to god for rain to help his drought stricken crops. Suppose it then rains. The happy farmer explains this as the act of God in response to his/her prayer. But suppose it doesn’t rain. The farmer explains this as god having had other reasons for withholding rain either way, the God hypothesis seems to do no real explanatory work. It can be used to account for literally anything in exactly the same way. Another reasons or case for atheism is the inconsistency on the part of the believer, the believer denies the reality of every other culture's god or gods although they may not wish to admit it, believers must hold that all other deities are illusory, and that people who believe in them are in the grip of a massive error or delusion. The believer will argue that whatever appears to be explained by these alternative deities can in fact, be accounted for by natural processes, or perhaps by the actions of his god whom he takes to be something very familiar and not in need of any explanation. If a Moslem tells a Christian about the divine healing abilities of allah, the Christian will dismiss it and try to look for medical explanations for the muslims claim but he refuses to apply the same reason when it comes to his own god and his claim of the supernatural.

There are otherr cases for the denial of the supernatural, I still assert that prayer which is supposed to be an evidence for the divine does not work. There is no evidence to show that people who pray do better than people who do not pray, there is no evidence to show that Christians who are prayed for get well faster than non Christians who are not prayed for. There is no evidence to show that Christians who pray to god for prosperity, prosper better than those who do not pray, there is no evidence to show that god protects those who pray to him more than those who do not pray to him. There is no evidence to show for any supernatural interferance in this wolrd, If there is then please go anead and provide it.

Another argument for God is that from design according to this argument, the universe shows an impressive degree of order, coherence, and structure that is highly unlikely to be the product of random chance or anything like that. There is instead a remarkable fitness in the way that organisms are adapted to their environment and the way that processes in the universe are appropriately suited one to another therefore, the argument concludes, there is some kind of intelligent designer who is responsible for the remarkable order, structure and coherence of everything and who is very intrested in what he has designed. But this hypothesis of a divine designer is difficult to take seriously for several reasons. First if we are in a position to recognize the wonderful design of the world, we are also entitled to critique the design work. It is obvious to say that, the human body could be much better designed. Replaceable lung filters to prevent lung disease, absence of congenital diseases, very strong lined arteries to avoid arterial blockage, an improvement on our absurdly inefficient digestive system, and so forth. The world is self contains a lot of things that are always on the need to harm humans, bacteria, viruses, natural disaters, are always on the move to kill and destroy humans. With problems like this in the design the supposed designer of humankind is by no means an imperfect craftsman. But he would likely get a 'C' in an industrial design course. There is still no evidence for the supernatural, all the claims of the supernatural and how it functions have yeilded nothing positive in favour of the super natural. If only things like prayer work we will not be here having this conversation.

noetic2:
WHO/WHAT is the alternative to GOD (an entity) ?

Must there always be an alternative?  . But since you only think like a robot then the opposite of barbarism, violence, rape, murder, cannibalism, human sacrifice, vindictive is the alternative to God.

pilgrim.1:
What evidence "disproves" the EXISTENCE of God, huxley2?

Just so the discourse does not get lost in this kind of mix-up statements in your quote, let me remind you: Christians do not "need to disprove" the existence of any of those 'gods' you mentioned - that is not a "need" that defines the veracity of the Christian faith. Atheists such as yourself may see a "need to disprove" the EXISTENCE of any 'god' - and yet you have never been able to credibly satisfy that need!

On the other, I as a Christian understand that my worldview does not have any such "need" which the atheist often dreams of. How is that? For one thing, I know that the Biblical faith does not set out with a "need" to disprove the EXISTENCE of such deities - but it reminds us as Christians to approach this enquiry with this mindset:

[list][li]'For though there be that are called gods,
whether in heaven or in earth,
(as there be gods many, and lords many,)
But to us there is but one God,
the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him;
and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,
and we by him"
~~ 1 Corinthians 8:5-6[/li][/list]

This is echoed throughout the Bible, and the informed Christian understands he/she does not have the atheist's "[b]need to disprove" the EXISTENCE of such gods as may suit your worldviews.[/b]

You should be able to prove or provide evidence that your god is greater or better than the other gods don't you think so? You should be able to show that all things came into being by your god and not the islamic god.

@Dalama

Are you sure you are not an atheist?

@ dalaman

Nice write up, you provided a case for atheism that I believe some atheist can not even do. _{Are you sure you are not an atheist?}

noetic2:
does that deny the existence/possibility of miracles?

It depends on what you call miracles. some scientific discoveries are also called miracles but miracles that are promised in the bible, like healing the sick, raising the dead, drinking poison and not being affeted by it, and stepping on the head of wild snakes and not getting hurt do NOT happen. If miracles are real them why can't god heal amputees and make their amputated lims grow back? Why are miracles ALWAYS hidden or things that will eventually happen anyway? Go to the national hospital in abuja and see all the sophisticated live saving machies and other medical quipments that are inside the hospital, people pray all the time even when they are on those machines but the truth is if any body TRULY believes that there is a god that will heal them through miracles when they pray to him when they are sick non of those machines will ever be there.

ttalks:
Apart from the leviathan which donnie pointed out(which actually is the bible's representation of what we call dragons), Job 40:15-23 describes the behemoth which completely fits the description of a dinosaur.
The scientific theory of the earth being millions of years old is wrong as carbon dating is based on three unfounded assumptions.
I started a thread similar to this sometime ago but left it when it wasn't really patronised properly.

leviathans are great sea creatures according to the bible are dinosaurs sea creatures? How old is the earth if I may ask?

davidylan:
yawn . . . pls respond to my last post. tired of this brainless and fruitless back and forth with these dishonest sons of belial.

Of course I expect you to yawn to hide away your shame, the only person that has been caught plagiarizing and changing positions all over a single thread is you. I have responded your post you deluded, block-headed and ridiculous wannabe descendant of the mythical abraham.

If only you can read and understand what people are saying rather than hurrying to sound stupid and block-headed.

bindex:
If only you read what i wrote[b] the second time[/b] you will see that i provided the source and you won't be here be here making a fool of yourself. foolish fool.

bindex:
Now lets talk about the historical aspects? Why is there no mention of the Flood in the records of Egyptian or Mesopotamian civilizations which existed at the time? Biblical dates (I Kings 6:1, Gal 3:17, various generation lengths given in Genesis) place the Flood 1300 years before Solomon began the first temple. We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C. Unfortunately, the Egyptians (among others) have written records dating well back before 2250 B.C. (the Great Pyramid, for example dates to the 26th century B.C., 300 years before the Biblical date for the Flood). No sign in Egyptian inscriptions of this global flood around 2250 B.C.

Why do other flood myths vary so greatly from the Genesis account? Flood myths are fairly common worldwide, and if they came from a common source, we should expect similarities in most of them. Instead, the myths show great diversity. For example, people survive on high land or trees in the myths about as often as on boats or rafts, and no other flood myth includes a covenant not to destroy all life again.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html#r6Alley

Lean to read you brainless goon. Before ejaculating like a disturbed retard.