₦airaland Forum

[quote author=~Lady~ link=topic=200073.msg3182927#msg3182927 date=1228430751]um David sorry o, but this isn't the perfect come back. Chemistry and the Bible are not on the same page o. Chemistry has been changed over time as understanding and findings have come underway, so chemistry should be edited and changed when there are new findings, but not the Bible.

But I do get the point you were trying to make sha.[/quote]I know but i had to use an analogy he could comprehend much better.

Bastage:
The Bible has been edited hundreds of times.

I have a dozen different editions sitting on my book-shelf right now. My favourite is what is known as a Parallel Bible. It has the King James version on one side of the page and the 1881 revision on the other side. It's amazing looking at the same page and seeing just how many differences there are.

your chemistry textbook has been edited so many times . . . it has thus become unreliable. Maybe you can stop studying chemistry too.

4 Play:
The irony is that the self-assured bumpkins who castigate religion are often people who sorely lack the ability to reason.

I cant count the number of times i have had to reach this same conclusion.

Bastage:
It's like arguing with a Muslim. They'll never give you a straight answer either.
Isaac Newton was born almost 400 years ago. 400 years ago he was considered a heretic. By your standards of "judgement" today he would still be considered a heretic.
Try again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton%27s_religious_views

I never get a straight answer from you either besides the tired old excuse of "research", the bone-headed obstinacy that is based on a gross negligence of facts and the over reliance on dubious websites put up by people with an agenda.

James Joule, Gregor Mendel, John Dalton, Blaise Pascal . . . were all devout christians.

Nobel Laureates who were devout christians - Richard Smalley, Walter Kohn, Nevill Mott, John Eccles and many more.

You're nothing but an intellectual midget besides these men . . . i dont blame you . . . Earnest Hemmingway it was who attempted to fool the world when he famously made this stupid claim - "All thinking men are atheists."

Bastage:
@DavidDylan.
They are the rules of men. Period.

- You claim to at least believe in a "god" . . . what are His/Her rules?

- Why are they "rules of men"? How did you arrive at that conclusion and why? Because they are not compatible with your fleshly desires?

Bastage:
And how many times do you want me to type that I don't give a crap about heaven?

If you truly didnt the religion section would be the last place to waste your time. I've heard it 1000 times, the very people who claim "god", heaven and hell dont matter to them seem to live exclusively on the religion sections.

Bastage:
Name them. Go on. Who are these "intelligent scientists"? And don't go pulling up names from hundreds of years ago when professing not to be a Christian would have got you your balls cut off. Name some contemporary, modern-day geniuses who believe in the bible as "God's Word revealed to man".

this in highlights is the ready excuse you and your ilk bandy around as an excuse when we mention the likes of Isaac Newton. Sorry but there are many contemporary scientists here whom you dont know who profess a staunch belief in the bible.

Bastage:
Then analyse and expose.
Go for it.

I already did. There was nothing to analyse there. Filing a thread with endless grammar with little substance seems to be the stock in trade of a lot of you.

[quote author=~Lady~ link=topic=200073.msg3182774#msg3182774 date=1228428150]Chris, instead of asking man about God, why don't you ask God himself. You will not believe if man tells you, you will only believe if God tells you. That is what I have observed from the convos I have had with you.[/quote]Chris isnt really interested in asking God anything. All he is wants is a "God" who will turn a blind eye to his sins but still guarantee him heaven. That is what he and is ilk mean when they tell you God is wicked.

Bastage:
I don't condemn the Bible per se in the same way that I don't condemn the Qu'ran.
They are just books. Pieces of paper. They are worthless until they are read. Then they are either great or disastrous depending on interpretation. Unfortunately, it seems that disastrous is making a return.

Scriptures do not make a religion until they are read by men. And that is where the problem occurs.
You say to appreciate the fact that men penned the Bible, but the problem is that once it was penned, to a large degree it became immovable. This meant that errors became dogma. Also, there are so many contradictions, interpretation becomes very, very difficult. Putting the religions to paper means that they aren't flexible and I honestly believe that this is a big failure. I personally prefer the old ways of oral tradition and editing as you go along as with many of the Buddhist and Hindu scripts. Unfortunately, Biblical editing has been very slap-dash and sometimes even compounded errors (not to mention influenced by politics).

There is so much written here . . . garnished of course in flowery language . . . that is ultimately meant to decieve. A careful analysis of the points made expose them to be nothing but a desperate attempt to play down the significance of righteous christian living.

The soul that sinneth it shall die. You can crow about the "injustice" of it from now till next yr.

Bastage:
No. Salvation is totally and utterly irrelevant to me. Concentrating on it is at odds with everything I believe in.

this problem has been highlighted from time immemorial. The REAL ISSUE with many of you "researchers" is that you want a God that is flexible, one that is amenable to your own fleshly desires. You have no wish to abide by His rules but want Him to welcome you with open arms into heaven.

Bastage:
@DavidDylan.
Research. Lots and lots of research. Some of what stands out is obvious (like politics) some not so obvious (like ritual) - but I study everything and anything that I think may be relevant - from Mathematics to History, from Science to my own personal sense of spirituality.

what type of "research"? One geared towards understanding God more or one that is already predicated on picking out none existent holes in the bible?

the idea that you have some extra knowledge of the bible because you've carried out "lots of research" is laughable. There are more renowned men than you, more intelligent scientists who have done way more "research" than you would ever do shld you live your life 5 times over . . . if they could believe the bible as God's Word revealed to man then ur opinion is nothing to me.

Bastage:
Most certainly not by taking everything that is written in the Bible at face value. And definitely not by having Him defined by organised religion and by other men.

How do you know what is defined by organised religion and what is not?

[quote author=Ebony-Silk link=topic=189700.msg3181838#msg3181838 date=1228414572]Then why didn't you answer one of the question?
It's ok. . . .we understand [/quote]i don old pass all this type of simple questions.

hubreality:
David, the evangelization or reach out to China is a move energized by God's Spirit. The Word of God that will be preached in China is full of Power. Being critical about God's word and the power therein is fruitless. Are you going to stop the move of the Spirit? Why not use your time to win souls for Jesus and be a source of strength and joy to others. No arguements are allowed in this thread. You're free to start any thread against pastor Chris, CEC or whatever. It's not News! This thread is centered in God's Love only. Only share your love walk with Jesus and among brethren to the glory of God.
The harvest of souls in China are ready and plenty. Glory to Jesus, I'm part of it. Hallelujah!

Again and again these frauds try to deceptively pull the wool over the eyes of the unsuspecting by trying to force the lie that to criticise their man-made altars of self-worship (aka BLW) is to criticize God's word and power. NO IT IS NOT THE SAME!

God's word and power is forever . . . everlasting to everlasting and it faileth not.

the issue is YOU.

I ran into a short summary of a new TV show being hosted by a young minister in the UK and while reading came across the following excerpt -

The show is hosted by Award winning Youth Diplomat, Europe’s Premier Youth and Young Adult Leader, and British Red Cross Humanitarian Citizen Ambassador – Dayo Israel. With deep experience in the media industry and youth development, Dayo bring a trail blazing approach to TV talk shows through “How with Dayo Israel”

So like the Berean christians did, i chose to compare this blatant expression of self promotion with that of apostle Paul -

Phil 3:4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: 5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; 6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. 8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: 10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;

I'm no longer sure if a lot of "pastors" are still reading the same epistles that the apostles wrote 2000 years ago, i'm no longer sure what role denying oneself for Christ plays among the body of Christ anymore.
I don't even know what it means to be called a "christian" anymore.

Is it now a social club for the religious pharisees?

Cristalz:
You seem to be missing David's point.

Jesus is already Lord yeah,but he isn't Lord over an individual's life until that individual makes a conscious decision to that effect. Jesus doesn't force anybody to put him first in their lives. . .you make that decision all by yourself.
When you choose to do that, then he is your personal Lord. Emphasis on ''personal''.

thank you. Saved me having to explain all over again. JeSoul, my point in a nutshell.

JeSoul:
I agree. My beef is not with the altar call in itself David, it's moreso with the way it is prevalently practiced: calling the sinners down, playing the emotional music, telling them to repeat a prayer, and then declaring them saved - that's what I mean by "altar call" and that's my gripe lays brotha.

You have a point. There's one thing i noticed, create an atmosphere of fear (of hell, the devil and the afterlife), play some emotional music and you are bound to get emotional reactions from the congregation (popularly mistaken as genuine conviction).

The idea that saying a 5 sec sinners prayer automatically makes a person saved is false. You dont get saved until YOU as an individual:

1. Realise that you have sinned and wronged God
2. Realised that God has provided a way of escape through His death on the cross
3. Are willing to, of your own accord not the prompting of your pastor, decided to give your life to Jesus.

I usually remember the conversion of the Eunuch by Philip. It was he who was reading the book of Isaiah, it was he who asked the questions about salvation . . . Philip's role was not to "lead him in prayer" but to guide him through a journey of discovering salvation.
Note that Philip must have seen the body of water but it took the insistence of the eunuch before Philip would baptise him.

Conversion is a heart thing, your pastor cannot do it for you neither can merely repeating a generic prayer save you.

[quote author=Ebony-Silk link=topic=201056.msg3181876#msg3181876 date=1228415041]I say, stay free and single. . . . [/quote]i'll remember this.

[quote author=Danke. link=topic=203674.msg3181796#msg3181796 date=1228413819] look tonto boobs u don see my own,only say my own dey higher and bigger _{anyways i don see her before}
[/quote]without the weight of legal proof we cannot ascertain the veracity of this claim.

Show us a clear picture and it sufficeth us.

I will return to address a few of my concerns later but two things struck me:

search and nowhere will you see anything like making Jesus your "personal Lord and Savior". We don't make Jesus Lord, He IS Lord. - It is true that Jesus IS Lord but it is our conscious duty to make the personal decision to accept him as Lord over our lives. So in that sense i dont see anything wrong with "making Jesus your personal Lord and Saviour.

Christ is the Saviour of the world but until you come to Him in Godly repentance, His death on the cross is of no value to you.

- Is there anything wrong with an "altar-call"? I say not . . . Because the bible does not expressly say that Peter called for those who wanted to be saved to come forward does not mean what we do now is wrong.

primary school biology . . . chei!

As i hear say na boobs be the focus of this thread na im carry me come.

spikedcylinder:
I don't understand her boobs. Are they big or are they average? in one set of pictures, they appear large, in others, they appear average. Whats the real deal?

As una get experience reach nobody fit explain this question?  

Na the answer be this - Those boobs have started to experience the "downfall" effect. Though large, the center of mass has shifted ensuring the nipples point towards the toes rather than the front of the chest.
Depending on the bra used, you can either "shift" the boobs to give an "upward" effect or simply allow them to obey gravity (hence the "average" look).

A very important clue in determining cases like this is the apparent absence of any semblance of a cleavage.

she can kill the baby or give it up for adoption . . . in Nigeria of course.

na Wigan will go home losers.

arramyjay:
It is simple then let her change her religion,Take her to your Imam.

ummm why cant he change his?

[quote author=~Lady~ link=topic=74061.msg3155150#msg3155150 date=1227910587]Anyway, this is the reason why Sacred Tradition is really important, even thought some people because of their pride refuse to acknowledge it (Not you Chris), but the reason we know who wrote what is because of Sacred Tradition and because these writings were kept and used. They weren't just floating around. The ones that were floating around were the ones that were questioned and not included.
So because Catholics (early christians) kept to what was taught to them, they knew who taught what and in what way. Each author has his own style of writing, especially to the people he was writing to. Because we know who these people were talking to and what they talked about and their style of teaching we are able to tell who taught what and where. So the writers of the gospels were very well known.

Yeah some people say that the early christians weren't "organised religion" when in fact all the information we know of today was kept well because they were "organised"

if they weren't "organised" we wouldn't have the info we have today. plain and simple. someone had to have documented it. their organisation may be different and considered disorganised in our day but in their day they were well organised.
If everyone realised what sacred tradition is we'll able to counter people who bring up issues to try to break the faith, and bring up falsifications and non-facts just because they saw it and decided to believe it. Basically non-christians (this would be you Chris, ) and those who claim to be christians but don't know a thing about Christ and his teachings[/quote]sacred tradition bla bla bla bla . . . the JEWS kept accurate records and because of them we know those who wrote what. this back-door attempt by Italians who morphed into a religion of fraud to usurp jewish history is pathetic.

Chrisbenogor:
David I think its having an intellectual discussion with you that is difficult. I have been screaming focus, it does not change the fact that they did not have authors I do not expect anything I only say the original authors are not known how hard is that to admit!

You havent shown me anything to prove that you're even making a half-hearted attempt at an "intellectual discourse". you cant keep throwing meaningless words around and expect me to lap it up.

What is your EVIDENCE that the writers are truly not known? You keep harping on your own poorly explained point of view even in the light of evidence that ii showed you.

Smacks of intellectuall dishonesty to me.

And pls tell your clueless lapdog mazaje to try another tactic.

Pastors are "big men" . . . what do you expect? They are too busy to tend the sheep.

tope2000:
U are happy i got angry
the guy is mad jare

lol i've never seen you lose your cool before . . .

tope2000:
Are u crazy or did madman piss inside ur brain
Was i talking you? Idiot

Tope got angry today?
Ope o!

tope2000:
David when i said Good sex, i don't mean everyday pounding
might be 2-3 days a week of good one

na big mouth una get. 2-3 days a week? Shame on you.  

the same girls would be the first to use the "tired" excuse.

I agree with Ogboralph. There is a deeper mystery beyond mere eating of a physical apple.

Outstrip:
Nobody likes a woman like that not even other women so that is not what I meant. A man is more likely to be jealous of a woman's success that a woman is to be jealous of a man's.

I dont know those type of men.

Tope - professional thread derailer . . . na railway station you dey work?

Outstrip:
Most nigerian men are intimidated by successful women.

Depends on your idea of "successful women". If you mean women who are obnoxious, self-centered, rude and who think the sun rises and sets at their feet then yeah . . . men arent intimidated but put off by them.