₦airaland Forum

Hi Inesqor -

Fair points, but please note that I have not said that influenecs do not exist. Rather this is what I said -

I see your point but it does not change my view because even where there is influence, it takes two to tango. Nobody can influence another person without that other person accepting the influence. Nobody can influence you to commit murder without you first burying your own conscience.

Please note it carefully and I believe it addresses all your concerns. If there are any you think it does not address, please let me know.

If indeed you read M_Nwankwo's post, and if you absorbed it, then you would undetrstanfd my view better. Because within that post you can understand that I do not believe that a person will be saved or damned on account of denominations or labels. And for this reason the concerns being expressed here about souls being lost on account of debates here is surely paranoid. Any soul that is lost on such an account was already lost.

InesQor:
Hmm Deep Sight thanks for your reply, though I don't totally agree. My view is midway between yours and the popular view that churches and people can "save". I believe it is up to each soul to absorb the free gift of salvation but My view also has to do with influence. It is easier for some people to influence other people's lives, by nature of their interaction or the elevation at which those people have placed them in their minds. At the end of the day, it is up to each human to believe or not (as you have said), but I believe any soul who claims to have any partaking in love for God ought not to lead others into possible failure and/or damnation.

I hear you. But i insist that salvation rests as a rock within the spirit - and no man or church can save or damn anyone else. The living spark of love and charity, once alive in a man, cannot be taken away by anything - least of all by these online debates and such rhetoric.

Do this: take a cup and fill it with half measure of water and half measure of oil. There is no amount of influence that will make the oil mix with the water. Each liquid will separate itself on account of its different weight and consistency.

Thus the intrinsic nature of each spirit will naturally rise or fall to its natural place within creation.

Nothing can change this.

For this reason I keep a glass in my bedrrom half water and half oil, to remind me daily of this eternal spiritual truth. Each will rise to its place by virtue of its intrinsic nature.

Did you read M_Nwankwo's post that I referred you to?

Here's an analogy (as usual to my posts, it's a wack one but it does the job ). It's like a dude in a story I once wrote, who used to "fish" from a local river by adding a cheap germicide to the water, and the fishes would float upwards, very dead. Dude would then sell the fish at a very cheap price, and market women and men would buy in volumes. Is the guy to blame for selling poisoned fish (the General Overseer), or are the sellers to blame for buying cheap fish without questions (trusting their General Overseer without questioning); or are the innocent retailers and housewives to blame for buying at the normal price (trusting their pastors without questioning) after some bargaining with the market women(pastors) and maybe they should have gone to a supermarket?

This is a bad analogy because in the case of the spirit, its intrinsic nature is what determines its fate. It is not teh consumption of anything, the nature of which it is ignorant of, that will damn it. Rather its conscientuous disposition will seal its fate.

Jesus himself taught this when he stated that there is nothing that goes into the man that corrupts him - rather it is things that come out of the man that corrupt him. This shows that it is what the intrinsic spirit gives off that is cardinal.

I hope you see my point. In some cases there is an undeniable influence brought to bear on unsuspecting "users". It is one's duty to test all spirits and take nothing hook line and sinker. If you need clarification on my point please do tell.

I see your point but it does not change my view because even where there is influence, it takes two to tango. Nobody can influence another person without that other person accepting the influence. Nobody can influence you to commit murder without you first burying your own conscience.

nuclearboy:
@DeepSight:

Joagbaje was caught using multiple IDs. How is my saying so an "insult"?
He said I am/was demonic - would you (a non-believer) go to your enemy? You may not like that I exposed him but did I lie?
He claimed to be a businessman making millions from paying tithes and then Kunle discovered he was actually collecting tithes. That is deceit and how is my saying so an insult?
How is me saying such people ought not stand on the pulpit as teachers an insult? Are Biblical standards not clear?

I do know I can be extremely insulting and emotional in these matters but I will NOT lie.

And we all do it, friend - which is why though I am repeatedly calling you "friend" deliberately, you have JUDGED (though you said only God can judge) me to be petty, insulting, ungentlemanly, etc. Just as the fake tries to insult a battle-hardened veteran by pointing towards my ancestry. Which cannot be compared to his obviously desperately reaching for societal acceptance manner in getting money no matter what/how.

My friend, I am sure with hindsight you will agree that there could have been a more tidy way to go about this. That is what I am saying to you. As it is, it is all very messy, and I am sure you could not be very proud of this.

The Symbolic Meaning of the Genie and the Lamp

Some schools of thought of the ancient eastern world viewed the physical body as a tool to reach the divine. The spirit, which is a person's true identity, needs to take a body made of flesh and blood in order to acquire consciousness, and learn the difference between good and evil. The body is full of wishes and desires – it becomes attached to the matter and longs for material things, forgetting that the body is just a temporary home for the spirit.

So, when Aladdin goes to the Cave of Wonders in order to find the magic lamp, he is advised not to touch anything, despite all the gold and sparkling gems he finds in there. This is a metaphor also used in the Bible, when Adam and Eve are told not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, symbolizing that the consciousness should not be entranced by the wonders of the physical world.

The genie, then, is the ego that comes along with the physical body. The ego naturally tries to grant all the wishes a person may have, which is an important part in the evolutionary process of the soul. The wishes, when used wisely, can make a person excel in all tasks and reach goals. The ancients understood that a person's highest goal should be to reunite with the source and no longer need a physical body, and therefore, knowledge should be used to attain this objective.

Princess Jasmine represents the other half of the soul who awaits until the incarnated consciousness comes home after a long journey in the physical existence. Many philosophical traditions of the ancient world theorized that people reach the human ideal once they become conscious of their true spiritual nature and are able to abandon the worldly pleasures.

So, when Aladdin releases the genie, he arrives at the final destination, proving he no longer needs the ego. This is when he can merge with his soulmate, and become one again with his true spiritual self.

http://www.suite101.com/content/aladdin-and-the-magic-lamp---meaning-and-symbolism-a344878

nuclearboy:
Btw, friend, you still haven't answered me - what do you say of satan's trials of Jesus? He too used scripture to achieve his objective, didn't he? How right was he?

And Jesus answered him with scripture, and not insults.

Toe that path.

One more for the road- you want me to be Christ like, yes? How Christ like then was Christ when He took a whip to defenseless people innocently going about their business in the Temple?

Even parents take a whip to children. The book of proverbs says "Spare the rod and spoil the child." Insulting their children however, might be quite unseemly.

What is the verbal equivalent of a whip? An insult, or mature correction and reproof?

Friend, if the verbal equivalent of a whip is an insult, then christians are authourized to go about insulting all whom they wish to reprove!

Of all the forms of government manknd has conceived and applied; which form do we think would be most in line with the divine will? Or for those who might not believe in divinity, let us rephrase the question. Which form or method of human government is most reflective of a higher spiritual order for society?

Democracy? Vox Populi vox dei. . . the voice of the people is the voice of God?

An absolute mornachy? . . .The king is anointed of God. . . ?

A Constitutional Mornachy. . . the King is anointed of God but the voice of the people is the voice of God?

A Theocracy?. . . Government by divine guidance. . . such as government based on the tenets of a given Religion. . . think Saudi Arabia?

What about Plato's ideal state, governed by an aristocracy of philosopher kings? -

http://www.suite101.com/content/platos-ideal-state--plato-and-the-aristocratic-government-a278155

What do you think?

This is just amazing.

Nuclearboy:

No problem. Carry on then, if that is your conviction. Continue to expose private communication in public. That is both honorable and gentlemanly. Carry Go!

Repeat: There is nothing you could not rebutt by scriptural reference only. There is also nothing you wrote above as per his emails that is of any tangible consequence. Maybe you have more, I don't know

Really I am tired of this discussion. It is petty and nauseating. Reminds me of a mob chasing down a thief. Even if the thief is a thief, there are sounder and more civil methods. Especially if the mob are a bunch of fellas claiming the moral, ethical and spiritual high ground.

We have seen exposure of private communication, vitriolic insults etc. All of these have come from you saintly lot. Not once on this thread have your so called opponents uttered an insulting word. That is telling. Please if you are a christian, act christ-like.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-687376.0.html

Inesqor, here is the link to the topic i referred to.

The post from nwankwo in the OP is my view exactly and that is why i state that the idea that souls are at stake on account of these debates is rather paranoid.

Hi Inesqor. Thank you for the courtesy of a question. That seems to be short supply amongst the Holy Vanguard on this forum these days.

WhT i mean by that statement is simply that each man is responsible for his own salvation before God. There is no church that can save or damn anybody, least of all Jo and CE. Salvation rests within the spirit and if one bears within his spirit the love of God and the spirit of charity, there is no amount of debate that can take that away from one. It simply is a gemstone sitting firmly in your conscience.

Thus when people say that souls are at stake, i think they are being paranoid. No soul will be saved or damned other than on account of that which he bears within his spirit.

I don't know if I have conveyed my meaning properly, but for a better elucidation the is a thread I opened titled "the true meaning of love, by nwankwo". In that thread i posted something written by mnwankwo in my op. Please read it, and it summarizes my view on this matter.

Thank you.

^^^ Many thanks for your insults even on my career, of which you thankfully know nothing.

The position I advocate is simply about method. If you disagree with a certain religious interpretation, can you not simply post your own correct view supported by scripture?

No need you descend to insults, abuses, and the opening of one thousand threads maligning that person. Frankly, all of that is simply unchristian and immature.

And the pattern repeats itself with me. Because i simply point out the error in these ungentlemanly and undignified methods and insults, I am also tagged appalling, manipulative, etc. You guys should really stop and examine yourselves. If you need to rebutt a falsehood, there is a dignified way to do it. Opening threads such as that opened by PASTOR AIO is just way too childish.

I do not share Agbaje's beliefs and you all know that. So the fact that I criticize your methods is no reason to turn the invective on me. But I guess that has since become an accepted pattern. Like i said before, each man to his conscience. If you see nothing wrong with the approach you all have adopted, no problem. I reacll that you yourself stated that Jo is being given too much attention. How you find it within you to abuse me for saying the same thing, I dont know.

Please my friend if you value your reputation, do not ask such excellent and reasonable questions on this forum. Very soon people will describe you as an underhand and appalling satan. My two cents.

Pastor AIO:
You have a way of being underhand that I find quite appalling.  That is why I think you recognise your type in Joe.

Standard responses these days. Any dissenting view is an underhand view. God dey.

Its allowed to open threads requesting links persecuting another poster for his differing views, but a protest against such amounts to being "apalling", even when you, Pastor, already apologized and indeed acceded that your thread was malicious.

Just examine yourself sha. We all have a conscience and I am sure you do have one.

Since you cannot dispute anything these days without violent abuses, (notwithstanding that your own conduct has become childish), then we must permanently resile from discussion.

@ Pastor, Enigma.

Okay, and thanks. We can agree to disagree. Good afternoon.

Edit: By the way, I did not read the thread/ link. I merely saw and extracted that statement of yours which is and remains an eternal truism, whether you were joking or not - anything that truly belongs to you cannot be taken away from you. Certainly not by online religious debates.

Enigma:
I'm afraid your urging is lost on me. I have written what I wrote and I stand by it: some support Joagbaje because it suits their caricature of Christianity, some because it does not reproach them, others because they do similar things like double IDs etc.

What is "support"? Is criticizing a given approach "support"? ? ?

If I see a mob lynching a thief in the street, and I criticze their method, does that amount to support of the thief?

And when you list the reasons for the so called "support" - do you deny that there still remain people who have reasons other than the reasons you mentioned? Must everyone have a nefarious motive simply because he does not agree with you?

Answer these honetsly, if you will sir. Especially about the thief in the street and the method of the mob. Does criticizing such a method amount to "support" of the thief?

Pastor AIO:
O, you really are a pathetic and pitiful monkey!!

Gracias. This has since become typical. And it is especially remarkable coming from one moaning about "saving souls." I have become permanently convinced that someone has hijacked your account. It simply cant be you.

That entire thread was done in jest. Why didn't you quote the whole of what I said.

Pastor I DEMAND HONESTY! - Did the jest there take anything away from the timeless truth you uttered when you said that anything that is truly yours cannot be taken away? That is what I am driving at mate.

In other words - it is not within the power of Jo or CEC to damn any soul. Any soul that is lost can only blame itself. No sould that has teh spark of love within it will be lost. Like you said - that which is truly yours cannot be taken away from you. Not by Jo, not by CEC, and certainly not by online religious debates. Thus even if you were jesting, I use that trusim appropriately.

It is becoming clear why you are so keen to support Joe. You are of the same ilk.

You obviously do not even know the meaning of the word "support". You have joined the crew who see any objection to a given approach as "support" of the person attacked by that approach,. Come on.

Deepsight this is low.

My dear, you know the truth always. There is no need to start to demonize me as well simply because I have a different view. That is exactly what I complain is wrong about the attitude to Jo.  Demonization on account of different views.

Enigma:
Others prefer to support Joagbaje because it suits them: some of the non-Christians prefer to use his type of portrayal of Christianity as their straw-man for attacking Christianity; some prefer some of his more "worldly" approach because it does not reprove them; some will support his actions like using double-IDs because they do the same etc etc etc.

I urge you not to attribute a motive to everything. I find the persecution and vitriol obnoxious. That is my view. Got no motive other than that which I have stated. In fact there are others who share my view. Do you regard them all to be as insidiously evil and hypocritical as Deep Sight? Come on.

I repeat: if people disagree: disagreement is permitted. The man has always cited scripture to support his contentions. Please simply carry on citing your own scripture as well to debunk them. That's the essence of a good debate. No need to get personal.

But then, some people always get personal once their convictions are challenged.

And I retain this -

Pastor AIO:
Okay, I stand corrected. This thread is malicious. I apologize to all concerned. Above all to Joagbaje. My apologies.

- - - as an accepted reference. Kudos.

And in support of my assertion that no charitable soul can be lost, I quote from you, Pastor AIO -

Pastor AIO:
What is yours can never be taken away from you. Ti ewure ba ja lo, a pada wale o, ti agutan ba je lo, a pada wale o. Ile o, abosimi oko. If Goat or Sheep should escape it will still come back home, because home is the resting place after work.

Pastor AIO:
There are souls at stake

There is not one single soul that will be lost if such a soul has the unction of love and charity. And in that regard, God, and not man, is the judge.

and it is only fair that someone coming unto NL for the first time can quickly make references. It took me over half an hour to find the link above.

There is no justification for what you did in opening such a malicious and petty thread. Do not try to dignify it as some altruistic act. It is only fair that anyone coming to NL as a new comer can freely open threads to make their own inquiries from Jo and co. If you were being fair, you would also seek links to thread where these same guys have preached stuff that no one disputed.

If your thread was done as a joke, (as I myself have made joking threads about others before), fair enough. No harm in a good joke. But to the extent that you try to render it a serious matter, that is contemptible. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

nuclearboy:
^^ Not too surprised. Especially at your desire to take the bite away from my allegory and water it down.

You know that is the proper analogy.

Questions are simply

1. Is said dude a biblical example of a Christian with what we've seen? Pls do not make me go thru the entire hog of multiple ids , lies etc again.

2. Can the blind lead the blind successfully? At least, according to the Bible since you have alternative viewpoint?

3. Are his reputation and emotions of more weight than the hundreds following these erroneous teachings and getting into problems?

The simple [point is that fair arguments can be made without vitriol. In so doing, you could wage a decent and gentlemanly campaign against that which you think is wrong. Think: Mahatma Ghandi's non-violent resistance.

4. What would a decent DeepSight say about someone who professes enmity publicly but befriends him privately? That he is a lovely chap of upstanding morals and character, perhaps?

I don't know much about the history of your relationship with Jo. But what I have witnessed is that I have scarcely seen him bandying any vitriolic insults even when the same has been heaped on him in gargantuan quantities consistently. I thus doubt that he will call you his "enemy", though I may be wrong. I don't see anything wrong in reaching out to you privately. Depending on the words used, reaching out to a vehement critic might actually be a great thing to do. But the caveat is that I am not in a position to comment since I do not know what he wrote to you. But I strongly believe that you ought to have played teh dignified gentleman by keeping private communication private. There is nothing in his posts which you cannot rebutt by fairscriptural arguments without a need to "spill the beans" on any private communication. That really does not look good on anybody - and it never wil, so I am surprised to see Aleth and Enigma endorse that. But they are entitled to their views. For me, I think its unsporting.

Lol, Nwankwo! You may be modest, but you don't just have deep sight, you have deepest sight.

By the way, I was also just playin a pun on my user name.

Just for the record, I reproduce here the post I made which elicited the response quoted in the OP.

@ Nuclearboy -

Sincerely my shock is simply that one would divulge any details of a private communication. I simply feel that that is ungentlemanly, unethical and below the belt. This is my sincere feeling, and I personally would not do such. I tell you this in good faith.

The truth is that you guys have a lot of disagreements with Jo's views on scripture. I urge you to understand that it is perfectly permissible to have different understandings of scripture. The mere fact of a different view of scripture is no reason for the level of invective I have seen consistently directed at Jo. You could point out your disagreements and educate the public civilly on your views which you believe are the correct interpretations. Everyone is entitled to his view.

And I say to you very sincerely: when we speak about the interpretation of scripture, in most of what Jo writes, all that is obvious to the calm and non-participatory observer is that you simply have different views: I say to you that if you would be less emotional, you might see that there is a lot that Jo writes that is very tenable indeed. I thus find it extremely hard to understand the agression and vitriol.

Different views are different views. It particularly strikes me because virtually everything that I see Jo argue, he argues with the aid and defense of scripture which he quotes. I remember once I went into detail to describe why I did not see anything unscriptural in some of the teachings you pointed out.

I say this to you in all calm sincerity. I am aware that you have always imputed some sinister motive to me for speaking on the positive side of Jo - but there is none whatsoever. I do not wish you to waste any time imagining that there is any such elusive motive on my part: I am telling in absolute honesty and sincerity as I see it.

I have gone through Jo's posts again on this thread and sincerey, maybe I am the one lacking deep sight, but I have not seen any heresy in what he has argued, and indeed there has been a good deal of scripture in support. So it is obvious that you simply have different views, which is allowed, and there is no reason to get angry, insultive or ungentlemanly in that regard.

I am sure that justification by works under the OT law is a subject that you will agree many people could legitimatley have diverse views on. Stop for a moment and examine your own views on the subject and then ask yourself which sounds most fantastical?

Pastor AIO, are you also joining the crucify-him crowd up in arms against Jo?

This fellow has been rather excessively persecuted. People disagree all the time. I really don't know what is so outrageous about his specific views that warrant the unprecedented level of attention and vitriol against him. If people disagree, they should argue their points, simple.

Personally I think this thread is in bad taste.

nuclearboy:
@DeepSight:

Claims : -> Jo is a pastor. A Christian. A mature one and a sincere person.

Issue: -> What are the characteristics of Sincere Mature Christian pastors

As simply as possible -
1. Fear of God
2. Honesty
3. True sincerity
4. refusal to hobnob with evil and/or evil semblances
5. I could go on but you catch the drift

You know very well that only God can be the judge of such things.

And if you then are not a Christian, should I allow things stand as "To each his own" and allow you teach "anti-TRUE-Christian" stuff when I am supposed to be my brother's keeper?

What you could do is to civilly point out the errors in his assertions, and, backing your views with scripture, thereby educate and enlighten the flock.

How would you feel if your chambers/office had a couple of guys who repeatedly went out and defrauded clients in your name? Would your partners keep quiet simply because "they are lawyers like us"? What would that do to the reputation of your firm? How long would your firm stomach it? Would you be angry with your firm for involving police or failing that, for asking them to stop and at their refusal, dissociating the rest of the firm from their activities?

The proper analogy would be to say that there are attorneys in my law firm who have different LEGAL views from me on LEGAL issues, and have different interpretations of the law than I do. (Joagbaje has different RELIGIOUS views and interpretations from you). In that event I will simply make my own arguments based on the law and legal principles only. That is what you need to do. Nothing else.

@ Nuclearboy -

Sincerely my shock is simply that one would divulge any details of a private communication. I simply feel that that is ungentlemanly, unethical and below the belt. This is my sincere feeling, and I personally would not do such. I tell you this in good faith.

The truth is that you guys have a lot of disagreements with Jo's views on scripture. I urge you to understand that it is perfectly permissible to have different understandings of scripture. The mere fact of a different view of scripture is no reason for the level of invective I have seen consistently directed at Jo. You could point out your disagreements and educate the public civilly on your views which you believe are the correct interpretations. Everyone is entitled to his view.

And I say to you very sincerely: when we speak about the interpretation of scripture, in most of what Jo writes, all that is obvious to the calm and non-participatory observer is that you simply have different views: I say to you that if you would be less emotional, you might see that there is a lot that Jo writes that is very tenable indeed. I thus find it extremely hard to understand the agression and vitriol.

Different views are different views. It particularly strikes me because virtually everything that I see Jo argue, he argues with the aid and defense of scripture which he quotes. I remember once I went into detail to describe why I did not see anything unscriptural in some of the teachings you pointed out.

I say this to you in all calm sincerity. I am aware that you have always imputed some sinister motive to me for speaking on the positive side of Jo - but there is none whatsoever. I do not wish you to waste any time imagining that there is any such elusive motive on my part: I am telling in absolute honesty and sincerity as I see it.

I have gone through Jo's posts again on this thread and sincerey, maybe I am the one lacking deep sight, but I have not seen any heresy in what he has argued, and indeed there has been a good deal of scripture in support. So it is obvious that you simply have different views, which is allowed, and there is no reason to get angry, insultive or ungentlemanly in that regard.

I am sure that justification by works under the OT law is a subject that you will agree many people could legitimatley have diverse views on. Stop for a moment and examine your own views on the subject and then ask yourself which sounds most fantastical?

nuella2:
@nuclearboy

Are you the only person he sent a mail to? Why are you the only person talking abt it in every thread? Alot of pple sent me mails and we discuss privately, i dont bring such to nl even if its in the nature of a woman to talk mostimes without limit, for christ sake you are a man o! This your attitude its disguisting to me, haha Chineke!

NLMediator:
Generally, my take is that it is not good form to bring up the fact or content of private correspondence into the public arena. Except extraordinary circumstances warrant divulging such information, like when a life is directly at stake. E.g., somebody writes that he or another person plans to hurt Miss B or Mr. C.

In fact, I am shocked.

what is wrong with skinpy dresses? ssexuality is a potent tool of worship

Pastor AIO:
I knew it!!

Lol. Have never denied it. School days sha.

But more seriously, the altered state of mind that it produces (at least for the spiritually minded), is mind-blowing (pun intended).

It enables one to view the world in all its astounding strangeness.

And I use that word "strangeness" . . . very advisedly.

Only when one is under igbo can one recognise something as simple and yet as strange as the fact that a man walking down the street is a very strange phenomenon and that men do not belong to nature as known on earth.

But abeg. Make I sharrap before una carry me go yaba-left.

As a reformed igbo expert, i can confirm that it makes one feel like a sorcerer in a dreamlike realm . . .

^^^ Honestly, its so incisive. It strikes the chord of truth. He clearly has deep sight.

Sadly I don't use a BB. Brand loyalty.

God is love. One can also say that God is the source of love. All creatures of God irrespective of race, religion, sex, nationality etc can absorb of this love of God and dispense it accordingly. In the case of human beings, what absorbs this love from God is the human spirit. This love will permeate the spirit, its clocks including the outermost shell, the physical body. Thus he who absorbs the rays of love will manifest love including love for all creations of God. Now, the recognition of this love as coming from God depends on the various radiation connection between the spirit and the various shells surrounding the spirit, the last shell being the physical body and its coordinating center, the human brain. In many of us, this radiation connections are not straight, thus the shells enveloping the spirit are not conscious of the impressions that vibrates in the spirit. Thus a man may believe himself to be an atheist because that is what his brain tells him and yet his spirit is in the recognition of God. Irrespective of his brain telling him that God does not exist, the emanations of the spirit including love still permeates his mind and body resulting in expressions of genuine love. Thus although from a human standpoint, such a man is considered by himself and others to be atheist, spiritually the man is a theist.

In a similar vein the brain and the mind may be trained or indoctrinated or programmed to believe in God but their spirit has no recognition of God. In this case, this believer is actually an atheist even though he believes himself to be a theist. However because he, that is, the spirit has no connection with God, he cannot absorb the rays of love and manifest it. Thus, in spite of his intellectual believe in God, he still manifests the works of the flesh including hatred, anger, lust, gossip, avarice, fear, etc. The species of a seed determines the fruits that it will bear. Thus all genuine love and human beings who indulge in it believe in God even when they are unconscious of it while on earth.

Thus, all human beings who indulge in genuine love are of God and all those who indulge in hatred are not of God. By there works or fruits, you shall know those who stand in the will of God and those that oppose it or do not recognize it. This is an infallible yardstick to know who belongs to God and those who are not.

Therefore the love of God manifests in the love of all creations of God. On earth, it is possible for an atheist to love God without being spiritually conscious of it. However if such atheist continues in the manifestation of the love of God, either later in this earthly life or in the beyond on in another earthly life the emanations of the love of God that vibrates in his spirit will also permeate his earthly brain such that he also becomes conscious of the existence of God while in the physical body. What counts is how our spirit is close or far away from the will of God. Religion, nationality, sex, class and similar things that we think are very important while on earth are worthless once we drop this physical body.

In my view, there is no difference between the pope, the Christian, the mystic or an atheists when it concerns the will of God. Murder is murder whether perpetrated by a pope, a theist or an atheist. Genuine love is genuine love whether it came from an atheist, a pastor or an agnostic. Sometimes we think too much and thus think nothing. If we look around even on earth, we should find that the natural laws which are the manifestation of the will of God in nature does not give a hoot about all these artificial constructs. If a bud-hist sows yam in a fertile soil, he will reap yam. The same goes for an atheist and the theist. In an earthquake or epidemic or accident, both theists and atheists are saved and killed. A deeper look on why these things are the way they are may open our eyes to the working of God. Best wishes.

The above in red was written and posted sometime ago by the wisest man on Nairaland, M_Nwankwo.

For me, it is one of the best posts I have ever seen on this Forum.

I just feel compelled to share it and highlight it again for reflection.