₦airaland Forum

Cult members are NOT criminals until they break the criminal law.

hopefulLandlord:
Is there any such thing as "Unconditional Love"?

Hahaha...I wouldn't say there is.

A or F

bloodofthelamb:
The earth cannot continue in it sinful state forever. Those who refuse, the free gift of God's righteousness and nature in Christ will finally be destroyed in hell alongside the devil in a righteous judgement.

Is God all powerful?

Going by the bible, it can be argued that God doesn't have unconditional love. Else, there'll be no place for eternal punishment.

Expect a level of free thought from someone before you disclose some of your beliefs or unbelief.

johnydon22:
Ok

Alright

No No No. Descriptions of unknown things are usually executed by employing a combination of near words available to discriber.

John's description did not show one that was alien to his knowledge, his descriptions were vivid and precise.

Example: In Igbo land when we first came in contact with bicycles, we called them Iron horse (inyinya igwe) this hints on both the material and animal we believe it mimicks. And to a 21st century mind, iron horse connotes a mechanical horse.

In John's case, his descriptions were direct and precise.



But your great grand father's discription of a TV would have an subtle inference to its mechanical nature.

The book of Ezekiel, he referred to a vision where he saw a living creature with eyes all over, wheels for legs that could turn in every direction.

Ezekiel 1.

When I looked, I saw a stormy wind coming from the north. There was a great cloud with a bright light around it and fire flashing out of it. Something that looked like glowing metal was in the center of the fire.


Now as I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the ground by each of the living creatures with its four faces. 16 The wheels and the way they were made were like this: They looked like sparkling chrysolite. All four of them looked the same, like one wheel crossways inside another wheel. 17 When they moved, they went in any one of the four directions, without turning as they went. 18 The rims of the wheels were high and frightening and were full of eyes all around.

19 When the living creatures moved, the wheels moved beside them. When the living creatures were lifted up from the ground, the wheels also were lifted up. 20 Wherever the spirit would go, the living creatures would go. And the wheels were lifted up beside them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. 21 When the living creatures moved, the wheels moved. When the living creatures stopped, the wheels stopped. And when the living creatures were lifted from the ground, the wheels were lifted beside them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels.

22 Now, over the heads of the living creatures was something like a dome that sparkled like ice and was frightening. 23 And under the dome the wings of the living creatures were stretched out straight toward one another. Each living creature also had two wings covering its body. 24 I heard the sound of their wings, like the roaring sound of the sea, as they moved. It was like the voice of God Almighty, a roaring sound like a noisy army. When the living creatures stopped, they lowered their wings.



This discription was showing a technology that was alien to Ezekiel's culture and time. But he managed to discribe them using words that were attainable to his time but still exhibited a clear distinction between what was normal and his discription even though he used normal words.

John's visions and descriptions did not come in this format.

Your response was quite elaborate.
Considering your last statement, your conclusion will be ...?

johnydon22:
Alright brother.

No. But like every religious book there are two intents behind the biblical stories.

1. For theological purpose
2. A hint of history.

The stories that are intended as theological lessons both in Old and New testament are mostly false or exaggerated and they constitute a bigger part of the bible. Example, Job, Daniel etc.

The stories that attempt a hint at history have subtle truths in them even though largely exeggerated: E.G: Ezdras


No. Theological stories however are meant for one purpose, to impact spiritual edification and upliftment. E.G: The story of Israel being rescued from Egypt was written as a time of Babylonian exile trying to make the people strong and faithful that their salvation is at hand. It was for a theological purpose not historical.



No. There are many biblical characters I happen to think once walked this earth, even Jesus himself.

I won't argue that the exaggerations weren't intentional for specific purposes as it is very likely. However, my concern is on how we perceive the stories and discern the real ones from the imagined one.

In this case, your focus is on a portion of the revelation by John and as we see, it was really influenced by the times in which he lived.

So do you expect John, who supposedly walked the earth a couple thousand years to describe something he saw the same way a 21st century man would?
He described things he 'saw' by words available in his vocabulary.

Let me put it in a different light.
The way my great grand father would describe a television when he saw it the first time (if at all he saw it) may sound ridiculous to me.

Hello Johnydon22,

I'd like to ask some questions.

Do you think all stories in the bible are false?
Are all happenings imaginations?
Are all the characters fictional?

Jesse01:
[color=darkblue]some people goes to church on Saturdays .so basically you have no point of course u have a death wish, u are on a suicide mission [/color]

You're simply too dumb to reason. No apologies.

Dami12345:
Claiming a monopoly of knowledge is one of the few must stupid failing of average people.

Because you can't doesn't mean it can't happen.
Your predecessors believed a while ago that everything worth discovering in science has been discovered.
Well guess what. They wereare wrong.

Are you digressing because you're not able to mention specifically the cloning method that births an adult clone in 14 weeks?

Luciferan369:
I do not think, I know. And I have no reason to explain further.

Stop making bogus claims if you won't explain further.

Dami12345:
Look if you really want to know, start with google, you'll probably end up in the dark and deep web but you'll understand.

If its really important to you to know, search. If not just laugh and move along. Eventually you'll find out when the powers that be decide you should or can know.

For now the internet is till free,(relatively) soon it might be impossible to find the things you want to know without advance knowledge ( the same knowledge you are looking for).
It'll be like a loop, " to make Money you need school knowledge and to go to school you need money "
Of course there are always exceptions.

Don't make baseless claim on subjects you know nearly nothing about. There are various methods of cloning. As a practicing researcher in the field of genomics, I can tell you that it takes nothing near 14 weeks to make an adult clone from scratch via embryonic stem cell cloning.
Stop googling fiction.

Luciferan369:
It is necessary for Kim to be very careful. Many Heads of States have been swapped with clones. With his sample, just two DNA cells can be cultured, electrified and magnetized for polarization, then introduced to embryonic fluid for fertilization and in 14 weeks a brand new Kim Jong-Un can be produced. And with Laser/Saner Technologies beamed from satellite his memory can be harvested within seconds and implanted on a nano-chip and beamed to the skull.

A brand new Kim, can be produced, and the next phase will be to replaced him with the clone, with full memory, but this time, with a tracker and botnet for control using the Voice of God (VoGT) Technology.

There are many clones that have been replaced with heads of States already and even celebrities have been replaced. Even their wives will not spot the difference if well handled, apart from birth marks and scars and spots.

I have experienced this. And I read some people saying he can be killed. That is silly, no one dares to kill these days, they simply replace the real with a clone that they control 100% with VoGT.

What makes you think that an adult clone can be made within 14 weeks via embryonic stem cell cloning?

That's a saner and more civilized way of practicing religion.

When I look at some ass licker here, I confirm that indeed, someone can be totally stupid and not know it.

God
Jesus
Abraham
Moses
Joshua
Elijah
David
Solomon
John the Baptist
Peter
Paul
etc
They were all beard gang o

iamgenius:
You only dodged OP's argument up there. Be sincere to yourself, and reply to OP's claims above.
Below is the summary of what he's trying to bring your sense to:


It is either you believe in Qur’an as the word of God or you believe in it as the word of a great liar that impersonates God. There is no third alternative. But do you think the God of truth and wisdom would allow any deliberate liar to impersonate Him and then also allow such impersonator to praise all the Biblical prophets in the way the author of Qur’an has done? Is it possible for an impersonator and deliberate liar against God to be the author of those noble verses of Qur’an cited above especially when we call tomind that the first set of people the Qur’an was admonishing were idol-worshippers living in ancient Mecca? Has God ever sent a liar to guide the people who were in error to the right path?


Please answer us sir.

If God could allow a 'great liar' to deceive his new creations in the beginning and ruin the paradise, and not punish this liar up till now, then he could also allow a great liar to impersonate him with Koran.

Highbrow:
While some people are kind because of the religion they have, others have no religion but are nonetheless kind.

The kindest people might not even be religious. Bill Gates is a very kind man though he isn't because of a religion.

Without your religion, wouldn't you be kind and good?

Lalasticla
Dominique

What makes you think that Bill Gates is very kind?

orunto27:
He is not mental. He is sane to commit suicide. He wont go to Heaven.

you mean to say that suicide requires a sane mind at all times?

Let's give the Internet a little more time to educate Africans.

winner01:
Very true.
Another advantage is that many Christians will be challenged to pick up books and read.

In this part of the world, many Christians don't bother looking for answers.

Yeah! That's on point.

winner01:
Nothing personal bro, I'm simply having fun. That's what I do when I come here, fun, and its nothing personal.

Are my threads not healthy or do they not give strong religious views?
Opposition is healthy bro, that's why this religion section is interesting for some people.

Hahaha...of course, the divergent views are the spice of this section.

winner01:
Lol, this guys just funny one kind.

Every post I made on this thread apart from the op is a reply to one person or another.

You missed those atheists who disagree with the honest atheist in the op. But you care that I hive them reply with quotes from more honest atheists.

Don't worry ehn, because if you, i'll stop opening threads concerning atheism. Only because of you

Hey bro, don't take things too personal. I only made a simple observation in my first post on your thread and I did so because I saw your posts/responses. I have always known you to talk about atheists/atheism all the time and like I said, you haven't stopped.

winner01:
Can you please highlight just 1 criticism of atheists in the op?

Loads of them in your subsequent posts. You couldn't resist the urge

winner01:
This is a topic on Christianity. Why Christianity is great. You missed that part right?

I didn't!. I also didn't miss that you felt the need to emphasize that John is an atheist in your post's title while still seizing same opportunity to criticize other atheists.

It seems to me that you winner01 haven't stopped posting topics about atheism/atheists. � . Well, no hard feelings bro.

Butterflyleo:
People who pride themselves in logic. Yet logic cannot tell you all to simply shoot him an email by sending him a pm to enquire directly from him what's up.

So despite having avenues available to reach out to him directly you all chose to open a thread and wait for others to tell you where he is.

This is the day logic died!!!!

Smh

You quickly assume that they didnt do that with your superior logic abi

Butterflyleo:
You cannot trust that picture becaude it puts a dent on evolutionary science but you can trust other pictures which support evolutionary science right?

You ask how the picture came to be 433 million years old? Do you now doubt the carbon dating methods applied by same science to date other fossils which support evolution?

Why not to yourself a favour. Google is available to you and not restricted from you. Look it up and stop claiming a certain level of "enlightenment" when you are clearly in the dark about so so so much.

Get some real enlightenment via google which is a huge resource.

http://studylib.net/doc/7500332/outcome-2-c--platypus-fossil-comparison-answers

I'm not questioning scientific methods of inquiry like carbon dating, I'm questioning the conclusion implied from a picture which has no credible source.

I may be the last man to totally accept that a scorpions fossil is 433 million years old simply because I saw it on a random picture.

Butterflyleo:
That's the problem with insincere Scientists and science minded folks like you. They say well as long as some evolved then those that didn't evolve do not matter.

If you need a source for proof of such then look no further than google. IT IS LOADED!

Also there is no such thing as a peer research article for creatures that did not evolve because it is an embarrassment to science whenever any of such pops up so why would evolutionary scientists discredit their own theory of evolution?

Such articles are left for liberals to do but are never accepted into main stream science as its a keg of gun powder. So they say exactly what you said right here and I quote:



Yet at the bolded pictures of fossils have been "credible" sources for evolution (when in support) but when against it no longer is "credible".

By the way, those fossils are not pictures. They are actual fossils and like I said, google is LOADED with all you need from CREDIBLE sources.

It's simple, my question is: 'why should I trust that picture you posted as authentic? Is it truly 433 million years old? How did 'they' come about that?
At this level of enlightenment, I don't just accept any published scientific finding as truth, worst of it is a picture of questionable source.

Butterflyleo:
Not one! Several!

And why wouldn't it disprove evolution? Afterall the claim is that EVERY LIVING THING evolved to its present state. So why didn't some evolve? Why have they remained the same after 433milliom years? Were they an exception? If they were, why?

Did they arrive on the scene already fully evolved or in full form while others evolved from single cells?

You need to ask yourselves those pertinent questions.

Well, inability to observe evolution in one species doesn't dismiss the possibility of evolution in other species.
If there isn't evolution in such a species as you claim, a picture of no credible scientific source isn't evidence enough. Are there published peer reviewed scientific articles / researches supporting that claim?

OLAADEGBU:
There were no cameras but what we have are fossils as seen in the picture in the OP.

One single fossil shouldn't disprove evolution. Should it?