₦airaland Forum

Pls Mr. Obadiah77 kindly re-read Exodus 14:1-end very well.

Just let me quote this verse:

Exo 14:22-"and the children of Israel wnet into the midst of the see upon the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto their right hand, and on their left."

It also the same in 29
Notice the bold.

[quote author=bobby.L]But why is this thread not being well responded to.
Indeed, the prince of this world has blinded many.[/quote]That's their life. They always boycott anything they don't have enough facts to support/they know is true/can not be refuted except only Kay 17 I respect him because he's an open-minded atheist. He doesn't close his mind on any topic he will clearly say his mind. I noticed that in most of my thread.

[quote author=Ijele-igbo]The way you broke down my post! Only an Atheist will effectively do that[/quote]You're right because it's only atheist that can think and study science as they do believe, christians don't have brain. Is better you tell yourself the truth and search for the truth. John 8:32 "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free"

Two questions arise from the very verse; 1) what is that truth we need to know? 2) The truth will make us free from what?

Question 1 was answered in John 14:6-"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Question 2 was answered in John 16:33-"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me you might have peace. In the world you shall have tribulation: but be of a good cheer, I have overcome the world."

Shallom!

Kay 17: ^^^

If God only knows these things, how come we know it too??

Bible was written thousand of years ago, and the reason while God asked Job those question is because Job and his friends were talking about universe without knowledge(science), then God answered Job;
Job 38:1-2 "Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, [2] Whos is this that darkeneth counsel(predict) by words without knowledge(science)."

So these are things in those books that only a God could have known. Things that no man has ever known, or could conceivably have known in Job's time, until our century.

Remember OT was written over 3000 years ago and poeple's knowledge were so limited to their environment as you can see the details @OP but someone who is greater than man and created all things with so much confidence could have inspired those verses accurately and we can testify with the help of science today.

Beretta92: dont get u

Can you explain the word natural phenomenon?

Alfa Seltzer: I will paraphrase Jesus here and say let the dead bury the dead. I will worry about death when I die. For now, I am concentrating on living.

The same Jesus you paraphrase is the one who says "For God so love the world that He gave only begotten Son and who so ever believe in Him will not perish but have everlasting LIFE" John 3:16

The word everlasting life has a beginning and end meaning. Before you have it you must believe and after you have it you live forever.

[quote author=bobby.L]Nice thread.
What about the prophecies.
The four major empires.
The end time increase in knowledge, etc.[/quote]All these are well fulfulled.

Alfa Seltzer: Life is too short to spend pondering death.

Truly is too short but what happen after death is the main issue on ground.

Beretta92: I personally dont believe this. I think it to be a mere natural phenomenon, and i knw several Nigerians would disagree with me. Since it's been raining heavily here, folks hv been talking about it n i've debated a few. i'd like to knw yr thoughts on this.

How can you define your own natural phenomenon?

okeyxyz: @Emusan; @bizmahn;

Like I said in my note; This is not for every christian but for those who are truly free, with the mindset of god himself. To him that is pure, all things in nature are pure and fit for use and enjoyment. Otherwise God would not have made them. There is good sex and there is abuse of sex. Now we know which of these two is good and natural and which(the abuse) is not. Alcohol is good but addiction is not. There is also good p0rn and not-good p0rn. You misunderstand me when you include abuses amongst the all things that i consider sanctified. If God cannot be corrupted by the things he created, so likewise I cannot be corrupted.

@bold-then you should know that some songs are abusive.

[quote author=Ijele-igbo]Top 10 Reasons I’m Atheist

1. If we truly had one creator
speaking to prophets, it would do
so consistently, not contradictory
as thousands of different religions
have proven.

2. Living by the means of man
helping man, and realizing time on
earth is not a practice run, creates
an urgency of life that requires
fulfilling.

3. I asked my four-year-old
daughter where the stars came
from. She confidently said “The
moon made them.” I followed by
asking “Then where did the moon
come from?” She strongly asserted
“Daddy, the moon is the boss.
Nobody made the moon.” This is an
unmistakably familiar mindset; and
rightfully embarrassing for an adult
to hold such similar thought.

4. Demeter, Jesus, Apollo, Horus,
Zeus, Mithra, Yahweh, Tammuz,
Ganesha, and Allah are only 10 of
the thousands of gods recorded in
history. An Atheist is not one that
refuses to read religious doctrine; it
is often one who reads too many.

5. In the technicalities of most
religions, there is no difference
between a believer that dies before
having time to repent, and a
nonbeliever that rejected the
doctrine altogether.

6. If the Christian god created
humans as sinners, how could it
rightfully expect us to believe the
corrupt messengers it has sent to
teach us the way of life?

7. “Is God willing to prevent evil,
but not able? Then He is not
omnipotent. Is He able, but not
willing? Then He is malevolent. Is
He both able and willing? Then
whence cometh evil? Is He neither
able nor willing? Then why call Him
God?” – Epicurus

8. All babies are Atheists. Religions
are taught depending on the
location and era in which you are
raised. Being born in the U.S. in
1974 does not make you right, it
most likely just makes you another
Christian. That’s no better or worse
than the person born in Tibet in
1955, who proudly worships the
Dalai Lama.

9. It is better to find your own
answers and make an educated
decision, than to intentionally
remain uneducated and make a
fearful one.

10. Only for the sake of argument,
if I were to astonishingly find
myself face to face with a supreme
being, I would expect to be judged
on my life as a humanist, and how I
treated others, (just as most
Christians plan to be judged on
character, not on the actual Ten
Commandments). If my positive
actions were ignored, and I was
instead judged on using my
intelligence to doubt religious
doctrines created by human
sinners, I would rather be eternally
punished than bow to such an
unfair tyrant who made things
seemingly impossible for humans
to succeed at this horrific game.

After more than a year of
responding to comments on this
and continuing my debates and
investigations into religion, and my
own psychology, I realized there
was an 11th, and most important
reason for my atheism…

11. I simply refuse to be a
hypocritical, disingenuous
Christian. I could go through the
motions, attend the churches,
shake the hands, follow the rituals
of whichever religion or
denomination of Christianity I liked
the best, sing the songs, and help
with the luncheons. That still
wouldn’t make me a believer. It
would make me a pretender. I am
honest with myself and those
around me that these things don’t
make sense to me. That doesn’t
make me a bad person. It makes
me an atheist.

Written by David Smalley of Dogma Debate[/quote]Well nobody can hold you responsible for your own personal decision. In his statement he didn't say there's no God. You can name God as a wickecd, cruel e.t.c but to claim there's no God is my argument with atheist.

Mattew 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the SUN be darkened, and and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven shall be shaken:

How this prove the existence of God? Because in most ancient time what the believe is that Sun and the Moon produce light on their own but only God could have known over 2000 years ago that without sun moon can't produce light.

Some people do misinterpret this very verse by saying "SUN & MOON" won't give their light, WRONG!

Let's look at this phrase again ".....shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light..." Looking at this phrase Jesus clearly stated that immediately sun darken then moon will not give her light any more.

Again second to the last phrase (".....and the stars shall fall from heaven....." is being misinterpreted by some people by saying many stars are bigger than the earth so it's not possible for stars to fall on earth.

Jesus didn't specify in His statement where the stars will fall to whether 'earth or not' yet they just assume that it was earth. The hebrew word 'naphal' is where 'fall' is translated from it could also mean 'adandon, fail'. If we replace any of these two words in the phrase it will read "....and the stars shall fail from heaven...." which could simply mean fail to give light also.

Affiliated: Genesis
1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

And in between

1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

If you took time to read it you'll see that there was evening and morning and photosynthesis before the sun

Everything you put up there means there's no God or He's not omni-potent?

Because you read Bible at a certain age makes you believe that Bible is not complete.

If I make ask, are you arguing that there's no God or there's God but Bible is not complete?

SniperInADiaper: I believe it all has to do with the physical manifestation of Jesus which some believe to be God. I believe that there are 3 separate entities. God (the father) Jesus (the son) and then the Holy Ghost. Each are of their own, but together the purpose is one. Jewish belief is different than the normal Christian belief, but so is mine compared to others I suppose. I believe that because of the atonement that we all can go to Heaven as long as we accept the atonement and live to our best.

I believe those that know of the Gospel are meant to teach the Gospel to all of the world, thus leading all people (Africa, Asia, whatever) to Heaven. I do not think that somebody will go to hell for not believing.

@bold- This is the major problem we have in christendom today "making asertion without the help of the Holy Spirit". If you don't believe people will go to hell for not believing in Jesus then you disprove Jesus saying in John 14:6 and call God a liar because He said "Heaven and earth shall passed away but none of His words shall go without fulfilled" remember BIBLE is the word of God.

okeyxyz: For any true christian: All songs is good for listening and enjoyment. Nothing can corrupt his mind or conscience, just as God himself is incorruptible.

Note: This is not for everybody who identify as christian, but for those who are truly free through the death of jesus and therefore the death of the Law of sin. So if the law of sin is dead, then you should fear sin no more because all things(including all music) are now sanctified(through the law of the holy spirit) for your enjoyment.

No, I disagree with you.

Songs are message sent to do a particular work in people's life that listen to them. Just like christians hymn!

For instance, a drunker have some song he can listen to that will boost his ego to drink more. There're some songs recommend for couples anytime they want to meet.

There're truly some songs from the pit of hell.

mazaje: the bible very clearly says that the stars were created for signs among other things, yet we have you running around lying through your teeth trying to explain lies. . .The bible talks about stars falling into the earth and the lying davidylan claims is meteorites, the bible says the moon gives off its light and the lying davidylan claims its reflection from the sun. . .How do you know this?. . .Where was it written in the bible.

Anti-christian always use this statement to claim that BIBLE is wrong.

Then what evidence do you have to claim that stars were created before earth? Don't mention big bang because is out of it.

Again see what the Bible says; Matt 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days SHALL THE SUN BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON SHALL NOT GIVE HER LIGHT, AND THE STARS SHALL FALL FROM HEAVEN, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken."

In a clear manner without setiment the writer mention darken of the SUN first before moon given off its LIGHT. Today we all know that moon derives its light from the sun. This is one of the thing only God could have known about two thousand years ago because most acient poeple believe that moon produce light on its own.

Also, the writer didn't mention where the stars will fall into whelther it's 'earth' or not yet you people have concluded that it is earth.

F00028: ^^^u have still not answered the question

This is the question that the OP ask: "Now do Christians believe that the Jews(God's chosen people) will still enter heaven even though they reject Jesus? And if the Jews don't enter heaven what make Africans think they will get in?"

because you don't want to hear the truth you cover your eyes not to see any truth in 'enilove's' reply.

anyway, how did you know it was God?

If you want to know grab your BIBLE with an open mind and read.

ROMANS 10:12-13 "[12] For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. [13] For whosoever shall call the name of the Lord (Jesus Christ) shall be saved."

enilove: It is not good to come to a conclusion when you do not know anything about the subject.

I was not born into a christian home or by christian parents.

I was a teenager when I realised that Muslims and Christians are not serving the same God and are heading in diff directions.

I dicided to know more about that religion I was (Islam ).Frankly speaking, you must know what you are doing in this life. I knew there is a purpose for everything in life. With reserch and question from my muslim friends I got to know that most muslims know nothing about the god they worship and are ready to take all or any lie they are fed with.

I said to myself,this Islam and Christianity are not the religion of our forefathers,so why must I worship their gods.

I also started reading the bible and made a research about it.I asked the Jehovah witness many questions.
What I got satisfied me. And I called on my Creator to show some signs regarding the right religion. I got a confirmation from God that Jesus Christ is the only way.

I then joined Deeper Life Bible Church and got born again at their former head quater at Gbagada in lagos.

If you do not ask God for the way,am afraid, you might continue in darkness and keep posting this nonsense and justifiying your actions.

You can ask your Creator to show you who He is.
He is faithful and just,He will answer you.

@bold-I'm so impressed with it!

Many christians today are just claiming there's God by faith (even on NL) not that they have real encounter with God.

I was born into christian home but initially I was so deep in science more than christianity, if not because I seek the face of God personally and got a sign from God I would have become an atheist.

[quote author=Mr knowitall.]^^^^^^^^^^^^
What is all this? you just happened to be born into a christian family...if you were born in India you would be telling me to accept...Hinduism....if you were born in Saudi Arabia you would be telling me to accept Allah....after all this you still didn't even answer my question...[/quote]Do you want to tell me that there's no christian in India?

A thread is coming soon about how people misunderstand BIBLE wait for it!

For me I do listening to non-christian songs before "I won't call it worldly song" but before I listen to any non-christian song I have to get the detail of the lyrics to know the kind of message its passing.

Recently, I don't listen to any non-christian song anymore because most of it are not passing any message across except old songs.

Uyi Iredia: @ Emusan: We all are more or less subjective. It's an inevitable part of being human. Consider the story of the elephant and the 7 blind men. The elephant is what's subjective, the blind men are subjective. The physical world is the reality. We humans interprete it in various ways at various times. I think without knowing it scientists prove God. The idea of dark energy some atheists will uncritically accept (because energy is associated with matter) while failing to note that, dark energy is an immaterial thing, of which is said CANNOT BE EMPIRICALLY percieved. That right there, isn't science the way materialists present it.

I agree with your point.

But @bold- do atheist do realise that? Remember they always present their debate as fact and they'll never agree with PARANORMAL/AFTERLIFE.

The information you read it's from Victor J. Zammit an open-minded rationalist and freethinker. All the scientists mention in this article are all open-minded they are not christians. They called Dawkins a close-minded scientist, why? because once Dawkins accept paranormal problem starts. As stated in point 5 of this article.

My argument with atheist (like I always say) is that no scientific evidence can be used to disprove the existence of God but they can hate God or claim there's no God base on their own personal view of nature but what most of them hold onto is "scientist says".

Now some atheist are rejecting EVOLUTION because it's a "theory in crisis".

Traditional, orthodox science has virtually come to a standstill. Dawkins himself also conceded to the viewers that there is a most serious crisis in orthodox science - that many science departments at universities in the UK (and around the world) are closing down, yet the acceptance of the paranormal is inversely increasing. This is because, I submit, people all over the world are themselves experiencing the paranormal – OBE’s and NDE’s, telepathy, EVP and ITC, communicating with crossed-over loved ones, accurate mediumship from highly gifted mediums andapparitions. Because of the internet, these critical evidentiary paranormal experiences are now being made public on an international level and cannot be censored any more. They have filtered into mainstream media and are rapidly becoming deeply entrenched in the world culture – they’ve become impossible to shift.

Accordingly, people have lost faith in orthodox science because orthodox science CANNOT explain what people are experiencing paranormally and spiritually.

The final word goes to a clairaudient medium who told me about materialist scientists anti-afterlife crusaders, “They’re disseminating darkness on a global level – and surely one day they’ll have to pay the price for that.” Yet some atheist will be ranting "Religions is the ever worse thing in human's life"


http://www.victorzammit.com/articles/dawkins77.htm

1. First, this R. Dawkins when referring to the paranormal, is expressing a personal view, NOT a scientific or empirical or objective view, because he can NEVER use science to show that the paranormal and the afterlife do not exist. RD is into conjecture and speculation. He’s into subjectivity and debunking. He’s into justification for his own personal beliefs - not in search for the truth.

2. Further, because he is a self-confessed materialist atheist and has been actively anti-paranormal, it follows that he does not and cannot perceive empirical evidence for the paranormal/afterlife with true empirical equanimity. He showed he’s deeply negatively prejudiced, "and that is a huge problem for someone who keeps on reminding the viewers he is a ‘scientist’ "– rather arrogantly implying he knows more than the paranormal empirical experts and the viewer about the paranormal.

3 . There is some misguided and erroneous assumption by this R.Dawkins that just because he is qualified in science, he is also an expert in the admissibility of evidence. WRONG! Dawkins is NOT a lawyer and accordingly, he has NO expertise in the admissibility of evidence. He often states and imputes that anything to do with the paranormal/afterlife is a personal belief or ‘superstition’ and therefore we must not accept it. WRONG! He shows he does not make critical distinctions, does not discriminate between the subjective and the objective, between the admissible and inadmissible in afterlife/paranormal evidence. Skeptical materialist scientists, including Dawkins, ought to rebut the formidable hitherto unrebutted afterlife evidence of the relatively recent SCOLE REPORT – where scientists and other professionals from Europe, UK and the US, including NASA scientists agreed that the paranormal actually happened. no scientist or skeptical debunker in eight years – not even for the allurement of a huge $1,000,000 cash prize - has been able to show the world that the objective evidence presented is not valid. Over eighteen months of weekly investigations, Dawkins buries his head in the sand pretending empirical materializations are not happening because a priori he would argue illogically, irrationally and speciously that cannot be true because there is no afterlife!
Physicists and other open-minded scientists of the ‘new science’ (those who used science to accept the paranormal) – to name just a few - such as Nobel Laureate Professor Brian Josephson, Professor Jessica Utts, Professor Alan Wolf, Dr Harold Puthoff, Professor RussellTarg, Professor Dr Ernst Senkowski, Dr Amit Goswami – Professor John Bockris, Ron Pearson (UK), Professor Archie Roy, Professor Rupert Sheldrake, Dr Claude Swanson Professors of Physics – and also some of the classic scientists such as Sir Oliver Lodge, Sir William Crookes, Sir William Barrett et al- ALL conceded after investigating that the paranormal is real – and most of them also conceded that there is an afterlife.
Now this Dawkins, has NOT rebutted any of the scientific evidence of these aforementioned scientists. He knowingly and willfully omitted to rebut the evidence because no scientist can rebut objectivity and repeatability.

4. “Where a better way to start my investigation than in a New Age fair” stated Dawkins to the viewers. Any serious, professional scientist who wants to investigate the paranormal will NOT go to a psychic fair. Why did not Dawkins try to rebut Dr Dean Radin’s highly acclaimed empirically elicited paranormal results? Why did not Dawkins deal with the plethora of other empirically accepted psi results? Why did not Dawkins deal with the classic objective afterlife evidence of Sir Oliver Lodge and Sir William Crookes which hitherto has not been rebutted? Why did not Dawkins try to debate professional psi empiricists about the paranormal who have the professional empirical afterlife knowledge to effectively deal with the closed minded skeptics such as Dawkins himsel

5 . Notwithstanding the objective, empirical psi evidence by the ‘new’ scientists to-day, Dawkins and others like him who strictly adhere to orthodox science just cannot or don't want to investigate or accept any empirical paranormal activities. Why not? First, if the empirically elicited psi evidence is accepted, it will make these materialists totally irrelevant and look rather silly and totally anachronistic. Also, the whole spectrum of reductionist orthodox science would inevitably have to be reviewed – in fact, it would become redundant overnight. The existence of non-physical energy, which a number of physicists accept, explains all paranormal activities. Accordingly, the war between orthodox science and the ‘new’ science is a fierce one and even Dawkins conceded on television that orthodox scienceis rapidly losing the war.

Victor James Zammit, LL.B, Ph.D., is a retired attorney of the Supreme Court of the New South Wales and the High Court of Australia. He has served as an attorney in the Local, District, and Supreme Courts in Sydney, has worked as a company-law consultant ,and lectured in Corporations Law. Also, he has worked part-time for police prosecution. In 1979, Zammit was a member of the United Nations Association of New South Wales - Human Rights Committee. In his work as a lawyer, Zammit became a 'professional skeptic' since he was never in a position to believe anyone unless the client had objective evidence to support the client's claims. Although initially suspicious of the New Age Movement for what appeared to be its blatant commercial exploitation of people's basic instinctual tendency for spiritual development, after many years as an open-minded skeptic, Zammit had a number of repeated psychic/mediumistic experiences which set him questioning, reading, and researching. Adopting a scientific criterion, he was able to select that information which could withstand and pass the many rigid tests of repeatability and objectivity. Currently, he does afterlife investigations virtually seven days a week. Zammit wrote A Lawyer Presents the Case For The Afterlife (ISBN: 0-9580115-0-, which has been translated into Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch and now is in the process of being translated into German and French. The same book has been translated into Russian and is now being sold in Russian bookshops. Since 2001, Victor Zammit has sponsored a one-million-dollar challenge to anyone in the world who can rebut the existing evidence for the afterlife. Up 'til now, no scientist, no physicist, no biologist, no psychologist, no empiricist, no skeptical debunker - no one has been able to show where, when, how, or why the evidence is invalid.

Professor Stephen Hawking EXPOSED!-By Zammit

To-day’s brief talk is to show you why this closed-minded Professor of Cosmology Prof. Stephen Hawking is deluding himself when he says there is no afterlife. He further stated in the television documentary ‘Curiosity … Who Created the Universe’ that there is no God. This professor made serious blunders and failures which I believe have completely destroyed the credibility of his anti-afterlife argument.

1. His first big BLUNDER: he FAILED to use Scientific Methodology to show why the existing evidence for the afterlife is not valid. He had to deal with EVP, ITC, NDE, OBE and MENTAL MEDIUMSHIP including the research done by the Windbridge Institute where they use PURE SCIENCE to investigate mediumship. This paranormally uninformed professor FAILED to deal with the most sensational afterlife evidence of the Cross-Correspondences, and the objective and repeatable scientific evidence of materialization – and some ten other areas of afterlife evidence this professor shows he’s totally ignorant about.

2. His second BIGGER BLUNDER: this professor FAILED to apply scientific methodology to his claim about the afterlife when he negligently came to conclusions about the evidence BEFORE he investigated! The principle involved is not dissimilar to this professor saying there are no blond haired people in the United States before he investigated. This professor allowed his closed mindedness and negative prejudices to over-ride scientific reasoning. That is a huge blunder– and something which I believe destroyed his credibility in relation to the afterlife.

3. His third BIGGEST BLUNDER is that he is presenting speculations and interpretations from speculations as science. THAT IS WRONG! THAT IS INADMISSIBLE AND UNACCAPTABLE. Lawyers and scientists will tell you that you cannot present speculations UNLESS you can independently substantiate your argument. When afterlife investigators deal with some afterlife evidence, it has to be repeated over time and space, keeping variables constant. And it has to yield the same positive results. We CAN independently substantiate the evidence we present for the afterlife.
In relation to God this professor said that because there was no ‘time’ before the big-bang – there was no God. He also said that since protons appear and disappear this shows that the universe created itself without the need for a creator.
But I say all these are just mere speculations and interpretations from speculations. In the next two to three decades other cosmologists will make other discoveries to completely invalidate Stephen Hawking’s argument against the afterlife and against the existence of God.
He is using his status as a ‘scientist’ to completely ignore the strict laws of science. That can never be accepted. So what this afterlife UNINFORMED professor stated was NOT science.
He expressed his closed minded prejudices and negativity as an atheistic layperson. Heshows he knows absolutely nothing about the afterlife - DON’T LET HIM MAKE A FOOL OF YOU!

Uyi Iredia: Please state what you mean by soul.

The unseen DNA of man's spirit.

Man is made up of spirit, soul and body.

ooman: @bold: i'd rather rot in hell than lose my reasoning power.

No you won't because there's still chance for you now. Most people who has expirenced NDE in their story they say "until they have been told to remember then they will remember". You don't have power to reason until is being given to you in that instance. REV 21:5 "...... And he said unto me, write: for these words are true and faithful."

and you contradict your own bible by your second sentence, Rev 21v4 says"he will remove all their sorrows.....there will be no more ....sorrow, crying or pain.

Most anti-christian will just pick one verse and interpret it to suit themselves. Why can't you quote it from verse 3- "And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God"
this very verse together with verse 4 are talking about people in heaven not in hell. If you're in heaven you will feel joy always but in hell it's pains always.

ooman: the bold shows your ignorance, if you have seen variations in organisms, then you dont need a microscope to see evolution, that's it. it's the phenotypic expression of genetic changes and change is evolution.

Variation in organism is cause by mutations which is not what evolution is all about.
Has organism ever evolved to another organism?

I know no one, rationalist or not, in his right state of mind, that would want to find a spirit with physical calculations and fields. Their research is destroyed right from the beginning, nothing true and logical can come from it.

I've told you many times stop argue this way. How was their research is being distroyed, is there no scientific evidence or fact for it? Check the link again!

just one question: can the spirit run mad? if yes, then we have spirits, if no then we don't.

YES! People have been manipulating some people's spirit (Eleda in Yoruba "as some one's spirit) is either they do it evil or do it fortune. Anything that happen to a man it starts in the spirit realm before manifest in physical.

If I may ask;
*Is it every mad man that have brain disease?
*Why someone who doesn't drink, smoke suddenly run mad?
*Why some mad man can't be taking care off medically?

Uyi Iredia: The fact that spirit beings are represented as entities with physical attributes and can be empirically perceived makes me skeptical of the notion. Even if there is an afterlife, it will necessarily be physical. Consider that streets of gold refer to physical things.

Yes it will be physical. You can see your love one's, feel sad or happy, you can still sing e.t.c but no power of reasoning on your own and no power to control yourself because you're not the owner of your SOUL.

ooman: Emusan, you never cease to amaze me. So your spirit world is now something I can see with my microscope? Oga oo...

btw, we all know that almost all the so called scientists you list are Christian creationists. I see no reason why any atheist evolutionist would want to go into spiritual research.

and for the op, if consciousness is spirit based, why does mental diseases cause madness and other impairment?
you need to read more biology.

I've said that I will create a thread title "Where is Ooman?" man it has been a long time.

No you can't view spirit under microscope as you can't view evolution too?

Thank God this time around is "all most" not "all" are creationist. Chech the link provided Michael Roll is a rationalist and freethinker, do you think he will accomodate christian in his research?
Atheist will never try it because it's against their religion.

Get the clue about the thread human has spirit and the spirit in human exist after death including mad man.

[quote author=outc*st]Lol!!!

Who is the Olodo?

The one who opened a thread that says 'Science confirms life after death" when it is glaring that science has nothing to do with metaphysics or the one who opened the thread to reveal that it is misleading?

Don't worry man, I believe firmly in the life after and if you consider my calling you olodo as rude and uncalled for then I apologise...but c'mon man this thread screams olodo!...not you o. I am referring to some of those you quoted. [/quote]Shallom!

[quote author=dr.shrewd]those scientists are at best practicing pseudo science by allowing their impressionable sentiments to encroach and influence their scientific freedom and objectivity. the fact presented by these pseudo scientists are by and large not epistemically warranted in the scientific circle. the hypothesis they presented are fraught with facts that does not conform with the well established scientific principles. saying series of discoveries, involving mathematical equations and physical experiments, when taken together, furnish empirical evidence that makes an extremely strong case for continuing after-death survival of the human psyche is as blanket as they come. what discovery? what mathematical equations? what physical experiment? a lot of lies they say are concealed in big big grammar. these guys are quacks [/quote]That's most atheist conclusion "pseudoscientist" when you don't have fact to support your claim.

I can see there was a little membrane that covered your eyes which couldn't allow you to see clearly, people like "Michael Roll-a rationalist and freethinker, Elisa Medsu-atheist, NOBEL Josephson" when you're reading the thread (you said their quack scientist). Try to remove the membrane and check the links provided.

About the Bible you quoted Eccl 3:19 and stop the lies you're feeding yourself see verse 20-21 "20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.
21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?"

[quote author=outc*st]Olodo![/quote]Who should we say is 'Olodo' between you and I?

You know science can't confirm or verify metaphysics yet you went ahead and opened the thread to show your ignorance.