₦airaland Forum

Let us start with some positives in favour of TB Joshua, he said some things that are accurate albeit in generic terms:

1. Whoever scores first will "carry the day"
2. It will not be favourable for Nigeria

However, let me also say upfront that, while I have no proof, I strongly suspect that this particular video has been doctored with careful editing. In fact I suspect the same of other TB Joshua prophecy videos. Specifically on the one above:

1. When TB Joshua's followers and supporters told us of the prophecy before the match, according to them, TB Joshua said the teams were struggling for one goal e.g.

Joagbaje:
He said what he saw was that they were fighting for one goal. And it ended not in favour of  Nigeria . He said it will be too bad for Nigeria at this time to lose like that . He said he can't change it alone that others have to join him in prayer to effect a change.

2. In fact the first person to start a thread on the prophecy did confirm a prediction of 1-0 and headlined that in thread title.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-773184.0.html


3. A Newspaper claims (unless they are lying) that TB Joshua confirmed to them that the result would be 1-0

Link: http://tribune.com.ng/sat/index.php/sports/5490-eagles-beware-prophet-tb-joshua-warns.html

AS Nigeria gets set for the crucial 2012 Nations Cup qualifier against Guinea today at the Abuja National Stadium, renowned cleric, Prophet Temitope Joshua said the team needs serious prayers to emerge victorious in the encounter.

The founder and General Overseer of Synagogue Church of Christ while ministering on Monday during one of the church's programmes televised live on cable television, DSTV,  Emmanuel Televison  revealed that having watched the encounter in the spiritual realm, the outcome of the encounter was not favourable to the Nigerian lads.

The clergyman disclosed that only one goal was scored all through the 90 minutes of the match, warning that the Super Eagles might lose the match based on what he saw.

He, however, explained that the result could still be positive but advised the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) to seek the face of God through him on the issue before the must win match.

When Saturdaytribunesports contacted him, Prophet Joshua confirmed the 1-0 score line, saying that even though he did not state where the pendulum of victory would swing , he declared emphatically that Nigerians must pray fervently for Eagles'success.

He warned that the Super Eagles needed divine prayers to emerge victorious.

My own suspicion is that the video above has been edited such as to cut out those bits suggesting (strongly, apparently) a 1-0 result; in other words some "film-trick" is going on here.

Lol, one fella in the Sports section even had a better dream and prediction than TB Joshua.

yorke:
2 - 1 in favour of 9ja. I watched it in my dream last week bt didnt watch it up 2 d final whistle b4 i woke up. I hope it stays like dat.

One day go be one day; one person somewhere someday will be able to do proper "forensics" on the videos that Joshua and team put on Youtube.

Epic fail! De man na false prophet obviously, anyway! The power of the Holy Spirit is not for "show" ---- thus de man's style alone puts the discerning on alert.

I hope one day someone has time to do proper "forensics" on all those videos the so-called Emmanuel TV puts on Youtube for propaganda.

Dawkins' fleas, my leg!

More like Dawkins flees --- e.g. dodging a debate recently.

@Joagbaje

In video 1 ---- on 26th July 2009 your man is wearing a suit!

In video 2 ---- on the same 26th July 2009 your man is wearing something different altogether!


Hmmmm 

Or was one morning service and the other evening service? 

Edit: I listened again and in fairness they did say it was "second service".

Pastor AIO

I am actually familiar with the material you posted; you see you were wrong --- I had checked! This same letter has actually come up on this same Nairaland at least twice in the past. Ever since it first surfaced on the Net many have always suspected it to be fake.

Consider this: if the letter is genuine, would there not be some scholarly or even semi-scholarly material on it on the Net? Would even our famous Wikipedia not have an entry on it?

There is zilch such material about the "letter" on the Internet ----- at least as far as I have checked.

So like Frosbel said, the letter is just a letter from somewhere on the Internet?

So is it any more true, on the surface, than {saying} that Dr Tai Solarin said it is not good to believe everything one reads on the Internet?

How logical or wise is it of people who accept the "genuineness" of such a "letter" (without any proof) while at the same time saying the Bible is faked, that epistle or other is forged, this that or the other is an addition to the original biblical manuscripts?

Quite surprising that no single one of the defenders/supporters of the Leopold "letter" has so far proved or even tried to prove that it is genuine! 

I'd honestly like to be educated as I've never seen proof that it is historically genuine.

In all truth I find it quite apt to repeat the post below:

Enigma:
To be honest, there are not that many intellectually honest or sound positions for an evangelical atheist. Two options that I can readily identify are:

1. the evangelical atheist maintains his assertion that there is no God but is honest enough to accept that this assertion is based only on faith in the final analysis.

2. eat humble pie, be truthful and "upgrade" to agnosticism.

I'd be happy to see any further suggestions.

Please do bear in mind that Joagbaje has said he knows more than the people who wrote parts of the Bible.

Please note that Joagbaje has said that he has "greater light" than the prophet Isaiah.

Please note that Joagbaje has said that the prophet Isaiah was wrong on one of the things he wrote in the book of Isaiah.

Please note that Joagbaje has said that he is greater than the prophet Elijah.

Please note that Joagbaje has said that the writer of the New Testament book of Matthew was wrong to record that Jesus spoke of "the kingdom of heaven".

Please note . . . . etc etc

From the link in post #3

In fact, Being Wrong is at the very heart of the proper pursuit of knowledge:  the assumption that we know nothing yet.  And that we wish to know more.  The only good scientist is the extremely humble one.  Not the idio.t who actually believes they know anything at all.  To believe you know anything is to snuff out the purpose of the pursuit- to KNOW is to deny the very motivation of science.  It is the squelching of motivation & direction.  Only the truly humble can see the magnificent wonder of all that we have yet to uncover.  It must be at the heart of all Good Science to assume that anything is possible.

At the heart of ill intentioned science, is the will of bad men.  It is there that the ugliness of human nature lies with the claim that only certain things are possible.  Sin resides in that heart- but also the lack of pure reason, logic and proper science. The scientist who actually believes that human beings, who can not even begin to understand aging, time, space, disease, psychology, genetics, or anything else for that matter- can define what can NOT exist is just plain silly.  These people make me laugh- and many times, make me scorn.  They are the antithesis of science, these definers of what can not be.  They work in the negative and so are stunted from the beginning.

E still dey pain am!

frosbel:
Rubbish.

Anyone can come and post anything from any source and  make it look real.

Post a reliable source  , not some random letter pulled out from some dark corner of the Internet.

As the late Dr Tai Ṣolarin said rather wisely: "Don't believe everything you read on the Internet!"

Yada yada yada yada! Curious kọ, serious ni!

^^^ Ah, my mumu friend is still displaying himself as one of the worst examples of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

God help him.

^^^ Why are you bringing up my name? What's your problem? You think even if the letter is genuine, it will change anything about my Christianity?

In any event apart from assertion I haven't seen you or any of the other people on the thread vaunting the letter as a historical document provide any proof that it is genuine. I am aware that the letter has been circulating on the Net since circa 2005 but, while Leopold's brutality and barbarism is well known, I am not aware of any instance where this particular letter has been confirmed to be genuine.

davidylan:
But do we know the response of the missionaries or are we automatically assuming (which seems to be inherent in the responses of many of the atheists here) the missionaries swallowed King Leopold's words hook, line and sinker?

Indeed your point is reflected if not even made by a proper reading of Post # 16 above.

Another interesting piece by the same writer as above: http://shortlittlerebel./2011/09/28/why-atheists-make-the-worst-scientists/

I know a couple of forumites who will like this.

Interesting blog piece from http://loopyloo305./2011/10/05/yet-another-example-of-dumb-atheist-scientists-via-short-little-rebel/

In yet another example of the ENTIRE scientific community being wrong and ONE man being right, a Jewish scientist proves that ‘science was wrong.’ Just like one man thought the earth revolved around the sun, right?

And yet, atheist scientists continue their historic arrogant march of ignorance- blinded by their own hubris, so sure in their ability to ‘know’ anything at all and their NEED to believe what they want to believe. In the article below, you will see a ‘good’ scientist who believes in humility and the possibility that ANYTHING is possible. Ridiculed by the ‘best scientists’ of the modern-day and ignobly kicked out of the prevailing science community, he rises supreme above them all in victory as he claims the most coveted recognition in the science community- the Nobel Prize. He takes a dig at his nemesis, Linus Pauling, who mocked him as a ‘quasi-scientist’. Pauling took pride in being one of the 50 Greatest Atheist Minds of all time. Pauling proves the point I made in my previous article, “Why Atheists Make the Worst Scientists’, to a tee.

Good science is not, nor ever can be, based on what can NOT be. It must always keep its mind open to the possiblity that ANYTHING is possible. Hence, atheist scientists’ claim that a belief in God is ‘unscientific’, ‘illogical’, or ‘irrational’ is equal nonsense. A good scientist will always admit that.

JeSoul:
Ah! who dares harrass my future in-law?    You berra mind yourself oh before thunder strikes, and strikes hard.

Enigma, you have acheived rock-star status it appears    congrats my in-law! lol. I for apply key, but e be like say you sef you dey enjoy am 

. . . .

My in-law, na wa oh!

No need to lock the thread really; e just be say if our friends fit dish am, make themselves no mind to receive am now!

@ aletheia and davidylan

It is quite telling that manmustwac does not consider this a thread to be closed; not only that he is even an active participant! All good.

Anyway, the fact remains:

Enigma:
Anywhere you see an evangelical atheist, even on his own, you see a fool and you also see the very worst case of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

Only an omniscient person or a fool can say there is no God.

I suppose that manmustwac will now lock the thread because thin-skinned evangelical atheists' sensibilities will be "offended" by my post.

I will put down a marker as follows:

Enigma:
Anywhere you see an evangelical atheist, even on his own, you see a fool and you also see the very worst case of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

Only an omniscient person or a fool can say there is no God.

harakiri:
@Enigma, I would advise you to go back to that link,read through it and make a concerted effort to understand the contents before coming here to embarass yourself. Once again, an agnostic disbelieves in religion but hasn't refuted the concept that a god/ultimate deity exists. An atheist isn't hanging on the fence on the issue. Make an effort to READ and UNDERSTAND!

OK Let us start again: what do you understand by my post through which caused you to start to expose your ignorance? Here it is again below -

Enigma:
To be honest, there are not that many intellectually honest or sound positions for an evangelical atheist. Two options that I can readily identify are:

1. the evangelical atheist maintains his assertion that there is no God but is honest enough to accept that this assertion is based only on faith in the final analysis.

2. eat humble pie, be truthful and "upgrade" to agnosticism.

I'd be happy to see any further suggestions.

harakiri:
@Enigma, Please can you educate ignorant folks like me what the difference is between atheists and agnostics?

Please start with that now famous (albeit useful) resource of nairaland debates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

1. Where did I coin "unintelligent evangelical atheists"?

2. Assuming even I did, then it would be that now the shoe is on the other foot you are complaining; what do the evangelical atheists say of Christians, and even of Jesus Christ, day in and day out?

You people shouldn't be so thin-skinned. You have been dishing it constantly and only for a few days we decide to take it back to you --- saying things that are truthful and accurate by the way ---- and you guys start whining  !



EDIT: if you complain of "mumu", what then do you say about "crass ignorance"?

harakiri:
@justcool, I know the clear difference between agnostics and atheists (thank you very much). Agnostics have no belief in religion but believe in a supreme being. Atheists have no belief in nothing. It seems a lot of you people find it hard to believe Africans can become Atheists. A lot of you believe atheism is a "white man's thing". Pitiful.

And for an upstart who accuses me of ignorance, you do not even really know what agnosticism means! No wonder my post went over your head!

Pity.

harakiri:
@Enigma, It's best you talk about things you know about (e.g the latest benz your pastor picked up with the tithes from your church) rather than regurgitating crass ignorance all over the place.

I'm fairly certain (correct me if I'm wrong) that I have not been directly rude to you up to this point.

Now I am going to directly attach to you the official evangelical atheists' title of "mumu"! If you were not, you would have known by now that since my very first day on this forum I have been one of the most vociferous challengers of the so-called prosperity "gospel". Although I don't normrally expect a lot from evangelical atheists generally, I had expected better of you. Pity!

To be honest, there are not that many intellectually honest or sound positions for an evangelical atheist. Two options that I can readily identify are:

1. the evangelical atheist maintains his assertion that there is no God but is honest enough to accept that this assertion is based only on faith in the final analysis.

2. eat humble pie, be truthful and "upgrade" to agnosticism.

I'd be happy to see any further suggestions.

^^^ I haven't yet; maybe later.

Purist:
So in essence, this is another of such "Atheism is a religion" threads. I still don't get what's there to discuss, seriously.

Well it is not by force to discuss it! Afterall we now generally leave the evangelical atheists to their folly on their rubbish threads!

From http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/flying-spaghetti-monster-invisible-pink-unicorns-et-al-part-1-4

On the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorns, et al.

Many atheists exhibit a lack of knowledge of the very theism against which they most often, if not exclusively, argue - the Bible's Judeo-Christianity. Worse yet, they think that they are well versed by claiming that they were "raised Christian" (whatever that means), "went to Sunday School," "was an altar boy," "saw the movie (hyperbole intended)," etc.

I am not one to claim that you must be a theologian to speak on, or against, Christianity nor a scholar to speak on, or against, the Bible. That is to be reserved for scholarly settings. Yet, one ought to be at least somewhat versed on the subject that one seeks to critique and be skeptical enough to double check both what one is being told as well as one's own positions.

I find that many atheists not only lack knowledge of Christian theology and the contents and contexts of the Bible but lack a basic understanding of natural theology / general revelation, which seeks to infer the cause of the universe from nature (nature not meaning biosphere alone but the universe as a whole).

Take a lack of knowledge of natural theology / general revelation - add to it a lack knowledge of Christian theology and the contents of the Bible - mix that with a typically early age rejection of Christianity - blend it with the early, Sunday School, age understanding of theology - and finally bake it in the presuppositional oven of self-professed erudition and what do we end up with?

We end up with atheists seriously arguing that the concept of God as postulated by Christian theology is on a par with postulating the existence of imaginary friends, fairies, celestial teapots, sky daddies or Flying Spaghetti Monster and Invisible Pink Unicorns.

^^^ You are even wasting time! You forget you are quoting from the very MUMU who started a thread "God R.aped Mary Who Gave Birth to A Bastard Child"!

And the hypocritical MUMU claims he wants dialogue!


By the way, every evangelical atheist is ipso facto a MUMU automatically!