₦airaland Forum

Encroyable! I was very curious about that Dulcet7 ID all the while, lol.

@ Inesqor

Nice to 'see' you again; how's tricks?

A very very big thank you to every single person who has voted so far whether you gave a reason or not. The poll is open indefinitely, so people can always continue to vote; please note that the poll is set up such that people can actually also go back and change their vote if they wish.

Now onwards: I have set up a follow up poll (I still plan one more) asking people to vote on who is robbing God; that new poll is to be found here https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-747403.0.html#msg9035517

Again, I'd be happy to see as many votes as possible, many thanks.

Here are examples of three Christian givers. (I am using just three examples but people can figure out that there are myriad permutations)


1. Mr A earns 1000 a month; unfailingly he gives 100 a month as "tithe" in/to "church"; he gives 50 a month as offering; he then gives up to 20 to other needy causes outside "church".


2. Mr B earns 1000 a month; he gives anything up to 90 in/to church every month, he then gives 110 to other needy causes outside the "church".


3. Mrs C is a seller of "provisions"; any time that she is going to buy stock, she buys 10% extra (e.g. instead of buying 100 cans of milk, she buys 110); she regularly takes the extra 10% to her local orphanage; she then gives about 5% of her net profits in/to "church".


NB Please feel free to vote entirely anonymously without giving any explanation or reason for your post vote. However, I really would be happy to see any reason given for voting in any way at all. Thanks.   

davidylan:
Our resident cheerleader. Should introduce him to thehomer.

Here is the problem dudes . . . serious christians know that religion and science are NOT inter-related. With me, religion/faith is a way of life while science is a career. Both are distinct. I can go work in the lab without that having a prejudicial influence on my faith and vice versa. Rather it is the atheist who has a problem with religion and tries too hard to use science as a stick with which to beat it.

Even the truly serious scientists, who are not evangelical atheists obsessed about religion, respect the differences in spheres of religion and science. One of Britain's very top scientists and former President of the Royal Society once said:

"I would support peaceful co-existence between religion and science because they concern different domains," Lord Rees said. "Anyone who takes theology seriously knows that it's not a matter of using it to explain things that scientists are mystified by."

From http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/martin-rees-we-shouldnt-attach-any-weight-to-what-hawking-says-about-god-2090421.html  and previously quoted here  https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-523483.0.html#msg6870776

davidylan:
I have to point out one thing . . . the inconsistent use of the term "logic" as if this is strictly the domain of science. On this thread alone, we have been treated to several completely illogical science articles purporting to describe the origin of life . . .

Obviously because they do not have the wherewithal to discuss let alone challenge or disprove Christian philosophy and logic, they pretend these do not exist (Edit: oh, or maybe they are too ignorant to know of these); instead they nit-pick the same Bible passages (that they do not even understand) to make some rather spurious arguments.

Here is what Lord Rees said about even a scientist that obviously none of our evangelical atheists (even the ones that are truly scientists) comes anywhere near. I reckon he is probably even better read on theology/philosophy than any of our resident evangelical atheists, yet hear/read Lord Rees about him:

On the need to confront the big environmental problems facing us in the 21st century, he parts company with his friend and colleague Stephen Hawking, who famously once said that humans will have to colonise distant planets if they are to survive. "I think that's an an ill-thought through statement and we have to bear in mind that there is nowhere we know about in our own Solar System that is even as hospitable as the top of Everest or the South Pole. The problems of the Earth must be solved here on the Earth and we must not divert attention from that necessity," Lord Rees said. He is equally scathing about Hawking's more recent comments about there being no need for God in order to explain creation. "Stephen Hawking is a remarkable person whom I've know for 40 years and for that reason any oracular statement he makes gets exaggerated publicity. I know Stephen Hawking well enough to know that he has read very little philosophy and even less theology, so I don't think we should attach any weight to his views on this topic," he said.

Again from  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/martin-rees-we-shouldnt-attach-any-weight-to-what-hawking-says-about-god-2090421.html  and previously mentioned here https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-507888.64.html#msg6828285

^^^ Once somebody who knows his/her stuff stands up to them, they are soon exposed for what they truly are. Look at Dawkins and co running away all over the place from debating Craig --- much to the dismay of many of Dawkins' own supporters.

Again, I say also that if you say Abraham was not born again, then you are calling Jesus a liar.

Jesus said unless a person is born again he shall not see the kingdom of God.

The same Jesus said we shall see this same Abraham in the kingdom of God.

So how are you going to see a person who was not "born again" in the kingdom of God ---- unless you are calling Jesus a liar?

Micuilles:
@ Jo,

Happy Sunday sir. I'm back.

@ Enigma,

Stop aguing so loudly without scriptural proofs. Abraham could not have been born again because Jesus had not come, died & ressurected. The one who's born again recieves by faith, the life Jesus had after he was ressurected from the dead by the Holy Spirit.

Secondly, check the meaning of the word BEGOTTEN, it means to beget i.e. to bear a child. That's why in Acts 13;33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written ,  thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee.

If you read post no #118 and #204 to proper comprehension, you will see that you really don't know what you are talking about and should take time out to devote to proper study.

Micuilles:
@ Jesoul & Enigma,

"Abraham believed God & it was couted to him for rigtheousness" This did not make him (Abraham) born again.

If Abraham was mot born again then you are calling Jesus Christ a liar?

Micuilles:
And Jesus Christ, , the first begotten from the dead (Rev. 1;5). Jesus was the first to be born again.

That Jesus was begotten from the dead does not mean Jesus was "born again". Go and study these things properly.

OK for completeness, below is Sense 2 of the total of three senses so now we will have all three set out.

An Evangelical Atheist is a person that is an atheist and tries to spread atheism amongst theists. It is derived from Evangelism, meaning "Spreading Good News" as practised by Christianity. Due to the rise of the Conservative Christain movement in the United States of America and the increase of humanistic thought, along with the increased blending other many different religions, Atheism has become more and more popular. Evangelical atheist usually seeks to "convert" borderline theists, often by engagaing in debate with fundamentalists.

Therefore two definitions (senses) out of three agree, or acknowledge, or at least suggest that evangelical atheism is an evangelising religion. 


PS Same link: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=evangelical%20atheist

Caveat: this one is a slight cheat as the truly memorable thing i.e. the definition comes from an external website. 

Enigma:
Ah, mention of "The Urban Dictionary" reminds me of a definition I once saw there.

From here http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=evangelical%20atheist

Evangelical Atheist*

* I have tried to be kind by not including the first two words you see in the link immediately after "evangelical atheist"

Evangelical Atheist

An evangelical atheist is one who not only believes there is no god or other supreme being, but is obsessed with convincing everyone around them to become an atheist too, usually through hard-line intolerance (the kind they accuse other religions of). When cornered they usually try to put down their opponent's religion and bash them for 'blind faith', not realizing that their belief that there is no god is no more or less valid or provable than the other guy's belief that there is one.

Not to be confused with normal atheists/agnostics, who for the most part just dont talk about religion and accept the beliefs of those around them as their perogative. Evangelical atheists are particularly common on the Internet, as organized religion is generally accepted as part of 'the system' of global human society, and lately it's become cool on the Internet to hate 'the system'. Mostly teen angst if you ask me,

Ah, mention of "The Urban Dictionary" reminds me of a definition I once saw there.

From here http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=evangelical%20atheist

Evangelical Atheist*

An evangelical atheist is one who not only believes there is no god or other supreme being, but is obsessed with convincing everyone around them to become an atheist too, usually through hard-line intolerance (the kind they accuse other religions of). When cornered they usually try to put down their opponent's religion and bash them for 'blind faith', not realizing that their belief that there is no god is no more or less valid or provable than the other guy's belief that there is one.

Not to be confused with normal atheists/agnostics, who for the most part just dont talk about religion and accept the beliefs of those around them as their perogative. Evangelical atheists are particularly common on the Internet, as organized religion is generally accepted as part of 'the system' of global human society, and lately it's become cool on the Internet to hate 'the system'. Mostly teen angst if you ask me,

* I have tried to be kind by not including the first two words you see in the link immediately after "evangelical atheist"

Ọga Nuke

Eagle has landed, please give me till a bit later, thanks.

You sha wan finish me! Abeg, carry go jọ! 

@ zikky

Na him be say you want put me for quandary be that! If you no the trouble when I go through before this final version of the poll, ehn? Make you start by going through the link on the last line of the opening post and come back come read here! 

Seriously, I'll leave each voter to vote in the poll according to what they understand by "tithe", "tithes", "tithing", "tither".

Also, I use this opportunity to point out that there is no issue of winning and/or losing in this poll at all. The underlying purpose of the poll is that I expect that when people have to make significant/important/critical choices, they tend to think carefully. In all honesty, that is all I want from the poll. 

Well, I'll give wordtalk one thing s/he does know how to throw insults around liberally --- really, only a more polished version of "coogar".

;d ;d

Snowwy:


This desperation is amazing.
As if it is not obvious that it is all about winning or losing for some.

OK, you win! Happy now?

Azibalua:
Ah multiple id oh
This is preposterous
O ma sé o

This post by Joagb erm Azibalua reminds me of the passage: "The voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau.” 

He who has ears, let him hear what the spirit is telling the church.   

Thanks to everyone who has voted so far in the "Who is a tither" Poll thread.

This is to encourage others to vote here https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-744234.0.html#msg9003450

Please bear in mind whatever the results of the poll is not a question of winning/losing; rather what I always had in mind was/is that when people have to make an important choice they think carefully.

davidylan:
Now lets not try to be evasive, ignorant and deceitful all at the same time . . . .

[quote author=ondo_boi link=topic=468635.msg6277731#msg6277731 date=1277417108]

Quote from: logten on June 24, 2010, 10:42 PM
Why is it dat wen a pastors is ministering,

wen they blow dat their spiritual breeze from their mouth,

everybody falls.

except d camera men?

try and ask your pastor. [/quote][quote author=ondo_boi link=topic=468635.msg6278787#msg6278787 date=1277440490]

Quote from: logten on June 24, 2010, 11:23 PM
guy face d fact. abi u no dey go church

I dey go church but my own pastor no dey do miracle na only tithe him sabi.[/quote]

justcool:
. . . . I don’t have any scientific evidence that God exists; neither do you have any scientific evidence that God does not exist.. . . .

davidylan:
Neither does the atheist have any empirical evidence that God doesnt exist at all . . . infact the only argument the atheist has is that the theist has not provided God's home address to him.

MyJoe:
That won't do. They'd want to shake hands.

Now, how such can qualify to be God in anyone's view beats me.

This thread is really meant for light relief by putting up comments that people find/found funny. However, it may also be used to highlight quotes/posts that people find/found profound. Any body can post any of either such material.

One important caveat: sometimes posts/quotes may refer to people either on or outside the forum (derogatorily); the intention is not to deride such people (again) but just to highlight the comic or profound nature of the post/quote.

I'll start up with a couple that I like/d!

[quote author=omo_to_dun link=topic=743212.msg9008325#msg9008325 date=1314307892]Your recommendation is good. But how can anyone take anything said here seriously if folks cannot back up their statements? If you are a scientist, I'd think you'd be proud to share your work, or is my thinking problematic?[/quote]I think it is better not to be taken seriously than to have your anonymity compromised contrary to your desire.  

davidylan:
. . .
Only on a mutually agreed assurance that my anonymity will remain intact.

David, I will recommend please don't grant the request. I'm sorry to the requester and I mean no disrespect ----- but David should only do it if he accepts that his anonymity is indeed likely to be compromised ultimately.

davidylan:
Its a two-way street. no contradictions here. The default mindset of the atheist is that the religious person is ignorant, in delusion and half as smart because he/she is not busy on talkorigins copying faulty claims for evolution. That much was evident from the very first 10 posts here.

In my experience, most evangelical atheists are sciolists, usually repeating the same stock arguments, challenging the same particular set of passages from the Bible, often parroting old arguments some of which the original proponents have accepted to be obsolete or superseded by superior arguments etc etc.

@ Nuke

The eagle has not landed yet; please note a instead of i.

^^^Ah nuke, you know I always forget about enigmatrax; I'll check in a mo. Thanx.

davidylan:
Now lets not try to be evasive, ignorant and deceitful all at the same time . . . .

Kai David, na wa oh; I pick another one up today! Only recently I used one of your old ones about providing God's address as proof of his existence!

Thanks again; the likkle un says mwah!

Mukina dey super efficient for me today ----- e be like say I use superior and better native soap.

^ You're much too kind.