₦airaland Forum

davidylan: Bros, i have never seen such level of dishonesty until i started running into NL atheists.

The shameless disregard for intellectual honesty, ready disposition to accepting and spreading conspiracy theories, empty grandstanding means I don't take quite a lot of them (and even some of their supposed non-atheist supporters with the same disposition) seriously.

davidylan: The funny thing is how atheists employ mental gymnastics. One debate they will only accept the KJV, in another they will NEVER consider the KJV. So long as their point is the "right" one.

One thing I find quite pitiable and rather pitiful is the desperation to discredit Christianity at all costs, by all means, on anything (even ordinarily innocuous things as I pointed out on another thread recently) ---- which leads to the mental gymnastics, intellectual bankruptcy and/or dishonesty.

[quote author=Ileke-IdI]Since we're all making up stuff, I think it's Orisha's temple[/quote]

I won't put it past some of these conspiraloons!

Oga Joagbaje, how now? When are we going to fight again?

Anyway, I trust that alafia ni gbogbo ile wa.

Happy new year --- but don't do that first fruit thing this year sha o.

TroGunn: "Explosion" was used in quotes and it's the term used to describe the relatively sudden appearance of different fully formed species during the Cambrian period - "Cambrian Explosion". "Spontaneous" is your term, not mine. Point is that new species appeared so fast, within a few years, they possibly couldn't have evolved.

I think your point was pretty clear; it is about the suddenness of appearance disclosed in the fossil record; and the use of quotation marks for the word "explosion" should also have been noted.

davidylan: This is universally accepted fact. It is absurd that you would query that.

I remember reading somewhere that this supposed distinction between "expansion" and "explosion" is mere semantics.



(EDIT: actually this post is more appropriate for the other thread on the big b.ang!)

chukwudi44: You are a pathetic m.o.r.o.n.what has all these got to do with topic being discussed? Did the op mention holy communion or anything like that in his opening post? Your bigotry infested head would make you type otherwise just because the catholic church was mentioned

You see yourself. In your post, you abused me; I tried to be friendly and even wished you well; you come back at me with even more abuse. When I hit you now you will start crying and whining. Anyway, I will try and be understanding one more time because I recognise say na so de thing dey pain you reach.

Oh, by the way my posts have been very much in line with the message and intent of the opening post.

Will the Roman Catholic Church allow those Japanese Christians to take part in its "Holy Communion"?

^^ Evidently, you have not understood my post or my point. Incidentally, you are making another claim without proof and, I believe, making up your statistics on the spot. Well, someone did say that 88.29% of statistics are made up on the spot.

The point is that no evidence was produced for saying that the "majority of the general population" in Europe etc understands the theory of evolution; in fact none was produced either for saying they "accept" it though I am less concerned about that presently. Additionally, the fact that someone with a secondary level education accepts what his/her teachers said, without critical examination let alone empirical examination, does not mean the person truly understands the thing and may not even necessarily mean that they truly accept it. Often, they are acting on no more than mere faith.

Going back to one of the comments and the claim that "majority of the general population" in Europe etc "understands and accepts" evolution: I think this is at least an overstatement if not indeed an inaccuracy. It is true that people at the GCE/Secondary level of education generally "accept" what they are taught without critical thought; that does not however mean that they "understand" it or really recognise it to be true beyond that they they were told it is.

On another thread currently there is a somewhat amusing disussion whether the big ban.g involved an explosion or not. However, see an example of an explanation at a level for the "general population".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/ocr_gateway/energy_resources/big_bangrev1.shtml

Scientists have gathered a lot of evidence and information about the Universe. They have used their observations to develop a theory called the Big B.ang. The theory states that about 13.7 billion years ago all the matter in the Universe was concentrated into a single incredibly tiny point. This began to enlarge rapidly in a hot explosion, and it is still expanding today.

Can we therefore extrapolate from that that the majority of the general population in the UK understands and accepts the big ban.g theory?

The so-called "religionists" are in fact correct when they say that majority of those who accept what the so-called scientists say on things like evolution etc simply do so on faith; not on knowledge, understanding or proof.

@ chukwudi44

First of all Happy Christmas. To be honest, I am answering your post above because I repented when I remembered that today is Christmas; my initial reaction was either to ignore the post or to say "go and call police".

So, an explanation: when I started commenting on the claims that the Roman Catholic Church "gave us the Bible" etc etc etc, I did not criticise or insult the RCC or its members. My intention was to correct misinformaton and help people have a better perspective of things.

My own commitment is not to any denomination but to the Christian Church, to the Church of Christ, to the catholic i.e. universal Church.

Unfortunately, you and some other Roman Catholics (and some other people with an axe to grind) decided to turn it all into a fight throwing all kinds of insult at me even just as you have done with my post above; well, I am not going to pretend to be the most patient person here but yet I actually did give you people quite some leeway before I too started coming hard at you lot and at the RCC

Take a pause for a minute: my post that you have responded to above: look at it again ----- carefully.

1. Tell me what is untrue in it.
2. Tell me what insults the Roman Catholic Church in it
3. In addressing issue 2, consider whether criticism automatically means insult.
4. Consider whether criticism could be intended to make the criticised person/institution repent, reconsider and improve to become a better person/institution.
5. Will the Nigerian Anglican archbishop today or say Desmond Tutu or say Rowan Williams be allowed Holy Communion in the lowliest Roman Catholic Church in Nigeria or anywhere else today? Is that a good thing ---- even despite different views on transubstantiation?

As far as I'm concerned, I am ready to discuss with anyone in an atmosphere of respect; and if you people had shown respect, I would have maintained respect to you people.

Joy to the world the Lord is king.

Ihedinobi: You know, for all your bragging you have still never solved the problem that Hebrews 1:8-12 posed for your stance. Even when I showed you that your darling New World Translation held what a bunch of other translations held: that the Father ascribed to the Lord Jesus Christ qualities that belong only to the Almighty, all you could do was complain that such a passage could be in the Bible.

It only takes enormous pompousity and the feeling that you are especially privileged to possess some knowledge that the "majority" does not have to become so blind to Truth. There is no portion of the Bible that does not hold the Supreme Deity of the Father, the Word (Who became Son at a point in history) and the Spirit, regardless what you and your cohorts do with the Scriptures. I mean, your favorite translation judges you wrong even. As the Scriptures say, out of your own mouth you will be judged.

This is interesting. The same is true of passages in Revelation where Jesus Christ is called Alpha & Omega, First and Last etc. I mean one chap (actually one of the more amenable ones) says only God is Alpha and Omega; we show him where Jesus is called Alpha and Omega --- him turn eye!

Interestingly also, I see all kinds of false accusations made against Trinitarians about passages describing Jesus as "Son" or where Jesus calls the Father God etc. As I have pointed out before, Trinitarians accept such passages without any difficulty! Of course Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the Son of God. This is quite different from those who pretend not to see the passages clearly calling Jesus God, or making laughable distinctions between "mighty God" and "almighty God", or jumping from translation to translation etc.



PS @hisblud, you could also check out this older thread https://www.nairaland.com/1077335/trinitarians-ignorant-what-moses-said/2#12665255

Addendum: also, check this link on OT parables http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/parallel/paral08.cfm

@ Goshen

Quick point: Nathan to David (re Bathsheba) could also be considered a parable.

Todaynatoday: Okay, by the power so vested in me, I hereby declare this thread suspended indefinitely. Everybody should go for a 7-day fasting & prayer session asking for revelation on the true nature of God. Frankly, this argument is not going to help anybody. This trininity issue has been overflogged several times on this site and I want it to finally come to an end. We must either agree or forever hold our peace. Now, I suggest that we all pray & ask God (don't ask me which God oo, if na trinity God u wan pray to make u pray and if na one God u wan pray, make u pray. My own be say we must agree and end this issue) to reveal Himself to us so that we can get a better understanding of who He truly is. I'm serious ooo, nobody must post anything here again if God has not revealed anything to him or her. Let us begin to pray for a revelation!!!!!!!

As if the alakatakitis are going to listen.

FXKing2012: I respectfully disagree wt u ma. Atheists shld not be allowed to disrespect us by blaspheming.
I seriously think atheists deserve their own board where they can ask one another all those philosophical questions and argue till the trumpet sounds.

Even if they get their own board they will not have much that is sensible to discuss anyway. Their lifeblood is trolling and insulting others ---- just ask them to discuss something constructive neutrally and see their shallowness.

James 2

3 If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” 4 have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?

5 Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him?

Ihedinobi: . . . . A year later, Catholic missionaries from Paris entered Japan and began evangelizing anew. Then an amazing thing happened: A small band of Japanese visited the little mission chapel at Nagasaki and caught the eye of Father, later Bishop, Petitjean, by their unusually pious demeanor. Conversing with them, he was dumbfounded to learn that they were believing Christians who had secretly managed to hold onto the essentials of the Christian faith for two centuries, although without priests and totally isolated from the outside world. Other groups of these crypto-Christians were gradually discovered scattered in the islands and mountains around Nagasaki - numbering in all some ten thousand. Their organisation was almost everywhere the same: Usually there were two male leaders who conducted the prayers every Sunday, baptized, and ministered consolation to the dying.

- No monarchical "bishop" or clergy; instead if we must say they had "bishops" in the true biblical sense of overseers, then again their pattern conforms with biblical expectation and that line from The Didache: "appoint for yourselves bishops".

- I think this description is comparable to (what I understand of) the China house church movement in the face of persecution.

- Should any of us meet with members of such groups, are we going to say they are not members of the true Church of Christ because they do not belong to a particular denomination or because they do not submit to the "authority" of the head of a particular denomination.

- Should members of those groups attend a service in our "denomination", are we going to refuse them Holy Communion? ****


**** Anecdote (based on true events).

Currently, a TV series is running in the UK focusing on the work of the leading Anglican church i.e. Westminster Abbey. In one episode, they mentioned and showed pictures from when the Roman Catholic pope visited the UK. The Anglicans are of course easy going generally and have no qualms about allowing visiting Roman Catholics to participate in Holy Communion in an Anglican service. A subsequent episode showed the return visit to Rome (the Vatican) by senior clergy of the Abbey and its Choir. The Choir of the Abbey and of the Vatican (St Peter's Basilica) sang together. However, both the Choir of the Abbey and even the most senior clergy of the Abbey were unable to participate in "Holy Communion" in the Roman Catholic service. Nuff said!

Ah, second thread today calling for the same response.

Previously posted here https://www.nairaland.com/1138711/christians-dont-lie-atheists-made#13480634

One of the atheists said that Francis Bacon was a genius; well, the following statement of the genius Bacon used to be my signature until I 'upgraded' (or 'downgraded'?) to the current one:

. . . nothing can be more justly allotted to be the saying of fools than this: 'there is no God'

Ihedinobi: Lol

Lol x 2

^^ Even in those days he was not a Trinitarian. His position was more the oneness position aka "Jesus only". *

In fact, I do not think he was ever truly a Trinitarian or ever understood the doctrine of The Holy Trinity; he certainly does not understand it presently.

So, it makes his transformation to his current position easier for me to understand.



*EDIT In fact, evidence for this my claim can be found in about his 3rd post on the thread: https://www.nairaland.com/872641/proof-jesus-christ-god-straight#10211449

[quote author=Tonye-t]Sir,

Please how exactly do you mean? 'cos your claim seem bogus.[/quote]Tonye-t

Long time! How now? Trust all is well; takia.

Techwriter: That scripture came alive on Nairaland. I never really grabbed the gravity of that verse until I started listening to some so called atheist. Right now I think the word FOOL is too light to describe an atheist. That would be an understatement

One of the atheists said that Francis Bacon was a genius; well, the following statement of the genius Bacon used to be my signature until I 'upgraded' (or 'downgraded'?) to the current one:

. . . nothing can be more justly allotted to be the saying of fools than this: 'there is no God'

Goshen360: . . . 1. Revelation 12:11. If they had ALREADY OVERCAME by the blood, does that mean what the blood they overcame with wasn't effective when they overcame the devil and they will have to keep overcoming again and again? . . . .

Plus: We cannot be treating the precious blood of Christ like that of goat and bull that was offered repeatedly under the old covenant. The blood of Christ was shed once and for all for our redemption and victory. It's a done deal. What the bible teaches is FAITH in what the blood had already not pleading the blood again and again.

Give Me The Wings Of Faith

Give me the wings of faith to rise
Within the veil, and see
The saints above, how great their joys,
How bright their glories be.

Once they were mourning here below,
And wet their couch with tears:
They wrestled hard, as we do now,
With sins, and doubts, and fears.

I ask them whence their victory came:
They, with united breath,
Ascribe their conquest to the Lamb,
Their triumph to His death.

They marked the footsteps that He trod,
His zeal inspired their br.east;
And following their incarnate God,
Possess the promised rest.

Our glorious Leader claims our praise
For His own pattern giv’n;
While the long cloud of witnesses
Show the same path to Heav’n.

(For me the best tune and performance of this song is by The St Michael Singers from a CD titled Daily Abundance; unfortunately I couldn't find a linkable version.)

Ishilove: Hmph, if their mammary organs are their best features, then they are bunch of brainless bimbos.

Ishi, you no see say you jus confirm wetin I write? Look dem pictures and axe (ask, pshaw) me wetin de people dem consider to be dem own br.east, sorry, best features.

See even when we seem to disagree ----- we actually agree.

naptu2

Uyi Iredia: OMG ! sEE BOBEE.

Putting their br.east (erm, best?) features forward . . . . .

italo: Yes sir, I get you. 'The Holy Spirit and Lord inspires millions of denominations to teach millions of different doctrines. He also inspires anybody who disagrees with a doctrine on Saturday night to break off and form another so-called denomination on Sunday morning. The Holy Spirit inspires one denomination of the "body of Christ" to say "Jesus is God" and another denomination to say "Jesus is man."' Thank you Sir!

I imagine the Holy Spirit inspired one "pope" to say “We declare, state, define and pronounce that it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff.” Yet He inspires the Roman Catholic Church to contradict that "pope"; even yet He inspires the Roman Catholic Church to say that "pope" was infallible and that statement is infallible ---- yet He inspires the Roman Catholic Church to contradict it. Yeah, right; thank you very much sir.

italo: But Sir, on St. Paul's dispute with St. Peter. Don't you see how the body of Christ dealt with the issue in the unity of the council? Don't you see how St. Peter how St. Peter acted and spoke definitively as the head of the Church in the end - backed by St. James?

Even after that the different groups still had different practices (e.g. Jews and Gentile groups); it did not prevent them from being one in Christ and all part of the one body of Christ.

italo: Give me an example of this kind of council in your so called 'two or three are gathered' church.

1. I have already given you the example of the church that met in the house of Prisca and Aquilla; and also the church that met in the house of Philemon.*

2. I give you two more examples: (a) Romans 16:23 - "Gaius, whose hospitality I and the whole church here enjoy, sends you his greetings."; (b) Luke 9: 49“Master,” said John, “we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us.” 50“Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.”

3. Most importantly are you telling us that Jesus was lying or was a "joker" when He said "where two or three are gathered in My name, there I am in the midst of them."?

italo: When have all the so-called denominations gathered in a council to thrash an issue with the head of the Church proclaiming definitively the way forward?

Just one example Sir.

1. Jesus is the only Head of the Church. Any other person claiming or being called by that title ---- is false.

2. I am not interested in "denominations" as such and even less so what you refer to as "so-called denominations".

3. The Roman Catholic Church is a denomination and one of the "so-called denominations".

4. The aggrandisement and fraud of the Roman Catholic Church prevents the possibility of a truly ecumenical council now; which is why it is holding its own councils like Trent etc and if it likes it can deceive itself that things like Trent etc are "ecumenical".



* EDIT I also previously gave the example of the Ethiopean eunuch --- he did not stop being a member of the body of Christ or of the Church of Christ even when it was him alone.

seriallink: The bolded makes me wonder if the Church being discussed is a cult or something?? Smh!!!

Is the question not supposed to be 'do you believe in God Almighty and the sacrifice of His son for your salvation?'. Why must it be about believing in a Church for salvation? What if the Church leaders erred? He should just follow in their footsteps like sheeple without asking questions?

Salvation is an individual thing and it comes only through believing in God and the sacrifice of His son for our sins and living the Christ-like life! Shikena!!!

Very good point! When people place an organisation above Christ Himself, then it is legitimate to wonder.

italo: @ Enigma,

Rather than 'nice' or 'rough', I'll rather play the daft student.

You have implied that God's Church contradicts itself. One part says "A" is truth...another part says "A" is heresy. Yet it is ONE TRUE CHURCH.

Yes sir!

Anything you like you can play, that one does not concern me after your last post addressed to me.

Now to the point: the Church of Christ does not "contradict" itself.

Rather, organisations and denominations like the Roman Catholic Church, Koboko Ministry, Power Must Change Hands Ministry etc etc etc etc are the ones contradicting each other.

The members of the body of Christ may have different understandings of certain issues e.g. the Council of Jerusalem having to address some matters (and which still did not mean that different groups even at that time had uniform practices), Paul having to confront Peter, Paul himself facing charges of hypocrisy etc. Nevertheless, the body of Christ, the Church of Christ ---- remains united by the One Holy Spirit and by their One Lord. Simples.

italo: I don't see anything wrong in his warning me of your insincerity, especially since I already know of it from first-hand experience. Don't you remember when you quoted one line from St. Ignatius letter out of context, and I got you the whole chapter of that letter to show that Ignatius idea of the Catholic Church bears no semblance to the lie that you're telling. You suddenly didn't want to hear of St. Ignatius anymore.

Hypocrisy is difficult to deal with, my dear. Look what Jesus had to say to your understudies, the Pharisees in Matthew 23. I imagine if he's not saying worse to you than whatever Chukwudi says.

But you don't pray that one day we will come to understand and realise the falsehood you are spreading, abi? You would consider that an "insult."

Be it far from me that I should be committed to Christ and unconcerned with his body, The Catholic Church. What sort of fake commitment would that be?

1. It seems this matter is really paining you people! In other words, that we are combatting the lies and misrepresentations that the Roman Catholic Church has fed you lot and the world is being exposed is causing you people wahala. Make una sorry oh; make una sorry gaaan. Truly, if you na like sef, make una no sorry at all! The truth hurts sometimes and you will just have to suck it, I'm afraid.

2. You may lie all you like about my "insincerity" ----- well, my posts about Ignatius' statement remain there for all to see. The problem is that the Roman Catholic Church has always lied and twisted that statement of Ignatius in the same way that it has always lied and twisted statements of other "church fathers". Now that someone with proper comprehension explains the statement accurately here, it exposes the lies and misrepresentations of the Roman Catholic Church. Because that one dey pain una, you label the person "insincere". Well, na una wahala be that.

3. This one is just a notice: if una wan play nice, I will be nice to you people; if una wan play rough, then let's get ready to rumbleeeeeee!

italo: What you are saying is that the ONE true Church of Christ teaches millions of different doctrines. One might say 'it is right to have gay bishops,' while the other says 'it is wrong.' One might say 'Holy Communion is Jesus,' while the other says 'it's just biscuit...or wafer.' 'One might say 'Jesus is God,' while the other says 'he was only a man.'

It is obvious the "real one true Church" cannot have millions of false doctrines in it.

1 Tim 3:15: "The Church...is the pillar and foundation of truth."

You are making a mistake; what is more you are ignoring what is in the Bible.

According to the Bible, the one true Church is not a building; even more importantly it is not an organisation! Therefore, the one true Church is not especially concerned with different organisations who are between them teaching different doctrines ---- like the Roman Catholic Church, Pentecostal Church etc etc etc

The one true Church of Christ is simply a body of people; a body of people who have accepted and are trusting in Christ. They may be individual e.g. like their brother of old the Ethiopean eunuch, they may be a small group that meets in a house e.g. the Church that met in the house of Priscilla and Aquilla or in the house of Philemon; they may meet in a bigger group as with a dedicated church building.

When they meet in a bigger group especially, it is possible that false people and even wolves may be among them; yet Jesus still knows His sheep.

Where we get information about recognising the one true Church is --- from the Bible. We are not concerned with an organisation that deceives itself with bulls etc and says it is the "only true Church". The Bible quite easily shows that the organisation is lying, in fact it is talking --- bull.

A joke at best.

Here, you are showing your colours and that of the Roman Catholic Church. What you call a joke is my statement that the true Church is even found where two or three are gathered in Jesus'name. Well, that means you are calling Jesus Christ a "joker" because He is the One who said it.