₦airaland Forum

buzugee: i think a better question is why do you keep asking the same question day in day out ? what are ya an OCD patient ? next time i see another logicboy question asking the same question i promise to hang myself

A beg, no try am; your posts dey too valuable jare.

Long may you continue to make me laff or smile.

^^^ They all used to have links ---- until the forum change.

Anyway below; it is the post at 8.24PM on Aug 13 2011

https://www.nairaland.com/734568/atheists-do-not-reject-god#8916803

Pastor AIO: Before you guys continue slapping each other on the back, I'll be back to address what you are saying tomorrow.

You use this kind of expression; but I can easily point to you and fellow atheists/non-Christians "slapping each other on the back" ------ constantly as a matter of fact.

OLAADEGBU: Agreed. I don't thing those Secular humanists will agree with you though. They have been trying to gag the Church from having any influence in Government and Education institutions with the help of the religious compromisers.

Agreed (though there may be a better expression for "religious compromisers" ); and they are aided, sometimes unwittingly, by misguided "intellectuals" and even "do-gooders".

OLAADEGBU: You still don't get it. What he is saying is that your so called Separation of Church and State is a myth that is found nowhere in the 1st Amendment.

Strictly speaking "separation of church and state" is not a legal concept. Further, the concept, though known in American "politics" (for want of a better word presently) is open to different interpretations.

From a legal point of view, what the authorities are not allowed to do is divided into the two broad categories: (a) do not establish a religion and (b) do not interfere with free exercise of religion.

This is far far far removed from "Congress cannot pass any law with respect to religion"

I'll do better; I'll redraft the First Amendment in simpler terms for you.

Congress may pass any law concerning religion as long as such law does not (1) establish a religion, or (2) interfere with free exercise of religion.

Simples.

Pastor AIO: Yes, and pig is equal to goat, and water is oil. Confirmed!!! Maybe if you took off those shades that you're always wearing at the end of your posts then your thinking would not be so blinkered.

Me too, I know how to talk nonsense if that is what you want to do with me.

^ I always knew it would come to that: ad hominem in face of failed argument.

Sad thing is I'm not surprised.

OK let's see, there are laws in the American legal system e.g. respecting religious freedom, inter alia. How come there are such laws if "Congress cannot pass any law with respect to religion"?

By the way a well trained first year law student on reading the First Amendment that you quoted should be able to tell you straight away that your representation was and remains inaccurate. If an A student, he will also note that it is inaccurate illogical.

logicboy: WTF? Why would you say that? Pastor AIO is right. Separation of church and state. Read about it

And this was my last response.

Pastor AIO:
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that[b] "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...."[/b] and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Confirms the bolded in your post as inaccurate ---- and as I said even illogical.

Pastor AIO:
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that[b] "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...."[/b] and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Confirms the bolded in your post as inaccurate ---- and as I said even illogical.

Pastor AIO: Please you will have to give me references. From what I know the constitution says that congress cannot pass any law 'in respect to religion' ( i paraphrase). If anything at all the separation will go both ways. Government will not be involved with religion, whether the influence is passing from religion to government, or from government to religion.

Which Church had a say in the government? The Catholic church? The Mormons? Which church?

How can there be a National Day of Prayer by Law if the Government cannot pass any laws with respect to religion? How is Obama breaking the law by telling you to pray at home? Why do you insist on doing your prayer in public, yet you call yourself a christian/follower of christ and Jesus said you should not pray on street corners but in private.

Oya, Ola, talk and further expose yourself.

The bolded are inaccuracies ---- even illogical.

Again, slight taking of liberty as quote originally by a person external to Nairaland, but still . . .

From https://www.nairaland.com/445085/chalenge-huxley,kay-17,ogaga4luv-other-atheists/7#10836976 ***

{*** well the quoted post below is dated 16/05/12 11.24 AM.}

NJnC: By Marilyn Adamson . . . .

5. Does God exist? We know God exists because he pursues us. He is constantly initiating and seeking for us to come to him.

I was an atheist at one time. And like many atheists, the issue of people believing in God bothered me greatly. What is it about atheists that we would spend so much time, attention, and energy refuting something that we don't believe even exists?! What causes us to do that? When I was an atheist, I attributed my intentions as caring for those poor, delusional people...to help them realize their hope was completely ill-founded. To be honest, I also had another motive. As I challenged those who believed in God, I was deeply curious to see if they could convince me otherwise. Part of my quest was to become free from the question of God. If I could conclusively prove to believers that they were wrong, then the issue is off the table, and I would be free to go about my life.

I didn't realize that the reason the topic of God weighed so heavily on my mind, was because God was pressing the issue. I have come to find out that God wants to be known. He created us with the intention that we would know him. He has surrounded us with evidence of himself and he keeps the question of his existence squarely before us. It was as if I couldn't escape thinking about the possibility of God. In fact, the day I chose to acknowledge God's existence, my prayer began with, "Ok, you win..." It might be that the underlying reason atheists are bothered by people believing in God is because God is actively pursuing them.

I am not the only one who has experienced this. Malcolm Muggeridge, socialist and philosophical author, wrote, "I had a notion that somehow, besides questing, I was being pursued." C.S. Lewis said he remembered, "...night after night, feeling whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all of England."

Lewis went on to write a book titled, "Surprised by Joy" as a result of knowing God. I too had no expectations other than rightfully admitting God's existence. Yet over the following several months, I became amazed by his love for me. . . . . .

brainpulse: @Enigma well said

Cheers, brainpulse.

Let us add also

2 Corinthians 13:14

May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.

Well, the apostle Paul must have known something, no?

^^^ I see where you are coming from. However, according to Matthew . . .

Matthew 28

18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Kay 17: Jesus not God is the creator of everything, while Jesus wasn't created by God, right?

Consequently, there three deities in Chirstianity. And we nor Jesus can't be Creations of God, since God didn't create anything.

No, my good friend, there is only one deity in Christianity. The Bible is emphatic that God is One.

Nevertheless, though God is One, He has revealed Himself in three persons i.e. The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit.

Accordingly, Christians do not have a difficulty accepting the following passages, inter alia, from the Bible.


1. Genesis 1:1

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2a. John 1:1-4

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning.

3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

2b. John 1:14,15

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”

3. Hebrews 1:1,2

1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he {God} has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

4. Hebrews 1:3

3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his {God's} being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.

OK, the passages I've quoted reveal the following.

1. God created the heavens and earth in the beginning.
2. Jesus was in the beginning.
3. Jesus was with God in the beginning.
4. Jesus was God
5. Through Jesus all things were made and without Him nothing was made {(edit) and God appointed Him heir of all things and God made the universe through Him}.
6. Jesus became flesh and dwelt among us
7. Jesus is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of God's being!

Now, I can understand if you say you do not believe all these or if you say you do not believe in the Bible. However, can you honestly deny that the Bible teaches what I have just summarised?

Kay 17: We can proceed.

I believe this was for you to explain your understanding of Jesus as "son of God"; perhaps you want to stick with the basic explanation you already gave. As for Christians, it is a given that He is the Son of God as I said earlier.

Kay 17: Since God CREATED everything, everything comes after. God's creation can be categorically seen as his Sons/Son.

Christians believe that "everything" was made by or through Jesus. Jesus Himself is not created but is eternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Kay 17: as long as there is a son, there is the presence of a father which complements the relationship. Thus two separate persons at both ends, with rights, trust and duties in slope towards the Son.

But this is not what is meant by "fiduciary relationship" as such - though this is not a big issue.

Kay 17: At least there is reason to discuss.

No problemo.


EDIT Meanwhile, we never did settle how "us" is/are son/s of God!

^ OK, thanks.

ijawkid: He said he is Gods son....

And ofcus he is divine,he had lived in heaven by his Fathers side aeons b4 d universe was formed...

But he(Jesus) is Gods 1st born son and Yahweh is his DADDYYYYYY!!!!!!

The Jews who knew about d messiahs coming knew Jesus was mainly coming to do his Fathers will(our Fathers will)....
Dying for sinful mankind and reedeming us from sin and death.....

In all that Jesus did he sanctified his Fathers name and preached about him...

Because Yahweh is all and in all.......

If He is "divine", that means He is God. No?

Or do you mean He is a god?

^^

You still have my excellent advice --- generously given to you twice already.

buzugee: . . . he gangsta

Exactly my point!

He a homie --- especially when it comes to throwing insults.

buzugee: he was one of those slaves taken from nigeria to go work the coccaina fields in uruguay

The "nigga" (only to borrow your exression used affectionately as I see) does know how to throw insults even when he himself has not been provoked; so, really no need for "colo mentality" that he is from Mars or wherever in considering whether to repay him in kind.

@Kay17

Going through your posts again, I realise you did not really answer this one.

2. How is "us" the son/s of God?

Kay 17: 1. The frequent claims of the Christian with scriptural confirmation.

Christians of course accept Jesus to be the Son of God. Your post implied you did too and it would be nice to see you explain your own understanding.

Kay 17: 2.Working on an assumption that God created all that exists except himself, Jesus becomes a creation of his, just like we are.

If you are still working with "claims of the Christian with scriptural confirmation" then you are wrong I'm afraid. Christians do not believe that Jesus is a "creation". You see now why it is important that you explain your own understanding?

Kay 17: 3. Same creation.

Well, this is a non-starter I'm afraid since Christians do not believe Jesus to be a "creation".

Kay 17: 4. In other words, father and son relationship.

A father and son relationship does not ipso facto create a "fiduciary relationship"! Are you aware that the concept of "fiduciary relationship" is a particular concept in the common law system/family of laws?

Kay 17: For these matters beyond reason, does it include the trinity concept?

The doctrine of "The Trinity" per se is not beyond human reason. Firstly, it is revealed in scripture; secondly, it has been articulated in logical forms over the years, indeed over centuries, by Christians.

However, the full nature of God's divinity or the interrelationships within The Trinity is indeed beyond human reason.

Kay 17: Its so clear!

I'm not quite sure it's so clear, could you clarify a couple of things for me as below? Thanks.

Kay 17: That Jesus is the Son of God like us, thus a separate being different and connected by a fidiucary relationship with God!

1. How is Jesus "the son of God"?

2. How is "us" the son/s of God?

3. How is Jesus' sonship comparable with that of "us"?

4. What exactly do you mean by a "fiduciary relationship with God"?

Kay 17: Simple, except if matters of divinity is above reason.

Certain matters of divinity must ex necessitate be above reason. Having said that, there are logical and reasoned conceptions of divinity even within the Christian faith as you should know.

Deep Sight: Thanks for your comments, and yes, I take them in good faith. Don't worry about Enigma, as a famed sissy, he has a long habit of behaving like a girl: so no doubt he will take your advise. No one but her over-aged raping suitors should be concerned about that.

As to the issue, you too should cease to read scripture the lens of infallibility. Scripture is not infallible: and I can show you this in an instant, if you care. The plain fact is that Paul stated that God made a statement about Jesus: he quoted from Psalm 45: and any reading of Psalm 45 shows that no such statement was made regarding Jesus!

That is the plain and undeniable fact.

But you will still beeeg in future to discuss with this famed sissy who in your fit you referred to in one go as "he" and "her".

brainpulse: @ Deepsight i am forced to respond to your allusion here on the bolded, i would rather say you are not a believer in the words of God at all and a deceiver of the brethren, because every words as written in the bible are the mind of God and inspired only by him(II Tim 3:16). For all the words to survive generations and brought together is never the effort of any man if God has not willed. For you to say Paul was lying even when you were not born during this period shows you are deliberately ignorant or mislead in your beliefs.
I will suggest that Enigma seize to discuss with you on this issue because it shows that you are only out to paint the truth lies despite evidences posed before you. I regret if my words sounds harsh but know its in good faith.
Thanks

Quite obviously a waste of time, isn't it?

mbulela: It just seems like a scam.

It was and remains unnecessary (despite all the noise about crime). Indeed, it could itself of course be a scam.

Deep Sight: YOU ARE CAPITAL Arrow.

Go to bed. Don't worry I will find other posters to beg.

Thanks. I know you will find other posters to beg, I don't deny you that.

All I know is, you will still beg to discuss with me again in the future.

Deep Sight: Oh, dont worry, I will pull them all up in my next post myself - and it should be obvious I was cajoling you to drop your very childish approach to things - a developnment which I would have liked to see - but which appears to be a pipe dream.

You ought to be ashamed of your petty woman-like behaviour. Infact, saying that is even an offence to women. You are worse than any female I know in terms of this ridiculous behaviour of yours. My asking you severally to kick your bitterness and engage in a discourse is actually shameful for you. It shows just how silly and childish you have always been.

Olodo. Now you have given five intensely silly responses.

Talking about being begged to chat. . .what a m.oronic Arrow. Are you 12 years old or something

You will still beeeeg again to discuss with me.

And I will once again laugh at you. In heat, you throw all sorts of insults at me, something you have done from day one. When you calm down, you beg me to discuss. Even me the "Arrow", (I don't think you even know what it means or how offensive it is considered --- another example of your idiotic ignorance), you will still beg again to discuss with.

Thanks.

When I have time, I might pull up the several different occasions when you begged that I should discuss with you; like a little boy who wants to play with the big boys.

I will even bet you now, that you will still beg me again in future. I could easily agree, if only you would show yourself to be of integrity ---- like apologising for wrongfully accusing me of dishonesty with regard to my use of Hebrews 1:8.

However, seeing as I know now conclusively concludedly conclusively that you lack integrity, when you beg me again, you will beg in vain.

Deep Sight: Of course, you have long made heavy weather of the fact that I am not worth speaking to. Yet you have here allotted me one response and so far could not resist three? And you talk about i[/i]diocy? My boy, you an unintelligent clown who believes ridiculous mythical piffle simply because you have an inferiority complex for the white man. Your posts are nonsensical, you have a pathetically exaggerated opinion of yourselve given the poverty of your intellect, and worst of all the way you pose like some primadonna just makes you apear like a bitter gossiping [i]petty[b[b]woman.[/b]

Go sleep joor. Olodo.

Cool.

Yet you keep begging me to engage in discussion with you!

Even on this thread, do you realise how you asked me.