₦airaland Forum

hello kag and tudor

Tudór:
I find this topic illogical.
How can i prove your ontology when i don't know who the hell you are. You first reveal yourself maybe orally or through a memior,blog or diary then we can study and know if you're being dishonest.
You can't for example claim to be loving or holy then we see in your diary that you steal, loot murder and full of jealousy. Its just not possible.

now that is what i want you to understand
How can i prove your ontology when i don't know who the hell you are.

It boils down to one simple point "CHOICE", a choice to reveal just what I WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT ME, period!

You first reveal yourself maybe orally or through a memior,blog or diary [/b]then we can study and know if you're being dishonest.

yes true, just as i stated, using the profile in nairaland, i may say i am tall, fair etc but u cant prove that that is what i am but simply u accept it as being me becasuse i chose what i want u to know and that does not make me a liar.

[b]You can't for example claim to be loving or holy then we see in your diary that you steal, loot murder and full of jealousy. Its just not possible.

yes  that is the TOTALITY OF WHAT I CHOOSE TO REVEAL ABOUT ME but that does not make my existence untrue? or more better it does not prove that i dont exist but proves i EXIST hence you must accept ie believe I EXIST not the other way round.

even tho it is foolishness to your understanding all I CHOOSE TO REVEAL ABOUT MYSELF yet you accept that I EXIST.

THEN if you accept i EXIST, you would draw close to understand WHY i DID WHAT I DID as a COUNSELLOR OR AN ADVOCATE to understand me better- abi? 


MY RIGHTNESS OR WRONGNESS DOES NOT PROVE I DONT EXIST BUT ON THE CONTRARY IT DOES PROVE I EXIST AND YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE ME!!!

U FEEL HIM!

yes

could it be that the pyramid in eygpt, azetc which modern man can not figure out, was man trying to reach God like the tower of babel? as a result of being around the tower of babel after they were scattered, they went with such "technology" to build the pyramids?

modern man boast that he has so much advancement that he can decipher anything including God yet how the pyramid was built by ancient men, they cant decipher. IF WHAT IS SEEN (PYRAMID MADE BY ANCIENT MEN) HAS NOT BEEN UNDERSTOOD BY MODERN MAN, HOW CAN THE UNSEEN(SUPERNATURAL) BE UNDERSTOOD BY MERE HUMAN UNDERSTANDING?

this remind me of a verse in the bible

Rom 1:19-22
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 [size=13pt]Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,[/size]
KJV


does it not tell us that there is a conspiracy among modern man to rubbish anything God?

ok kag but hope u have followed my thought pattern? about proving my ontology?

and this post too

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-281109.0.html

max

something like that, am sensing so

Now what is the meaning of the term "ontology"? I like this one as I think it best sums it up: "An ontology is a specification of a conceptualization." Which in layman's terms means ". . . a description (like a formal specification of a program) of the concepts and relationships that can exist for an agent or a community of agents."[2] Doesn't that just blow you away? What I particularly like about that description is that, despite the claims of the author, it covers many thorny aspects of what exactly ontology describes in philosophy

from ur reply above, i choose to accept your layman's definition and it speaks so well about what ontology means.

"Your argument appears to be illogical, more so because it's built on a straw man of what it means for atheists to reject the claims made on behalf of gods."

What's that? You are a six-armed Leprechaun with torpedoes for legs and jet into space at least once a day for radioactive supplements? I don't believe you. That doesn't preclude the person making th claims having an ontology, though.

that is what i was saying in my post, that if i CHOOSE NOT to make my ontology known to you u can assume me to be anything from the fits of your imagination, philosophy experience and you will be sincerely wrong at it. and of a fact you are wrong.

do you see your fallacy and limitation as an athiest about my ontology?

hi pi;grim

sorry the question i intend asking might not be for this thread however when its sorted i might create a thread for it.

KAG:
Exactly. So, are you, um, going to reveal the intricacies of your ontology - or what you've discovered in relation to the subject? or are we gonna have to play twenty questions? What we know for some sort of certainty so far is that you have an ontology.

Ontology - I don't think it means what you think it means. Your argument appears to be illogical, more so because it's built on a straw man of what it means for atheists to reject the claims made on behalf of gods.

I'm sure we can help. What parts of your ontology would you like evidenced. Try to state them as clearly as possible, or it may become tricky.

KAG:
Now what is the meaning of the term "ontology"? I like this one as I think it best sums it up: "An ontology is a specification of a conceptualization." Which in layman's terms means ". . . a description (like a formal specification of a program) of the concepts and relationships that can exist for an agent or a community of agents."^[2] Doesn't that just blow you away? What I particularly like about that description is that, despite the claims of the author, it covers many thorny aspects of what exactly ontology describes in philosophy: studies about the nature of existence, life, essence, etc.

of certainity u do, but u know i can CHOOSE not to state my ONTOLOGY.

esensed:
thanx for honestly stating u do not know my ontology

becasue u dont see me,
hear me,
you dont feel me,
you can only accept [i]WHAT I CHOOSE[/i]to reveal about myself, my concept and my relationship to all around me.


dont you think it is merely stupid or outright foolishness that if i reveal myself to you (via this website created by seun) and u in your understanding decide to say that based on some analysis and conclusion, that what I CHOOSE to show u via this medium, is not right or proves that i dont exist hence i dont have an ontology. And moreover, if i refuse to use any forum beside nairaland to lend credence to my ontology, does that mean my report about myself in nairaland is false?

what do you think i will take u to be?

since u certain, can u logically answer the above.

in addition, if as a result of some error on seun's website becos of some bug, or becos the browser type u used is not compatible with the website setting of seun etc that can alter the presentation of myself through this forum, does it mean that WHAT I CHOOSE TO SAY ABOUT ME IS FALSE HENCE I DONT EXIST becos of how it was distorted?


THANKS FOR REPLY GOD BLESS!

could it be that when the children of isreal in eygpt as slaves were building the pyramid
i wanted to ask some mysterious question but i cant put it in words but , i hopr i can

And that's disappointing how? The pyramids were an aside, a mere example in a post that argues that progress is more 'cyclical' than linear. That they haven't solved the pyramid puzzle only buttresses the fact that generations past weren't comprised of dummies who couldn't tell the difference between scientific puzzles and the supernatural, and that  modern man is not 'smarter' than they merely because he's the most recent in the progression.

Scientists are still unable to determine how life started on earth.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/science/16orig.html?pagewanted=1&em


HMMM how true

@
nice no great posting noetic

all

what i have observed about the response from anti christianity is that they
1. couldnt state why they are anti christian the way noetic boldly stated why he/she is a christian
2. tend to digress once in a while and inject a divergent issues.

so please be bold like noetic and show us why u are what u are. period

hi kag

please r u still around,  or any athiest can help by proving what my ontology is?

thanks

Hello

You are welcome to this forum whether an athiest or not, kindly take your time to read this post is really interesting and eye opener for you.

enjoy

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-279631.0.html

Tudór:
I wonder why you guys keep making it sound like charles darwin is the founder of atheism. The above quote is his PERSONAL opinion and NOT central dogma for atheists. . . . .

no it is part of it

KAG:
Thank you.

good can u describe the concepts and relations that can exist of me?

No. I don't know you. I know absolutely nothing about you. Can YOU describe the concepts and relations that can exist of you?


It is after we've deduced that esensed has an ontology - and I already did so - that we can ask esensed, not me, what his or her ontology, away from the basic generalities, are.

thanx for honestly stating u do not know my ontology

becasue u dont see me,
hear me,
you dont feel me,
you can only accept [i]WHAT I CHOOSE[/i]to reveal about myself, my concept and my relationship to all around me.


dont you think it is merely stupid or outright foolishness that if i reveal myself to you (via this website created by seun) and u in your understanding decide to say that based on some analysis and conclusion, what I CHOOSE to show u via this medium, is not right or proves that i dont exist hence i dont have an ontology. And moreover, if i refuse to use any forum beside nairaland to lend credence to my ontology, does that mean my report about myself in nairaland is false? i dont think so

what do you think i will take u to be?

yes bro but where is the link to the website or the utube. could you upload the reporter's response. thanks

i was really shocked to read such quotes.

[b]Charles Darwin and his disciples are examples of the heroes of atheism, it is amazing that black Africans would believe and swallow what these proponents of the humanist religion says hook, line and sinker.  Below are quotes of what they believe about the black race.  They believe that they are highly evolved than us and that we are close to the ape like creature that we evolved from.  To think that an African will take this fallacy and accept it as science is beyond me and here you have them boasting that they are the intelligent ones who think for themselves.


“The Negroid stock is even more ancient than the Caucasian and Mongolians, as may be proved by an examination not only of the brain, of the hair, of the bodily characteristics , but of the instincts, the intelligence. The standard of intelligence of the average adult Negro is similar to that of the eleven-year-old-youth of the species Homo sapiens.” -- Henry Fairfield Osborn   Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked


“No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man. And if this be true, it is simply incredible that, when all his disabilities are removed, and our prognathous relative has a fair field and no favor, as well as no oppressor, he will be able to compete successfully with his bigger-brained and smaller-jawed rival, in a contest which is to be carried on by thoughts and not by bites.” -- Thomas Huxley Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked

“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes … will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.” -- Charles Darwin


This among many atheist quotes are the basic foundation of the atheists and for a black man not  only to be insulted but about his race and ancestors but to then turn on his fellow brothers and accuse them of ignorance is what as someone said  "foolery" and that at the highest order.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-283796.32.html
Re: Where Are All The Black Atheist?
« #55 on: Yesterday at 12:01:22 PM »[/b]

so na me be this wai them one convert me come thier religion ko,  me next to ape ,

hello all

thanks to all that contributed.

kag
[b]Are you sure you want to go down this route? Now, clearly, based solely on reading the way you've used the word, I'd say you have no idea what ontology means. That makes your "prove my ontology" clamour all the more interesting to me. I'm going to respond in a slightly more detailed manner because I will like to see where this leads.

First, I'll start by letting you know that like science, I don't do proofs - well, except for when I drink alcohol and when I do maths[1]. To that effect, there will be no "proofs" only evidence based on the logical reading of your posts. It will be short, though, because you refused to try to understand what you were trying to ask from the Jesus story I posted. Nor, thinking about it, understand what Pastor AIO wrote in response to your op.

Now what is the meaning of the term "ontology"? I like this one as I think it best sums it up: "An ontology is a specification of a conceptualization." Which in layman's terms means ". . . a description (like a formal specification of a program) of the concepts and relationships that can exist for an agent or a community of agents."[2] Doesn't that just blow you away? What I particularly like about that description is that, despite the claims of the author, it covers many thorny aspects of what exactly ontology describes in philosophy: studies about the nature of existence, life, essence, etc.

Having gotten an idea of what ontology means. What, then, does one mean when one states or implies they have an ontology? Bear in mind the claim here isn't I am a being, or I exist, or I am an ontological manifestation, or, even, I bear traits identified in ontology. The claim or implication was that you have an ontology. Something you subsequently asked to be "proved". In light of that, it is easy to state unequivocally (a surprising state of things given the logical, literal reading that has occurred thus far) that you'd like atheists to show evidence that you, the OP, have the capacity for the study of nature, existence and other such things. To get even more technical - and as it is philosophy, it's hard not to - to show that you have the capabilities to be a dasein.[3]

If that is case - and it is the logical conclusion I drew from your words - what remains is to show that you have the abilities to not only think, but to think in such a way as to ask questions about existence. Questions about what "it" all means. Can we in fact show that based solely on your words? I think we can.

What you wrote in the op is probably sufficient for the task. You wrote: "please can you prove my ontology?" Reading that and parsing the words correctly, what you imply is that you already have an ontology. That is, in your question, you ask if we atheists can prove your description of existence, etc. From that we can gather that you do, in fact, already possess an ontology. That in itself is evidence (I refuse to do proof) that the broad scope of your study or analysis of your manifest person, etc has some basis. The evidence here has small caveat: that since you didn't explicitly state your ontology in full, then we have to assume based on the notion that the gestalt[4] of all daseins have a basic structure built on language, that your ontology will have to follow the usual pattern, and it is the vague outlines that you want proved. Q.E.D.

Oh, also, in case you're wondering, you're a dasein because you have an ontology.

P.S. If you have any questions or need me to be clearer in some part, then please don't hesitate to ask. I'll get on it as soon as I can.


[1] It's a paraphrase of "proof is for maths and alcohol"
[2] http://www-ksl.stanford.edu/kst/what-is-an-ontology.html
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dasein
[4] Gestalt, in this instance, is Lacan's use of the term: "the visual image of another member of the same species, which is perceived as a unified whole." (http://nosubject.com/Gestalt)[/b]

see kag, what u rote to me i simply explaining around my simple question 'prove my ontology".
good u have started by defining it


Which in layman's terms means ". . . a description (like a formal specification of a program) of the concepts and relationships that can exist for an agent or a community of agents."

good can u describe the concepts and relations that can exist of me?

hi pilgrim well i feel that noetic comprehends what qm requesting of our fellows to delve in. in any case i appreciate your observation. thanks.


@noetic

In further revealing the limits of ur understanding, u chose to ontologically define the poster based on his/her opening words, but u consider this untenable for a God who does not exist and as such cannot produce words. who are u deceiving? why the continuous shifts in position?

I cant believe u ran under grammatical semantics. Let us re frame the opening post: What is esensed's ontology?
Now make an attempt.

true that is what i need anyone to prove not just in the text but remember i said what seun has provoided us and they cant comprehend?

My point is this, note that
1. KAG refused to ontologically define esensed on the premise that there are several concepts of ontology.

2. KAG however established that by asking "can u prove my ontology?" esensed simply proved that he was a dasein, which in reality does not produce a convincing analogy of esensed's ontology. For instance, I (and presumably esensed) was expecting an ontology that included his (esensed) meta-physical components, hindsights, abilities and limitations all summed up in the basis of his (esensed's) existence.

Deducibly KAG has limited the scope of esensed's ontology to the fact that esensed might be a dasein, based on grammatical function without stating the ontological basis that establishes:
1. The nature of esensed's existence
2. essensed's life
3. The very essence of this life.

true again.

@mantraa


@essenced
Very interesting question!

Can you prove your own ontology?

Atheists don't claim to have all the answers yet. If they cannot scientifically prove your ontology, what does this mean to you?

And can you prove my ontology?

now i see someone has started but mantraa are you saying this of your own self or of all athiest? it really matters.

halleluyah 2x

time is 1:55am on tuesday.

pilgrim, noetic, pastor AIO etc

this is a well laid out discussion and may God's grace and peace be with u all in answering athiest.
i followed it and i really wanted to see the end and i am convinced that thier is more that meets the eye - supernatural.
i believe there are "natural" things but more importantly there is the SUPERNATURAL where athiesm, naturalism will forever continue to deceive themselves that it doesnt exist. however a scripture comes to mind and i hope that it will not be too late for dem athiest

2 Tim 3:13-14

13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

14 [size=20pt]But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
KJV[/size]

2 Tim 2:23-3:1
3 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.

24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,

25 [size=28pt]In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
[/size]

KJV

and thru this discuss u have being meekly instructing them and may God (the supernatural) show em mercy to be delivered from the snare of the devil - athiesm. and finally agree with u - why i am NOT an athiest, my choice!

May we be used continually in this wonderful vineyard of the Lord. Amen

kag

simply u cant explain plainly my ontology scientifically -- [size=20pt]why cant you just own up and prove my ontology or admit that you cant prove my ontology. em seun has provided you with what you may use to prove my ontology am waitin[/size]

athiest,

as you scientifically consider, remember this simple line is the smooth stone of the five from the river of life, it is seekin you temple of ur uncircumsiced mind.

so please prove my ontology.

hi all

thanks pilgrim and noetic, i understand what u u mean however i wish them to prove my ontology with what seun has provided for them,  that is why its so short.

hello kag tudo
what kind of question? my ontology

kag
talk about me first now that is my ontology

hello noetic and pilgrim.1

well i seem to be interested for them to state my ontology, by scientifically stating my ontology.

expecting all u athiest,

hello

please can you prove my ontology?

hi

abuzola

i tot u pple were given your own site (muslim section) and we are left with athiest?
since reasonong with you might cos seun's head to roll down mmm?

pls dont allow seun's head to be rolled as a result of a fatwa

thanks

Nothing! Absolutely nothing. Because believing in God gives me a hope of a better life.


What do I hope to gain by being an atheist?
Nothing! But delusion and hopelessness. They may claim that they are knowledgeable, enlightened than God who they feel has not done much than the bible in revealing Himself.

Purpose then? Accountable to no one but themselves. Hence believe that just like out nothing they were form as a result of chemical reaction, when they die… they just return to chemicals. Period.
Furthermore, since one is not accountable to no one, live as you please. Now as a result of such concept of thought, homosexuality, lesbianism, all manner of lifestyle is permissible. No wonder, it has been properly stated in Romans 1.
[b]Rom 1:18-32

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
KJV

[/b]
In conclusion, I make a choice, I will follow this ‘foolish’ path of faith in an unseen God written by ‘dumb’ men some thousands of years ago in the scripture but it is in such dumb men that there is wisdom than the reasoning of men which believe that there is no God but on the theory propagated by Darwin, their god.
Well, even if they scorn, and scoff till the end of mankind, my case has and always will be There is GOD!

What do you choose? Evolution or God?

@ Forum
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion.

–Steven Weinberg


Reposted from http://whyevolutionistrue./
No conflict between science and religion, you say? Have a look at this article from the Minneapolist StarTribune. Thirteen-year old Daniel Hauser, whose parents are Catholics but adhere to the healing practices of “the Nemenhah religious group” (this appears to be a Native American religion that believes in spiritual and herbal healing) decided that he didn’t want treatment for his Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Instead, he wants herbal treatments, and his parents are supporting him. With chemotherapy, the cure rate is very high; doctors say that without it his survival probability is 5%.

The Hausers are in court:

Colleen and Anthony Hauser are in a legal battle with Brown County, where authorities are accusing the parents of child neglect and endangerment. After Daniel stopped chemotherapy after a single treatment, opting instead for “alternative medicines,” child protection workers went to court requesting custody.

Doctors had recommended six chemo treatments, followed by radiation. Dr. Bruce Bostrom, a pediatric oncologist at Childrens Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota and Daniel’s treating physician, on Friday estimated the risk of death from forgoing treatment at about 95 percent. And he testified that Daniel’s tumor had grown since he underwent one chemotherapy treatment in February.

“What is the ultimate outcome of that process?” Tom Sinas, an attorney for the guardian ad litem, asked of the tumor’s growth.

“Death,” Bostrom replied.

The StarTribune report goes on:

The Hausers declined to speak to reporters after Friday’s court session. But Dan Zwakman, a member of the Nemenhah religious group to which they belong, acted as the family spokesman. He argued that this is a case about religious freedom, noting that the group’s motto is “our religion is our medicine.”

. . . Earlier in the day, Dr. Bruce Bostrom of Children’s Hospitals and Clinics, who first diagnosed the cancer when the boy arrived at a Minneapolis emergency room in January, said Daniel has a 95 percent chance of survival if he receives chemotherapy.

Bostrom also said he believes Daniel does not fully understand his condition.

“I think that he understands that he was sick,” Bostrom testified. “He doesn’t understand that the Hodgkin’s is what’s making him sick, and he was led to believe that the chemotherapy was making him sick, when the exact opposite was true.”

“Religious freedom” is not the freedom to kill a child through withholding science-based medicine. A 13-year-old child, perhaps brainwashed by his parents, simply cannot make this decision for himself. This is a life-or-death conflict between science, which can save the child, and religion, which is killing him. No conflict here? What would Francis Collins say?

yes Sola scriptura

well if I may understand what the above piece is all about is not saying that Christians are going to hospitals rather its talking about the authority opposing the belief of a person from choosing to be healed without depending on medicines. now medicine is not bad but one has a choice to choose what he/she believes,

so before any ado, i hope the atheist understand where huxley is coming from.

so the question is not why are Christians going to the hospital rather why are Christians choosing to trust the Lord for healing instead of medicines.

i think from there we can proceed!



@tudor
The only solution is for us to wait and see.what baffles me is when religious people,especiall christians come to the hospital for treatment.i thot christ was beaten for their sicknesses and diseases

to correct you, and not beaten!
Matt 8:17
That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities , and bare our sicknesses.
KJV



@mazaje
where does it say that christians should go to the hospital in the bible?

hospitals are part of the world and the world belongs to christians
1 Cor 3:21-23
21 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;
22 Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours;
23 And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's.
KJV




jesus says that does who believe in him will be able to perform magic. . . .because the bible said that he was a magician. . .

naa not the bible. where is it stated? Please quote for us not your limited understanding that is darkened by the god of this world so that you do not believe the gospel to be saved.
2 Cor 4:4-5
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.
KJV



why do christians go to hospitals if all they have to do is ask jesus to heal them? more promises. . .

[b]ahh sola scriptura only!
read this Mark 5:25-34
25 And a certain woman, which had an issue of blood twelve years,
26 And had suffered many things of many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse,
27 When she had heard of Jesus, came in the press behind, and touched his garment.
28 For she said, If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole.
29 And straightway the fountain of her blood was dried up; and she felt in her body that she was healed of that plague.
30 And Jesus, immediately knowing in himself that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in the press, and said, Who touched my clothes?
31 And his disciples said unto him, Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
32 And he looked round about to see her that had done this thing.
33 But the woman fearing and trembling, knowing what was done in her, came and fell down before him, and told him all the truth.
34 And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague.
KJV


now mazaje, your god – even though you choose not to accept him – satan – has blinded your eyes. Jesus Christ has never contradicted or negated doctors/physicians, instead He graciously healed a woman who had spent all her money on doctor’s treatment which did not prove successful. [size=20pt]So Jesus Christ, never contradicted hospitals because He never condemned the woman for seeing the doctors first before coming to Him.[/size] Therefore we can safely conclude if you go to hospitals, trust God; if doctors cant help through the knowledge He graciously help them acquire, you can come to Him for healing, not magic, through faith as you rightly quoted from the various scriptures.

Doctors cure but God Heals!!!

Ka gane ko! Allah ya bude maka ido kuma! Salam! Shalom!

[/b]

jagunbi
Stick to the scriptures all you want,but who has the right interpretations of the scriptures?Who knows the true meaning they represent?That is the problem,interpretations.That is why there are soooo many different cults/sects/denominations or whatever you want to call them sprouting all over the place claiming that theirs only is the right interpretations.
A whole big comedy.
ha ha i laugh at the comedy you think. i did not mean we should interprete to you. i mean we give you the scripture and allow it to work in you. it has its life and can defend itself to your mind.

and mazaje
if you truly have the scriptures to rely on why are there over 30,000 sects of christianity most of which are fighting against each other as to which sect best understands the interpretation of the scriptures? if the scripture exist then why is there no a universally acceptable christian doctrine? why are christians still fighting each other over the meaning and interpretation of the scriptures. . .as far as i am concened the only thing you have displayed is that you can not reason for your self. . .see your answer from the scripture to this question
[b]
SOLA SCRIPTURAL ONLY!
before i go far, i hope you read my post well. if you have, thanks! a seed has been sown. now to what you asked.

It was not today that we have divisons that led to sects, read paul's advice which is to you and all the sects.

1 Cor 1:11-13

11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
KJV

1 Cor 3:3-5

3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions , are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
KJV

similar to i am methodist, presybetarian etc. but that doesnt mean that the scripture is wrong, its the people that differ based on thier understanding howvere, the scripture is scripture. its not new! [/b]


hi tudor
Sola scriptura my arse! What gives you the right to call those writings scriptures,what evidence do you have that they are the words of god,rather than the writings of deluded men,what makes your bible scripture and the others like the koran,verdas and others invalid, afterall they all claim to come from god.
Dnt quote scripture in answers to those questions cuz it's like an author saying my book is the best cuz it says so in my book, ridiculous!

am glad you scoff at it equating it to your arse. great. for being a scoffer. read this
2 Peter 3:3
Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers , walking after their own lusts,
KJV
Prov 14:6
A scorner seeketh wisdom, and findeth it not: but knowledge is easy unto him that understandeth.
KJV

this is my evidence
2 Tim 3:16-17
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
KJV

does the other "words of gods" make you "perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."


Dnt quote scripture in answers to those questions cuz it's like an author saying my book is the best cuz it says so in my book, ridiculous!
sorry i just did. and that is all i have as my reason for not being an athiest


toneyb
Why is the God of the bible so anti-knowledge?.

never, only knowledge that contradicts the knowledge of the existence of God like athiesm. but knowledge about things points to the Creator. so God encourages men to know for in thier knowledege it will point to Him.
Rom 1:18-21
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
KJV



why is the god of the bible always killing or trying to kill the curious?
am happy you are reading the scripture please continue to read the scripture.
And he smote of the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of Jehovah, he smote of the people seventy men, `and' fifty thousand men; and the people mourned, because Jehovah had smitten the people with a great slaughter. And the men of Beth-shemesh said, Who is able to stand before Jehovah, this holy God? and to whom shall he go up from us? (1Samuel 6:19-20)

Simple, He had people that were allowed to come close but they were not such. so if they want to know what is in the ark, let them read the scripture.



What kind of god is this that tells people to kill their, friends family and neighbours? Does doing good entails killing ones brothers, sisters and family because you want to please Yahweh? will you kill your parents and neighbors if your god tells you so ?

Quote
(Moses) stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." The Levites obeyed Moses, and about three thousand people died that day. Then Moses told the Levites, "Today you have been ordained for the service of the LORD, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Because of this, he will now give you a great blessing." (Exodus 32:26-29)


Rom 9:17-22
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
KJV



Exodus 3:19:
"But I know that the king of Egypt will not permit you to go, except under compulsion. So I will stretch out My hand, and strike Egypt with all My miracles which I shall do in the midst of it; and after that he will let you go. And I will grant this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and it shall be that when you go, you will not go empty-handed. But every woman shall ask of her neighbor and the woman who lives in her house, articles of silver and articles of gold, and clothing; and you will put them on your sons and daughters. Thus you shall plunder the Egyptians.
Is plundering not a corrupt act? is plundering a good act? Why then is your god telling people to steal and plunder? The same bible that tells you that those that deny the existence of your god are fools and do no good is the same bible that says your god is a murderer and a deity that encourages stealing, lying and deceit. How do you reconcile all these things?

[b]simple
To you athiest, here again He says to you. Not me but Him.
Ps 14:1
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
KJV
Sorry, oh, He says to you , Hope you complete what He says about you.
To your understanding of Him being a murderer,

Rom 9:17-22
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

[/b]


mazaje
Exodus 3:19:

"But I know that the king of Egypt will not permit you to go, except under compulsion. So I will stretch out My hand, and strike Egypt with all My miracles which I shall do in the midst of it; and after that he will let you go. And I will grant this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and it shall be that when you go, you will not go empty-handed. But every woman shall ask of her neighbor and the woman who lives in her house, articles of silver and articles of gold, and clothing; and you will put them on your sons and daughters. Thus you shall plunder the Egyptians.
so the bible god tells the hebrew women to break the eighth commandment. . . . and encourages the israelite to steal from the egyptians eh? . . . people that do not believe in this holy, good, and just god are fools who are not wise . christians worship a very holy god that commands people to do very unholy things. . . . delusion at its finest. . . sola scriptura indeed . . .
hmm not quite, however, its no use explaining becasue
Prov 14:6
A scorner seeketh wisdom, and findeth it not: but knowledge is easy unto him that understandeth.
KJV
Prov 9:7-8
7 He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot.
8 Reprove not a scorner , lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.
KJV
so athiest! oh according to the scriptures, scorner!



hi jagunlabi
The poster was just quoting all the verse of the bible(most out of context by the way) that says unbelievers are fools. . He did not refute any arguments all he did was quote passages out of context to refute well reasoned and presented arguments.

[b]Prov 14:6
A scorner seeketh wisdom, and findeth it not: but knowledge is easy unto him that understandeth.
KJV
Prov 9:7-8
7 He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot.
8 Reprove not a scorner , lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.
KJV

i dont need to refute it, cos the scripture has its own life. Just read through carefully, as am writing am praying for God's mercy on your darkened souls to receive light. note the bolden text in relation to your questions. And its the best way to answer you not using human reason (humanism) to reason God. Glory to the God of Jesus Christ. and finally to you the scriptures i quote is out of context to your mind cos you are just plain carnal not spiritual.

1 Cor 2:13-14
3 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual .

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
KJV
Rom 8:7
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
KJV

ciao!
[/b]

Hmm

Well done all!

una don finish! its whether its sola scriptura or arse whatever,
[size=20pt]it is still SOLA SCRIPTURAL PERIOD![/size]

And so what? Does that stop His existence? or prove that He doesnt heal.
I commend such a family, yeah they call em extremist, but i call them people of faith.