₦airaland Forum

You're pulling our legs, aren't you OP?

Perhaps God allows evil because he does not mind evil.

Zikdik: Interesting.

Yeah? Which part?

chulla12: All I can think about is the vomit inducing se.x.

Stray body hair everywhere, pot bellies and droopy male behinds, saggy skin and wrinkles, chapped and jagged lips, uneven skin tone and texture. Scary old face.

How do these women do it every night?

You forgot the wilted ex peni.s

I think he did in fact commit suicide.

His purpose on earth was to die for our sins and he did just that.

By wanting to die for our sins, he is shown to have a death wish. Every suicidal person has a death wish. In terms of intent then, he possessed the requisite suicidal intent.

How did he end up dying? By accident (an unplanned course), by his own hand, or by inducing another to kill him?

It is quite certain that his death was no accident. Between the other two means, there is no consensus.

There is evidence that he died by his own hand. Crucifixion is known to take a very long time to kill; it is designed to torture one to death. The process is hastened by the breaking of one's legs. Jesus is reported to have died before long:

"So the soldiers came, and broke the legs of the first man and of the other who was crucified with Him; but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs." (John 19:32-33)

You have to wonder what the state of health of the son of God was. It could have been nothing less than impeccable. Jesus could only have died this quickly if he gave up his life, which was certainly in his power to do. See these two verses:

John 10:17-18: "For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father."

Luke 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

Now, having been crucified and surely on his way to death, what difference would it have made to hasten the process? The two important conditions, being put on the cross and death, would be satisfied either way. So Jesus could conceivably have killed himself.

On the other hand, in the event that he did not kill himself, and he died at the hand of another, you have to remember that Jesus did have a death wish and he did not do anything to get out of harms way when it came. Even when Pilate attempted to give him a way out, he refused to take it.

If a human being whom you know to be suicidal, when confronted with danger which he knows will get him killed, refuses to react to it and ends up dead, would you not say that he committed suicide? Remember that for suicide, in the moral realm, it is the intention that counts and here we are concerned with the moral.

This issue of whether Jesus, being God and therefore immortal, can be said to die, is moot. The human soul is equally immortal, at death it is sent to either heaven or hell but it is not extinguished. Jesus, in human form, died and was sent to hell just like any other human being. This satisfies the definition of death and by extension, suicide, that we are using.

So I think Christ committed suicide. I don't think suicide is always wrong tho.

Another nutter on the loose.

Abeg which number Nigeria dey for the list?

You who posted this thing here, did you notice that the only places mentioned in the prophecy are from the western world, and that the first sign of the end time is communism? Communism?!

The prophecy is clearly showing a bias for the western world, and you are here adopting it and commending it to your countrymen. Smh. See as religion don wicked you.

menix: I jst help pple wiv it. But wiv there experience its somfin u nid giv a try..

More grease to your elbow

menix: Then try d choking game..

I don't want it that bad, man. Have you tried it?

menix: This controversial process that was repeated on 944 volunteers over that last four years, necessitates a complex mixture of drugs including epinephrine and dimethyltryptamine, destined to allow the body to survive the state of clinical death and the reanimation process without damage. The body of the subject was then put into a temporary comatic state induced by a mixture of other drugs which had to be filtered by ozone from his blood during the reanimation process 18 minutes later.

Its doesn't sound like actual death. Since the brain was undamaged, any experiences they had would simply be normal brain function, under abnormal circumstances.

Sounds like a good trip sha. I want one.

This is sorcery.

Great Ship please spare my soul.

Okies.

Here's what you said:

asalimpo: Any system that prescribes guidelines/dictates rules for handling any of the above issues is a religion.

What that means is that a system that addresses, for example, work ethics alone is a religion. You said it bro, not me. So once again, the code of conduct for public officers is a religious text according to your well thought out definition.

Let's assume you meant to say:

"Any system that prescribes guidelines/dictates rules for handling all of the above issues is a religion."

Given this definition, and assuming that it is correct, I would like to know which religion is responsible for the CoC for public officers. The CoC clearly addresses work ethics, and you say work ethics is one of the areas that religion superintends. Unless it is possible for a 'system' to provide for work ethics without being part of a larger 'system' which you have chosen to call religion, the CoC must be a part of some religion. Which is it?

[quote author=asalimpo:]Whether man believes in A divine being or not.
Man cannot not live without religion.[/quote]If you tinker with the definition of religion, then you are right.

Just like no organization can operate without a budget- even if they choose to implement an ad hoc/unplanned one. That is still a budget.

Where did you find this analogy?

Any system prescribing how man should relate with his fellow man,

The Nigerian legal system is a religion.

his relationship and responsibility to his leaders,
community and government,

The social contract is a religion. Democracy is a religion. Autocracy is a religion. Monarchy is a religion.

his work ethics,

The code of conduct for public officers is a religious book. Employer/employee contracts are religious scripts.

Adresses the issue of life(how it began),

Science is a religion.

why we are here, where we go at death,

Philosophy is a religion.

marraige relationships,
- responsibility of spouses

Culture is a religion

- work ethics
- money issues

Financial planning is a religious doctrine.

- employee/employer issues
what to do when worried, offended, provoked
, when you lose a loved one and are grieving,

Dear Agony Aunt Rebecca is a religious leader. Law enforcement are principalities and powers

- what to do when sick
etc and many more.

Medicine and healthcare are religion

Any system that prescribes guidelines/dictates rules for handling any of the above issues is a religion.
So a religion is a guiding body of rules on pertinent matters (listed above).
Everybody has religion.
Everybody worships a god.
No religion no life.

Excellent. You have said it all.

Maybe you are a sex bomb and she could not resist.

Dragonking: Did anyone notice that there are only two comments on front page of this thread ?

Is like Seun's experiment extends beyond the like button

macof: let's put it this way...what do you understand by the concept of consciousness?
If you consider your definition to relate to all things, then we on the same page, if not too bad

I was hoping we can get on the same page.

My definition of consciousness is limited to living things.

How can a non living thing be conscious? What is it doing with consciousness?

oluwabambam: I was just reading a post on Nairaland some minutes ago where the topic was on what constitutes a God-fearing individual. Someone commented adding that he/she is an atheist and that got me wondering. I have been seeing so many atheists on social media in Nigeria and it bothers me why there are so many of them nowadays.

I wouldn't say we are 'so many'. There may have been a surge in number, and this surge may be ongoing, but we are far from 'so many'. However just one of us is 'too many' for you, so I get where you are coming from.

Are people now saying that there is no God?

People have said that there is no God for the longest time.

Do people mean that they don't believe in the creator of the universe?

No. Not at all. What they mean is that there is no creator of the universe.

How did they come into existence if they don't believe in God.

Belief in God never brought anybody into existence. You can't believe if you don't exist. Seriously tho, does any question of existence have to be answered with 'God'? Which God brought God into existence?

God created us all and this is what the Bible says.

Awww.

What is it with all these atheists?

What isn't it with all these atheists?

I want to understand why anyone would come to the conclusion that there is no God. It baffles me seriously. I need answers.

You want to understand how God is non existent, or you want to put the atheist under a microscope and see how his mind works (or fails to work)?

I hope it's the former you want to know.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God does not exist?

malvisguy212: dos who died as rithgeou people are not dead, bible say "they slept in the Lord".jesus say "you will not test death until you see the son of man comin in the cloud" what dos this mean? Those who died a physical death are sleeping spiritualy,when christ come[which is very soon] they will be the first to see Him and then the living will meet up.

Lol. You say that judgment of dead righteous people is reserved for the second coming. What of the dead unrighteous ones; do they get judged at once? If they do, then by extension the righteous ones have been judged at once, since allowing them to 'sleep' means they are certified okay for heaven.

hifaif: It makes him less real. His actions are contradictory. He was created by primitive men that is why like the primitive men that created him, he thinks the moon is a light and that the earth does not move. He thinks that the sky is solid and that the sun and stars are fixed to it. He even thinks there is water above the earth.
He is perfect, yet, he created angels and men.

He is all-knowing, yet he shows emotions of anger and regrets.

I believe in a creator and I know that he is not Jehovah.

Okay, maybe there are a few contradictions here and there. At least contradictions can be resolved. What kind of creator do you believe exists?

qstar: Dude, are you into programming? as in, do you programme?

Not at all.

AlfaSeltzer: Wierd zombies eh! And the reaction of the people show they were very used to seeing the undead. What a book!

Haha. Looks like it was merely a matter of course for people to un-die. Or is it re-live.

texanomaly: Good observation.

. The man mischief plenty.

hifaif: I see no sense in the existence of the Christian god, bro. A god that puts a forbidden tree near his creation and yet says he tempts no one. A god that speaks like a man, gets jealous like a man, is trivial like some men (he even gave instructions on how to make perfume), demands worship by force or burn in hell.

Throughout the Bible, there was no reasonable reason given for our existence. If we are here to just worship God instead of coming to experience life and take care of one another, then our own existence too does not make sense.

God is free to do as he pleases. You may not like how he acts, but that doesn't make him any less real.

He is one weird fellow tho.

hifaif: Even the Christian god does not make sense.

He does make sense in a way, but not in the way most people think.

He makes more sense than angels tho. What could he possibly have needed angels for?

psucc: OP You can only be accountable to a superior or to parent body who delegates you.

But The Almighty God had none of the two hence cannot and will never be restricted.

That's what I'm saying na. He is not accountable to anybody, not even to himself.

These are not zombies. The bible does not report any craving for braaiins.

shaneroberts26: God is NOTHING.
Man is NOTHING.
God is Man.
Man is God.
Op,didnt Jesus tell you and your fake men of 'God' this in John 10:34?
THERE ARE NO ANGELS.

Who is Lucifer? Who was standing guard at the garden of Eden after the fall of man? Who came to tell Mary that the Lord had selected her for impregnation? Who are the people that came down from heaven to shag?

Which bible are you using sef?

mazaje: Because god is an idea that is imbibed in culture. . .When you reject god, you are rejecting a people's way of life and people feel bad when you reject their way of life and how they do things. . .Especially those that want you to join them. . .

Walahi. I just wonder where in their religious books they were instructed to hate atheists more than people of other religions.

macof: Yes to all questions except the last.

Only humans are conscious like humans, only you is conscious like you, both of us don't share the same consciousness level per say.

The human consciousness is at the sentient level, your phone is not we could call that nano level

Okay. Everything is conscious this very minute.

I'm not sure if you meant that both my phone as a whole is conscious, and that the atoms that make it up are also individually conscious.

I think you are conscious the same way I am, though we may not share the same identity. Our senses are mostly the same, and we both are self aware. We can think and read and write and all that.

You say the phone (or it's atoms?) are conscious on a different level. What are the features of consciousness at this level, and how are you able to identify such consciousness?

Maybe I'm mistaken, but apparently people have expectations of God, the same God who is said to be omnipotent, the ultimate arbiter, and the uncaused cause.

But God has barely informed man of how he wishes to conduct himself. In the absence of any such information, does it make sense to expect any pattern of behavior from him? Keep in mind that he is not bound by our desires. You cannot even say that God is bound by his word, for he cannot be bound.

There might be objections to the statement that God cannot be bound by his word, so here are some illuminating events, up for examination:


From the bible:

1. ISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.


2. EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.


3. PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.

JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.

From the qur'an:

1. And Allah will not mislead a people after He hath guided them, in order that He may make clear to them what to fear (and avoid)- for Allah hath knowledge of all things.
Qur'an 9:115

Of them there are some who (pretend to) listen to thee; but We have thrown veils on their hearts, So they understand it not, and deafness in their ears; if they saw every one of the signs, not they will believe in them; in so much that when they come to thee, they (but) dispute with thee; the Unbelievers say: "These are nothing but tales of the ancients." Qur'an 6:25


2. Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Qur'an 39:53

Allah forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right) Qur'an 4:116



It might be said, that God did this because that, or he did that because this, but barring instances where he explains the reason for a particular act, on what basis do we proffer reasons for his actions? Is it based on our desires, or on his word?

You might choose to ignore conflicting statements made by him, and say that his word is to be trusted, because he is trustworthy, but what's to say that your idea of trustworthy is the same as his?

There are things that happen to us that we attribute to forces other than God, because we expect God to fit into our expectations. We must realise that we cannot have expectations of him, and that therefore what we think is not his doing, might as well be his. He is not accountable to us, to himself, or to anything else. He can decide tomorrow that he finds the wicked pleasing in his sight and that only them will see paradise. You would just have to deal with it.

Legendoscar2: You read a little of that ancient 6 century BC religion called Zoroastrianism or Mazdaism then come out here to feel like something...
I think you better pay attention to what you are reading from Chrisviral....it will save your life..

I guess dismissing somebody's argument without even considering it does not count as feeling like something.

My life is not in danger. Neither is yours.

macof: What ordinary explanations?? If you understand the concept of consciousness you would know why everything has to be conscious

Everything has to be conscious?

Are they conscious right now? For example, this phone I'm typing with. Is the phone conscious, or are the atoms that make up the phone conscious? Is any of them conscious in the same way that I am?

olaeffect: when you know the difference between employees and family members/children, I will tell you the relationship and the divided between man's purpose and that of angels.

Okay sir. From the perspective of one man who is an employer and who also has a family, I think the primary difference between the employee and the family member lies in the nature of the affiliations between the employer/employee on the one hand, and the family man/family member on the other hand.

For employer/employee, the affiliation is monetary and involves the exchange of services for compensation, where the employee does not provide services as part of his own independent business.

Whereas, for family man/family member, the affiliation is either by consanguinity (by recognized birth), affinity (by marriage), or co-residence/shared consumption.

I hope you will be persuaded that I have an idea of the difference. I await your explanation.