₦airaland Forum

raphieMontella:
upon saying that gravity keeps u from not floating when you jump?
Weight is a function of gravity....

If you had two metal balls and a flat elastic rubber...if you put the bigger one on the elastic...a curvature appears...placing the smaller ball within the dip of the bigger ball will cause the smaller ball to move towards the bigger ball..that is gravity...curvature/force...

First, I would like to congratulate you for your effort at an argument.

Please listen carefully.

For this...description to begin to be worthy of discussion you would have to demonstrate that there is indeed

a physical environment resembling your elastic sheet upon which we all live. There is not.

And even if I chose to humour you...how then is it that your little ball does not spiral around its partner in turns of diminishing length?

Why does it roll straight down the dip? Is that what 'planets' are supposed to do?

Perhaps you saw Carl Sagan perform this activity on a cable program. That is not science.

Please note my courtesy in even addressing this post, it is not empirical evidence.

If you don't know the word, look it up.

Don't be lazy or embarrassed.

lordnicklaus:
Well, I am not "atheist". The questions you asked is the same as asking for the evidence of motion or radiation.

No, it's not.

Have you heard of a Geiger counter?

Its a device used to measure and detect radiation.

I'm sure you've seen your household technician testing sockets with a screwdriver-shaped device.

And you do know that compasses are instruments which detect magnetic fields.

Gravity cannot be detected, nor measured, nor weighed, nor leave an effect on photosensitive plates.

You are simply told its there.

raphieMontella:
do you even know how gravity works?
Time zones?
Bros...how you go they talk this kind thing...
Gravity keeps you to the ground...

Tell us then, boy genius.

Tell us the physical mechanism by which mass attracts mass.

lordnicklaus:
The guy is probably a flat earth conspiracist.

The taunts will come and come.

The mouths will run and run.

But a single testable phenomenon proving the theory will never arrive.

They think 'science' means 'men in eyeglasses saying clever-sounding things'.

They think 'truth' means 'stuff I heard on TV'.

donnffd:
Still did not answer my question!

Let me ask again, why doesnt God judge people on how they lived on earth without considering whether they believed in him or not, and not burn them for all of ETERNITY in hell?

NB: you hardly see buddhists in india, and if i were to urinate on a cross or use the bible to smoke weed, i would still be criticized by christians, wont i?, So you cant cherrypick and say because a person from another religion gets offended because you dishonored his beliefs automatically means yours is the one true religion, thats just absolutely inaccurate.

1.

It is you who have dodged a question.

Are you tyrannized because the consequence of crime is government force?

2.

Violence was not my point.

My point was that different perspectives on what is good must lead to conflict.

So which 'rule book' would you suggest?

Yorubamafia:
Shame on anambra for reducing themselves to ugwu hawkers. How will they survive if they have biafra? How much will ugwu generate? The Igbo's are better in nigeria than having a stupid Biafra

Look.

You could die tonight and have the fate of Biafra become completely irrelevant from your end.

What's to be your fate with all this envy in your soul?

What's wrong with you?

donnffd:
I just answered you and i would answer you again, the government are not tyrants because they do not force you to love them, infact oppressive regimes are specifically referred to as tyrants because they force their citizens to accept their right to rule.

Every government on Earth requires citizens to 'accept its right to rule'. This is enforced by threat of violence and imprisonment. Is 'treason' a

new word to you? This supports my argument.

donnffd:
Rules are rules, if buhari leaves office tomorrow, the rules of the country would still be the rules, everyone is suppose to follow it so that we dont live in a chaotic society.

Now, if buhari puts an embargo on Nigerians, that in addition to the laws of the land, we must love him and his party and if we dont, we would be thrown in jail, thats TYRANNY. Do you understand the difference now?

Be honest. Many of government's laws are not understood, but are still obeyed (e.g. marriage only lasts a month, but Mr Man has to pay alimony

for life). And the same man will balk at obeying God because he 'does not understand'. Hypocrisy.

Be honest. People are chided and victimized for not loving their country. In fact, the southeasterners of your own (I assume) country are in

this very position.

donnffd:
Now why cant people just live good lives, Majority of Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Taoists, and even Atheists are good people and just want to do good by themselves and their fellow man BUT because they do not believe in your God YAHWEH(i would assume you to be a Christian) and his only begotten son JESUS CHRIST, they would burn in hell for all of eternity.

why cant God just allow people live by the rule book and judge people according to how they lived, why must God emphasize that these people believe, love and worship him and his son for entry into heaven?

Do you know if you toss some pork sausage in front of a mosque you could easily be dead? And if you dropped some beef before a Buddha statue in India, the result could be the same? What chaos. So what rule book, precisely?

Someone must define what the standard of Good is.

Babies cry when given an injection. If they knew its purpose, they might rejoice. We are babes in God's eyes.

Thus people cry over His medicine, because they do not know its purpose.

Christianity is the One Faith, the one standard, the precise one 'rule book'.

And He is not only my God, He is God - plain and simple.

raphieMontella:
how can you confidently come to the internet and say that gravity has no emperical proof?
Are you not ashamed?
You're asking me what emperical evidence is That questionn is for you...man upgrade your knowledge...it will help you

---

you even confidently said that there's no emperical evidence that the earth is a globe??
How do you guys even think?

Edited..

You can run your mouth all day long.

But you will be unable to provide a single shred of observable, verifiable evidence for all you've said.

You believe what you believe because you heard it in a classroom, and then on TV.

This is trust. This is not empiricism.

donnffd:
The law is how you conduct in society, if you default, you are thrown in prison...it has nothing to do with loving the government.

God wants you not only to live a good life but also love him and accept his son who died for our sins, now if you dont do this, you would burn in hell even if you were a good person all your life...doesnt that sound tyrannical to you?

Divine Law is the rule of conduct in the Universe.

When you reject God you are immediately under the devil's influence. By default.

The government wants you to obey its authority. If you don't, there are consequences.

Go smoke crack by Louis Edet House and tell the officers there 'you're a good person'.

The scenarios are parallel. Please don't prevaricate.

Answer the question if you can.

Is it not obvious that the spirit in you yields to the authority of man, but not of God?

Why are the government not tyrants according to your opinion?

donnffd:
I understand you perfectly but i would say i am still not totally convinced about your argument.

If i was going to create an intelligent car for my pleasure, i would be sure to not give it freewill because doing that, i am no longer subjecting it to my will but its own, and so if it chooses to not obey my commands, then it is well within its rights to do so.

Now on the flip side of the coin, imagine you love a girl with all your heart, and can do anything for her but sadly she doesnt feel the same way about you, Do you lock her up in a dungeon and torture her because she doesnt love you?...only a psychopath would do that.

Look at another scenario, a queen who never shows herself to her subjects and remain hidden for the public eye claims she doesnt need anybodys love and admiration, but every sunday, all her subjects are required to show love and admiration to her with gifts, and those who do not do that are thrown into a dungeon she ordered built for that specific purpose and torture them till they die.

The idea of we being tools for God fails when freewill is thrown into the equation, because as a free agent you choose whether you want to be a tool or not, and if you are punished because you choose otherwise, then obviously the choice is there to override the freewill.

What i mean is if i offer you two choices, and one of those choices leds to a severe punishment but you are free to choose anyone, i am automatically trying to override your freewill because i am forcing you to choose the choice without punishment.

So if God really wanted us as tools, he shouldnt have given us freewill, and if he wanted free agents to be tools for him, he shouldnt threaten with the punishment of hell because then he no longer have free agents.

Thats the paradox, bro...

By this argument every government in the world is a tyrannical dictatorship.

Since we face punishment when our choices diverge from the law.

Do you agree?

reallest:
why can't he reveal himself first?why must I first have blind faith?

Oh, come now.

Do you know the mathematical probability of a single simple protein assembling by chance?

It is 1 : 10⁷⁴

A single protein.

Evidence of Him is everywhere if one is sincere

Be sincere.

segcymoor:
Deep one!

------
U Ve access to advanced spiritual knowledge. Right?

Thanks.

Yes. As a matter of fact I do.

beolay2k:
5. Lastly I want to throw this question back to the writer and its that the first commandment in the Bible says that one should not worship any other God except the Almighty God but yet the Christians believe Jesus is God.

Jesus Christ is God.

Zenlife:
Totally off topic!

If that was an off-topic response then you simply cannot read.

Zenlife:
Name calling uneccesary and stupidly immature.

Or write for that matter. (This one just replies itself.)

Zenlife:
Then go fly a kite kiddo.

People probably laugh at your Americanisms in real life.

raphieMontella:
u need science in your life...
You need to go back to school
god forbid!

Pipe down.

There is a difference between 'having an idea of scientific stuff' - the amalgamated effects of a third-rate education, some Discovery Channel, some sci-fi movies - and actually understanding science.

I repeat : no empirical proof.

Do you even know what 'empirical' means?

seunmsg:
No! I can still withstand going to Ado Ekiti, the Ekiti state capital for such issues.

But, in this scenario, wouldn't Ado-Ekiti be a county or local government where you could go for the same thing?

[quote author=hopefulLandlord post=49666677][/quote]Look at it this way.

There are two Spirits in the world - Christ and Antichrist.

Every soul is fundamentally under either influence.

Following Christ results in union with Him, which is Heaven. Following Antichrist results in union also - this is Hell.

And here enters freedom of the will.

Now of course the glorious destiny of those who choose Christ is known to God, they are under His dominion. Those who reject Him fall immediately under the dominion of the devil. Thus their eventual union with the devil is also obvious.

Omniscience does not exclude free will. (I do not purport to describe the mechanism of Omniscience. I merely offer a model to make
accessible to base intellect what is actually a sublime Mystery.)

As to why God would not decide against the creation of soul destined for doom, why should He?

It is a choice. The soul chooses. And lives with what it chooses.

Were He to thwart your choices, would you not have the temerity to accuse Him of tyranny?

It is the nature of the impious to be hypocrites.

Zenlife:
Thank you for a good brief analysis.
To take it a lil' further up a notch...
Why be upset with Biblical Adam & Eve, knowing they'll rebell? and when they did, cast them out in anger? As though disappointed?
Been omniscient, Adam & Eve didn't fail, they met His expectations. They played to expectations.
Thus, expectedly, the omniscient should have been glad and give them a pat on the back and go chest beating that right on, it's all working according to plan.

Now, this in no way suggest that there's no God, still though, through time, no one has seen Him. And inspite of His creations yearnings, atheism, questions, He just can't be bothered, Not even to oblige us for once; too busy through the eons of time I guess.

It is the greatest phenomenon, that those that have come and gone and here, have maimed, killed, murdered, wars fought, etc, on an unproven assumption. Beats the heck outta me.

However, let's be indulgent and play ball.
God as presented by religions, practices, faiths, 9/11 terrorist bombing catastrophe of the twin towers, innocent babies, adults present, babies just dropped off school and never to see their parents again, etc, if He is omniscient, must be different from the biblical God.

Do you know how many people have died as a result of United States imperialism? From Vietnam, to Guatemala, to Guam, to Nicaragua, to Iraq, to Panama, to Pakistan, to Afghanistan, to Syria etc.?

Yet I am sure you are able to distinguish the general vision of the 'American Way' from the crimes of its military-industrial complex.

Do you know how many millions have perished at the hands of Socialist regimes worldwide? In just a century or so? From Russia, to the Ukraine, to Romania, to Cambodia, to North Korea, to China, to Uganda etc.?

But I'm sure you distinguish the 'well-meaning' celebrity socialists (UK Labour, 'comrade' this and that) from the murderous Eastern regimes.

Yet every Christian must wear guilt for every crime ever committed in religion's name.

You are a liar in your heart.

fyneboi79:
I also ask them in laymans english;How many earthly fathers look up to judging theirs childrens sins and casting away some of their children into eternal damnation one day? It doesn't make any sense,Instead,He should keep loving all his children the same. So what kind of father is the Christian God? Partial to sufferings of his people or powerless against the forces of evil?

Leave this silly talk.

The punishment for a crime depends as much upon the person against whom it is committed as upon the crime itself.

Hitting your friend is one thing.
Hitting your father quite another.
Merely attempting to hit the president will likely cost you your life.

As the status of the person increases so does the punishment.

God is of infinite status, if we may use that language. The maths is pretty straightforward from there.

NovusHomo:

If you knew the answer to your own question, what is the point in asking?

I have a few questions of my own:
Who/What is "GOD"?
What/Where is "HEAVEN"?
What/Where is "HELL"?
Has ANYONE been to these places?
Has ANYONE come back from these places to tell about their experience?

You do know there is no empirical evidence that:

The world is a globe.
That gravity exists.
That much of quantum physics is even real.
And let's not even talk about evolution.

But you believe this anyway.

We all have faith in things we've not seen. The difference is that some have faith in man, others have Faith in God.

PastorAIO:
You've gone above my head here. I'll have to do some more studying before I can respond knowledgeably to the above.

Don't bother. Quantum physics is basically nonsense.

Seun:
Such a God could have created a universe without evil (suffering). Being all-knowing, he knows how to do it. Being all-powerful, he has the power to do it. Being benevolent, he wants to do it. Yet we have a world filled with awful suffering. So no such God exists. The problem of evil.

Alright.

PREAMBLE

Look. You sound a reasonably bright dude. But, not uncommonly among this type, your mind is mostly an accounting machine gathering numbers. No depth, no shade, no real sophistication, no colour. Just processor speed. So we'll have to do this slowly. I don't quite mean to offend, it's just what it is. Preamble done.

Now.

You do understand that, concerning any given system, one cannot pronounce on what is (wholly) good or (wholly) evil without a total knowledge of that system's workings?

E.g. If we eradicated flies for their nuisance, we'd inflict damage on the earth's biosystem. Damage that would occur as an eventual surprise if we did this prior to our current knowledge of bio-dependence.

You do understand, therefore, that one would require total knowledge of the universe to pronounce definitively on the (whole) good or (whole) evil of any event at all?

Thus you do understand that Omniscience alone can even rule on the matter of whether this or that thing is good or evil to begin with?

The case is mere logic, you understand?

Seun:
I'm 100% certain that there is no good evidence for the existence of any God or supernatural phenomenon. That's the only claim I feel comfortable making. It's easy to rule out the existence of any all-powerful, all-knowing, benevolent God. But a shy, detached God who started the big bang and has done nothing since can't be ruled out 100%. Nor can we completely rule out the existence of an evil God who claims to be benevolent but is only lying. I'm certain enough to live my life without being worried about the possibility. If a God existed and wanted to be worshipped by all mankind, he would provide good evidence. I can say that I am 0% certain that God exists, but that's not what you asked for.

Hmmm.

One hardly knows where to begin dismantling this.

Let's begin here - since you say it is easy.

It's easy to rule out the existence of any all-powerful, all-knowing, benevolent God

Briefly do so please. Just the bullet points'll be fine.

@ Seun

Precisely how certain are you that there is no God?

In percentage terms, please.

mildteddy:
POPE FRANCIS IS AT IT AGAIN. finally he may have just proven that he is a heretic or worse an apostate. Any catholic who knows the doctrine very well should look into his publication very well, because my basic catholic teaching tells me that without taking the body and blood of Christ which u must believe in to receive, you will have no LIFE.
Sharp Catholics should investigate this ASAP. Thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvjmveYw0tE

God is supposed to be JUST, right?


Why did he have to condenm Adams offspring to eternal torment in fire living out Adam and Eve that introduced sin into the world?
Here is his sentence to them:


16 To the woman he said: “I shall greatly increase the pain of your pregnancy; in birth pangs you will bring forth children, and your craving will be for your husband, and he will dominate you.”

17 And to Adam he said: “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and took to eating from the tree concerning which I gave you this command, ‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account. In pain you will eat its produce all the days of your life.18 And thorns and thistles it will grow for you, and you must eat the vegetation of the field.19 In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.”(Gen. 3:16-19)

Adam condemned his own offspring.

Do you know what a 'crack baby' is?

That is what we are when we are born, spiritually.

Original Sin.

elampiro:
Pope Francis said our sins are not committed by us but they are Jesus' sins : "When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us. "* June 15 at his daily mass homily PF1.
*source http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-the-christian-life-proclaims-the-road-to-reco

.......................

The above was one of the controversial statements the Pope had earlier made. He said Jesus has died for our sins , that when we commit sins they are not ours but Jesus' sins. Then he went further to say how we should go to confession. This one generated heat too and many Church officials came to his defense that he was speaking theologically? Why did we not have some many confusion with JP II and Benedict?

Now I am beginning to worry. Catholic prophecies have it that here will be an Antipope who will be one of the two beasts with the Antichrist as described in Revelation 13.

They explained that the Antichrist will be head of the one world govt while the Antipope will be head of a new age church basing their teachings on humanism and atheism. The Catholic church will be hijacked to form this new one world new age religion. They said the Antipope will take the seat of Peter, he wil rule and be loved by many due to his new all inclusive religion.

The prophecy of la Salette?

italo:
This is Catholic teaching from time immemoria. The Catholic Church has always taught that those who through no fault of theirs do not know the Catholic Church to be God's true faith can go to heaven if they follow their conscience and live a good life.

Did you guys really think that all your ancestors would burn in hell?

Completely false.

Look up 'extra ecclesiam nulla salus' - 'outside the Church there is no salvation'.

That's the infallible dogma.

ramalot:
Questions are great, but questions aren't answers.

Yeah, they are. To a degree at least.

If you saw incontrovertible evidence that 9-11-01 was an inside job, you would have to accept that US government, media and corporate
are part of a single entity of secret control, run by a secret clique.

That would be certain, whatever else might be obscure.

I'm just asking for some good faith. Men have a way of seeing what they wish, if the truth is too uncomfortable. This is why most
televangelists exist.

Anyhow. Check out

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCE60816E15E92281 (videos 5, 8 and 10. 15 minutes each)

and to round out my hour


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hGZM7heYKw

ramalot:
"An hour or so worth of video" CONTAINING objective EVIDENCE. Why not?

No, man. I'm offering an hourish's worth of video that passes any reasonable test of rational objectivity. The kind you deny, and instinctively know you're kidding yourself.

ramalot:
]
A hypothesis is nothing more than a hypothesis, until proven otherwise.

If I put up a link with an hour or so's worth of video, would you watch it?

GuyfawkesAB:
He that has an ear let him hear

How do we start a thread - or better yet create a section for this? People are so blind it's pitiful.

Moneyyy:
1.1 was tested on December 16 so there is a great possibility of retesting it within the next 24 hours or even in the next few days. Historically, December is a bad month for the dollar and January is always a great month for the dollar. So it sounds logical to sell the dollar in December and buy it in January. But again since I only stay in the market for maximum of few hours a day most times, I'm not too bothered about the mid-term move of the dollar.

Grazie.

All you guys make me feel like when I was a kid learning to drive, looking at grown-ups thinking,

'How do they do it so effortlessly?'