Danisaint112:


And this is where you guys get this wrong.

The goal is to get new converts not to get new customers for more money.

Oyedapo have different branches of churches everywhere not to talk of the countless franchise running under his church, so it's obvious if for ads purpose for more money. We ain't fools.

LOL! Do catholics not have parishes and outstations everywhere? What franchises does winners have that catholics don't? What is the difference between a convert and a customer?

Everybody is a hypocrite. will condemn this with the zeal which they would never condemn the 'ballers'. If the church members aren't complaining, your complaint is akin to weeping on behalf of the bereaved.

Danisaint112:
This is one reason I will rather remain a Catholic and die a Catholic. Catholics will never do this, they would rather donate the money missionary school and charity than use it to build a mighty edifice (auditorium) because they don't even look for customers.

Apart from other religions the hypocrisy in christainity Is too glaring too. What most of this pastors preach isn't what they do.

There nothing Godly he would benefit from building this if not for making more money. The Glory Dome by Pastor Paul Enenche must have been his inspiration.

LOL, most of the 'mightiest edifices', the cathedrals, and basilicas belong to the catholic church. you say 'looking for customers' like it is a bad thing for christians to want to increase membership of the church when that's the major point of christianity.

Electrical engineers, electricians of nairaland.

Please explain how even though we are using the same transformer, light gets damaged for only one part of that area, sometimes only one building is affected (having extremely low voltage or even no power at all). And this issue keeps repeating itself no matter how many times the power is repaired (always same building/same part of the neighborhood).

Roger3D:
There's no formal conviction for any crime in a court of law. This case was brought against Tinubu over 20 years ago and was thrown out. It won't be different this time around

Lol

It's not a matter of what you think anymore, the information is in public domain. The facts are clear.

See box 625 under forfeiture.

Imagine throwing people in jail for prostitution, fornication and masturbation. That's how stupid throwing people in jail for sodomy is.

They are all sins but they do not affect anyone apart from the participants(unlike things like murder, theft, fraud). There are no victims.

This thing is easy to understand.

Homosexuality is not a crime in the same sense that fornication and masturbation are not crimes even though they are sin.

No one is going to prosecute you for touching yourself, that would be stupid.

Sins like that cannot be compared to murder and theft where you are violating another person's right.

It's best to just leave it between the man and God.

People that played ball outside, what's the meaning of OGO?

You know, the one where you score and keep till another person scores and keep.

nkiliuzo:
people should understand that tecno makes phones with less quality cos of the low Africa purcasing market, if they decide to add all the features y'all want in tecno, do you actually think the average Nigerian can afford it. both phones are okay, stop dissing tecno

That's not true. Tecno, (and infinix) make trash phones with high price tags.

There are identical, if not better phone specs in phones in the range of 60 to 80k naira.

Tecno is capitalizing on the fact that Nigerians are not phone tech savvy, and there is limited competition in the phone arena.

The pictures are not complete without the one where he waves Nigeria goodbye.

OLAADEGBU:



What they don't know is that unlike in Islam, you cannot be forced into Christianity. It is only when you willingly repent and trust in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour could you be said to have become a Christian. Kidnapping and forcing one into becoming a Christian is antithetical to Christianity.

Lol. it this was true, Christianity would not be as large as it is.

tiredoflife:


Now hustle to u now is a noun
A noun is a name of a person animal place or thing if I am right.

A verb is an action or what is done

Now say God bless my hustle
Is hustle not a verb in this context

And the verbal definition you have there say to defraud

So you are still wrong
I am right

yomi007k:


Too busy to argue.

You win.

hustle is actually a noun in that sentence, so he doesn't win.

God bless my hustle.

God- subject(noun)

bless- action (verb)

my hustle- object (phrase functioning as a noun i.e noun phrase)

No

KingEbukasBlog:
@johnnydon22

I'm glad you do accept that these are fictional, illusionary or imaginary orders in your worldview as an atheist. But I do have good logical arguments to demonstrate that indeed rationality, mathematics, equality, freewill, moral responsibility , objective morality etc are not fictional but objectively real in a theistic worldview

That they can be objectively real in a theistic worldview doesn't mean that the theistic worldview is real.

That something sounds better doesn't mean it is real.

Experience shows that in the real world, all these things except for maths and science change from time to time, even for those that believe in the theistic worldview. God has been a subjective human concept like the rest.

Your op at bests highlights how all these things are fictional because that is the experience that agrees with reality.

johnydon22:


Lol. That's interesting.

And that's exactly what they are. Imaginary order, products of man to keep his social fabric in order.

Anyone who states otherwise is fooling himself.

I don't understand this post all. You list out imaginary orders (social constructs) as imaginary things atheist believe, of course they are fictional, myths, the problem is, no one stated otherwise.

Everyone knows every element of social order is invented.

Humans do not have inherent social engineering like ants or termites, so imaginary orders such as:
Government
Morality
Laws
Religion
Corporations
Language
Money
Stock
Etc

Help bypass this and give humans an almost unnatural capability to create large complex social structures.

Everyone agrees that Imaginary orders only exist because humans believe it.

If everyone stops believing the value of money (the paper) it simply becomes a worthless piece of paper.

Even with a God in place, imaginary orders won't be anymore realer than they already are. They'd still remain imaginary.

Except maybe for morality.

An argument for another day.



Correct. That's why they are Imaginary orders. Social myths.

Man's abstract inventions to keep the social norms.



Imaginary orders are a belief, nobody claims they are not.

You on the other hand assert God isn't.

See the difference?

You are arguing on this based on the premise that they aren't real, we already know that.

I have already explained the idea of social myths, imaginary orders countless times to other atheists on this board.

No one is actually arguing this.

Quite agreeable. More correctly, many on this board don't grasp the concept of Imaginary orders.

Lol.



Equality is a myth, an imaginary order, a human belief, you can even say that objective reality is quite the opposite.

No two humans are ever equal, one must be taller, one must be stronger, faster, fatter and so it goes.

Equality is a concept that only work as a social term.

Since we all live together under one social umbrella, why not we assume we are all equals.

That's why it is an imaginary order. A myth, a belief.

So, yes. Equality isn't objective reality but no one stated otherwise.

We are actually subject to natural laws. We only bypass quite a few.

Human society isn't natural, it is also a myth, an imaginary order.

Humans lack the genetical codes to inherently orchestrate a social community like ants, termites.

Ants and termite have well organized societies, these societies come as genetically predetermines in them, they are not doing it because they have to, they do it because they can't do otherwise.

Humans on the other have strong affinity to direct family, which break up the more it goes.

So, human society isn't natural, it was constructed by the help of social myths such as morality, ethnicity, tribe and social laws.

A Christian from Nigeria will automatically have a form of trust, a sense of fellowship with another Christian he met in Rome even they have never met in their lives.

Because both believe in the same imaginary order (organization/institution) Christianity.

A soldier would die alongside another soldier he never met defending a country.

The only thing they have in common is they believe in the imaginary order which is - Country.



Not too long ago, humans believed the sun went around the earth, in fact, some still do.

When you wake up, you see the sun move from the east, journey across ths sky, all the way to the west, in all of this, earth seems stationary.

It is logical and rational to conclude based on this observation that sun moves, earth doesn't.

Logical or Rational doesn't mean true, it means premise 1 follows with premise 2 and the conclusion follows both premises.

So, again, You are correct. No one would claim Rationality or logic means something is true unless that person is naive.

Mathematical figures is a language and like all languages are invented by humans.

The word "Ocean" is a human invention that describes that which exists.

The word "Human" describes that which exists.

The substance is a constant, the language is abstract.

Change the word, the substance remains the same.

Mathematical language describes observable physical patterns and qualities like every other form of language, but yes, the language in itself is a human invention.

I'm not sure someone who is an evolutionalist ever claims to not be an animal like other animals.

In fact, the major bone of contention between evolutionists and opposing school of thoughts is that evolution reduces man to a humble creature like every other beast in the world.

I believe you are arguing over an argument atheists didn't make.

Man is special is mostly a theistic belief not atheistic.

Though man can be quite chauvinistic about himself to think himself special amongst all animals, this value is a myth as you rightly pointed out. It is a belief.



Again, true, Rights are social myths, imaginary order, there is no such thing, it only exists within a social structure which also is in itself a myth.

No one is arguing against that still.


It is safe to say you are reaching now.

How many times have you argued on this board with atheists that morality is subjective?

Here is me explaining to Budaatum that morality has no facts, it is a myth, an imaginary order and the rationality of morality with God as a basis some months back :

https://www.nairaland.com/5355840/atheist-irreligious-men-tell-truth/1#81224453

https://www.nairaland.com/5355840/atheist-irreligious-men-tell-truth/1#81220666

Atheists don't make the argument that morality is objective (some may), that you bring it up as part of the thing they believe is weird.




After going through this argument, I don't see a problem really.

Social myths are social myths, a belief.

No one can say otherwise unless they don't understand it.

Social myths are imaginary orders, they are pure human inventions given meaning by belief.

Anyone (Atheist or not) who asserts they exist in an objective sense is wrong.

So, you are correct, these are imaginary things atheist also believe.

So that means the op is a strawman.

judedwriter:


The supernatural is real. In fact, it is more real than the physical. How do I know this? There is a Supreme supernatural being who created all things by words of mouth and lives in the supernatural realm. We call Him God and all things exists from Him.

Now the problem is Many people don't have faith in God. God originally created us as supernatural beings to control the natural just like He does. The first man Adam, was created to dominate but fell into sin and out of fellowship with God.

Man out of fellowship with God began to seek alternatives to control the supernatural. This is how man dabbled into magic and witchcraft. These spiritual forces are real, but they are a lesser spiritual power to God almighty, which is why they often fail and disappoint many.

God is the true source of the supernatural.

God did not create man, man was created by obatala.

He didn't honour his father and mother.

Abdulgaffar22:


Yes anything eternal would not exhibit any changing characteristics in its "essence" because there is no any external cause that can trigger such a change.

If such an eternal entity is impersonal being that lacks "free will" it would not be able to exert any change in anything all by itself just like any impersonal substance that lacks free will cannot trigger any change in anything all by itself.

But if such an eternal entity is a personal being that possess "free will" and "power", then such being can act as an external cause that will trigger the creation of another something (universe) from absolutely nothing. It is this very personal being with freewill and power that we call God.

Possessing freewill is exerting change, which will be impossible without a cause, using your logic. So an eternal entity can not have freewill.

As have been pointed out, your argument consists only of baseless assumptions that you mask as facts.

Abdulgaffar22:


Yes it would sound foolish because we KNOW quite right that all living things (like elephant) began to exist and will cease to exist. But it would not sound foolish if it is something whose nature is UNKNOWN to us.

What is explained below is another way to see that it is more logical to assume that "something is eternal" than to assume that "something pop into existence from absolutely nothing"

1. For a "change" to occur, a "cause" is required.
2. Popping of something into existence from absolutely nothing is a "change" which therefore require a "cause".
3. But there is no any "cause" present in an absolutely nothing.
4. Therefore, there is no cause to trigger a change from absolutely nothing to something. Hence popping of something into existence from absolutely nothing is impossible.

5.But when something is eternal, no "change" has occur. Therefore, no cause is required. Hence there is no way we can FALSIFY the existence of something that is eternal as we have done with the case of something popping into existence from absolutely nothing.

Hence assuming that something is eternal is more logical than assuming that something pop into existence from absolutely nothing.

Going by your logic, an eternal something will not be able to exert any change since it does not experience change, therefore, your eternal something functions effectively as nothing.

Abdulgaffar22:


It is illogical to assume that something comes from nothing because it looks magical. If some body tell you that as he was walking along the road, all of a sudden, a very big elephant just fell from space above his head and started chasing many people. Would you sincerely believe this story ? Certainly not ! This simply shows that it is illogical to believe that something just pop into existence from absolutely nothing.

Since it is illogical to assume that something just pop into existence from absolutely nothing, then the ONLY OPTION left to account for something we have presently is to assume that SOMETHING MUST BE ETERNAL.

It would also sound foolish if someone told you that he knows an elephant that has always existed, without a beginning and would always exist.

Abdulgaffar22:
You can never pick SOMETHING from the wardrobe that contains NOTHING before you locked it up. This is because SOMETHING cannot just suddenly pop into the wardrobe from NOTHING.

In a similar manner, "SOMETHING" at this present time could not have suddenly popped into existence from absolutely "NOTHING" in the long past. Therefore, something must be eternal i:e always exist and infinitely old. Hence Premise 1 is perfectly true.

Something can never be in a wardrobe for eternity either.


Something at this present time can not be eternal also.

Therefore your assumption of eternal something is just as illogical.

Why is it illogical to assume that something comes from nothing, while assuming something is eternal is deemed logical?

eagleeye2:
If na man now this thread for don reach 7 pages

Man that will marry another woman when his wife is still alive and active.

Lol

.

enolife2:
The Bible has 66 books,

subtract your age from it, then add 1953 you will get your birth year


....waiting your prove

There are 36 states in Nigeria. Subtract your age from it and add 1983 you will get your birth year.

There are 100 years in a century. Subtract your age and add 1919 to you will get your birth year.

This year is 2019. Subtract your age you will get your birth year.

jesusjnr2:
Name just one instance of such!

Sacrifice of Jesus.

jesusjnr2:
Lol! What manner of confused satan zombie this is!

Sexuality ko consent ni!

Sexuality can only be in the respect of the male sexual attraction to his female counterpart and vice versa, anything else as attraction to same sex, or animals, etc., is absolute abomination!

So keep chasing shadows that there's any such thing as normal sexuality between persons of the same sex, for you would never catch it!

Are we not talking about gay rights here?

Is it not the reason the baseless justification using consent between adults came up?

So if that be the case, then such a figmental gay rights would not apply to a 15 year old boy who's gay?

That rips the basis of consent in that respect to shreds, for if a 15 year old boy would not be protected by such gay rights, then that should be adults gay rights and not gay rights, fool.

And whatever rights you decide it becomes it would equate to bestiality rights!

So that as it applies to gay rights, you can also have the right to have sex with an adult she or even he goat(gay mixed animal rights).

And if it be an adult she goat, you'd have consentual sex with her, and she would give bouncing baby human-goat that'll be crying, meeh, meeh, meeh, and you'd be like my goat wife has given birth to a bouncing baby human-goat!

And if it's a he-goat, of course, let's not even go there into the goat shit aspect, for I don't won't throw up, as "really disgusting" would be a huge understatement!

So how far do we have to go with this before we say enough is enough?

It we don't say no to homosexuality, then we'll be saying yes to all abominable possibilities.

Yeah!

Exactly my point!

They are non-negotiable just like ritualists, adulterers, rapists, bestiality rights etc.

So you are gay right to that extent, Lol!

#Satanzombie

Seriously dumb.

Btw have you seen 1st Corinthians 5:12?

jesusjnr2:
Wow!

This is the certainly the dumbest comparison I have ever heard.

Comparing taking milk from a Cow's breast for consumption without insertion of sexual organ, to sperm that is mixed up with shit in the anus with insertion of sexual organ?

Definitely you have concluded the matter for me, because now you have no right to say to me that gay rights does not equate to bestiality, paedophile, ritualist, adulterer, rapist rights etc.

Sol let me leave you in your mess, so that if you decide not to get out of it, you can remain in it until it takes you to its everlasting habitations.

#satanzombie

You are dumb.

MONIKERREVEALER:
how about you the op give us also the comprehensive stats of the gender gap in regards to the military personnel being deployed at the multitude of battle fronts in this lugardian contraption called zoogeria?!

don't you think that females are not being properly represented in this sector?!

Like it isn't still men that shut women outside the military.

filani:


"Responsibility without power is ineffective but Power without Responsibility is TYRANNY!"- Anonymous

When was the last time anybody on this thread heard or read about what Responsibilities that Feminists will take up along with the Power...oh excuse me the "Rights" that they keep asking for?

Southerners complain that power is concentrated in the hands of northerners but they don't clamour for equal representation in almajiri, street begging, shoe making...