₦airaland Forum

CBN recently introduced redesigned coins and notes of the Naira.  The Coins are in the 50 Kobo, N1 and N2 denomination, while the redesigned Notes are in the N5, N10, N20 and N50 denominations respectively.

I will like to know what everyone thinks about this.  Is this a welcome development, or another of Nigeria's misplaced priorities?  Because personally, I honestly do not know what 50 Kobo can buy in this present day Nigeria.  Even N1 and N2, as far as I know, can only buy trivial stuffs like sweets and kulikuli.

Can someone please tell me why CBN felt the need to re-introduce coins and notes (N5) that I thought were already extinct, into the Nigerian market?  Or is there something I'm not getting right?

pataki, you're free to talk okay? No one will devour your inputs, this is not a religious thread.

[quote author=trini_girl link=topic=37590.msg884709#msg884709 date=1171333970]Unfortunately, if you have heard the message of salvation and redemption to God through Jesus Christ and rejected it for whatever reason,  God will not be able to save you from the second death.

. . . . . . .

"Good people" will not enter into the Kingdom of God if they are not born again. Muslims if they are not converted will not enter into the Kingdon of heaven. 

Ignorance of truth does not make you exempt from the consequence. I believe the goodness of God makes it possible for each person to hear the good news of the gospel at least once in their lives, and we choose to either reject or deny him.

If you choose not to receive the free gift of salvation, then it is out of God's hands to save you. You have practised free will.[/quote]I have a problem with that emboldened part of your post.  Do you honestly think God will just allow some people to 'hear' the message of Salvation, and whatever follows after that - whether they are convinced or not - He just doesn't care?   He made us all, and whether anyone is genuinely convinced or not - only Him knows, and He definitely has a way He'll judge those ones.  I am sick of seeing us all act as the judge here, saying some people will go to hell if they don't believe 'what they hear' about Jesus.

That definition just doesn't sound right.

davidylan:
At this rate no one will be in hell at all, one look at the fury of hell and everyone might as well come up with the excuse of not being "fully convinced" about the message of salvation.

Well, the good news is that no one will be able to give any excuses.  God will know those that were genuinely unconvinced, and will probably judge them in another way.

davidylan:
Let's rephrase YOUR own scenario:
A Nigerian travels to Singapore and is ignorant of strict drug laws, he is arrested, not because he was not aware it was a crime but because in Nigeria you can still carry cocaine and get away with a slap on the wrist. It's difficult to do away with the atitude one has been stuck with from Nigeria, you know? Will such person be condemned to death if he traffics cocaine in Singapore on that basis? I can recall I said something on one thread concerning this, that it's one thing for one to know the law and still flout it, and another for someone to be genuinely oblivious of the law since he's never been to Singapore before. Will this person still be hanged on this basis as well?

Your analogy here does not hold water, and here's why:

Every sane mature human knows that trafficking of drugs is a serious crime in any country, and that's why they usually smuggle it in.  For the Nigerian to be aware that it is a crime in his own country, he definitely can't claim ignorance of the same if he travels out to another country.  And as for attitude, it depends on the type of attitude one has been stuck with in the first place.  By the way, trafficking of drugs is not even an attitude in the first place.  Those that "grease palms" are also fully aware of the consequences if caught, and cannot claim ignorance on that basis, no matter how "stuck" they are with such acts.

Also, the Singaporean goverment is not All-knowing, and definitely not Omnibenevolent. Let's even assume that the Nigerian is truly unaware of the laws against drugs, or maybe he doesn't even know that the act is a crime itself.  There's absolutely no way the Singaporean government will forgive him if he pleads on that basis, since they are not omnibenevolent, because they do not know for sure if he's lying or not since they are not Omniscient.

Now, will this person be condemned to death on that basis?  Sure!  Reason? - Based on the fact that the Singaporean goverment comprises human beings that believe in that bullshit of a law that "Ignorance is not an excuse".  It's a good thing bari_kade has even cleared that one because for someone to travel to a country at all, one must have studied the rules and regulations guiding that country, and can definitely not claim ignorance of any sort, especially concerning crimes in that country, on that basis.

So you see, that analogy of yours is flawed.

davidylan:
Here again we will try and rephrase your argument:

Well, personally, I believe a criminal is someone who outrightly flouts the law, despite knowing the truth. Don't you think it will be unfair of Singapore to hang someone who is absolutely ignorant/unconvinced about the law? Afterall, it was not his fault that he had never read or seen the Singaporean constitution. Note that every true Singaporean today still obeys the law because of what they've seen and experienced. But what happens to those that are yet to [or may never like foreigners] see or experience anything that is supposed to alert them about severe consequences of breaking Singaporean law?

For the fact that he chose/decided to travel to another country, he cannot claim ignorance of that law, and whether he sees/experiences anything or not before travelling down there will not be an excuse.  This is not the case with an unbeliever since he never chose/decided to come to world by himself.  He just found himself here, 'heard' stuffs about God, and was not convinced due to some of the reasons highlighted by Grouppoint.

davidylan:
Try and see if this your lame argument holds up in a Singaporean court of law not to talk of the white throne judgement.

My lame argument will definitely not hold up in a Singaporean court because they are equally humans like yourself that will only see things the exact way you are seeing it presently.  God is different.  His ways are definitely not our ways, and his thoughts, definitely not our thoughts.  That's what makes Him God.

Babyosisi, just relax and watch.  Seems to me that some peeps dey use style dey do "Holy toasting" for Nairaland.

@bari_kade,

Thanks for the clarification on the issue of 'those that died before Christ came to the world'.

[quote author=bari_kade link=topic=37590.msg882168#msg882168 date=1171238997]When someone hears the Gospel clearly preached to him, and he rejects it, the Bible removes all doubts as to the fate of such. This is quite a different thing from having never heard about Jesus Christ - and it simply spells "unbelief".[/quote]Now, this is what bothers me.  Someone 'hears' the Gospel, he's not convinced, not because he doesn't want to, but probably because it is antithetical to what he has been hearing from birth. It's difficult to do away with the religion/belief one has been stuck with from birth, you know?  Will such person be condemned to hell if he rejects the Gospel on that basis?  I can recall I said something on one thread concerning this, that it's one thing for one to know something as the truth and still reject it, and another for someone to be genuinely oblivious of the truth despite having 'heard' the Gospel.  Will this person still be faulted on this basis as well?

[quote author=bari_kade link=topic=37590.msg882168#msg882168 date=1171238997]I'm still studying my Bible, but so far I haven't come across a single text that seems to assume that a person is an "unbeliever" out of having never heard anything about God or Christ. An un[/b]believer in Scripture is one who [b]rejects the message preached to him/her. There are several texts clearly highlighting the fate of the 'unbeliever' in Scripture, but two will suffice for now ~~

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" - John 3:36.

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" - Mark 16:16.[/quote]I agree with you here.  But the Bible tells us no man comes to the Father except through Jesus -- and I guess that will include even those that never 'heard' anything -- that's if we're to apply the widely accepted interpretation of that verse.

But the way David has been responding with the Bible verses is more like -  "That is their own problem, whether they are ignorant or aware of the Gospel is not our own concern.  As far as they don't believe in Jesus, they are going straight to Hell!  That's what the Bible tells us.  Read it and stop asking stupid questions!"

So, I hope you see the cause of my insistence on the interpretation of John 14:6.

[quote author=bari_kade link=topic=37590.msg882168#msg882168 date=1171238997]I'm not a syncretist trying to look for a middle course somewhere in Christ's words. He by Himself stated clearly what an unbeliever assumes for him-/herself in not believing His words. Like I said, this may outrightly rejected one and all; but it doesn't really change what He said.[/quote]Well, personally, I believe an unbeliever is someone who outrightly rejects Jesus, despite knowing the truth.  Don't you think it will be unfair of God to punish someone who is absolutely ignorant/unconvinced about the Gospel?  Afterall, it was not his fault that he couldn't grasp the truth.  Note that every true Christian today still holds on to Christianity because of what they've seen and experienced.  But what happens to those that are yet to [or may never] see or experience anything that is supposed to spark off their belief at all?

David & Bari_kade

Thanks for your reponses.

@Bari_kade: My analogy may be flawed, but not deeply.

Actually, the type of membership I am trying to depict here with my analogy is the type that one just finds himself to be a part of. Now, I am referring to this World. We did not choose to become members of this world.

Different people are born in different places with different cultures, beliefs and religion. Every religion believes theirs is the only way. While I am not disputing the claims of Jesus Christ, I will like to know what really He meant in John 14:6. I just have this feeling that the way we have always interpreted the verse is not the way it should be.

Also, going by the undisputed arguments presented by 4 Play, it will be irrational to think that unless one is a Christian, such person cannot enter heaven. I gave an instance on the other thread, of a person born in Saudi Arabia where Islam is the predominant religion. Such person never goes beyond the shores of Saudi Arabia during his life time, and eventually dies as an ardent God-believing Muslim. Pray tell, will such person be condemned to hell for not being a Christian?

Okay David, let's just round this off. But before that, let me breifly bring to your notice some things you missed.

davidylan:
Dear sir, what you are indignant about is not any assumptions of aggression (which are basically your own assumptions and of no concern to me) but the fact that you really have no pedestal on which to stand with your "questions".

Seems like you know me more than I do, myself. Of course, these are as well your assumptions, and are of little concern to me. But honestly, I appreciate the fact that you attempted to answer my queries. My reply to you on the other thread alone proves that, because I did not point out what I felt was "aggressive" there, unlike how I did here. I was going to end my post there in just that first paragraph, but I felt the need to let you know how I felt about that particular line.

davidylan:
I have no problems with my "attitude" as you put it.

You think so?

davidylan:
The problem is that of ego, no one wants to be proved wrong. As soon as your baseless accusations and claims are debunked you run under the cover of "aggression". Keep running.

Now, here's where you actually miss the point. I was not making any accusations/claims. I was simply asking questions that were meant to incite an interesting discussion on another thread. But as we would have it, you said I was arguing pointlessly. Please, be slow to attack goodguy.

TV01:
The choice/decision to marry (although I personally consider marriage the norm), is ultimatley a personal one and in itself has no eternal bearing.

While this is actually true, the ultimate personal choice/decision may still depend on other factors that do not totally suit the person making the choice/decision.

TV01:
You previously said divorce was only permitted under the law of Moses due to the "hardness of some mens hearts".

The Bible said so, I only made reference to it.

TV01:
Pursuant to this and under grace, it would appear that divorce even in cases of adutery were due to that same hardness (or unforgiveness). This seems quite plausible at first glance, but thinking about it, the penalty for adultery under the law was death. Therefore "divorce" would hardly have been necessary would it? How would you factor this into your thinking.

Lev 20:10 - Penalty for Adultery is Death
Deut 24: 1 - Spouse can be divorced on the basis of Adultery

First, it is important to note that while Leviticus 20 talks categorically about the Punishments for Sins committed by the people, Deuteronomy 24 only outlines Miscellaneous Laws to govern the people.  [That's how my NIV Bible describes both].

Also, we could look at this from a rational point of view, that since the Book of Leviticus was written before the Book of Deuteronomy, there is a possibility that some laws changed over time.

That's how I factor this into my thinking, and I am open to corrections on any perceived misconception on my part.

Shalom.

@ davidylan

davidylan:
It is false to state with authority that the bible is not explicit in stating those who will make heaven or hell.
As i said earlier, the answers to your "questions" are answered explicitly in myriads of verses in the bible, all you need do is take the time to read it rather than arguing pointlessly on the forum.

Here are a few examples:

John 3: 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
- Your question will be valid if you claim ignorance of the only begotten Son of God.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned
- Those who are damned is explicitly stated here! Unless you can convince me that even muslims and buddhists undergo water baptism too!

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
- I wonder if this is not explicit enough!

1 John 5:
1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

If after all these, the difference is still not explicit enough then we might have course to question your supposed faith!

I am fully aware of all these verses, and that's why questions are being asked concerning them, as they do not seem to favour all of mankind.

Before I proceed with my arguments, I will like to know what you yourself think about this subject.  And while you're still preparing your words on that, take this for instance:

I am a new member on Nairaland.  I break a rule that I never even knew existed, and Seun still goes ahead to ban me knowing fully well that I was not aware of that rule.  In all honesty, tell me what you would think of Seun in that regard.  And don't give me the "Ignorance is not an excuse" crap.  That's one very big Bullshit that I will totally annul if I were in the position to do so.  To me, the human law is indeed an ass.

You should have posted your rejoinder on the other thread.  All the Bible verses you quoted still brings us back to the ultimate question - Who is an unbeliever?

However, let me just quickly correct something here:

davidylan:
all you need do is take the time to read it rather than arguing pointlessly on the forum.

You may think you made perfect sense to yourself here, but I tell you, you did not!  No matter how the amount of truths in your words, a little aggression on your part totally disuades the person you're admonishing.  Now, you really do expect me to "reason" with you after telling me I'm arguing pointlessly?

Read what this 18 year old says about people like you: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-17939.0.html#msg494667 -- the first line of the 4th paragraph is where you and your likes should pay close attention to, and have a change of attitude in that aspect.

By the way, I already replied you here: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-37590.0.html#msg879510

Shalom.

I like your arguments, 4 Play.  I will like to see a refutation though, from an opposing side.

davidylan:
The bible gives us perfect answers to your question. Please read it for more info.

Yes.  But there are still questions left unaswered.  Who really is an unbeliever?

1.  One who does not believe in God?

2.  One who does not believe in Trinity?

3.  One who never got convinced about the Gospel?

4.  One who never even heard about the Gospel, but just knows there's one Jesus served by the Christians?  A typical example will be someone who was born and bred in Saudi, and died a Conc. Muslim in Saudi.  Even though he believed in God, is he still an unbeliever for not acknowledging Christ as the Saviour?

These are questions that bother the mind, and the Bible does not state explicitly the category of people that will make heaven or hell.  Even some Christians don't believe a good God is capable of creating a place like Hell for His creations.

So, let's discuss all these on the thread.

ono:
Now, I've got questions for goodguy et al. Some people get boxed into unwanted marriages by family, peers etc. And they go into such marriages with their eyes wide open. Then after a some time they come complaining to all that they're regretting ever going into such a union and want out. What do you advice such one to do?

If the marriage was sanctioned by God, despite being boxed into it, the couple should work it out by all means.

However, if the reverse is the case, they should go their seperate ways because they were not meant to be together in the first place.  Even God will be glad at this.  Remember the case of Jesus and the Samaritan woman?  (John 4:16-18)

But now, the Big Question is -- How do we know for sure if a marriage is sanctioned by God or not?  I'll leave this to the greater minds to answer.

But one thing I know for sure is this:  ". . . all things work together for good to them that love God. . ."  (Rom 8:28).

Shalom.

. . . And all these arguments still lead us back to the very much avoided thread:

What Then Happens To The Unbeliever?

Thank you Shahan.

As the the story itself, even though it applies to every human, I believe belloti intentionally included Muslims into brackets, just to avoid what we've already seen in the last few posts on this thread.  Unfortunately, it seems he got more than he had bargained for.

Haba People! This is just a story that is meant to analogize the present relationship bewteen man and God. This is not some kind of Nollywood script that should undergo some "professional" scrutiny. Please take it easy on this guy. I'm pretty sure if it was a Christian that posted something similar, we would all be praising and thanking him for sharing an inspirational story.

Forget the contradictions. Pay more attention to the message that is being passed across!


@Belloti -- thanks for sharing.

shahan:
The good thing is that almost everyone is a winner in one way or another. But as is said in the golden rule, the first shall be the last, abi? So, shall we say that your own gift be given to ope_emi who just joined in here!

Leave Ope and I to sort ourselves out. He's my boy. Our houses are just less than a 5 minute walk apart, so you can still send the gifts to my own house . I will give him his own share that I feel he deserves. . . and that's even if the gift is shareable in the first place.

I'm a goodguy, remember?

I'm a winner! I won something!!


@ope_emi, you follow me guess? Abi na ur brain I take guess?


J/K.

bari_kade,

I have also asked two Muslims since I started this thread if they believe in the same God the Christians believe, and they answered in the affirmative.

Spindomer that posted here is one of them. When I asked him whether he was a Christian or a Muslim, he even stressed the spelling of "Muslim" to indicate to me how conc. he is in Islam.

And when I asked him if he believes Christians and Muslims worship the same God, his answer was "Of course!".

That was why I introduced him to this thread, but unfortunately, that's the only post he has made so far.

[quote author=trini_girl link=topic=35449.msg867422#msg867422 date=1170716345]I have repeatedly asked if the people who oppose this are virgins, one or two are, and as a result really should not even contribute because their view is biased.[/quote]If those who are virgins should not contribute - "because their views are biased"

And those who are not virgins should not contribute either - "because they are equally sinners like yourself" (as you implied on page one of this thread)

. . . then, who exactly are those that should contribute?

bari_kade, this one pass me o! The same points you're raising here, have been presented earlier:
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-35449.192.html#msg815414
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-35449.192.html#msg816265

But this lady has made up her mind already. I just tire for her.

@ pataki & David

Okay, on a more serious note now.  I don't have any problems with you guys at all.  But when you begin to label some people as ignorant, blind Christians, then will I begin to fault you on that basis.

I want to make you realise that one can only be informed on what he knows.  The fact that I'm not deeply informed on a particular subject does not make me ignorant of the whole body of the matter.  Just as you know some things about Christianity, there are other things that I know better than you do.  But that does not make you an ignorant Christian.

Besides, you cannot continually emphasize to someone how ignorant he is, and expect him to constantly smile back at you.  If you feel I am ignorant, make me know what I don't know, rather than find adjectives and Bible verses to qualify my ignorance the more!  That's what makes you a good Christian - being Christ-like; and that's why out of all my opposers on this thread, it's only bari_kade's and sometimes, gbade. x's rejoinders that I have been finding worthwhile.

David, what would you think of Jesus if, when Nicodemus went to him, He had said . . . "How ignorant of you!  A pharisee that doesn't know the things of the spirit!  Are you sure you really have the spirit of God in you?  You're so blind!  Go and study the scriptures better!" -- You tell.

You guys need to see the way I smile at your posts whenever I see you question the strength of my Christian life.  The very same people that accuse others of 'not being Christian enough' are equally guilty of some things that they do not realise themselves.  Very ironical, innit?  That's what makes us humans afterall.

Anyway, I just hope you guys will call off these cat fights with me.  If you disagree with me, present your points without aggression, then we may have a civil debate together.  But if you begin to attack me for making my points, in the name of disagreement, then don't expect to see a cool-headed goodguy.

Shalom!

davidylan:
As for goodguy, ii would advice you let him enjoy his ignorant fantasyland where christians and muslims worship the same "god".

Okay Mr. Good Christian David, since I'm ignorant and you know it, why don't you educate me, rather than continually emphasize how ignorant you feel I am?

mrpataki:
@ goodguy,
I am actually flabbergasted at your thought patterns here!

Of course, you should be!  I am equally flabbergasted at your response pattern too.  You remind me of secondary school days; I told you that once, remember?

mrpataki:
Reading your post goes to show a long way, what kind of kid you really are. Grow out of it, you are fast becoming a man.

Now it has become "kid", no longer "Muslim".  Perhaps, you meant to write "Muslim kid".  Either way, this advice of yours will really go a long way in shaping you into a proper man.

mrpataki:
Your input here proves one thing, you can't read in between the lines and see that you have no point here.

Okay sir.  Since you have realised that, why don't you lead me on the right way?

mrpataki:
@ goodguy,
Its quite ridiculous to me to see an Imam trying to preach to me here

What a nice way to evade my post.  You should have just accepted your mistakes (even if it was done privately, that wouldn't be a problem), and ended it there, rather than reveal more of your inconsistencies publicly.

By the way, what's wrong with an Imam preaching to someone?  If what the Imam is saying is the truth, what's ridiculous about it?  It's the message that matters, not the messenger.  Take note.

mrpataki:
I would have loved to quote all your jargons above and give you resposes due for your size, but again whats the point? An Imam will always be an Imam, except if convicted by the Holy Spirit.

Funny how you are quick to label my post 'jargons', but you were unable to point out a single jargon in the post.  There's no point giving me "responses due to my size" because:

1.  You don't even know my size.
2.  You really don't have anything to say to me because I hit you real hard with the truth.

mrpataki:
Again, your post above just tries to pass across the message to me of you seeking public sympathy to your plight.

What part of my post exactly? And what's the plight you're talking about?  It seems to me that you really do love making presumptions, even when there's absolutely no basis for it.

mrpataki:
Well, you just got mine! Sorry if my inputs to you were terrible Imam goodguy.

No one will castigate you for being straightforward in your apology.  You know it yourself that I have done absolutely nothing wrong to you to warrant all these attacks against me.  When exactly did defending Islam become a crime?

mrpataki:
But more importantly, you make a babyish assumption here, that all responses must suit your taste and desire, which I don't correspond to.

Can you kindly point out the exact assumption?  Please, don't evade this one.

mrpataki:
Not all inputs do I, give a response to here, if I feel I am going to make sense greatly, I do that, or just add a level of humor to the whole thing. Even though I might have an extensive knowledge as to the subject matter.

Weren't you the same person that reprimanded ope_emi for ascribing the glory of God to his intellect?  Now, you're guilty of the same thing.

mrpataki:
As to your case, I guess you are better left to your ways of thinking!

And why should that be?  It seems to me that you're just deliberately jumping down on my throat without any valid reason.  Because I have pointed out your inconsistencies in my previous posts, you don't have anything to say to justify yourself, and you feel resorting to these cheap attacks will attract the applauds of others here?

mrpataki:
Funny that the same scripture ope_emi uses to admonish davidylan, is the same error you are falling into now.

Matthew 7:1-2 right?  Pray tell, how have I jugded you or anyone else here?  Don't evade this one either.

mrpataki:
As to my views of you being a muslim, I am not convinced that you are not.

You don't need to be convinced.  Just have it at the back of your mind that I am not a Muslim.  What will it cost me to say I am one, if truly I am?  Will Seun ban me, or will anyone kill me for that?  I have been on this forum since the first day of September 2005, and if you think I have been faking my religion all the while, na u sabi.

mrpataki:
Also, I don't hate any muslim brother or sister, infact, I was at the hospital today and I was attended to by an Alfa, who is a doctor! very nice and understanding a human being.
I only hate that religion!

Congrats!

mrpataki:
@ goodguy,
Add this to the compendium of my insults, you know very little about the teachings of God!

I hope you saw the way bari_kade responded to the same post you quoted?  Rather than disparage me to tell me how unknowledgeable I am, he simply showed me how Christianly he is by attempting to correct me.

You, on the other hand, are not displaying a true Christian virtue here at all.  I don't have any issues with you at all, mrpataki.  But the way you reply to posts, supposedly trying to show people "the way", is really nothing to write home about.  What exactly are you going to call these replies of yours?  That you're simply trying to open the eyes of a 'blind' and 'deluded' Christian by emphasizing and re-emphasizing to him how blind and deluded he is?  Is that how Christ taught you to put people on the right track?  Above all brother, please meditate on Proverbs 15:1.

mrpataki:
Personally I am made to believe that neither do you believe in the concept of the trinity. To you, it is outright foolishness, well, worshipping an idol and trying to equate it to the I Am the I Am is far more than the concept of the trinity alone!

I really do not owe you any explanations concerning my belief in God, as well as Trinity.  However, I will just refer you to some of my posts that show my stance on the issue of trinity.  Whether you choose to believe or not will actually not bother me in any way.

Here they are:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-33222.128.html#msg773807
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-33222.128.html#msg775818
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-33222.224.html#msg788540
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-33222.224.html#msg790109
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-33222.224.html#msg790160
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-33222.224.html#msg790175 [My reply to Shahan's first post on Nairaland]

mrpataki:
Your inputs here only goes to show how myopic you are in spiritual matters.

I don't know why you have taken so much delight in attacking me on this forum.  It all started when you started referring to my reasoning on the other thread just for posting my views, then with my subsequent refutations of every single line of your post.  Ever since then, goodguy has become a devil to you.  You even went to the extent of labelling me a Muslim, just for opposing your views!

That aside, isn't it funny how you never even attempted to deal with the posts, but you're more interested in telling me how myopic and ignorant I am?  Jesus Christ would never do this, my fellow Christ[/b]ian brother.   By the way, I never claimed to know enough about Spiritual matters.  If you read my first entry on this thread carefully, you'd see where I said that I needed clarification on this issue, and probably have my views changed.

Please be slow to denigrate, [b]mrpataki.

Thanks a lot for your response, bari_kade. However, I think you misunderstood me here:

[quote author=bari_kade link=topic=38605.msg867189#msg867189 date=1170709699]Quite on the contrary. Following your line of reasoning, could we say that: 'The only reason why an atheist would deny the beliefs of theism is because atheists believe in the existence of God too'?? I'm staggered at such a logic; and if you want to test this idea out - just simply ask the atheists on the Forum.[/quote]Note: I used Ideology there, not Belief. An Idealogy is quite different from a belief. For someone to deny your idealogy about something he knows you believe in, that person must also believe in that same thing, but only sees it differently -- hence, the need for the opposition. This is not the case with belief. Your example up there only applies to belief, as you have rightly put it yourself, and not the idealogy.

Thanks for the compliments.

@All: 

What I've gathered so far from this thread is that "Christians" believe Muslims worship an idol simply because they deny the concept of Trinity.  (I find that quite funny actually).

However, what you have failed to realize is that the only reason why anyone would deny your idealogy about something you believe in, is because they believe in that same thing too.  If Muslims truly worship another 'god', they wouldn't bother arguing on the concept of Trinity with us in the first place.

mrpataki: Again it is people of your type that go again to label certain people as church goers, and not christians, label certain peeps as "christians", yet to exchange insults, is your delight.

Ah!  Most Highest Bishop Prophet Pastor mrpataki, now you're beginning to amuse me the more with the way you perfectly qualify yourself .  But unlike David, you didn't use a Bible verse.  I know you're still learning. . with time, you'll learn the art perfectly.

Now let me remind you of who started the insults. . . - Your "very good Christian" friend, David, who brought in words like "Idiot", "Ignorant", "deluded", "blind", etc to an initially peaceful thread.

Then you took the baton from him when you started with:

1.  Stop making me to believe that you cannot reason at all! (Last paragraph)

2.  Reverend and his moronic species (2nd to the last paragraph)

3.  I should apply my sense of Logic (paraphrased, Last paragraph)

4.  Sometimes I forget that I am not talking to people of great minds  (1st paragraph)

There!  I've hyperlinked your insults and indicated where they can be found in each posts, Mr. Good Christian.

Nice thread.

naijacutee:
What's wrong with Emeagwali?

I thought nothing was wrong with Emeagwali too until I read these:

http://chippla..com/2005/12/is-philip-emeagwali-fake.html
http://chippla..com/2005/12/philip-emeagwali-final-thoughts.html
http://magazine.biafranigeriaworld.com/cezeilo/2003nov09.html
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-19285.0.html
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-31725.0.html