₦airaland Forum

davidylan:
I'm not even going to bother with the piffle mazaje posted here. the fact that there are miniature horses the size of the alleged ancestor horse makes his horse evolution claims to rubbish.

An assertion without substantiation. Why do you think the size of the horse do not indicate evolution? BTW, it is not the size alone, but the size together with many other features.

Much like the sizes of present-day elephants. Two main species exist today - the African and the Asian elephants. The Asian elepant is slightly smaller than the African elephant.

noetic2:
where is huxley?

I guess you have found dinosaurs in the bible now, have you?

mazaje:
what's up hux? how are you doing?

Maz,

Am fine.  Was just admiring in awe at how well you explain evolution here. Great Job.

To learn more about evolution, check out the following:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqIrM70ENFQ&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=8EE54070B382E73A

http://www.youtube.com/user/DonExodus2

Mazeje,

Well done. Keep it up.

noetic2:
what is the truth?

The fact that humans have not always walked this earth in our present form. The fact that there were no mammals in the precambrian. Show my a mammalian fossil from the precambrian, and I will bow to your superior knowledge and stop posting anti-christian and anti-religion post here on NL.

noetic2:
I believe the OP asked for matured and objective debates.

What about my comments is wrong? The bits you highlighted - is there a problems with them?

huxley2:
There is NO mention of dinosaurs in the bible. PERIOD. The bible was written by barbaric tribesmen, about 3000 - 4000 years ago, who knew little about the nature of their environment. Dinosaurs went extinct about 65 million years ago. If the bible mention dinosaurs, I would not expect it to refer to them as creatures living at the time the books were written, but as fossils. But it does neither.

What about they above post is wrong or immature?

senator4u:
[color=#000099][/color]WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION, IS THERE TRUTH IN IT?

OH, Yes. It is nothing if not the TRUTH.

tonye-t:
@Huxley2,

at least the topic asked it all,

i want the biblical account, i am thru' with the scientific account

10ks

There is NO mention of dinosaurs in the bible. PERIOD. The bible was written by barbaric tribesmen, about 3000 - 4000 years ago, who knew little about the nature of their environment. Dinosaurs went extinct about 65 million years ago. If the bible mention dinosaurs, I would not expect it to refer to them as creatures living at the time the books were written, but as fossils. But it does neither.

Hello,

This is a good starting point for seeking out knowledge about dinosaurs, when the lived, when the died out, etc, etc, but I would suggest you do NOT limit you investigation to Nairaland. Nairalanders can only be pointers as to where good and reliable information about these beast are held.

I cannot give you any bible-related info about dinosaurs. However, if you really want the scientific account, I can help you with that.

What do you want? The scientific account or the mythological account?

FACE:
It is absolutely necessary to speak in a manner that most people will understand without straining their ears.

Most English speakers in Nigeria will understand the English spoken with US or British accent as long as the speaker speaks in a clear manner; in other words plain English or the TV English as I call it. The reverse is not the case as more Nigerians are exposed to English spoken with British or US accent than Americans and Brits exposed to Nigerian english.

Now if an American speaks only in heavy southern accent, other people will have to tune their ears into that speaking frequency to understand the speaker. The same applies to UK if someone speaks with heavy Scottish, Welsh, Irish or any of the northern accents. This brings the need to speak a common English that everyone understands.

Now, Americans, Brits and other English speakers will find it even more difficult understanding English spoken with heavy Nigerian accent.

Therefore, if anyone with Nigerian accent tries to speak in such a way that he is understood without having to repeat himself all the time, the person should be commended rather than criticized; afterall a Yoruba or Igbo Hausa-speaker does not go about saying "I am not going to make an effort to improve on my Hausa language because I prefer to speak Hausa with my Igbo or Yoruba accent, lest people say that I am speaking Hausa with a fake Hausa accent"

Very good point!

A lot of thing go into making oneself understood in a "foreign" language; Accent, intonation, where stresses are placed in words/sentences, pace of speech, articulation, gesticulations (in Italian and French, for example), pronounciation, etc, etc. People unfamiliar with West African English (Nigeria, Ghana, CAmeroon, Sierra Leone) may find it hard to understand a speaker from West Africa who uses strong West African mannerisms.

In my experience, one of the biggest impediment to comprehension is pronounciations. Many West African tend to pronounce th as though it were a simple t. Thus the words below are pronouced as follows;

With --> Wit
Earth --> Eart
Truth ---> Trut
Mouth ---> Mout
This ---> Tis
That ---> Tat

etc, etc

This sloppiness can cause quite a lot of confusion in oral communication.

manmustwac:
@pilgrim1
Na woa i can just tell by all your posts on tithing that your very sensitive about the issue. Why?

I think she ought to be Christened "Lady of the Tithe", as nothing stirs her zeal quite as much as tithing.

noetic2:
what is the evidence that they did not know or saw this commandment?

They did, and guess what? . . . . . .you are still alive!

Yes, but why do Christian pick and chose the injunction from JC to suit their needs? Why don't they just follow ALL of JC injunction? Would you follow this injunction from JC? If not, why ?

noetic2:
how come ur christian parents did not murder u?

SIMPLE:

1) I was ever so good

2) My parents, like most Christians probably did not know of this despicable injunction.

3) If they had known, they would have ignored it.

For that reason and others, I can savely say that my parents would not be going to heaven.

So what do Christians think about JC advising parents to murder their recalcitrant children? Why do they not follow JC's footsteps in this regard? Or, do they?

davidylan:
You ask this question because you are largely ignorant of the workings of the Holy Spirit.

1. The blood of Christ will ONLY wash away your sin if YOU are convicted of your sin, confess, repent and seek mercy.

[size=18pt]2. To sin against the Holy Spirit is to openly mock and blaspheme the very personality of the Lord Jesus Christ/holy Ghost. Read the earlier event that led to Christ making that statement. the pharisees saw Him perform a miracle and ascribed it to Satan.[/size]

3. Only the Holy Ghost can convict you of sin. Without the Spirit you CAN NEVER feel remorse for sin because you dont even understand that you are a sinner in the first place.

4. when you blaspheme the Holy Ghost, it leaves you.

5. Since #4 is true, then it means #3 MUST hold.

The blood of Christ just doesnt wash every scoffing idiot of sin.

The apostle Paul could be said to be guilty of mocking Jesus and the HS in his earlier incarnation as Saul, couldn't he?

davidylan:
Christianity has no moral code, trust and obey is the fundamental principle. You have a right to opt out.

What are "constraints" to you are no more than principles. You dont enter college just because you are as tall as others in the entry class. You must pass an entrance exam and fulfill other stipulated requirements. Heaven is no different.

Bizarre. Earlier, you attributed moral irresponsibility to the atheists and by implication moral responsibility to the atheist. However, here you just said Christianity has no moral code. Are moral code same as or different from "fundamental principle"?

Are such principle unavailable to non-theists?

davidylan:
And this is supposedly your laughable excuse against religion?

1. Religion deeply scarred human history but that has been over 500 yrs ago. Atheism from the likes of Lenin and Hitler has scarred history more . . . are you afraid of atheists too?

2. What happened in Jos is strictly islamic and for the most part cultural. Southern muslims for instance dont go beheading their christian neighbours. If you feel bad about islam pls head over to their thread instead of decietfully tarring us all with the same brush.

And Obama promptly reversed the order in January . . . no christians are complaining.

Next excuse pls.

This is essentially meaningless and ignorant jargon. The bible is replete with men who ACTIVELY QUESTIONED their faith -

1. Gideon
2. Moses
3. Peter

Just 3 examples shld suffice for now. As i said earlier . . . your problem is not that you are not allowed to "reason" and "question God" . . . your major problem is that you do not want to surrender your will and obedience. I repeat again . . . this constant drivel about "reason" is a sham, so you mean the rest of us in churches are just blank slates with no capacity to reason?

No, your problem is you dont want any moral responsibility, you dont want to leave the life of sin, you are not willing to pay the sacrifice for eternity.

Bizarre statement.  Does religions constraint or obliges any form of moral responsibility?   Where does the religion get its moral code from?

Pastor AIO:
What would you say were the essential characteristics of religions?

All or some of the following;

1)  They posit a god/deity or some divine entity

2)  They possess various forms of ritualisms

3)  Veneration of god/deity and the representatives of the god/deity.

4)  They are built around some sort of explanatory (usually mythological)  narratives.

5)  Some practitioners of said religions claim supernatural powers

etc, etc, etc

Those are the five most important that come to mind.

What do you think?

pilgrim.1:
Are we to then infer that "philosophical atheism" is also a "religion"? I pointed out and limited my comments to "religions" and mentioned "atheist religions", so I wonder what the issue really is here about 'philosophical atheism'.

What do you think?   Do you think it has the essential characters of religions?


I say philosophical atheism to distinguish from other forms of atheism like natural atheism, simple-minded atheism and "religious" atheism.


I for example would describe myself as a philosophical atheist (or better still a metaphical naturalist), my one year old daughter as a natural atheist, and the run-of-the-mill citizen who holds that there is no god but has not really given that much thought as a simple-minded atheist (or maybe, natural atheist).

While it is true that there are atheistic relgions (such as Taoism, Zen, some forms of Budhisms), these atheistic religions tend to be far less harmful to society as a whole. The real cultural battle is between irrationalism, of which ALL religions ar a part, and rationalism. Philosophical atheism is founded on rationalism and abhors all forms of irrationalisms and superstition which is the bread and butter of theistic religions.

Proverbs 13:24
He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

Proverbs 22:15
Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

Proverbs 23:13
Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.

Ecclesiasticus 22:6
Lecturing your children can sometimes be as out of place as singing to people in morning, but a whipping is a wise choice of discipline at any time.

Ecclesiasticus 30:11
Don't give him freedom while he is young, and don't overlook what he does wrong.  Whip him while he is still a child, and make him respect your authority.



Exodus 21:15
And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.


Exodus 21:17
And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.

Leviticus 20:9
For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 21:18-21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.


[size=16pt]
And the piece de resistance, by none other than Jesus himself, commanding parents to kill their children[/size]

Matthew 15:4-7
[b]For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the deat[/b]h. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Image123:
@SirJohn
I'm not here to prove any healing to you. I'm not obliged to. The point is that there are far better things of wider consequences and rewards to engage in. The initial post doesn't in any way improve any life or glorify God. You could engage in more profitable activity like evangelising or praying instead of igniting criticisms and hate that lead to no-where.
You say you believe that God heals, yet you're already in a default position of doubt as to whether there's any healed of an organic ailment.

SirJohn is actually doing a service to those gullible Christian who may one day feel the need to abandon medical treatment in favour of prayers and healing from God.  This service is far more beneficial to humanity than evangelising.

Image123:
@huxley
maybe it will suffice you if I say that SirJohn sounded more like a doubter than you sounded. At least you BELIEVE that God has not hardened your heart, abi?

No,  God has not hardened my heart because he does not exist.

How can one know whether their sins have been forgiven? Do all sins get forgiven automatically after on has repented about them? Can Jesus forgive only some proportions of ones sins, leaving the really egregous ones unforgiven.

Jesus once said "If one breaks ONE commandments, then he is guilty of having broken them ALL". Is the corollary true that if you repent for ONE sin, you are also forgiven for them ALL?

SirJohn:
Both!
Although there are hardly any concrete evidence to divine healing/miracles especially organic ailments, but I still stand on the fact that people have experienced unexplainable recoveries. I want to believe that within this misty view, there is a hand of God

This is a God-of-the Gap argument.  Anything that appears or is currently unexplainable is attributed to God.  Remember how earthquakes, lightening, etc used to be attributed to God because no one had a naturalistic explanation for them at the time?

Further, why would God choose to make his intervention so subtle, and almost imperceptibly recognisable as his direct work?  When you recover from a headache or stomachache, is that the work of God, miraculously healing you?  Or does God only intervene in "major" illnesses?

Image123:
@SirJohn
hi, how is it that huxley seems to be more of a believer than you are? Are the harlots and the publicans becoming closer to the kingdom or what?
If you had any idea how many people do not know Jesus as Saviour, you'll drop this almost inconsequential 'ministry' and do the works of God.

What do you mean by huxley being a believer?  "Believer" of what?

SirJohn:
I believe God still heals, however, not the way some of these preachers would have us believe. I believe in the sovereignty of Almighty God and not in some mumbo jumbo crap which they eroneously call faith.
There are records of unexplainable recoveries from illnessess which hitherto defied medical intervention. We cannot attribute them all to the supernatural but who knows some of them just might be.

Is your belief about God's healing today founded on evidence or on faith?

SirJohn,

How could it be that these disciples of God are not healing the sick in the name of Jesus? Jesus said they could do just that. Are you suggesting that these healings never really happen?

By the way, what is the point of miraculous healings and how long could the healing effects last to be considered a miracle healing? 1 day, 5 day, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years?

olabowale:
@Huxley2: I asked what happened to just "Huxley," you didn't give me a reply. I still need to know. Enquiring mind wanna know. I am sure my statement s often way over your head.

Now, have you heard the term "missing link," before? Forget the scientific possibility of it or lack of it. But its is an expression that is commonly used by the evolutionist, Atheist to "proof" if only that it never have passed the muster of hypothetical opinion, that there is no creation, but all things happened through the first action known as "Big Bang theory (to me it is an unsubstantiative hypothesis)." Now that I have reminded you of how "missing link" as a term came about, I will try to address your concern, stated in your post.

I need to remind you of the name Derwin and his fake theory of evolution which he was trying to proof with the Survival of the fittest thesis. I wonder what happened to him, particularly, since he would have been one of possible "proof" of his evolutionary mumbo jumbo if one he were to be alive, today. Thank God the Creator of all. He allowed Derwin to exist until the usual term He gave him; from birth as a child from his mother's womb, to old age, when he died.

Now then, is the individual who proposed a possible evolution of species, a Biologist? I guess, not! From the rank of the Biologists, you have esteemed persons, who do not subscribe to "evolution" as the way of beings. So your trying to argue that Biological scientists accept evolutional concept, and rejects Creationism is untrue.

The Bioogical community is not all in agreement on this. Those who are supporting evolution are often atheist, agnostics, and at best have no desire ask how is it possible that a simple object, a particle without any significant mass, but only a position in an empty space can produce such a varied and complex dynamically vast objects; some physical only, others chemical only, others Biological and Physical and chemical, all at the same time. Man is all of the above. So are aminals, trees, etc.

And the score is not settled on the evolutionary debate, either. Afterall, there is no trace that Knowledge is complete and nothing else to be known or discovered, in the future generations. Or are you sure that human race is settled on evolution against creation, and no more knowledge will be discovered about anything?

Now, tell me who is benighted? You who lashed on to a rudementary concept, as that of evolution, without a single proof, except that you are happy to be on the wrong side of history? Or me, who have analysed myslef as a being and look at my place within my society, my enviroment, and arrive at a convincing point; there must be a Being, greater than humans in control of all things? Talk to me, man.

What a waste of space! I asked for a textbook definition if evolution and you give me this nonsense. What a shame. Were you ever educated?

olabowale:
@Huxley2: What happened to simply; Huxley? But I have a question for you and all the evolutionists: The missing link did not have a clear indication of a single line of what it evolved into. Or what it involved from. Why not man?

I was thinking that they will have a half man and half whatever! All I saw was a fluke. What happened man? Evolutionists are losing it. When you have a a distinctively pure fraction of something and then the remaining percentage/fraction of the specie is still of the original, indicating a changing proess call me, man.

Let me give you an example; you see how day evolves to night. Or night evolving to day, by just simply the amount of light available, in the process, thats what I want to see. And don't worry your head about the muslims, by the assumed onslaughts from the Christians. If you add the Jews and all others including your atheist group, Islam guiding the conduct of the Muslims, the true muslims, by Allah's help will emerge victorious.

We are neither be benighted nor deluded. We are clear and determined on a resolve. There is a God you know. And He is sufficient as Supporter for the muslims.

The above ramble makes a strong case as to your benightedness. What are you talking about? What missing link? Who referred to any "missing link"? What is a "missing link" by the way? That is not a scientific term, is it?

To prove that you are not deluded and benighted, can you give me the definition of evolution as accepted by the biological scientific community?

And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD: and the LORD heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp. (Num.11:1)


Is the fire of the Lord burning in you today?

Amen

Mai Suya:
The thing tire me no be small. it seems he spends quite a lot of time reading the Bible, prolly even more than some practicing Xtians. Just take a look at the threads he has opend.

I just have to wonder what he is getting at. . .

Well, the bible is a book like any other book and can be read from cover to cover if you only invest the time and effort. Alas, many who call themselves Christian do not have the intellectual abilities to read and understand their own bible. They have been brainwashed and simply accepts the one or two "good" passages directed to them by their pastors.

You can change all of that. Why don't you start by reading Numbers 31 today and telling us what you found?