₦airaland Forum

Vieira:
Sagna, can play anywhere else and Gilberto can also play CB.

So with He can be cover for Hoyte if Sagna is used elsewhere.

we can have a situation where Gilberto is used in CB, Flamini is used as LB and Diaby as a striker and we will still be able to use Diarra as a defensive midfielder!!

I wish you were Arse-anal manager

The man went to Costa Rica to pack shit

I don't see why United fans denigrate Saha.His only drawback is his fitness problems.Once fit,he is one of the best strikers in the Premiership.He is the only arrow head we have in that team.

I wonder what possessed Fergie to start Anderson and Eagles.Fletcher should have played instead of Eagles and Carrick instead of Anderson.

Anderson is a player just coming back from injury and who has never played in the Premiership.Why start him ahead of Fletcher or Carrick?He could have started either of those 2 and pushed Scholes just behind Tevez.Scholes had to drop deep where he was ineffectual because  there were no targets to aim his pases for.He had a fumbling Anderson and an out-of-position Tevez as his targets.

Carrick and Hargreaves could have played in the centre of midfield with Scholes pushing up alongside Tevez.The wisdom behind playing Eagles ahead of Fletcher is hardly apparent

Don't mind the imposter.What did he actually do for Nigeria and when did he do it? Nigeria owes me too for the investigation I did into our diminishing foreign debt    

He could bring legal action if he actually did something which requires remuneration.

As regards his achievements, he could end up becoming the next Dead Sea who refused to give out anything.

What actually were his achievements?

always say I have finished with you but I am innately a debating pugilist.Ok,this is the last one

There's no need for me asking if you trace the origins of the Catholic Church to the 2nd century (certainly you'll still be mute on that). But, at least, for the sake of your convent and your quizzed brethren, offer something 'intelligent' to demystify this aspect in your piece.

There is no mystery to it.The "problem" resides in the lacuna in your knowledge.To use political analogies,the Church then had a "federal" structure to it for reasons of convenience.Nobody disputes that the Assyrian Church predates 431AD.Unlike you,I don't dispute historical facts.

To say that the Assyrian Church dates back to the 2nd century is not to say it was a wholly independent Church.Not even one single one of your sources makes such a misleading claim.However,having started then,it remained in communion with Rome untill the schism of 431 AD after a doctrinal dispute.

That was why your link noted that it developed almost wholly apart from the Roman Churches and the Greek Churches.You seem incapable of construing the implication of the above.Being ignorant,you were puzzled as to what the "Greek" Church meant.It refers to varied Eastern  Churches,most of  which  finally  seperated  from Catholicism after the Great Schism of 1052.

Where there  Churches/groups independent of Catholicism prior to 431 AD? Of course there were.Any person barely knowledgeable knows that but the Assyrian Church was not one of them.

PS:I noted that there are Assyrian Churches in London.If you sincerely want to learn more,you can make time to visit one of them.I'm truly and finally done with you  Next thing,you might start to argue over whether the Pope is a Catholic or a Roman Catholic instead  ;DYou might even find me there,Catholicism recognises its rites and hence allows us to worship there. 

MANCHESTER United are to quiz star striker Cristiano Ronaldo after he invited hookers back to his home for a poolside orgy.


The five girls travelled 60 miles by taxi from Leeds to Ronaldo’s home on the outskirts of Manchester to party with the players, who were celebrating United’s first victory of the season against Spurs this week.

The girls spent around six hours romping with Ronaldo, his team-mate Anderson and several other men in the pool, Jacuzzi and changing rooms.

The girls took a series of photos inside the house on mobile phones — one even videoed and snapped Brazilian midfielder Anderson naked apart from a pair of boxer shorts.

The stars laid on booze for the party as they cavorted with the girls — leaping in and out of the pool in the early hours. Some of the girls went skinny-dipping.

It seems our boys are maintaining an intensive fitness regime.Romping for 6 hours!That way,they can stay fit ahead of busy schedule

@Pilgrim.1

The Catholic Assyrian Church of the East and the Roman Catholic church separated from each other after the Council of Ephesus in 431 CE. Source:http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_meta.htm

The first great rupture in the Catholic Church followed the Council of Ephesus (AD 431), which affirmed the Virgin Mary as Theotokos. The majority of those who refused to accept this Council were Persian Christians, a Church now known as the Assyrian Church of the East. -http://www.spaceandmotion.com/religion-catholicism-catholic-church.htm


The Assyrian Church of the East is sometimes considered an Oriental Orthodox Church, although they left the Catholic and Apostolic Church before the Council of Chalcedon and revere Saints anathemized by the previously mentioned Churches.http://www.fact-index.com/o/or/oriental_orthodoxy.html

Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East
"The Assyrian Church of the East is sometimes, although incorrectly, considered an Oriental Orthodox Church. Being largely centered in what was then the Persian Empire, it separated itself administratively from the Church of the Roman Empire around AD 400, and then broke communion with the latter in reaction to the Council of Ephesus held in 431-http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:NVMKDiQ1BsMJ:ecumenism.net/denom/orthodox.htm+Assyrian+Church+of+The+East+schism+of+431&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=77&gl=uk

431 The Assyrians and Chaldeans broke from what was to become the Roman Catholic Church over a theological dispute.- http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:qjRWSv95T98J:timelines.ws/countries/VATICAN.HTML+Assyrian+Church+of+The+East+schism+of+431&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=277&gl=uk

The Assyrian Church was split from the Catholic/Orthodox Church (the undivided Church of the East and West prior to the Great Schism of 1054) as a result of the Nestorian schism in 431, .Source-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_Church_of_the_East

Ok.You don win. The Assyrian Church never split from Catholicism in 431 AD,contrary to all other evidence I may have cited.Carry on being an ignorant historical revisionist  No point in debating further

PS:There are Assyrian Churches in London,I think there is one in Westminster,you should pop in one day to teach them their history 

The Catholic Assyrian Church of the East and the Roman Catholic church separated from each other after the Council of Ephesus in  431 CE. Source:http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_meta.htm

The first great rupture in the Catholic Church followed the Council of Ephesus (AD 431), which affirmed the Virgin Mary as Theotokos. The majority of those who refused to accept this Council were Persian Christians, a Church now known as the Assyrian Church of the East. -http://www.spaceandmotion.com/religion-catholicism-catholic-church.htm


The Assyrian Church of the East is sometimes considered an Oriental Orthodox Church, although they left the Catholic and Apostolic Church before the Council of Chalcedon and revere Saints anathemized by the previously mentioned Churches.http://www.fact-index.com/o/or/oriental_orthodoxy.html

Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East
"The Assyrian Church of the East is sometimes, although incorrectly, considered an Oriental Orthodox Church. Being largely centered in what was then the Persian Empire, it separated itself administratively from the Church of the Roman Empire around AD 400, and then broke communion with the latter in reaction to the Council of Ephesus held in 431-http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:NVMKDiQ1BsMJ:ecumenism.net/denom/orthodox.htm+Assyrian+Church+of+The+East+schism+of+431&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=77&gl=uk

431 The Assyrians and Chaldeans broke from what was to become the Roman Catholic Church over a theological dispute.- http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:qjRWSv95T98J:timelines.ws/countries/VATICAN.HTML+Assyrian+Church+of+The+East+schism+of+431&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=277&gl=uk

There is no apparent contradiction between the links I have cited and yours.The contradiction exists solely in your mind.Here is an excerpt from your link:

This ancient church claimed a first-century origin and developed almost wholly apart from the Greek
   and Roman churches.

It never stated that it developed wholly apart but [b]almost wholly apart.[/b]If it never had anything to do with Catholicism,where does the caveat "almost" come in? Obviously,it was part of Catholicism untill the schism of 431AD after which it developed apart from Catholicism . 

You have chosen to inteprete the information the way you prefer,casting doubts about the schism of 431 AD.Are you saying it never happened?What actually were you blithering about?

@Pilgrim.1

I thought I add this little piece of information to your meagre pool of knowledge:
     
The Assyrian Church was split from the Catholic/Orthodox Church (the undivided Church of the East and West prior to the Great Schism of 1054) as a result of the Nestorian schism in 431, .Source-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_Church_of_the_East

They split from people they had nothing to do with in the first place?

The worst language is Arabic.They sound like they are trying to clear mucus from their throat

ziddy:
are you saying blacks are innately disposed to be irresponsible with fire-arms? your statisticsare probably right but i believe there are other facts behind those figures.

Not innately but environmental factors-racial discrimination,poverty,broken families,high unemployment.e.t.c-help breed a culture of delinquency amongst a significant part of the Black community in the Western world.

doyin13:
Rudy Giuliani- A Democrat in Republican garments. NO chance in the primaries. The conservative lobby will get him

Rudy had to be socially liberal to succeed in New York.He may not be a social conservative but he is a fiscal conservative supporting lower taxes(including extending Bush's tax cuts) and smaller Government.He is also hawkish on foreign policy.

The social conservatives don't really like him,but whoelse can they vote for?Fred Thompson is the only one that can come close but his conservative credentials are questionable(not helped anyway ,by having a wife young enough to be his daughter)The social conservatives will vote for Rudy albeit reluctantly.If they don't Clinton wins.Rudy is the only one who beats Clinton in head-to-head polls.

Obama has no chance against the Clinton juggernaut.His best hope is securing the Vice-Presidential nominee

*why can't u send your ward to a boarding house? I WENT TO ONE, AND I SEE MYSELF AS A MAJOR SUCCESS!

You dey count yourself as major success?    Boarding house is harmful.You shift responsibilty for raising your kids to the school authorities for 9 months in a year at the most formative time in their life.

BTW     . . . . . I SEE I CANT LOG IN AGAIN AS KITAUN . .  NA WAO

    You for come back as Arseki! No mind Seun.They can't keep a good man down!

@TOH

Howdy? You seem to have a potential stalker

shakira:
aint u TOYIN, can't even remeber your last name, i can easily trace u, even if u in the distant world,

Creepy

I won't mind Julio Baptista

Rudy Guiliani or John McCain.Both are equally qualified but Rudy is more electable so I support him.

@jakumo

permit me to say that it may be an insult to compare nigeria to the US in terms of security and the rule of law. you should be comparing the US to the UK. In the UK people don't own guns as such. violent crime in the UK is very low compared to the states. gun violence is not very common here. save for occassional skirmishes in london, liverpool and manchester where many young people are following american trends.

This might be hard for us to swallow but think of it.In the UK and the US,a disproportionately high level of gun violence is perpetrated by Blacks.The key difference between the 2 is that the Black population in the US is 13.4% while that of the UK is 3%.Switch those numbers and gun violence will go up in the UK while coming down in the US.This is one factor in the differences between the 2 countries but it is quite important

I believe Canada has fairly liberal gun laws but its gun violence is pretty low

@Pilgrim.1

I asked  you 2 simple questions:

1=Where did I claim that only Catholicism existed untill the 5th century or the 15th century?

2=What has the Assyrian Church got to do with Protestantism/Evangelical?

Your response has been an exhibition of obfuscation,inanity and downright dishonesty

The first question was in response to this comment:

Catholics like you have always tried to blow smoke in everyone's face that no other church ever existed apart from the Catholic Church up until past the 5th century (uhm. .  did you say it was the 15th century?).   Fact is, it's either you didn't quite do your homework well enough; or, you couldn't hide the facts from others - and now yawa don blow!

The above will be pretty clear to any discerning mind  as to infer that the addressee(me)  was culpable for such dishonest claims.What else could "Catholics like you" mean?What else could ,"it's either you didn't quite do your homework well enough; or, you couldn't hide the facts from others", also mean?   

Your desperate attempts to retreat from the above accusation by suggesting that you were refering to Catholics in general is comical.Your remark came in the course of a repartee  between the 2 of us.Somehow, you now want us to believe that "you" didn't mean I-man but some other unascertainable Catholics.It is either an admission that you are grammatically challenged or a lame attempt to retreat from a mendacious statement,I know it is the latter.

The second question was in response to your citation of the BBC link which you cited in order to refute my claim viz that there were no Protestants/Evangelicals  in the first 1400 years of Christianity.Your response to my claim was to refer me to the Assyrian Church,a Church which has no links to Protestantism/Evangelicalism.What then was the point of mentioning them in response to my claim?

To refer me to the Assyrian Church ,in response to my claim as to the non-existence of Evangelicals/Protestants, infers that the Assyrians were what they weren't-Protestants/Evangelicals.That could only be the rational implication.

Drawing your attention to the obvious fatuousness of the Assyrian reply,you now respond with a staggeringly vacuos reply-that you were simply drawing my attention to the fact that they were Non-Catholic.Which begs the question-what does that have to do with non-existence of Protestants/Evangelicals until the 15th century?Does non-Catholic mean Protestants/Evangelicals? Your attempts at sophistry are farcical.

Let me quickly address some of the more comical non-answers you provided.Asked "When the Catholic Church began";your response was "The Catholic Church did not begin at Pentecost" and "My point of reference to clear this issue was the PAPACY".Neither of these 2 irrelevant assertions answers the question-When did the Catholic Church begin"?

Pressed on the matter,you eventually said "I don't know" which you purport was another one from your  armada of meaningless comments.In effect,"I don't know" definitely doesn't mean that you don't know but that you couldn't be bothered to answer.A vainglorious attempt to hide your ignorance of the answer. 

Does it then mean that I've no clue what I was talking about as regards the origin of the Catholic Church?

So far. . . . .your cluelessness has been glaring.Check this out:

I've my answers, certainly - and as time went on, even you had to refer to a weblink that showed right from the 2nd century, there was at least the Assyrian Church that was NOT Catholic.

My link tells us nothing for the Assyrian Church was part of the Catholic Church untill the  Nestorian schism in 431 AD.Your desperate attempts to clutch to the Assyrian Church like a tabular in naufragio does nothing to rescue your apparent ignorance,unbridled oafishness and mind numbing mendacity.

. in quoting the same BBC link you referenced earlier, I offered that there are PROTESTANTS in the places you had mentioned including IRAQ:

Except for the obvious factor that nobody claimed that there weren't any ,only that they were near totally absent.

Your unimpressive farrago of hare-brained excuses,lame attempts at sophistry and reckless disregard for historical truths left me underwhelmed.The sooner you imbibe the virtues of graciousness and honesty,the quicker you are on the road to being a good Christian.For now,you strike me as a dishonest popinjay.I'm done with you.

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=75657.msg1451460#msg1451460 date=1188563841]I-man, you can remain - and please do. If I've asked you simply to be civil, and you take that as "lies", no worries. I'll get to the other thread when I do.[/quote]The "lies" were the misleading claims you attributed to me which I never made.You can't attribute lies to me and tell me to be civil about it. That is totally uncivil of you.By attributing such claims to me,you are effectively questioning my honesty.

I will be back in a few hours,by then I hope you have clarified the dishonest claims you attributed to me.

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=75657.msg1451401#msg1451401 date=1188563081]Right. I just knew you're here to distract this thread. I'll meet you in the other thread and deal with your worries. For now and for the umpteenth time, I-man be civil enough to not litter this thread with your distractions. Thank you. [/quote]Oya,I dey wait for you on the other thread.I'm not leaving untill you explain the dishonest claims you attribute to me.You can't attribute lies to me and tell me to go away.

However, I offered answers to what you enquired about - if you don't like them, no worries.

You offered answers to my enquiries?   Where did you respond,when?Did Seun delete your response.

Am I supposed to let you run away from dishonest claims you said I made?    Not only did you say I made dishonest claims,you are now claiming you have already responded   

You said you are too busy,if that is the case,when did your busy self "offer answers" to those questions? If you have already offered answers,why are you claiming to be busy,after all there is nothing else to answer. You want to "offer more answers" to something you have already answered?

Abeg,be truthful and and respond like the "good Christian" you imply you are.

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=75657.msg1451263#msg1451263 date=1188561598]I-man,

Please be civil.[/quote]Civil is not inventing claims that I was supposed to have made and claiming you backed them up,when you never did. Be civil and back up your claims instead of suddenly claiming to be "busy". Too busy to say the truth.

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=75657.msg1451118#msg1451118 date=1188560002]I-man,
I've done so several times,[/quote]No you haven't and you are being dishonest.Where did you back up those claims you made?Did Seun delete them?

Perhaps later when I'm less busy

You are now like the Muslim posters who tell you "later" when caught in difficulties.You suddenly became too "busy" despite being on NL since 8:14 am.

Can you do that for me?

It took you 3 days to admit "I don't know" to my original question on that thread.How long are you going to drag on this one?

TV01:
@Pilgrim.1,

There is absolutely no shame in realising and admitting your error. Please take it to the nth degree, I'm here.

Please demonstrate the decency and integrity whose absence you so decry in others and respond to my my post - #26 - of today.

Trying to ignore it, pretend to read contradiction in my statement and insinuate that I'm looking for a way out has become tediously characteristic of you.

You called me out, initiated the thread, set the tone and posed the questions. Went puce when at first I thought better of it and now that I've taken out the time and effort to clearly ouline my position - based on scripture & with the utmost decorum- and contrast it against your own, you immediately revert to type and try and make it a gutterfight.

You appoint yourself judge and jury and you still seek recourse to improvised technicalities. All your promises to "walk us through", "enlighten" and "educate". So tan? Is that it? A quick road block and excuses of being busy ?

So, post #26 please, if you are willing and able that is.

Thanks & God bless
TV

I thought it was only me that noticed!

@Pilgrim.1

You dey here dey query people.I am curious as to your sudden loss of interest in backing up the astonishing claims you made in the other thread.

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=74061.msg1450203#msg1450203 date=1188544471]@smile4kenn,

Great to have you back. I'm still smiling for you. [/quote]When you finish smiling,go and answer my queries! You never find where I talk say Catholicism be the only church till 5th or 15th century?

I suppose you still haven't found justification for citing the Assyrian Church to refute my claims that Protestants/Evangelicals didn't exist for 1400 years.If you haven't in either or both cases,then have the graciousness to withdraw your claims,that is the mark of a true Christian.

terrorist attacks are carried out by extremist/radical groups.
ex. an example of an extremist christian group is the KKK that target black people and basically non-whites.
these extremists don't represent every believer of the respective religion.

Nobody disputes that violence cuts across all creeds or ideologies-Atheistic Communists killed millions of people in the name of Communism,environmentalists/animal rights activists perpetrate violence too.However,simply pointing out this is akin to stating that incidents of poverty exists in the US as well as Nigeria,hence Nigeria is no more impoverished than the US.Such vacuous comparisons  leads to an obfuscation of real differences.

To note that religious violence may be perpetrated by Christians does not explain away the fact that religious violence is more prevalent amongst Muslims, just as noting incidents of poverty in the US does not  explain away the more prevalent poverty in Nigeria.

It is appallingly illogical and is one of most glaring examples of inane moral relativism

listen, i have muslim friends too. even many muslim distant relatives. My daily reactions with them shows me that indeed, islam is a religion of peace.

This is a complete non-sequitur.How does your interactions with a handful of Muslims prove that the religion is one of peace?

The Islamic religion is inherently more intolerant than all other major religions with its notable supremacist bent.It also acts as a vehicle for Arab cultural imperialism.One needs to note the living conditions of non-Muslims in Muslim majority countries.

@Cataun

So you think this group is tricky for the Goners(as Seun will say) ?As a lifelong Arsenal supporter,you are used to huge dissapointments .

I think its quite easy for the Gunners.The real question is who finishes first-my bet is that Sevilla will.That will jeopardise Arsenal's chances of getting past the 2nd Round stage

I heard you guys will be renamed to "Arseki" because of the Russian connection

@Afam
Your Bush Derangement Syndrome don dey get worse? 

You once implied that the Jews had fore-knowledge of the attacks.Are you saying they collaborated with Bush?

debosky:
I-man abeg o!

I no dey involved in that at all, Me I just be 'siddon look' oh

Arse-anal get "connections" for UEFA Bucharest and Sparta ? Unbelievable!

Tommorow,I will get to the root of this Assyrian connection with Evangelical/Protestantism. Everyday,person dey learn new things for NL