₦airaland Forum

OLAADEGBU:
That was a good attempt. The NT records Paul, Philip and our resurrected Christ using this special means of transportation, do you know what it was?

I wasn't done yet. That was an introduction

OLAADEGBU:
You hit the nail in the bolded above. As for Adam being a giant is stretching the truth but I believe you hit the nail on the head in the bolded above.

I was just stating two possibilities, and I lent my weight behind the one I agree with. The "Adam was a giant" hypothesis is what is commonly believed in Islam, since they do not accept the Christian understanding of glorified bodies, or transportation in the spirit.

OLAADEGBU:
I beg to differ here. The Fall was a historical event with spiritual consequences.

We may not agree on everything and that's totally fine.

To clarify though, I meant that I don't believe the "Eden and The Fall" events happened as they were literally described in the Genesis, but nevertheless the story describes an actual spiritual event involving man, God and the adversary.

standd:
Gradually, humanity will evolve and there will be no SINGLE trace of RELIGION left; by this time, men would be using more than 20% of their Medulla and things will become better and all hidden myths will be revealed...

Evolution!!

What do you need more of your "Medulla" for? You can't breathe well? Or you vomit too often and you can't keep food down? Or maybe your heart always beats too slowly or too fast? Or is it that your body is having a hard time regulating your blood pressure?

How will a solution to these various health problems make things better and reveal hidden myths in the future?

Lastly, how exactly does religion currently disturb your respiratory system, your blood circulation and other involuntary systems in your body?

OLAADEGBU:
Hi InesQor, How you dey? I got a question for you. How did you think Adam covered distance before he fell?

Hi Olaadegbu, I'm fine thanks! I hope you are, as well.

Hmmm your question is a good one. I think it depends on what Eden actually was. Some believe it was a small garden somewhere, but I think it was a huge chunk of the habitable earth at that point in time (all the continents were once joined together as one land mass surrounded by water), so Adam had a lot of space to tend to. In that case, gardening such a huge landmass means he must have had a means to travel faster than what we now have. So he probably covered distance like it's nothing.

So maybe he was a giant and could move long distances easily, or maybe his body was not limited by distance (just like Jesus' resurrected body) and could instantaneously move from place to place. That's the most likely case actually.

Of course all of this is mere speculation. I personally don't think the story about Adam's fall was meant to be taken exactly literally I.e. The garden, the snake, the tree, the fruit, were probably not physical objects but spiritual and soul objects.

Nice one, Ishi baby.

Growing up, I heard a lot about Jesu Oyingbo - there's even an old gospel song that mentions him, but I didn't have all this information.

- These religious cults never end well. Examples abound.
- I have noticed a common thread in similar stories involves convincing the women to believe in you. Once that is done, the men would follow the women, it seems.
- I don't believe in jazz / hypnosis but I believe severe fear is a crippling experience. If you are able to isolate what someone truly fears, and you are a discerning and manipulative psychologist, they will be like putty in your hands because you can provide false hope in exchange as a solution for those fears. And, believe me, almost everyone has something they fear gravely.

I just finished a chess game on this new site I found (lichess) and the game was really odd to me.

I won, but I'm wondering if the Jerome gambit my opponent played could ever have been better played than it was. Or else, if it is so terrible an opening?! Better players in the house, what do you think?

My game is here. I played black.

http://en.lichess.org/CS3WiGGGg4PC

Caveat: I haven't played chess in a while so I'm not in the best of forms. Secondly, we were playing a 3 minute blitz game so both of us were playing fast (thus, there are some blunders).

egbaguy:
u can lie sha......15yrs old dog

Maybe they are Dog-Years

Welp. Too bad he lost his job but most Nigerians are too damn forward. Level of empathy = zero.

"Shey na just dog na"
"You don gain weight"
"You never reach to marry?"
"Na when you go born sef?"
"This one don born e never marry"
"See as the face worwor"
etc

And to press this further, he was talking to his manager (Let me put aside that "boss" word)! What sort of insensitive silliness is that? At the very least, you should respect the feelings of your co-workers let alone your manager

Good job

SopranoCoder:
No no no.

I'm a christian AND I support the Evolution theory.
The evolution theory never said God didn't create us, it just gives a gradual means to the creation.

When Copernicus said the sun was the centre of the solar system the Church imprisoned him and said it was heresy. But today we know he was correct.

so please people, keep an open mind, read widely.

Yeah your beliefs are in line with Theistic Evolution. That's my view as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

@macof

Hi, I'm sorry about my last couple of posts above. All of that was totally uncalled for. I sincerely apologize.

macof:
I thought you were supposed to ignore my comments

The only language a beast understands is a rod to its back.

macof:
You have nothing to offer anyway

Sour grapes.

So you knew I have nothing to offer yet you came on to me like a b!tch on heat? Don't you have better things to do with your time?

Any write-up about Side-guys? Not everyday side-chicks.

pabloaimar:
VALAMONGOULIS!!! I haven't watch the season 5 yet due to my busy schedule, I just want to know what happened to the remainder of Ned Stark's children, Stanis Baratheon, and please someone should tell that Cercei Lannister is dead.

Lmao na you wan kill Cersei?

Don't hold your breath. A good story must have a screening antagonist, and now that Tywin is no longer there, Cersei has to stay alive for that role. Buckle up! Lol

I love this, Tex! Thanks for sharing.

The sper'm marathon is such a fascinating idea. It would seem like nature is wasting resources because hundreds of thousands of sper'ms are deployed to do one of them's job! And when that one is successful, the rest just chill out. But it's not really a waste, so to speak, it is to increase chances of fertilization to the utmost maximum, and to achieve it as fast as possible.

I still wonder how some biologists know details such as is presented in this video, and yet argue against intelligent design. All of this can't be the handiwork of random chance. I've seen what random chance looks like, and most times it's damn chaotic.

My favorite characters, people I identify with all their actions and how they think:

Male character: Jon Snow
Female character: Arya Stark

johnydon22:
God as a proper noun is used when referring to the supreme being of every monotheic religion not just one am sure you know..

thats why allah is also spelt God, and these other monotheic religions spells theirs God; Babism, the Bahá'í Faith , Cao
Dai (Caodaiism) , Cheondoism (Cheondogyo) , Christianity, Deism ,
Eckankar, Islam , Judaism , Rastafari, Ravidassia religion , Seicho no Ie,
Shaivism , Shaktism , Sikhism , Tenrikyo (Tenriism) , Vaishnavism , and
Zoroastrianism.

the word "god" as a noun means simply a deity... All these polytheist and monotheist God concepts all fall under the category of a deity. . spelling any as "god" is still not wrong because they are all deities.

It is sensible to see the context of my original post and deduce that in the phrase "It must have been controlled by a prime-mover, and for me that's God", God is being used as a proper noun to name supreme deity that was a prime mover or creator.

The next question might then be "Who is this God you speak of?" (Then I'll tell you other things to help you identify this being) or "What is your religion / worldview?" (Which macof knew very well but he was clearly being mischievous), rather than the obtuse "Which God?" (Followed by allegations of delusion when their logic fails), because God as used in that context has only one meaning: creator.

Whatever worldview supports the idea of God as used there is secondary; in my usage God meant "creator". Surely that's clear to any objective mind.

I remember you better now, macof. I should have simply ignored you. Have fun.

GooseBaba:
Guy stop deluding yourself... One meaning "God " but different concepts. Do you believe in Yaweh and Allah together..?

Please if you can't discuss without insults, keep me out of it. Thanks.

macof:
Oh! little one you don't understand a thing

God is nt a name lik macof.. its a title
macof can be given a title by his people, goosebaba given the same title by his people and we both bare the same title
say the title is "Eze"
macof is Eze (the only Eze to his people)
goosyb is Eze to his own people too

now is there only one Eze?

Oh now I'm "little one" because we don't agree? I see your brand of condescension is gradually surfacing.

God is NOT a title when it is used as a proper noun. macof is a proper noun. InesQor is a proper noun. Nairaland is a proper noun. Nigeria is a proper noun. Read more about proper nouns here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_noun

A more appropriate question you could have been asking in this context of a proper noun is "Who is God?" and not "Which God"?

ROSSIKE:
Thanks for admitting the absence of intelligence in their decision.

Did anyone ever say intelligence is a landmark in the pursuits of religion? Why should the intelligence of their personal choices matter to you? I think people make unintelligent choices each day, like living unhealthy lifestyles, having bad diets, unprotected sex with multiple partners, bad career and family choices, etc but none of them are really my problems or my business.

ROSSIKE:
Christians view the bible as a religious and a historical text. No christian goes around saying ''oh we know Jesus never lived.. we're just in it for the moral lessons!''

Where has it been said that the Bible is a historical text?

And, don't put words in my mouth, I never said Jesus didn't live or exist. I am saying "proving" that he did is not the focus of any of the scriptures, neither is it a task required of us in Christianity. Arguing otherwise is pointless.

ROSSIKE:
That's not what the evangelists and bible-heads say!

Hehe good for them, I guess. I can only speak from what I personally understand.

ROSSIKE:
Let's leave our personal morality levels for another thread shall we? This is about the authenticity of a document.

As I already said, the authenticity of the documents is neither important to those who prepared the documents, nor is it important to their primary audience.

My point about the morality thing is to further explain that your question is not as important as what the document actually serves to do. A religious text does not intend to serve the same purpose as a history text.

ROSSIKE:
It definitely matters who is said to have said what. Why should I believe you when you say the Son of God was born in your village and was killed by your people, without evidence? Do you realise the massiveness of such a claim? Go to the UK or Germany now and tell them your ancestors were the special chosen race of God. And that the only son of God was born in your village, and had ascended into heaven after he resurrected from the dead. They'd call a psychiatrist for you. But this is exactly what they've done to you, and you've accepted their story - with barely a whimper.

Actually you don't really need to believe it. And if I do the above, they are well within their rights to call a psychiatrist to evaluate my claims and state of mind. It's a free world!

Ify84, MrBrownJ is totally on point.

In addition, make sure you always use lots and lots of lubricant, and that she takes a lot of vitamin C throughout the day (you can talk to a doctor for detailed explanation on that).

At the very least, the teachings ascribed to Jesus are morally positive and very relevant even till date.

Are you even done practising all of that, or their equivalents, before you begin to worry about whether he existed or not? And worrying that there isn't enough evidence about his existence, what have you done with the revolutionary principles associated with his person?

Or in our increase of knowledge and in the betterment of ourselves and improvement in human relations one with another, as we learn from those who have gone ahead of us, to make better decisions and do right by others, why does it matter who said what?

ROSSIKE:
True.. and none of that is ideal is it?

Ideal for who? It's ideal enough for their intended audience, you know.

ROSSIKE:
So if there is no evidence (him being a 'religious figure'), how do we know 'Jesus' existed? Are we merely to ''have faith'' that he lived despite the lack of evidence? If so, on what basis? Why? Because the colonialists said so? Because some pastor says so? Why?

My point is that future generations knowing for sure that the characters existed was not on their priority list. Just knowing that your father told you, and his father before him told him some things, was sufficient.

Many of these people did not even know that people would study them after some decades, centuries and millennia; so they generally made no deliberate efforts to place footprints for us. There were few exceptions, like ancient Egyptians preserving some of their religious rites together with their tombs, and only because they believed their people would resurrect in future and need the documentation.

Or in Christianity for instance we have some footprints like that in the New Testament letters - which, oddly, were written for a specific audience but are now available for everyone to see. The writers couldn't have known everyone would have them all over the world today.

In my amateur theological study, I understand that Jews had an interesting angle towards stories with life-changing import, which include actual religious stories and experiences as well as myths and legends. There was little or no difference between them all as far as they were concerned. I.e. Unlike the way the West sees the ultimate value in a story as dependent on whether it is "true / factual" or "false / non-fiction", the Jews cared less about that than the life-changing import embedded in the story. It was less of a priority for them
E.g. The West is hung up about whether Jonah existed and what type of fish could have swallowed him; meanwhile the Jews have already picked all the morals that they can, from the story and they have moved on.

Rossike you should remember that until recent times, religion and faith were practised in such a way that nobody cared about checking out evidences, or even about convincing others - and it was deliberately kept that way.

Personal conviction was sufficient for people, and because everyone had their own beliefs and superstitions, none of them were heavily investigated.

This might be why it is easier, in retrospect, to find ancient evidence for military and political rulers than for any religious figures whatsoever. Religious stuff always involved many clearly guarded secrets that were often handed down via oral traditions and along family lines.

Well this will depend on what role the woman is ideal for...

macof:
Again they are so many cus The believers define their God

Okay, there are so many... what? So many God?

Edit: I didn't say "my God" or "my god" or "a god" or "god". I said "God", and it's a proper noun that has one meaning.
Just like saying "I was talking to macof" and you ask me "Which one?" as if macof isn't a proper noun in the Nairaland context.

macof:
Bros they are so many
That's why I asked which one?

God is a proper noun, and it generally means "supreme deity". I don't see how there can be so many "supremes".

So again, I'll ask, which one(s) do you know?

macof:
Which God?

Which one do you know?

Caseless:
love is an illusive creation that exists in our minds.

Ishilove:
False. Very very false.

Caseless, her handle is IshiLOVE. Goodluck convincing her! Lol

Gboliwe:
Huh?

It means I'm emphasizing your point.