FatherOFJesus2:
I never interswitched them. You are the person who wasn’t getting the point.

Mutations is not the reason why you don’t look exactly like your sibling, it’s because of gene recombination during moietic division.
The point I was trying to make that genetic recombination leads to variation which then contribute to evolution alongside heritable mutations.

If we all look like our sibling, we cannot adapt hence evolution will not happen. That was my point

This was your exact statement sir

FatherOfJesus:

Mutation is always happening, it always results in a new genetic orientation. Mutation is one reason why you will never look exactly like you sibling or have exactly same genetic makeup even as you have same parents.

I'm not trying to do a "got you moment" so we don't really need to keep going back and forth on the matter.
We all make mistakes; I just didn't think it's one a biologist would make and that's what stuck out. If you hadn't said you were a biologist, I wouldn't have even commented at all.

FatherOFJesus2:
i beg to disagree.
Crossing over is the exchange of genetic material between non-sister chromatids of homologous chromosomes during meiosis, which results in new allelic combinations in the daughter cells.
Which is the only recombination that lead to different genetic features in sibling.
Unless you are talking about recombination of the two donated pair of 23 chromosomes from each parents.
If you have any other concept, I will be glad to learn something new. I can’t know it all

I was talking about mutation and genetic recombination. They two completely different concepts.
You can't interswitch them and say you were trying to make a case for variation that leads to evolution. They are two completely different concepts that play two completely different roles sir and it struck me as odd that you would make such call since you said you were a biologist.
That was my point sir.

FatherOFJesus2:
yes, crossing of chromosomes during meiosis.

But the argument was to establish variation that prompts evolution

Still two completely different concepts sir;
but it's all good sir.

FatherOfJesus:

Mutation is always happening, it always results in a new genetic orientation. Mutation is one reason why you will never look exactly like you sibling or have exactly same genetic makeup even as you have same parents.

With respect sir, it's not mutation that accounts for differences amongst siblings; it's gene combination. This is not a mistake a biologist should make.

HellVictorinho:

According to that dude,the absence of faith in God is also a god.
How else can we define nonsense??

Which dude are you referring to?

Bacteriologist:


Lol yeah I can't deny that. There are many great threads lying buried in this section it doesn't hurt to bring them to the forefront once in a while.

I read the conversation before quoting you. You didn't seem to provide the beliefs in the discussion though.

Hmm, that's weird.
Okay so some of the beliefs held by adherents of the new atheism are Scientism, Naturalism(specifically Metaphysical Naturalism or Scientific Materialism), Relativism (moral, ethical or social... Still a tricky subject even amongst adherents of the movement but there's a definite upward trends towards it, especially amongst the younger population) and so on.

But sure, by all means, ask me the questions.

Do you believe it's irrational to believe in a transcendent deity?

Bacteriologist:



Such as.....

, You seem to be on an evangelical spree , this one that you are even going back to revive old threads these days lol.
But it's all good sir... It's always good to share ideologies and have conversations.
You can read my further conversation with IMAliyu to better understand the train of thought...

Do you mind if I ask you a few questions of my own?

debaj10:
lol.
it's understandable dt many lack this knowledge.
how did Gabriel greet her?

Actually sir, the greeting to her was not "Full of grace" but rather "Favoured one". The word recorded in Luke 1:28 is "κεχαριτωμένη (kecharitōmenē)" which is a description of a person's attitude and actions toward the one so labeled(in this case, God's attitude towards the recipient of the message).

The actual Greek phrase for "Full of grace" is "πλήρης χάριτος(pliris charitos)" and it describes a person's own character and capacity to bestow favor or grace(depending on context).
This exact phrase is used in only two places in the new testament
1) John 1:14: ....we beheld His glory, glory as of the only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth,". A description of Jesus and an allusion to Yahweh's own description of himself in Exodus 34:6(in greek of the time)
2) Acts 6:8: And Stephen, full of grace and power, was performing great wonders and signs among the people. In earlier verses of the same chapter, Stephen is said to be filled with the HolySpirit and with wisdom.
These are the only two places where the actual phrase "full of grace" occurs in the new testament.

The misunderstanding or mistranslation of Luke 1:28 comes from the Latin Vulgate which translated κεχαριτωμένη as "gratia plena"(which does mean full of grace in Latin). This is how the phrase Hail Mary, full of grace enters into church tradition.
Though today it's well known that the phrase is a mistranslation of the Greek , too much Catholic doctrine has been attached to this phrase for centuries that it would probably take a monumental shift before it can be removed from Catholic tradition.
Outside of Catholic traditions though no major translation renders the passage as full of grace but rather renders it more accurately as favoured one or highly favoured.

Hope that helps.

Bacteriologist:


Everything that we know as part of reality exists between the "limits" of space and time. Anything outside the space time concept; is something man cannot comprehend, interact with or use for anything, in anyway whatsoever.

A god outside of space and time is the same as a god that does not exist.

Ok, I see where you are coming from and I do agree that your statement holds true, but it holds true only to an extent.

Firstly, It is true as you stated, that anything outside of our observable universe is undetectable to us using the scientific method and that we can never get any new information about it (as long as it it stays outside our universe and has no causal relationship with it), but it does not follow that we cannot comprehend to an extent and also make coherent postulations about the nature or existence of such an entity by looking within our universe; most especially if such a being or entity at some ultimate point in the past(at the very least) had a causal relationship with our universe.
This is possible because,our understanding of reality isn't attained only through knowledge gained from the hard sciences but actually from knowledge gained through a complex matrix of interconnected disciplines in like Phylosophy,logic reasoning,history, theology etc in conjunction with the hard sciences.

Secondly, I believe you are working of the assumption that whoever or whatever(depending on your worldview) was in existence prior to the beginning of our space-time, didn't enter into our universe after its creation and operates within it. This assumption doesn't necessarily hold true, regardless of whether you believe this entity is a who or a what.

Finally sir, my question has very little to do with the nature of the being (God) that exist prior to the beginning of our space-time, but more to do with whether you believe there is a concrete reality outside of our universe that created the universe we inhabit or do you believe this universe is self existing.

So let me try and ask the question again in a more generic way.

Do you believe that there is a concrete reality that exist before and outside our universe that caused it(our universe) into existence or do you believe our universe is self existing?

Bacteriologist:


A god that is outside of space and time is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist.

That's an interesting view point.
What makes you think that, if I may ask?
Care to expatiate on your point...

Bacteriologist:


Damn it Christians are y'all really that dumb? Re read my last reply to you.

I do not have any obligation to provide evidence for your nonsensical claims. The onus is on you. Read this as many times as you need to.

Well sir, do you believe there is a God or not?
By God here, I mean a pre-existing being outside of space-time and matter who created everything we know & understand in our world.

haykayneyo:


Am in cross river and I have only size 10/75 - 15.3

Okay.... Do you have the rims for it?

haykayneyo:
Your location?

Lagos

Acehart:

You cannot go to Jesus Christ without leaving where you have been, or repent in response to the gospel. What does it mean to repent in response to the gospel? Well, he's talking about that coming to Jesus Christ in faith, but from the perspective of, "Therefore leaving behind the old lifestyle in which you once lived," or "Repent and believe the gospel." Exactly the same thing.

This is a good summary of the tension between true repentance and faith/believe in Christ ,in my opinion.

Great write up boss.

thisaminat:


No we don't.
I'm so sorry but I don't have the information you need.

Ok. Thanks alot for your time.

Still in urgent need of the tires and rims!!!

Cmoni1:
Where are you located and how do i contact u

I'm in Abuja. You can contact me via mayokun042@gmail.com

Vaughanlanrewaj:
Drop your number or email address.

mayokun042@gmail.com

You can reach me also directly be email at
mayokun042@gmail.com

Hello, I'm urgently looking to get tractor tires of size 10/75 - 15.3 and size 6.0/80-12.
I would also be needing the rims for the tires.

Any contact or info of where or whom I can get them from would be highly appreciated. Thanks

Hello, I'm urgently looking to get tractor tires of size 10/75 - 15.3 and size 6.0/80-12.
I would also be needing the rims for the tires.

Any contact or info of where or whom I can buy them from would be highly appreciated. Thanks

Hello,
Do you also offer sale of tractor part like rims and tires?
If not, can you point me to where I can get tractor tires and rims(especially) or give the contact of anyone who sells them.
This information will be highly appreciated. Thank you very much

Kobojunkiee:
The fact that I didn't even check up on it before now means I don't give a flying hoot what it means.

You did seem to be, but okay...

Kobojunkiee:

Gospel ethos? Is that like some spirituous brew or something?

Kobojunkiee:

If this is not about God, then what is it for?
Gospel ethos? Is that like some spirituous brew or something? Look, I am not here to serve you or your ideas... Stop derailing the thread o'jare!

... You seem to be really bent on diverting the conversation rather facing it.
It's all good

And by the way,you can check up what ethos is. It's a regular word... Nothing mysterious about it.✌️

Kobojunkiee:
I am not "hung up" on anything. Just wanting to make it clear who my brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, etc. are, according to Jesus Christ. I am by birth related to everyone on this earth, so those words have lost meaning to me except when used in the context of my relationship to Jesus Christ. :=\
Well, I was relating fine with her in much the same way I relate to others, yet you still felt you you needed to butt in on her behalf, why, I don't know. So?
First of all, there is no gospel mention in her retort so stop pretending you had to butt in for the sake of God or something.

Second, making fun of a person? Cut the bull... She made a claim that was out of nowhere, my laughing is not the reason for her statement, so go pretend to save her in the name of God somewhere else and with someone else abeg!

... You seem to want to make the conversation about every and anything else other than the actual crust of the matter.
My conversation is with you; not with her,not with God, not with anyone else...just with you. All this diversions and sidestepping, ko necessary.

The whole crust of the matter is ;Is making fun of a person because you do not agree with them part of your gospel ethos?
If yes, own it.
If not, be better(we all do). That's all

Kobojunkiee:
As a follower of Jesus Christ, I only listen to and do what Jesus Christ commands...your opinion matters not.
We relate to each other? To each other?
Following the teachings of Jesus Christ, not just any or everyone is my brother, sister, mother, father etc.

I am a follower of Jesus Christ, therefore, anyone who does (action) what my Father in heaven wants is my true brother and sister and mother. And given that there is no way to sufficiently judge the intentions or actions of another on here, I don't see how you can jump to the conclusion that there is a relationship of the sort you suggest.

First of all, Why are you so hung up in the sister part? Why are you so determined to focus on only that part while leaving the main crust of the matter?
I didn't even mean sister in a religious sense hence the use of a sister not your sister. And I didn't bring it up again since you objected to it,so why so hung up on it?

Secondly, how we relate to eachother has nothing to do with whether we take people as family,friend etc or not. It's about how we treat all humans regardless of social constructs like religion,race, status etc, because all humans are images of God and how we relate to them matters.

The main crust of the statement was, " How does making fun of her statement further the gospel?"
Is making fun of a person because you do not agree with them part of the gospel ethos or it was just mainly to feel good about yourself?

Kobojunkiee:
The gospel of Christ?
Where?
What part of her post has to do with the gospel?
And how do you know she is definitely my sister?

As long as you identify as a follower of Christ, everything about the person is connected to the gospel. One's words, actions,deeds etc either furthers or abates the furtherance of the gospel in the hearts of men.

How we relate to others is an essential part of the gospel

Kobojunkiee:
Agents on Nairaland?
ROFLMAO!

How does making fun of the assertions of a sister help further the gospel of Christ?�

Acehart:

You said “more brightly”; yes, but it doesn’t mean that words of wisdom or knowledge don’t shine. Gods power would shine if ones words are laced with godly wisdom and knowledge. Isn’t the power of life and death in the tongue? Does the tongue not speak what dwells in the mind? Is the mind not transformed through words anymore? If you say “nay”, Christian character would transform the wicked rather, then I ask you this: didn’t the scriptures say that when grace is shown to the wicked, they do not learn righteousness; even in a land of uprightness they go on doing evil and do not regard the majesty of the Lord? When you downplay righteous words in favor of righteous display, you are setting the stage for an unbalanced doctrine.

jamesid29:
Don't get me wrong sir, I do not think apologetics and biblical scholarship are not important; They have there place.

There is a limit to what man can do with respect to correcting. Please pardon what you see as my shortcoming; I am also work-in-progress.

All we can ask of eachother is to do what we believe to be good and right. That's all sir.
To be clear sir, I do not mean either I or you or anybody should take it upon themselves to be going around hounding and correcting anyone at every opportunity. We are not the HolySpirit's assistants.

My conversation with you was about enabling something that was not right.
This was my train of thought:
Jesus named the brothers "sons of thunder(Mark 3:17)" because of their fiery spirit or destructive zeal( that's usually the general consensus, but one can't be dogmatic about these things since the term was only used once in the whole NT). When a situation of the brothers showing that fiery spirit was recorded in the gospels, Jesus didn't say "that's just how their spirit is"; He simple told them, that's not how we do things and the story moved on. That was the parallel I was drawing on between those passages
A situation was open to be spoken on(woundedla/mb made his statement to you), it's within your right to not speak on it (nobody is nobodies teacher on here), but rationalising it away creates a enabling environment which is always a bad thing, as I mentioned in my last post.
From your reply,Now I know the misunderstanding comes from our different usage of the word "Boanerges". You saw it as your way of speaking on it, I saw it as a way of saying "thats just how his spirit is" ,and that was the enabling I was originally talking about...Everything that has been said, is strictly within those context;

I do not in anyway mean going around hounding anyone; life has enough troubles of its own for anyone to start adding that to their plate.

Enjoy the rest of your week sir and God bless you.

Acehart:

Rationalize MuttleyLaff’s behavior? Must I use harsh words or derogatory words on him before I drive home my point? If you have observed my responses in this thread and some others, I would reply anyone in gentleness; and rebuke wisely or simply ignore.

You do not have to use derogatory words to let someone know where you stand.
Did I use derogatory words with you sir; I do not believe I did, but I did say it clear enough for you to give a detailed reply.

Do you know the meaning of the word “Boanerges”? If you knew, you would know that I rebuked MuttleyLaff by giving him that name; MuttleyLaff knows that was a subtle rebuke, I am sure of that. I also made him and all those inclined to toxicity to know that when you acquiesce that someone is your brother in Christ, you do away with such behavior.

I don't see how "Boanerges" is letting someone know their behaviour is not right; You and I have a different understanding of the word.

The way you have spoken about him and his unfriendly responses, show you have to learn conflict resolution; it also shows you have something against him. God has given you NL to learn how to be a better person; MuttleyLaff is just a tool of refinement in the hands of God.

Its quite interesting, that you would say I have something against him personally.
I've been on NL on and off for over a year. I've had interesting conversations with a good number of people; some of them great conversations and some, not so much. What's interesting is, In all my conversations on NL(both good and not so good) , you are the second person to say I have a personal grudge against someone on here. I'm guessing you can guess who the first person is. Funny enough, I was so oblivious to what he was talking about that we eventually found out he read something totally different to what I was saying and held on to it for quite a while.
Anyway I'll tell you what I told him. I would rather go off NL for good than to get to a point where I would be carrying a grudge up and down for someone I do not even know. Its hard enough to hold a grudge against someone you know physically talkless of someone you don't even know what he/she looks like, what part of the world they are in, what is their real name etc.
Adulting takes enough energy on its own for one to start adding unnecessary online grudges to it.
So no, I do not have anything personal against him.
I say what I believe to be right without crossing the line and that's it.

With respect to the trajectory you have spoken of, who would you rather have on threads that show the power of God through writings: kobo!junkie or MuttleyLaff? I am sure you would pick the latter. The trajectory is the way it is because people like both of you don’t write. If you did, your temperament would get better, ask I!bhaga!di. By now, MuttleyLaff’s bite would be like that of a sandfly.

The first issue here is, you are looking at it from a lesser evil perspective. I've had the opportunity to have a couple of conversations with kob!ojunkie and yes he still has a lot to learn just like the rest of us but that doesn't mean you get to rationalize away muttley's behaviour since you prefer his theology over another persons own. They are not the only two people on nairaland. Without or without either of them, there would always be people with good heads on their shoulders in this section.

Secondly, the power and what God is like shines more brightly through the Christain character than in any words of wisdom or knowledge.
I am mainly an history person(secular and religious) so I tend to always look at the world from a historical perspective.
What made early christainity blossom in a world of conquest and philosophy, was not the writings of Origen or Tertullian but because of mainly two things; the cross and the christain character.
This two things were so counter culture to the Roman ethos that even the emperors took notice of these band of unlikely communities. Things that we take for granted today e.g, the intrinsic value of all humans, standing up for the weak and marginalized, believing all humans deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, weakness as a form of strength and so on. All this were foreign to the Roman conception of how the world works, but these and many more, were the very things that pulled people in, through the power the Spirit.
Don't get me wrong sir, I do not think apologetics and biblical scholarship are not important; They have there place. But in the grand scheme of things, this things pale in comparison to actually living the christain life and how we treat others. I would take a community that only knows 1% of the gospel (the death and resurrection of Christ and free gift of salvation - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4) and that embodies the christain character over a community that can dissect the word left to right but do not embody the love of God- 1 Corinthians 13.
As I said earlier, your conception of a trade off is incorrect and in this case ,unnecessary.

So do I have anything against MuttleyLaff personally? No I do not. Has he done anything to me personally that I'm trying to settle a score? Nope. Matter of fact, the couple of times me and him have been in a conversation, as soon as it tilts to him doing his anger speech, I just stop reading whatever he writes from that point onwards. I skip through it and give a one liner reply or ignore. There's too much to think about in the real world.

This is about a pattern of behaviour, not about any personal slight. I remember when this section used to be flooded with threads and comments from the radical wing of Atheistism and the tactics was always to belittle and attack religious folks at every turn. For some reason, this radical wing sort of disappeared from the section and now with the opportunity to show how a predominantly Christain section can be even in with our differences and theology, people like muttley and co just slide right in and took thier places. Problem in today's world is, we live in a culture where if you speak against your own whether right or wrong, you will be termed a hater just as I'm apparently being called here(I think)

Lastly, my post wasn't even about muttley. It was about your post and your enabling of his behaviour. I only tagged him because I do not believe in speaking behind people's back and since he's a subject in the conversation in this particular instance, he deserved to be privy to the conversation. What I have to say to him, I have done that personally on FOLYK!AZE's thread and that's that.
As I alluded to earlier, I usually view the world through the eyes of history. The thing about history is that, there's always a pattern(as they say, there's nothing new under the sun). I'll keep this short since I've written too much already.
Just as you have rationalized here, by saying you would rather have a muttley with his strife over letting some other person with a less desirable theology run wild, is the very same types of compromise people have made over the centuries and it's always a slippery slope. The men of God you see today didn't become the gods of men overnight. The Catholic church didn't become the big bad wolf in the middle ages overnight. The evangelicals in the states didn't loose all credibility overnight and trump didn't get this embolden by them overnight. Alot of factors and people contributed to it bit by bit; some were actually doing what they think was best at the time.
There's no time to expanciate on these things but the point is, there's always a point you have to say " This is not okay", "This should not be left unchecked".
The alternative is usually not what anyone can predict

I think what I've said would have to suffice to pass a cross my point even though you might not agree with them

Acehart:


He is my brother; he is yours too. His real name is Boanerges.

You seem like one with a good head on his shoulders; it would be nice if you posted a lot of good things in this section. [b]It’s horrifying seeing what the mods post on front page as Christian topics. [/b]It would be nice if someday “WoundedLamb” flooded this section with topics of divine concern that there wouldn’t be any reason for those men employed as mods to post airheaded topics that have nothing to do with Christian living.

I hope you begin today and surely, if it is nice, I would comment without any air of aggression, sneering or opposition.

@bolded would probably be the continued trajectory as long as you have people like MuttleyLaff who thrive on spreading toxicity and strife under the banner of Christainity on threads; and people like you sir, who rationalize and enable such behaviours, as you've done here.
Kindly compare Mark 3:17 to Luke 9:54-55(specifically 55) sir.
Unconditional love doesn't necessarily equate to unconditional acceptance of conduct sir.

Freeze usually chooses the right topics but ends up mixing truths and heresy together for his own personal reinterpretation of the scriptures.

As they say, the easiest lies to believe are those that are sprinkled with half truths; His reading of the scriptures can/would lead those who follow it down a very strange/dangerous path.
Please be careful. Col 2:8