₦airaland Forum

^ADM, nice move. I salute sir!

ogugua88, men, you sabi type oh!    I really enjoyed everything you had to say though, kudos!

@topic, Trump get am for ego sha. Lol. I don't blame him for basking in the glory now, its hard not to argue it was his relentless media-circuiting that made the WH finally release the dam thing. I've always said it shouldn't matter where one is born anyways - its who they are, and the character they display. I for one am sad to see this come to an end . . . I was really enjoying the show!!! Now we actually have to concentrate on the rising gas prices . It cost ~$30 to fill my tank when I first bought my car ~4yrs ago. Yesterday, I paid $47.29. Who do I send a thank you letter to?

As for Trump being a racist . . . common now. Surely we have some other cards in the deck besides the race card? Politics is and has always been a dirty, nasty business, with all kinds of cheap blows, low punches and witch-huntin' etc . . . being exchanged, only when it involves a black man we cry racism. Please lets stop this, and stop declaring any and every type of attack on a person of color as racism. Ahn ahn, we no dey tire to always dey play victim? Its a dog eat dog world, every politician takes advantage of who and what they can to get ahead - its certainly not unqiue to only 'exploiting' black folk.

1Godfather:
I am always amused by the "Why Wont God Heal Amputees" objection by atheists. I suppose that for them to establish that God does not exist, they've imagined that all they need do is pose some challenge for God to come and meet. Mighty presumptuous of atheists, won't you say? To assume that God amounts to no more than a circus dog who is trained to jump through hoops. And so, for them, God must meet their demands or he doesn't exist.

But pray tell, if a skeptic were presented with evidence for a case of something miraculous like the miraculous disappearance of cancer against the diagnoses of qualified doctors, or even the case of some spontaneous regeneration of limbs, would that do anything in the slightest bit to compel belief in God or the supernatural from an atheist? Will it rather not be the case that the atheist would reject the evidence before his very eyes, and seek to attribute it to some natural phenomena? And furthermore, if the requested miracle ever happened, what's to stop the atheist from raising the bar? I mean, what's next, "If God exists, why not heal all amputees and not just this one?" or "If God exists, why not remove all diseases and illnesses--surely he is a good God, and why would he not do so anyway?"; or what about "If God exists, why not remove suffering completely? Is he not capable of doing so?"

Such is the inflexible nature of willful unbelief: the systematic rejection of all inferences to God or Theism turtles all the way down. There is perhaps no gain in entertaining these amusing objections. It is useful to remind these skeptics that ultimately God performs miracles only in so much as they accord with his providential sovereignty over creation, or they glorify him. Deeply dissatisfying answer to a skeptic, but unfortunately you cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

1Godfather:
Very sorry. I didn't intend for you to read my post as addressing you specifically, but in any case, since you've ventured this reply, permit me to point out something. If as you say, you are practicing Christian, then I think that your chosen method for "exposing" fraudulent prosperity preachers is self-defeating and counter-productive in the end. Do you know why? Anyone who is not a theist can as well use your very own chosen method to debunk or seemingly "expose" any and all preachers whether they are genuine or not. If the ready performance of those desired miracles is the test of authenticity, you would be unwittingly dismissing all. And what is to stop a skeptic at spontaneous limb regenerations anyway? What if they decide the test of authenticity should be resurrections (not revivifications)? Or how about "calling down fire from heaven"?

Ladies and gentlemen, here, is a poster full of wisdom. Thank you for this so so much!

Joagbaje:
Show me where Jesus healed amputated limbs, and I will show you who's doing it.

So because it isn't recorded that Jesus healed amputated limbs, that means ¹He couldn't/didn't do it and ²it cannot be done? Surely, if Jesus could raise a man from the dead, commanding a limb to stretch forth cannot be beyond His power can it? talk carefully oga.

Furthermore, I thought the bible also says this - John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Nice List!

Never new Nash was born in SA. Mutombo & Hakeem are legends. Micheal Olowokandi was a bust, he had so much promise and talent, just too dam lazy. Serge Ibaka & Deng are the most notable guys from Africa in the nba today. Nice, solid all round players with nowhere to go but up.

[quote author=A-40 link=topic=344420.msg8199760#msg8199760 date=1303725186]And the Knicks went out with a whimper! What a shame.[/quote] for the series that was supposed to be the 'toughest' in all of the playoffs. Dem think say our old men for Boston know sabi trick?

The Hornets have tied the series and the Grizz are showing the Spurs pepper as i anticipated i see that series ending in 7 unless the Grizz win tomorrow and it ends in 6.

Seriously, I can't believe the Spurs are being embarrased like this. This is a darn shame for a team so accomplished. And I was so suprised the Hornets tied the series maybe they're tired of people like me who didn't give them a shot at doing some damage in the series.

The Magic have been the biggest disappointment so far and i wouldnt be suprised if Dwight bails on them in free agency and wind up in L.A just like Shaq!
Mavs are also tied

Abeg forget Orlando jor. Any team that refuses to play defense and is lazy on offense - prefering to jack up treys and hope to cheat your way into a Win does not deserve anything - by the way - that description also fits Atlanta. Jamal Crawford may have hit some big shots - but I remain unimpressed. Its not that hard to hog the ball from the inbound pass, stand behind the arc and throw up a 3 - with 20 seconds left on the shotclock. No versatility, no creativity, no nada in his game. Very predictable. And if Orlando were a decent team, they would take advantage of those glaring weaknesses.

Brave Hear:
I am very Sure you didnt mean that, its 6 times BTW if u beat them 2nite will make it 7. Playing Philly It's like we are not even in the playoffs right now, we are so coasting and will be well rested for the 2nd rd, TBF You guys will make the 2nd round but i see the Knicks taking the Series to 7 games and y'all be jaded when you meet the Heat and "The Real Big 3". Hoping to watch your game 2nite and u know u guys cant win this one.

See, I was prophesying the future . But kudos to the knicks Anthony Carter for coming back and making it a tough game in the 4Q. They scared me a bit there . . .

Honestly, while the Heat have been playing solid ball so far in the playoffs . . . one has to wonder whether the ghosts of the season will come back to haunt you guys. You were only .500 against +.500 teams. This I think is a very telling stat. Whether or not its in the past remains to be seen once you play a quality opponent like my C's.

Thank God you said It's more personal than ball that'd be excused, But man Flash plays his heart out every night man, if you love sports u gotta love his passion(that's what makes him great, to me he is the most passionate player on the floor since MJ when he is Hot, He is Hot.)

Wade, a "passionate" player? hmmm, not to me oh. I agree his style is "all-out" but 'passionate' is not a descriptor I'd use for him for every single game he plays. Infact wasn't it just last season or two he was a drag and sulking all over the place when the heat wasn't doing so well? and pretty much dissing his team mates?

dont get me started with Kobe who recently came out of Shaqs shadows with his previous rings, Point of Correction, Bosh is Unproven not Overrated if u call him over-rated I wonder what you'd call Gasol, He Just Needs time and he'll come through he's already doing that in this playoff series I'm impressed with his work thus far.

this boy stop it oh you're going to make me defend Gasoft now

I'm too lazy to go pick at stats now, but I'm certain Gasol has it over Bosh in most categories of importance over their careers. Please tell me what has Bosh done in his entire career that is worthy of note? the guy is overrated jor. He has made 1 or 2 all star teams - in a weak eastern conference. That's it. He hasn't carried a team on his back to the playoffs, hasn't won any scoring or rebounding or defensive titles, hasn't done jack. Yet has wants to be named among the top guns in the league? big man my small foot Abeg, I'll take Gasoft over Christina anyday.

And you're going to make me defend Kobe too I think he has stepped out of Shaq's shadows with the last 2 rings.

chiogo:
JeSoul love, how are you? I see you've been holding it down around here.

Wassup Chiogo my sweerie  I hope you're well and school's going on fantastic . How about our boys taking care of bizniz huh? 

This here is dedicated to the NY Knicks, first team to go home this playoff season & only team to get swept . . .
https://chiaroscuro.baltiblogs.com/archives/broom.jpghttps://www.mkscleaning.com/broom1.jpg

Brave Hear:
I see fan of the leprachaun of Irish folklore.

lol, I like Braveheart already!

Pleased to meet you, Yeah we Might be meeting in the 2nd rd coz I havent given up on Knicks knicking the series, Melo ran you close last time out all on his own and you are now back to Madison Square Garden,

Honestly, I was more worried to draw the Philadelphia 76ers than I was of the knicks! lol. Cos I know the knicks don't play no defense to save their lives (tho they've been pretty good so far this series). The offensive malaise the C's have been in have not helped matters either. Knicks have been playing us relatively close all season . . . yet we have beaten them what is it now? 7 times in a row? after a while it can't be coincidence . I hope we handle biz tonite.

Haba not a fan of Flash?? If you were a Laker I'd say coz he's better than Kobe and your jealous but since your a Celt common, Chris Bosh I can understand but he is proving himself in this series so far.

Its more personal than bball jare. Don't mind me. However I don't fancy his playing style . . . flinging his body all over the place and getting injured so often - the shelflife of players like him are relatively short. I'd rather go the kobe route - finesse and skill, while pacing yourself. Bosh I've always felt was overrated - I haven't changed my mind yet.

Anyways, Happy Easter DS, Nuke and everyone else. I gats to go fellas.

^A much much better attempt at the topic than anything you'd posted earlier. Now . . . if you're going to attribute any position to me, I'd like for you to quote me clearly and not inject your own assumptions. Thanks.

Moving on . . . the author is a Jew - PAIO pointed this out (i think) because you seemed fixated on 'the bible' and not really addressing the authors criticisms on scholarship work in regards to the Torah. As an overall point - the author extends these shortcomings he sees with scholarship in regards to the first few books, to all of the bible. You are right - and this point is lost on one (and infact bolded all thru the OP). PAIO was merely addressing the fact you hadn't previously addressed this. Then again Pastor, pls correct me if I'm wrong.

Deep Sight:
@ Pastor AIO and Jesoul –

It seems to me that you have missed the core purpose of the article. What is obvious is that the writer –

1. Takes a look at the pitfalls of scholastic analysis of scripture
2. Recognizes that scholarship has its limitations in terms of tracing (reverse engineering) an already edited text
3. Surmises that the scholastic conclusions regarding such matters as the identity of supposed writers of scripture is inessential.

It is thus apparent that the overall conclusion is that a scholastic identification of the writers of scripture is needless: scripture anyway being a potent factor in our existence.
This central idea is what I state to you is wrong.

Now you're indeed talking. I don't think "inessential" is however the proper word there. While he sees these shortcomings as problematic, he in no way dismisses scholarship as completely irrelevant, but rather recognizes its shortcomings and chooses to work/believe/choose around them.
  I wish this was your first post. Merely state your disagreement and explain why you see things otherwise, instead of galloping in head first and declaring the writers position a "lie".

What is important is the principle he is elucidating – namely as I said:  that the scholastic conclusions regarding such matters as the identity of supposed writers of scripture is [b]inessential.[/b]

See my reply 2 paragraphs above.

Further it is more than obvious that the OP was deploying that principle as a bulwark against criticism of authorship of scripture. The OP (Jesoul)  is a Christian, so please do not try to insinuate she has particular interest only in the Torah. The intention was clearly to show that ALL scholastic criticism of SCRIPTURE is inessential. That is obviously the point in the OP - that is why she has presented us with the article written by a Jew on his defence of teh same subject matter.

Wrong. Again, see my reply 3 paragraphs above.

For this reason I have sought to state within this thread and I emphatically state again: SUCH A PRINCIPLE IS DANGEROUS. And in this I refer to the clear principle which the OP tries to convey: namely that scholastic criticism of scriptural authorship is inessential.

Again that is not what he says. Expressing doubts and pointing out shortcomings in scholarship does not amount to a complete dismissal of all scholarship as 'inessential'. Context DS. Context.

Isn't it the same guy that says this:

As with any field of research that tries to reconstruct the distant past, biblical scholars get things wrong on a daily basis. And that's OK: Getting things wrong is part of the nature of reconstruction. Whether you’re talking about the origins of galaxies, dinosaurs, ancient civilizations, medieval history or World War II, the conclusions of all historical research come with a big disclaimer: This is the best we’ve got so far. Stay tuned; we may revise our beliefs in a couple of years.

Does this sound like someone who thinks all scholarship is 'inessential'? but rather one who recognizes its shortcomings? and urges us to work/think/decide within those limits?

  As for the rest of your post, the same scriptures have been used as a weapon unto great love - as well as unto great destruction. It is the people who are handling the work - not the work itself.

Brave Hear:
O.k Would like to say I am very impressed to see an NBA thread here on Nairaland, I am new to this so I Guess I should introduce myself. Brave Heart is the name and Miami Heat is the team. That will do I Guess.

Welcome Braveheart! you've come to the right place . . . though some of our regulars are slacking right now but enough of us are usually around even thru the offseason.

Hope to discuss the playoffs on here as the real business part comes along. BTW (Caveat Emptor) I am a big Lebron James fan and by big I mean collossal so I guess i would have a problem with one poster calling the King a Prince,

lol. Looks like we shall be 'meeting' very soon in the 2nd rd. Celtics fan here. Though I have always had an affection for Lebron, can't say the same for Wade or Christina Bosh .

Blazers take one from the Mavs. Kudos. But will still lose in 5-6 lol.
[quote author=A-40 link=topic=344420.msg8175267#msg8175267 date=1303393378]OKC vs Denver has been fantastic tho I don't understand why the Thunder kept poundin Denver on the boards[/quote]I feel bad for Denver. They need a closer. Its not enough in the playoffs to have a bunch of solid players unfortunately. But mehn, they've really done themselves and their fans proud.

Bos vs. NY tonight. I hope my boyz can take this series to 3-0 so they can rest those old legs for Miami .

And lets see if Orlando can go up a lead in the series. These Hawks came to play lol.

---

Come self, where are all these yeye nba fans on NL ehn? Chic2pimp, Chiogo, Na2day, Darth and co.

Pastor AIO:
Dear DeepSight, are you aware of the fact that the article that we are discussing was written by a Jew and that he was referring specifically to the Jewish scriptures, the Tanakh.  And his arguments are addressed at the sub-categorization of the Tanakh to 4 sources, J, E, P and D.  He discusses why he thinks that such scholarship is nothing but an exercise in futility. 

Please can you demonstrate to us how what you've written below and elsewhere pertains to the thrust of his argument.  

He does not say that he accepts that moses wrote the pentateuch. What he says is that he doubts the claims for JEPD.

This I remarked to him earlier . . .

JeSoul:
Perhaps you too haven't read and understood the article. Perhaps you might understand the level of weight & importance - in the grand scheme of personal faith - the author is giving to "content" vs. "scholarship" vs. "authorship" vs. "faith" vs. "belief" . . . and how all these factors are interacting within the context of article.

Ify & Dayo,
   I really understand you both not wanting her to confess . . . thing is just like Chaircover said:

chaircover:
I will suggest that you tell your husband[b] because one day he will find out[/b].

because it is his brother, the truth coming out is almost inevitable. It will be exposed, its only a matter of time.

Sheemitwu:
My spirit is so low right now and I could not get to sleep last night. I thousght about bringing the issue to my husband before we went to bed. I know him well. To tell him this truth is to lose him and I have NO DOUBT that would be the reality, even if our son is his. He is a true naija igbo man and no way he would swallow this. What things he did in the past will not be enough to excuse my actions in his mind. Even thought he told me sorry a hundred times about his cheating, he still would never forgive this. I love him but I was not blessed with a husband with that kind of forgiving heart. I just dont know. I was crying last night in bed after he went to sleep but I make sure he did not hear me.

I really feel for you. If you're not prepared to tell your husband, then hope that your BIL holds his tongue for the rest of his life and that you can live with carrying such a burden on your conscience. You cannot go to sleep every night crying and terrified he will find out - that is no way to live. Like another poster said, weigh your options soberly, and I pray it works out for you and the children most especially.

LagosShia:
i have told JeSoul that she should open another thread so we can discuss the Quran if she has any doubt or evidence against it.but she said its not a challenge.

My dear, it wasn't a challenge - I tried to explain what I meant by that question. But then, I think I might take you up on your offer of opening a thread . Sweetnecta, I'll be expecting you too bro.

Enigma:
Going back to the line below

"Language is fluid and flexible, the product of the vagaries of the human soul."

Even individual words can evidently be used in various ways with different meanings or shades of meaning which may depend on context.

1. Take the word "authority" and its use in the following contexts

(a) Einstein was an authority on the theory of relativity
(b) the case of Donoghue v Stevenson is an authority on the meaning of "neighbour" in law
(c) the lecturer concluded on the position of the law on his own authority
(d) Jesus taught as one who had authority
(e) Christians believe in te authority of the Bible

2. Consider the word "cleave" which could mean quite opposite things i.e. either coming together or parting.

Noted. Rewind back to your last thread on authority of scripture . . . recall PastorAIO's comment about what "authority" means in the first place - and how it can mean differently to each of us.

Thinking on all this . . . merely re-emphasizes the daunting task of handling the Word correctly. With the complexities of expression and evolution of language, there are so many potholes and slippery slopes to get it wrong - may God help us.

Enigma:
Ha ha, "the objective non- partisan reader trick" as expected ----- very predictable.

If I had a thousand gbams, I would give them to you.

Pastor AIO:
In my humble the writer is criticizing the pseudo-scholarship that passes for biblical scholarship. He cites his experience as an editor in a publishing firm, and demonstrates how impossible it is to unravel which specific element of a piece of literature came from which source. There is an awful lot of scholarship that revolves around this whole J, E, P, D categorization.

Excellent summary. Lets continue . . .

I find it quite suspect too for the simple fact that if the tanakh was edited to make it seem like it was from one source then it was done very badly. The writer/editor of Genesis for instance must have been blind or silly to not realise that at the very beginning he gives 2 accounts for the creation of the world that contradictory. I don't think he was silly, I think it was intentional. it is the intention that I think scholarship would be more rewarding if it tried to find why.

Gbam for you sir. And your point that it would perhaps be more profitable if scholars attempted to explain the why is well taken.

[b]What was the motives in compiling the bible. Was it to give an historical account, or has his intention been misconstrued?[/b]If the writer was trying to be dubious and pull the wool over our eyes then surely he could do a better job smoothing the cracks over the bits that refer to Jahweh and the bits that refer to Elohim or El.

*sigh* unfortunately questions (as Mr Hazony alludes to) that we will probably never have answers too.

---

I don't know how the Islamists thought they could get some mileage out of this thread for exercising their futilities. It is a fact that Mohammad could neither read or write and that the Koran was written after his death and there were various versions of it.
What puzzles me is whether or not Mohammad actually communicated with Gabriel face to face, with familiarity, or not. If he did and it wasn't that he was just imagining the interaction then I remain puzzled cos I cannot fathom how after such familiarity he could fail to tell the difference between Jibril and Satan. Can they be that similar? How come the Koran became infected with Satanic verses.

Lol . . . Pastor, you're looking for trouble oh

^okay if you felt that was an insult, then my apologies. It is never my intention to insult you or anyone else.

As for the rest of your post - that was actually not it. It was one of the straws I had been pulling off the camels back. You're a lawyer ain't you, you should be able to figure it out. Its not coincidence most of the peeps who had you in high regard no longer do. Perhaps a look in the mirror in overdue?

I repeat, its your recently developed attitude of spitting on others and general irritability with practically everyone that has put me off. Did you chop winch from somewhere? But anyways, leave it be and lets get back to topic if you so wish (or open a another topic). I don't want to ruin the discussion of a quality article with this irrelevant stuff . . . thanks. Really.

Deep Sight:
Yes madam, I do. That however does not constrain my desire or freedom to share my random thoughts on the subject.

Of course it doesn't. It certainly doesn't.

Enigma:
Re "clever people": abi, now as dem like big big words so!

Ehen now, that's the way it goes 

The only thing I'm "intolerant" of is pretense of which you are a skilled practitioner. Abi na lie? Ask just one more person to co-sign your accusation of jesoul's intolerance, lets see if you can find just one . Thankfully, what you think of me does not affect the price of the tilapia fish I will buy at my local stop & shop tonight.

But alas, I don't wish to trade words with you. The smurk & attitude with which you gallop into threads, thumping down and spitting on others opinions and faiths - is what has put me off from you. I mean just look at your first entry on this thread . . . need I say more?

and by the way, I have never insulted you or anyone else on this forum. Far be it from me. You can google dilly-dally if you didn't understand what it means.

Enigma:
^^^ Some clever people call it antinomy. See e.g. https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-477833.32.html#msg6382869

clever people lol. I'm just being introduced to the 'official' term. Thanks!

Deep Sight:
Perhaps we are all a part of Divine Self-Expression.

If that is the case, then it is the divinity within YOU that takes free divine volitions. Not necessarily a divinity outside of you.

You have come again. You do realize the OP is asking/speaking within the christian/biblical context?

^Okay DS, I have heard you. Me I no get time for dilly-dally and shilly-shally - your usual psuedo-pro-bono irritated-lawyer style today. So please indeed, don't start ehn. Thank you in advance.

Enigma:
Re the point on reverse editing in the OP, while a certain writing style may be associated with a particular person one should also note the capacity of that individual to modify/change writing style on a particular occasion for any number of good reasons. Somebody reading the two quotations below without further information would not readily think they were written by the same person.

Na so one time some years ago now, the Ghanaian bobo wen [Bleep] bin put for him Ghana church come vex when them wan transfer am. The bobo kuku seize control of the church for himself. As him and him erstwhile "spiritual father" come they fight (dem bin go court sef) na him e emerge say them bin dey smuggle money from Ghana come Naija like rogues and other nefarious activities.

This is very interesting. In a proper setting, the "church" will have a governing board; the governing board will set the monthly or annual salary (or income) of the "pastor". On this monthly/annual salary/income, the "pastor" should then pay tax --- as the amount is a fixed or set amount, calculating the amount of tax due will not be difficult. The problem we have is as identified by one poster earlier; our modern "pastors" (and their family in many cases) treat all church funds/incomes etc as personal or family assets for all practical purposes e.g. they alone use the "ministry"'s jet etc but for government and tax purposes they will claim that these assets belong to the "ministry" and therefore exempt from tax.

     . . . my poor attempt at a Patois version -

Inna de church dem plenty downpressors, plenty sunday-gimmal, tek smadi mek poppy-show. Instead affa luk after the people like em breddas, de preacherman come took alla de money for imself straight to babylon. Nuttin' nah go right, nun uh di bredden fi a say nuttin. Me sef cyaan believe it. Com dutty the bible instead affa unity, na harbor shark. Jah know alla dem well well. Mek we look, mek we pray. Mek we resist babylon enter inna de church.

LagosShia:
too bad, you do not have a goal post!
read it in both ways.

Haha! nice one . . . but you should try again. You still don't get it. Sweetnecta, you should also take note.
I repeat, if both of you would just relax and just breath in and out for a minute, you might actually notice that the fight you're both fighting is against an imaginary opponent

Deep Sight:
I think this summarizes it all: and being from scriture itself, gives a lie to the presupposition of the OP.

Perhaps you too haven't read and understood the article. Perhaps you might understand the level of weight & importance - in the grand scheme of personal faith - the author is giving to "content" vs. "scholarship" vs. "authorship" vs. "faith" vs. "belief" . . . and how all these factors are interacting within the context of article.

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=651586.msg8175800#msg8175800 date=1303403158]@ Jesoul,

Sissy, hope 'em northern brodaz didnt invade this citadel to moda our threads after Jega's annoucement. [/quote]Lol. So far they are behaving themselves. Cannot say the same for the politics section tho   

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=651586.msg8175800#msg8175800 date=1303403158][color=#000099] Really say i appreciate the link provided. . .just when i needed it! And to add. . .

How come christian folks are made to believe we are free-moral beings, that we are free to make our choices and decisions. while yet we flip thru' the pages of Proverbs 16:4 which says

The LORD has made everything for his own purposes, even the wicked for a day of disaster.

Mind-boggling quest #2: Who made the wicked guys too?

Its simple! Just like some puppets were designed to play the bad guy, while others play the good guys, the value of a good script is deemed good when every character maintains their role.[/quote]You're most welcome my brother.

On the free-will bit. I believe its a bit more complex than God simply pulling the strings . . .  I believe that God is the God of the impossible to human beings. And that applying pure logic in this scenario might be the equivalent of a handicapped man trying to compete in a decathlon.

I believe that somehow, God is able to ¹ pull the strings as He wishes, and work everything towards the fruition of His will, but yet at the same time ² we are also able to freely choose. How this works exactly? beats me. Because I know we choose and determine the course of our lives (no one forced you to marry your wife abi? or go to school? or eat breakfast this morning? ), yet at the same time, He has a grand scheme as stated in the scriptures, an end game to which all things are working and flowing towards.

I know this defies logic, but if God is omniscient and omnipotent, doesn't that by itself defy this logic we want to subject Him to?

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=651380.msg8175832#msg8175832 date=1303403405]Very good toys to keep 'em toddlers sucking at. . .while the thread prays some tranquility this lady is sure some goodish!

OP very educative too![/quote]goodish  lol. See as our brother miss road again, lol - 

LagosShia:
my dear brother,two wrongs do not make a right.will you prove to the atheist who is neither muslim nor christian that the bible must be accepted at face value because the muslim too cannot prove his Quran to have being written by Muhammad (sa) or that it was authored by Almighty Allah (swt)?let me for argument's sake accept that the Quran was neither written by Muhammad (sa) nor was it authored by Almighty Allah (swt).does that make your bible correct?does it make your point that "it doesn't matter who wrote the bible" correct?this your thread is about the bible,so stick to it.discuss the bible.if you find yourself lacking or your argument beaten then dont try to say "two wrongs make a right".

if you want to know about the Holy Quran,i am muslim and i will wholehearted tell you that your argument is wrong and therefore it does matter who wrote the Quran unlike the bible as is the case with you.if you want to know about the Holy Quran,you're are very welcome.open a new thread and throw a challenge at me to prove to you that the Holy Quran is the word of Almighty God and it was written by Muhammad (sa).i will prove to you that the Quran is the word of Almighty God and was written by only one man, Muhammad (sa).then you will also have your chance to prove me wrong if you can.while the content of the bible disproves itself as being the inerrant word of God,only the content of the Holy Quran can prove that it is indeed the infallible word of Almighty God.the Holy Quran,and historical sources and materials at our disposal prove that Muhammad (sa) and only him is responsible for narrating the word of God (the Holy Quran) to humanity and not some hundreds of confused men as is the case with your "holy bible".

Oga, you took a very good Free Kick, but unfortunately you not only missed the goal post, you also shot the ball at your own goal.

If you would slow down and not see this as a bible vs. quran battle . . . there are several top points of which one is one's faith cannot rely on ever-changing scholastic estimations of biblical authorship. There's plenty we don't know and probably never know. The content of the bible (or in your case the quran) should speak for itself. So when I asked you if you could prove who wrote the quran - it was not a challenge, but merely another way of making the same point.

  Oya, take another free kick . . .

Pastor AIO:
Simply excellent. And I see what you mean about his writing style. Obviously a professional writer. Great arguments too!

This line in his article: "Language is fluid and flexible, the product of the vagaries of the human soul." reminded me of you . . . you said something almost identical on one thread like this.

Sheemitwu,

   in this situation, the saying "the truth will set you free" is apt and fitting. If you do not go before your husband in humility and brokeness of heart now, this will forever hang over your head. And we all know secrets always have a nasty way of coming out. It will be better for your husband to find out from you than through some other terrible way.

  I actually admire and commend you Sheemitwu for staying with him even through those terrible times of him cheating on you with complete disregard for your feelings. Not to apportion blame, but it was his disrespectful and hurftul behavior that drove you to the arms of his brother. You are both equally to blame.

My advice sister, tell your husband the entire truth. Leave nothing out. You will not have peace until you do. Even if you BIL goes away, you will hold the knowledge in your heart like a heavy burden that will rob your marriage of its best joy and fulfilment. You said he has changed into a wonderful man - then trust that he will forgive you and work your hardest to earn his forgiveness and regain his trust. This will crush his heart no doubt, but imagine how much worse it will be when (and its only a matter of time) he finds out by some other means. We've all made terrible mistakes we wish we could take back - but its what we do after the mistakes that'll determine the kind of person you are and how you go on forward from there.

Don't underestimate the power of coming clean - that will mean a lot to him. I pray all works out best for you both as well as your children. Have faith and have hope you can both overcome this.

Godbless.

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=651586.msg8175010#msg8175010 date=1303386223]Now, the mind-boggling quest, who writes a play? Sure the puppeteer! Now if God takes the place of this puppeteer (a grand one for respect sake), then ought i say HE KNEW ABOUT THE FALL OF ADAM AND EVE[/quote]If God is omniscient, then yes He did.

You're heading in this direction? -  http://www.gotquestions.org/if-God-knew.html

LagosShia & Sweetnecta,

   my brothers, can either of you prove Mohammed wrote the Quran? and that it is indeed of divine inspiration from allah?

---

noetic16:
madam, for the sake of the lazy ones like my humble self . . . , pls summarize his point.

lol. Noetic how body now? Don't be lazy jor lol read study and show yourself approved sir its worth the 5-10mins

FBS:
Its Lakers or nothing.

Carry go jor . The Laker star is fading to black - let the people say amen .

That said, I expect them to win against CP3 and the Hornets tonite. Pau should be looking for redemption from that stinker in Game 1.
I am licking my lips in anticipation for the Denver vs OKC game . . . plus we'll see if the Spurs can hold serve at home and even the series vs. Memphis.

^lol. And perhaps you should google too. Juan Williams refers to himself as a liberal. Perhaps you may want to correct his own description of himself? and especially when most of his articulated political beliefs are squarely leftist?

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

Following his firing from NPR, Williams appeared on The O'Reilly Factor and discussed his thoughts on how his role at Fox played into NPR's decision: "I don't fit in their box. I'm not predictable black liberal. You [O'Reilly] were exactly right when you said you know what this comes down to. They were looking for a reason to get rid of me because I'm appearing on Fox News. They don't want me talking to you."

. . . but anyways, its not about Williams but rather the article/Trump. If Williams doesn't qualify as a Liberal to you, that's perfectly fine . Cheers.

A bit long, but so worth it. Bolded/colored bits added by me for emphasis:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/01/my-take-it-doesnt-matter-who-wrote-the-bible/

My Take: It Doesn't Matter Who Wrote The Bible
By David Hazony, Special to CNN

I am a person of faith. But sometimes I like to step outside of faith and just think about things rationally. Usually this oscillation between faith and skepticism serves me well, with faith giving reason its moral bearings, and reason keeping faith, well, reasonable. It’s a nice balancing act — except when the question of who wrote the Bible comes up. My Jewish faith tells me that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, known as the Torah or the Pentateuch. Reason tells me to be open to the idea that somebody else had a hand in it. And there are definitely a few glitches in the text that back up those suspicions - notably the last eight verses of Deuteronomy, which describe Moses’ own death.


But try as I might, I just can’t believe that the Five Books of Moses were written by J, E, P and D – the four main authors whose oral traditions, biblical scholars say, were cobbled together to make the Torah. (The letters stand for the Jahwist, the Elohist, the Priestly source and the Deuteronomist. Those, we may assume, were not their real names.) Call me an academic infidel. I know, it’s been generations now that Bible study scholars at universities around the world have accepted as true that:

(a) the Pentateuch was composed over many centuries through these four oral traditions, which were later written down;
(b) these main texts were woven together by an editor or series of editors living around the 6th century B.C.E.; and
(c) these different traditions are detectable by scholars today, to the point where you can justify entire conferences and an arena’s worth of endowed chairs to figure out not only the source document of every scrap of biblical text, but also the gender, political inclinations, subversive intentions, height, weight and personal traumas encumbering every one of its authors.


The first two are plausible, I suppose. But the third has always struck me as pure fantasy, the point where idle speculation gives way to heavily funded hubris. Of course, if I’m right about the third, the first two lose their authority as well. Why don’t I buy it? It’s not just because of how stark, uninspiring and vaguely European those four letters look in a byline. Nor is it the fact that in more than a century’s worth of digging up the Middle East by archaeologists, not a single trace of any of these postulated “source texts” has ever turned up. And it’s certainly not because the scholars’ approach contradicts my faith — after all, it was the willful suspension of faith that led me to consider it in the first place. No, faith and skepticism dwell together in my confused bosom like pudding and pie. Rather, my rebellion against these scholars comes from experience. Specifically, my experience as an editor. It all started a few years back when, as the senior editor of a Jerusalem-based journal of public thought, I ran into trouble on a 10,000-word, brilliantly researched essay about Israeli social policy composed by the sweetest man on earth who, unfortunately wasn’t a stellar writer. I spent a few weeks rewriting, moving things around, adding and cutting and sweating. Finally I passed it up the chain to Dan, my editor-in-chief. "Hey Dan," I said. "Could you take a look at this? I added a whole paragraph in the conclusion. Tell me what you think." A few days later I got it back, marked up in red ballpoint. On the last page, in the conclusion, he had written the words “This is the paragraph you added,” and drawn a huge red arrow. But the arrow, alas, was pointing at the wrong paragraph.


You see, it turns out that it’s not very easy to reverse-engineer an editing job. To take an edited text and figure out, in retrospect, what changes it went through — it’s about a million times harder than those tenured, tortured Bible scholars will tell you.


Language is fluid and flexible, the product of the vagaries of the human soul. When an editor has free rein, he can make anything sound like he’d written it himself, or like the author’s own voice, or something else entirely. It all depends on his aims, his training, his talent and the quality of his coffee that morning. A good editor is a ventriloquist of the written word. That’s when I started to suspect that what Bible scholars claim they’re doing — telling you what the “original” Bible looked like — might be, in fact, impossible to do. Think about it. My case was one in which the author, editor and reader are all known entities (in fact, they all know each other personally); the reading takes place in the exact same cultural and social context as the writing and editing; and the reader is himself a really smart guy, Ivy-league Ph.D. and all, who had spent a decade training the editor to be a certain kind of editor, with specific tools unique to the specific publication’s aims. Not only that, but he was even told what kind of edit to look for, in which section. And still he couldn’t identify the change.



Now compare that with what Bible scholars do when they talk about J, E, P, and D. Not only do the readers not know the writers and editors personally, or even their identities or when or where they lived. The readers live thousands of years later and know nothing about the editors’ goals, whims, tastes, passions or fears — they don’t even know for sure that the whole thing really went through an editorial process at all. (If anything, the same textual redundancies, narrative glitches, awkward word choices and so forth that the scholars claim are the telltale signs of an editing process are, in my experience, very often the opposite: the surest indicator that an author needs an editor, desperately. If the text was edited, it was done very poorly.) As with any field of research that tries to reconstruct the distant past, biblical scholars get things wrong on a daily basis. And that's OK: Getting things wrong is part of the nature of reconstruction. Whether you’re talking about the origins of galaxies, dinosaurs, ancient civilizations, medieval history or World War II, the conclusions of all historical research come with a big disclaimer: This is the best we’ve got so far. Stay tuned; we may revise our beliefs in a couple of years.

With biblical scholars, however, you often feel like they’re flying just a little blinder than everyone else. At what point does a scholar’s “best guess” become so foggy as to be meaningless? I LOVE THIS QUOTE! lol.


The Five Books of Moses take place somewhere in the second millennium B.C.E., centuries before our earliest archeological corroborations for the biblical tales appearing in the Book of Joshua and onward. We have no other Hebrew writings of the time to compare it with. So all that scholars really have to go on is the text itself — a wild ride on a rickety, ancient, circular-reasoning roller-coaster with little external data to anchor our knowledge of anything.
This would be fine, of course, if there weren’t so much riding on it. With other fields, we usually don’t have our own dinosaur in the fight. But with the Bible, it’s not just the scholars duking it out with the clergy. There’s all the rest of us trying to figure out what to do with this stupendously important book — either because it anchors our faith, or because it contains enduring wisdom and the foundations of our cultural identity.


Where does that leave us? Some people, sensing their most cherished beliefs are under siege, will retreat to the pillars of faith — whether that faith is religious or academic. Either it was Moses, or it was J, E, P, and D. End of discussion. As for the rest of us, it may raise questions about whether we really ought to care that much about authorship at all, or instead just go with Mark Twain’s approach. “If the Ten Commandments were not written by Moses,” he once quipped, “then they were written by another fellow of the same name.” Using our reason means sometimes admitting there are things we just don’t know, and maybe never will.


Maybe that’s all right. After all, isn’t it enough to know that the book is really important, that it has inspired love and hate and introspection and war for thousands of years, that it is full of interesting stories and wisdom, poetry and song, contradiction and fancy and an unparalleled belief in the importance of human endeavor - in the possibility of a better world - despite the enduring and tragic weaknesses that every biblical hero carries on his or her back? That it is an indelible part of who we are? Isn’t that enough to make you just read the thing and hope for the best, forever grateful to Moses, or that other fellow by the same name? lol

There are very few writers that I come across and just LOVE their tone of writing, approach to the subject matter, sentence contruction and overall diction - this fellow is one.