₦airaland Forum

safarigirl:
Please, you guys should vote for me in the etisalat prize for literature- flash fiction

Here's the link:
https://prize.etisalat.com.ng/flash-fiction/voteall.php?id=1470

Please just click the 'thumbs up' icon on the page.

Cc thegoodjoe, thesupernerd, terzurum5, icon4s, confun, tbaba1234, lakesidepapa, odenigboaroli, Joseph1013 and every well meaning member of this thread.

Voting closes Nov 30 and you can only vote via your native browser.

Thanks guys

noblefada:
Ok, let clarify some things.
I see that you’re not being honest. When you asked me concerning the earth being 4,000 – 10,000 years according to bible scholars. It is obvious you already knew that some Christians (sect as you call it) had already answered that, yet you used it as one of your major arguments. In other words either way I answered you had something to counter it. That’s not being fair and none of your logical friend could that out.

Your assertions that my Pastor said “the Holy Ghost to told” is making me doubt if we’re talking about the same person, because my Pastor has never said that and will never use such terminologies. For the records my Pastor is actually against personal revelation about the bible. Pls you know is name, kindly cross check your facts and come clarify to us where my Pastor actually used those words.

That being said, I’m a bit disappointed, I thought after listening to the track, you would have come with specific words my pastor and try and discredit them, rather than using spurious and bogus statement to describe what nobody knows about.
By the way when I mean snippets this is what I mean: for instance the teaching on “Understanding the law and the prophets” has two series consisting of 19 tracks and a total of 49 hours play time, so a snippet is to listen to just one track (may track 3 in series 1 which is 1hr 52mins) from begging to the end! Did you do that sir?

You see this why I sometimes have issues with those who cannot understand the bible (because they are spiritually dead) now trying to explain the bible more than those who it was written for. Let me educate you a bit, the book of genesis was written by Moses, it is obvious Moses wasn’t there because Moses was not born until Exodus 2. Therefore, Moses wrote the book of Genesis by revelation or what you will call today a vision. And in a vision, not all things are taken literally, some can be literal, some can be figurative, in the case of Genesis 2 & 3, the tree of life, three of knowledge and evil where all figurative. This why if study the bible, you will discover that in the old testament books, wherever the book of genesis is to be referenced they all stop at Abraham, because they did not have an understanding of the earlier part of the book.

Now why we know those stuff where figurative is very simple, the events in Genesis 3, was a major event that not only shaped humanity but after the bible itself because it is a very important subject. So out the book of Genesis, you will never see the tree referenced by anyone not even in the epistle, whenever it was to be referenced the writer used Adam disobeyed because they knew Moses was not talking about a tree. In fact the only mention of the 3 was the serpent in the book revelation “Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.” “Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years”, so my dear stop arguing about something you don’t much about.

To take it a bit further and show you your folly, you did mention that satan was responsible for the deaths in the book of Job, but what the Job say “Job 1:21 And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD, and Job 2:10 But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.” You say it was satan that was responsible but Job said it was God, So who do we believe

I truly don’t understand this guy, are you saying that the whole new testament is a forgery?? Books that have been studied by many theologians and religious professors, including archaeologists who are not Christians have studied for hundreds of years, who can verify that the events and places mentioned in the bible took place or exist, there are enough evidences that the accounts that the events in the New testament actually happened, in fact just last week the National Geography are excavating the burial tomb of Jesus (not that I’m into all this, just brought it up for the sake of this argument) and you come to discredit all it because something ONE so called prominent Professor I have never heard or know is religious of said about the authors. Please tell me who is more logical to be believed, one professor or the many other theologians, professors and archaeologists.

Now let’s examine the statement of your so called prominent professor, according to you he said why the scriptures was not valid was because “Not only do we not have the originals, we don't have the first copies of the originals. We don't even have copies of the copies of the originals, or copies of the copies of the copies of the originals and there were differences?”
I put in to you, that if anyone come today with the original manuscripts or copy of the copy of the original, then we should rather question its authenticity rather than rejoice over because of the following:
1. This manuscripts were original written by different people at different times, they were had written because at that time there was no printing press that could mass produced them.
2. Secondly, this were not private documents, but was intended for mass consumption hence several copies would have been made. At this point, let me say for instance, when Paul wrote to the church at Corinth, it was not just once assembly, but many different local smaller congregations within the city (Tit 1:5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee), so each local congregation would have duplicated a copy of the letter manually.
3. Now as the letter began to come, it was also duplicated by hand to other churches in other cities, because it was a public material for teaching Col 4:16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea: so we can begin to see different copies of the same letter. Please still bear in mind there were no printing press at that time so the letter couldn’t be mass produced.
4. As it is well documented in history, the early Christians were severely persecuted and most time had to go into hiding. Wherever they were caught they were brutally murdered and their possession brunt. So, what do you think would have happened to the early books during such times?
5. All the early Apostles that wrote the New Testament were all brutally murdered at different times and in different places, so assuming they had the original on them as traveled, do you think those who murdered them would’ve been gracious enough to preserve the manuscripts for historic purposes?
6. As per the difference in the written, that can easily explained, you see in those times the major spoken language/official language was Greek, and since it was not their first tongue, there would have of course been some discrepancies when this materials where being manually copied, just like today, we have the English Language, which has at least the British version and the American version. And last this manual copying where done by men.
7. Finally as early as the 15th 16th century, the roman catholic church withdrew all the bible in circulation and only put a locked up Latin version of it in Libraries and Museums. Before it was later again re-translated to the bible we have now

So you see, we have to question anyone who claims to have the origin or copies of the copies of the original, because from what I mentioned from the foregoing, it would be practically impossible to still have the original manuscripts and may I had the writers of the scriptures never envisage that one day their writings will be compiled into one book. So it beats me if no one ever questioned or disproved the assertions made by your prominent professor. So here is my question, is the dispute over the bible a dispute about its author or the content?

You see that is a major mistake many make, including some Christians, Muslims, agnostics and atheists alike, they think and believe that the Christians should be validated with physical things! That is a major error, because the Christians is essentially a life in and of the Spirit! Anything less than that if a false region and that’s why a man not born again can never understand or receive from it.
1Co 2:12-14 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Again you can never convince a man who has ate honey severally that honey is NOT Sweet!

I still have more, but I’ll stop for now
Shalom.

goldfish80:
You listed their agents. Here's their managers

Pogba =his mom
Ozil =mustafa Ozil
Iwobi =Chuba Iwobi (his dad)
Iheanacho =James Iheanacho

goldfish80:
Obviously agent play major roles in a players career. Although I prefer the agent being a parent of the player.
Like pogba and his mom, Ozil and his dad, Iwobi and his dad, Iheanacho and his dad.. Etc

goldfish80:
Agent is different from manager. Pogba's mom us his manager while Riolaia is his agent.
You typed in a hurry

goldfish80:
Obviously agent play major roles in a players career. Although I prefer the agent being a parent of the player.
Like pogba and his mom, Ozil and his dad, Iwobi and his dad, Iheanacho and his dad.. Etc

Icon4s:
No, TheGoodJoe is different in some regards.

1. He can argue a point to no conclusion but if he later finds out he was wrong after all, even if it is after 2yrs he would own up and acknowledge it.

2. His like for players are not born out of sectional sentiments.

TheSuperNerd:
I do know.... I know about Okocha's career.

Just wondering why an "inexperienced" fella like Okocha (who you said westerhof didn't take a risk on in big matches) and a 19yr old Oliseh featured in the biggest game of the African football calender in 1994.... The '94 Afcon Final.

TheSuperNerd:
Was he not "inexperienced"? You insinuated he was.

TheSuperNerd:
But westerhof started this same "inexperienced" Okocha in '94 Afcon final.

Why are you guys so quick to forget that?

Look, there are always exceptions to the "experience rule".

tbaba1234:
But Westerhof also gave a starting shirt to Oliseh, who was 19 at the time... Okocha started some games in Tunisia '94 and world cup 94. He was just not always a starter. Amuneke was also a youngster at the time.

Ikpeba was not that hot in 1993-1994... He just joined Monaco...

Westerhof did give opportunities to young players. He just did it gradually.

BascoVanVeli:
Ur insult could never have been directed at me as i am not Musa. U r trying to make it seem like he won't get offers in Europe as he is not that good. Like i said don't use npfl to cover shade, is it only Musa that u want to bring back home? Why don't u wish that on ur favorite player. The boy is trying to be a bread winner for his family and u are wishing him owed salary and i'm the wierd one for opposing it, go figure.

zuchyblink:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romaric_Rogombé
why is this Gabonese goal machine not in Europe?

ValentineMary:
U are very wicked. See how u finish the guy. I have nothing more to say

TheGoodJoe:


Please, when we talk of performing in camp, we talk of drills like shooting balls at different rates and the keeper making multiple save.

It is not a one thing that you will say fluke. Just like the passing drills Rohr made, a player can not get it by fluke.

That is what drills are for. Testing the players in different conditions with multiple routines.

People praise those brave men took risk weak and categorise those they are scared to take risk with as not up to the others.

TheGoodJoe:

If Alampasu shows better form than the other goalkeepers in camp and the coach chooses to drop him for a weaker performer in camp, is that not leaving things to chance? Hoping the weaker keeper does during the game what he could not do in training?

TheGoodJoe:

And an experienced keeper can fumble during matches. Ask Peter Rufai, Ask Joe Hart, Ask David James.

Keepers like De Gea and Courtois showed a young keeper can deal with the pressure. We are talking of a team with Iheanacho and Iwobi, U21 players as some of the star players.

BascoVanVeli:
If he was playing for arsenal u would be all over him. If it were up to people like u the young will never grow, let me guess he is not as disciplined as the kid at ac milan who is doing well at an even younger age. Cameroon used barca's feeder keeper and it wasn't all doom and gloom, this boy had a clean sheet against porto, he is a regular starter at his club. Oga wat i'm trying to say is u too dey fear, take a chance once in a while and get out of the bubble.

TheGoodJoe:

I disagree with that. Kick that experience talk out. The best in camp keeps. If the experience is so golden, the other keepers should easily Outshine Alampasu. If they can not, then we are opting for a weaker option.

Good morning everyone. Have a nice day.

noblefada:
Only one answer to the final paragraph, THE LIFE OF GOD LIVING IN A MAN!

noblefada:
You see why i never wanted to start at all, you guys become apprehensive when confronted with the truth, a bit busy now, but I'll make it has brief as possible.

First, the bible never said the earth is 4,000 - 10,000 years, it is all the assumptions of men, that's why I've been telling you that your info in actually from the wrong source. The earth is actually over billions of years old and I can tell it will take scientists a while to completely explain the time space which the bible has already done, in fact it is only the bible that can clearly explain what happened in the billion of years and may the disappearance of certain animal species. But let me give you a lead, the years you see in the bible only started counting after man fell in the garden of Eden, after Adam disobeyed, how long he lived before that time nobody knows.

The Job scenario is another reason i hate the seemly craftiness of atheists in trying to disapprove God, they will want to use the knowledge and language of modern day to explain things discuss in the bible thousands of years ago, even when the bible was being compiled, this knowledge was still not available at that time, so the mode of communication was appropriate at that time, are you sincerely arguing that Job should have been concise about space and the configuration of the earth? but let me say this when you guys read other historians and prominent scientists of old who gave snippets of things today base on what was known at that time, you accept them and even explain them further base on knowledge gained over time but expect that the bible that predated them should have been more accurate.

Do you know my Pastor? have you read any of his books or materials? how many of his messages have you listened to? have you ever sat down in a service where a taught or preached in, in other words on what basis do you concluded that my Pastor doesn't know much?

About the 4 gospels, why don't you use the same arguments on the other scriptures or the old testament? Just reading the gospel of John and the book of 1 John, you will know it was written by the same author. Please kindly tell me what is the function of the 4 gospels in the bible and how it is significantly different from the epistles even when they were written at the same time and probably after the epistles was written.

Now to the Holy Spirit, I won't say much but this, you see the major issue many atheists and some professed Christians have is that the were never truly born again, what is known as false conversion. let me ask you a simple question, how does a man get born again (become saved and a christian), kindly support your answer with bible passages.

Why is the Holy Spirit so unique, you can never know until you taste him, there is no way you can ever convinced a man who has eaten honey severally that honey is not sweet, you maybe able to confuse a growing infant/child, but definitely not a grown man.

And finally, the test of Christianity is not in the devotion or activity others christian monks would have been the best of preachers and miracle workers, nor is it the how much bible verses you can quote or the history or the exigencies you know about the bible, neither is it in how long you've been a christian or how much you give to the church, the true test of Christianity is in how much of the revelation knowledge you have about Christ Jesus Ephe 1:16-22, Ehp 3:14-21, Phil 1:9-11, Col 1:9-11, Phil 3:8-14

shalom

noblefada:
First, I never denied it was not a payment option, but it was never meant for anyone to pay for the materials because the materials are absolutely free. Actually it only came up on the site a few months ago, because true Christianity teaches that anyone who is blessed Spiritually should communicate canals things to him/organisations that blesses him. Since many of those who benefit from the website are from all over the world and had shown intention to keep this simple bible principle, my Pastor had no other option but put it up, doing otherwise would have been living in disobedience.

The intent of the analogy was not classify based on the strata of knowledge, but to show the wide disparity in content. Please, I'm not trying to belittle you or anyone but will appreciate if you can understand that if we start a debate, it will only lead to folly, because you'll think I'm mad! The points I'll raise for my arguments and the side I'll come from will totally be oblivious to you, because if 90% those who are believers (Christians), who have the hope of internal will have a very had time accepting what I'm going to be saying saying and may even fight me over it, how much a man without the Spirit?

You may think that you've acquired an enamors amount of knowledge over the years, but I can tell you that they were all from the wrong source.

Let me give you a few examples

What if I told you that God can never do evil, has never done evil or killed anyone, simply because he lack the capability to?

From the book of Genesis, what if I told there was never a tree of the knowlede good and evil, nor was there a fruit or even a talking serpent?

What if I told you that they were no contradictions in the bible but the contradictions are actually in the heart of men, because they fail to understand that the bible was written in progressive revelation that many of the writers knew so little about God, and in fact their greatest desire was to know God. If you truly believe that there are contradictions in the bible, then the first culprit should be Jesus Christ because it seemed He contradicted many things the old testament said, try reading Math 5:1-end.

What of if I told you that no one ever saw God in the old testament not even Moses, that the Lord he communicated with was an Angel. Or for laughs, what if I told you that satan was never in heaven and did not fall down from heaven nor was he a choir master or music director. What if i told you that God din't not give the Israelite all the 613 laws but they were actually inventions of Moses with the aid of an angel??

I can go on on, but for us to have any fruitful discussion, I will prefer you listen to the materials at least if only the one I recommended, so as to give you a picture of what I believe. See, as much as God wants all men to be saved and is relying on us to make that happen, we're usually not perturbed by atheists because we see it has a waste of our precious time. I challenge any atheist who is so sure of his/her believe to get those materials, listen to them and then he can try and defend what he believes.

Now to your question, let me indulge you. The is only one simple reason why I'm so sure that Christianity is the only true and main religion, is not because many concepts of science that were clearly explained in the bible thousands of years before science caught up with it and confirmed them to be true (book of Job a classical example), nor is because the bible was written over 4 thousand years by different authors who never knew themselves, but spoke and prophesied accurately the same things and also things that were to happen hundreds of years after they were gone. No it not because the life and actions of Christ were prophesied hundreds of years before he was born even up to the words he spoke,no book could be that accurate, to the extend that 4 whole books (Mathew to John) dedicated to document and bear witness that this actually happen. Nor is it because there are plethora of evidence confirmed by historians and archaeologists of the existence of places, people and events that were exclusively mentioned in the Holy Book, No all this things although they count but are not the really evidence, the only one reason why I am so sure I didn't make a mistake is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in me, which Jesus promised to give to all those who believe in His name and work upon His Resurrection!

[b]Lies! How did the Bible clearly explained scientific concepts? How old is this planet according to the bible? 6 to 10,000 years. While science gives a more accurate description like 4 billion years. The Bible does not hold a candle to science in terms of explaining the natural world and providing for mankind.

Believers used words in the book of Job like Job 26:7, "...hangeth the earth upon nothing." as saying the Bible explained natural phenonemon so well before modern science. Wrong! The quote from Job is misleading. Even if the earth "hangeth upon nothing", something that "hangeth" must still hangeth from something. The fact that Job talks about the earth hanging at all is proof of its falsity. Now, if Job said something like "the earth floateth among the emptiness of the void", religionists would have something to talk about. However, saying that the earth "hangeth upon nothing" is no more meaningful than saying that "the convicted criminal hangeth upon nothing". I mean, yeah... obviously, he hangeth upon nothing. If he hangethed upon something, it would defeat the whole purpose of hanging him.

Unfortunately for Job, the earth hangeth upon the gravitational attraction of the Sun - otherwise it would wizz off into space.

About different authors writing the same things, arghhh...you can make anything to fit the narrative. Scholars have looked intently at the supposed prophesized and have found that they are at best ambigious and most of the time untrue. Spare me that rhethoric.

Matthew to John? You don't even know the history of those books. None of them is accurate. They are a copy of the copy of the copy. They have been edited and edited for purpose. The book of John, for instance, has more than 4 different varieties with widely varying texts. Do you know that none of the disciples of Christ wrote any of the gospels? Do you know that they were not eye-witness accounts? Do you know that many more gospels exists apart from the four gospels which Emperor Constantine refused to accept? Study church history, brother. Your Pastor, from what I have heard in the tracks, does not know a lot.

So the real reason you believe Christianity is true is because you believe you have the Holy Spirit? LOL

A few days back, I was telling a Christian friend of mine about speaking in tongues. She said she speaks in tongues and I told her that I have not lost mine. I went ahead to speak gibberish and she was left confused. She knows I am not a Christian, but by virtue of being a very devoted believer in the past, I can still summon the speaking in tongues in a convincing manner. LOL

It's all in the mind. There is no Holy Spirit.

Let me ask you: What has the Holy Spirit afforded you that unbelievers do not have? What is unique about the Holy Spirit in your life that differentiates you from other people who are not christians? In other words, what is your unique advantage?[/b]

My dear, that is the only reason why I know I can never make a mistake. Have you met the Holy Ghost, if you eventually do, then you will understand my confidence in this matter.

Shalom

The strangest coincidences of your life probably aren’t that strange at all
By Ana Swanson November 2 at 12:14 PM

Mathematician Joseph Mazur was in the back of a van snaking through the mountains of Sardinia when he heard one of his favorite coincidence stories. The driver, an Italian language teacher named Francesco, told of meeting a woman named Manuela who had come to study at his school. Francesco and Manuela met for the first time in a hotel lobby, and then went to have coffee.

They spoke for an hour, getting acquainted, before the uncomfortable truth came out. Noting Manuela’s nearly perfect Italian, Francesco finally asked why she decided to come to his school.

“She said, ‘Italian? What are you talk about? I’m not here to learn Italian,’” Mazur relates. “And then it dawned on both of them that she was the wrong Manuela and he was the wrong Francesco.” They returned to the hotel lobby where they had met to find a different Francesco offering a different Manuela a job she didn’t want or expect.

The tale is one of the many stories that populate Mazur’s new book, “Fluke,” in which he explores the probability of coincidences.

Mazur argues that most of the coincidences we experience -- like stumbling into a close friend halfway around the world, meeting someone with the same birthday, or even dreaming of an event before it happens -- can be explained by simple mathematics. If coincidences seem so surprising to us, it's because people often fail to understand how the basic laws of probability work.

The chance of meeting someone with your birthday

For example, you might be surprised to meet someone who shares your birthday. But should you be?

Mathematicians call this "the birthday problem," and they usually phrase it like this: How big of a group of people do you have to assemble before there’s a 50-50 chance that two of the people share the same birthday? If you haven’t heard this problem before, take a guess now before reading further.

Right away, you know that if you assemble a group of 366 people, there's 100 percent probability that two people will have the same birthday -- since there are only 365 days in a year, excluding leap year. But the probability is still almost certain with a much smaller group than that.

For this problem, it's easier to look at the opposite case, the probability that no two people in a room have the same birthday. To figure out the probability of two independent events occurring together, like two people being born on the same day, you need to multiply the probabilities of each event. So the probability that two people do not share the same birthday is 365/365 x 364/365.

That equals about 99.7 percent -- meaning that, with just two people, it's very likely neither will have the same birthday. The probability that three random people do not share the same birthday is 99.18 percent.

But as you add people to this equation, the probability that no two people are born on the same day starts to fall, first gradually, and then sharply. With five people, it's 97.3 percent. At 15 people, it's 74.7 percent. And to get better than even odds (50 percent or more) that two people in the room have the same birthday, you only have to assemble 23 people.

It might seem strange that that number is so low, but consider this -- every person you add to the mix is compared independently with every other person in the group. Among 23 people, there are 253 potential pairings -- which creates a lot of potential for two people to share a birthday.

As the graph below shows, by the time you reach 60 people, it's close to certain that the group will contain a birthday match.

[img]https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2016/11/probability.png&w=1484[/img]

The problem has interesting practical applications -- for example, figuring out how likely it is that the FBI's database of genetic material contains random matches between people. While the kind of DNA readings that are used to convict suspects in criminal cases are highly unique, studies have shown that the chance of a random match between two unrelated people may be higher than convicting juries assume.

The chance of a monkey writing Shakespeare

Mazur discusses another problem that tells you a lot about how people misunderstand probabilities: the monkey problem, which originated with mathematician Emile Borel.


In 1913, Borel decided to tackle an age-old question about randomness, Mazur says. “He asked the question, ‘Could totally random events amount to something meaningful?’ And the popular rendition of the question soon became, ‘Could a monkey randomly hitting the keys of a keyboard type out a Shakespearean sonnet?’”

You’ve probably heard the question before – it’s become widespread in pop culture, including in this Simpson’s clip from 1993, in which Mr. Burns keeps a roomful of monkeys hammering away on typewriters, in hope of creating the next great work of literature:


Borel's answer to the monkey problems was, essentially, yes -- a monkey will eventually type out a Shakespearean sonnet, though it could take a very long time. As Mazur says, the probability of a monkey randomly typing "shall" -- as in "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day" -- is in itself nearly 1 in 12 million.

But if the monkey tries many, many times, or more fellow monkeys join it in its endeavor, that probability starts to drop. With 8.2 million tries, the monkey has a better than even chance of typing the word "shall."

This same principle is used in brute force attempts to crack passwords, in which algorithms use trial and error methods to quickly run through potential password combinations. This is why longer passwords are so much more secure than shorter ones, just as it's much harder for the monkey to type out a sonnet than the word "shall."

Why coincidences are so surprising

A central argument of Mazur’s book is that people tend to make several common mistakes when thinking about probabilities.

For example, think of probability estimate like FiveThirtyEight's 2016 Election Forecast, which in early November showed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton with a 70 percent chance of winning and Republican candidate Donald Trump with a 30 percent chance. Many people look at a lopsided probability like that and assume that a Clinton win is all but assured. And if Donald Trump were to be victorious, some might assume FiveThirtyEight got it wrong.


But that's not, of course, how probability works. With more than a one-in-four chance, Donald Trump could still easily win the 2016 election.

Another reason people tend to misunderstand probability is our selective attention -- we notice and remember coincidences, but we hardly ever heed their absence. Think of all the people you've met who don't share your birthday, for example. It's a huge number in comparison to those who do share it. After meeting so many people who don't share your birthday, you're bound to meet someone who does.

This is a point that's illustrated by the monkey problem -- as the number of trials rises, even very rare events have a high likelihood of occurring.

Something similar happens with the Francesco and Manuela story. It seems like a strange event, but as you add in other pairs of popular names, and other hotel lobbies around the world, the probability of an incident of this type occurring begins to grow.

“The mistaken identity event is more common than we think because numbers behind them are larger than we imagine," Mazur writes. "[I]f we include all the hotel lobbies of the entire world, our number would grow so large that we should be certain that two pairs of people will have a mistaken identity meeting in some hotel lobby (I would guess) somewhere every hour!”

This tendency to overestimate or underestimate particular numbers is what gives rise to our great surprise at many coincidences. As Mazur writes, “we are often deceived by the magnitude of our world.” With so many chance events occurring to so many people around the world, stunning coincidences are only natural.

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/02/why-lifes-strangest-coincidences-really-arent-that-strange-at-all/

noblefada:
Haba! Be truthful, the content of the website is totally free and thousands all over the world have been downloading materials from the website free of charge (you can check up on the statistics of the website). The payment platform was requested by folks that have benefited from the website and specially ask for an opportunity to give back. Go and check, every material on that website can be downloaded without paying a dime. I think you should double check things before you post it on a public forum.

Did you download any of the material I referred you to? The thing I've against your post is that it is born from a mind that have no knowledge of who God is. It is due to a lack of or a seriously skewed knowledge about the personality of God.
I'm sorry I'll not engage you in any debate because our knowledge of the subject matter is totally opposite and too far apart hence the debate will not be fruitful. It's like for instance asking you who has a PhD in Quantum Physics coming to debate with me a diploma holder in music on the subject of life. It is going to an uneventful and unproductive debate.

Remember I said you knowledge about God is seriously lacking or very skewed! Let me give you a snippet of what I'm talking about, it is from one on the teaching I referred you to, The Law in Genesis Series 2 track 3. Please I beg of you listen, be patient and afterward lets talk.
I tried uploading the track but it's large, is there a way I can email it to you?

Shalom

HomoSapiien:
lol

PastorAIO:
No how no how, they must try to scam some money out of people shaaa...

noblefada:
Can you please stop this ignorant posts already! Writing so confidently about a God you know nothing about. At least get the right knowledge about the God first, rather than wasting many years posting irrelevant questions and jibes based on rumors you've heard about God.
Go to www.livingwordmedia.org and get the requisite knowledge, the teachings are free to download.

terzurum5:
Joseph1013 must here this

CHUKWU is not YAHWEH
- Steve Abia

Igbo Christians, please listen up, the Judeo-Christian god you worship is not the same as Chukwu, in Igbo mythology.

Chukwu is the Almighty supreme God. Our ancestors worshiped Chukwu through the lesser deities because his ways are are assumed to be too high for men - men need something closer to them, and Chukwu understands.

Chukwu is not jealous, unlike the Jewish God, Yahweh. He recognises the existence of lesser gods and He accords them respect. There is no conflict of interest. Chukwu is tolerant. He does not feel threatened by the arrival of new deities. Even when other gods become vicious,
Chukwu cannot loose his cool. He does not meddle with the mundane affairs of little men and gods. He is busy maintaining the cosmic balance.

Chukwu is more of an impersonal god - a god of the philosophers and the deist - rather than a personal god.

When Igbo Christians refer to Judeo-christian God as 'Chukwu', I'm perplexed. There is no relationship between Jehovah and Chukwu. The characters of both gods differ. The Jewish God is a very personal god, tribalistic, petty - he can butcher little kids for mocking an old bald man. He is claimed to be involved in the everyday affairs of men, he is viciously jealous of other gods and has threatened mankind with eternal fire for daring to ignore him.

Addressing the Jewish God as Chukwu is inappropriate and a mark of ignorance! This happens when a people refuses to teach their children their own stories and mythology but would rather teach them stories of far away cultures and lands.

TheGoodJoe:


Just as Iwobi is a wing option, Aluko can play as a wing forward too. He also an option for the ten role. A very good option. I will pick him before Iwobi because of Aluko's ability to attract players to him and create gaps for the forwards.

TheGoodJoe:

At least, they gained from the experience. With continuous moves like that, we can discover rare gems.