₦airaland Forum

Purist: Unless it's recorded somewhere, we cannot be entirely sure of the exact kind of audience Jesus had whilst giving that admonition. Having being reported to have wined and dined with all manner of sinners, it is not out of place to assume that there could have indeed been perverts and psychopaths present with him, especially given that he categorically stated that he came for the lost sheep of Israel.

Purist: Unless it's recorded somewhere, we cannot be entirely sure of the exact kind of audience Jesus had whilst giving that admonition. Having being reported to have wined and dined with all manner of sinners, it is not out of place to assume that there could have indeed been perverts and psychopaths present with him, especially given that he categorically stated that he came for the lost sheep of Israel.

LagosShia: it should not be seen as miraculous in the sense of changing natural laws or observing events that fall outside the comprehension of man. [b]this is part of the knowledge of the unseen revealed at a time when no such knowledge existed [b]

Note, moses wrote the first 4 books of the Torah, how long do u think the history of the nation of Israel is?

the bible is very well dated,

Like there contemporary Aristotle that live at about same period.
He got the issue of the shape of the earth wrong and it led to the dead of Galileo,

SNCOQ3: Its not about views, its about the fact. Your question has been answered.
White moth --> Black moth |True|
Moth --> butterfly |False|

Species could evolve from its kind within a short time hence the term , microevolution.

God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds[i], and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.[/i]Genesis 1:25

The title of Darwin's book is "Origin of the species" not "Transition of the species within their kind" -edit-
---------------
Perhaps i may have to start a new topic on this. I don't want to derail the thread further.

Uyi Iredia: Christianity is a first & formost a philosophy and what I mean by philosophy in this context is 'a way of living'. Christianity as a religion holds because it attributes divine qualities to the person of Jesus. I can't say its a religion because of its sacred texts or rites because such have evolved in different ways over the centuries with the result being a huge number of Christian sects loosely bound by common norms.

Lemme use this chance to itirate that Christianity is unique in the sense that there was a verification of the fact that its founder escaped death via ressurection. The means of verification was through eye-witnessing and internal evidence (which is done by cross-checking against the story itself for integrity). I must say that the touted Mithraism doesn't hold because it is very unlikely that there was an actual person called Mithras & its account of ressurection is a doctrine as opposed to Christianity which has 4 seperate accounts of an actual ressurection.

deols: even though late on this thread, and some of my thoughts already expressed, I see a need to make my position clear.

First, you cant term whatever happens to the houris objectification. If you do that then you may have to question why angels are the way they are, never with free will and always following the commands of Allah-would you term that objectification of angels?.how about animals, allowed to be killed, used for farm work, means of tranportation, etc. Next would be to question why some are born rich and others poor. It could even get as ridiculous as why a part of clay was used in creating Adam and the rest tramped on by Adam and his offspring. know please that Allah is God, the creator and the doer of whatever pleases him. Continuous questioning of his ways lead to knowwhere good. And thank God you are a religious person. To an atheist, the terms would av bn different.

Houris av roles and are not provided the kinds of thoughts that makes humans reject\accept the words of God. There's no jealousy in their hearts and are satisfied with their position with Allah.

In addition to that, women are not the only creations in paradise. The Qur'an describes the presence of young boys who serve as servants too. They are described as pearls.wouldnt you see that as a beautiful description too?

maclatunji: Now, this particular bolded comment proves that you have not yet fully embraced your femininity. It doesn't matter what you achieve as a woman, if you like become President/Queen of the world. You would not have fulfilled your full potential if you don't have a man you look up to for support and whom you would be willing to give-up virtually everything for. A good-enough example is the Queen of England, despite the hype that surrounds her, she has remained level-headed and respectful of her husband. Going by what you are subtly inferring, she probably would have had him kicked-out after some years and could easily have had her way- isn't she the British monarch? I am not married, but there are ladies whom if they told me to "do this" or "not to do that" on issues that have no contradictions to Islamic injunctions, I would find it difficult to say "No", some are much older, some are my mates- I hold their opinions and views in high esteem not because they seek to be "Amazons" but because they have truly embraced what it is to be a woman and my God! It does bring them much distinction in my view.



Femininity is being true to yourself as a woman- this means being a 'good' daughter, sister, wife and mother. 'Good' in that definition means being a source of joy, inspiration, support. In addition, it means being a care-giver, an adviser, a partner, a friend, a stabilizing influence and so much more.

Surely, emofine. You don't expect me to teach you how to be a woman.

LagosShia: it should not be seen as miraculous in the sense of changing natural laws or observing events that fall outside the comprehension of man.this is part of the knowledge of the unseen revealed at a time when no such knowledge existed and in some areas even the physical phenomenon were not seen or observed-take for instance the "burning sea".

truthislight: are u aware that some of the names u just mention at one time or the other did attempted refuting what the bible said as not being rational only to be prove otherwise later on?
That the catholic church errorniouesly kill Galileo by following the views of those individuals? While Galileo stuck with the bible?
did u just mention names and said " i dont think knowledge is divine?
I thought u will have Quoted what they did and let it be extra ordinary, o! Dont 4get that they have to humble themself and say it was anothers idea (God's)

are u telling me that this ur knowledge u are shearing with me i can take it and make a hip about it and it will stick just because u sheard ur knowledge? O! It will remain as the inthing and upto date for the next 3000yrs.

(Note, bible writers were not career men and have no ego to feed.
They were shepherd, kings, farmers, fisher men, doctors, servants.
Most had no formal training at all they. They were honest men, so, when they said God ask them to write i then have every reason to believe them. As the evidence show)

Men, does the world celebrate midiocrity?

If u are a science oriented individual u will agree with me that certain constants use therein are just out of this world and if u should attempt the proving u will know it just not that possible, if u ignore it ur mathematical solution becomes impossible, we accept inspiration from certain souces, but u will not just want to concede as long u have held to ur idear of no God.
u want to stay put, wont even appeal to reason.
By the way, if it was religion, we would have called that dogma.

I had ask u to advice me on what my conclussion should be after examining those info contain in the bible, unfortunately u 4got? Or, Is it that u avoided giving ur honest advise, less i know how honest ur mind is.

I appreciate the fact u are an intelligent fellow, but ur intelligent will serve more use if it gives credit to the designer then give such beaautifull credite to rude chance
peace

truthislight: If i am to agree with u, i will then assume that the bible is not Gods word, then i have to accept also the following:

a jew leaving in tent 3500yrs ago stood up, look at the sky and came up with the conlcussion that the earth is hanging on nothing And got it perfectly. Abi?

That a jew leaving 3000yrs ago also stood up and look at the sky and came up with the conclussion that the earth with its oceans is like a ball And got it perfectly right, abi?

That a jew leaving 3000yrs ago looked at the skies and knew that there are galaxies and got it perfectly right, abi?

That a jew leaving 3000yrs a go (without microbscop) look at his environ and saw bacterials and gave laws on it prevention from infections, also knew that the diseases thereoff are contagiouse and listed out it preventions and maintenance/diagnoses,

that a Jew 3000yrs ago, look at the skies and saw the water vepour going up to come back as rain, and listed the water cicle perfectly, abi? etc

that a jew look at his mothers womb and knew that when he was form there was a written code that guirded the proces, and got it perfectly right, (DNA) abi?

Why is it that it is only the jew that have this nag for getting it right spot on? But when other well educated men like aristotle attemted it they got it all wrong?(phylosophers)

That so many Jews without the assist from any God foretold the history in advance and that of other nations including the extinction of the nation of babylon of which it ruines is still with us just 50miles from Iran?

Etc, etc etc
kay17
Honestly tell me which i should accept that i will not look or rather fail?

nuclearboy: The love of something "higher" than self actually makes sense.

We leave behind the belief that we are all that matters, because we have subjugated our baser instincts to "something higher" - Women's Lib was not love for an individual but an ideal. Same with the end of slavery in the USA. People saw more than the guy in the mirror in these cases and I wonder if they would be called names for such decisions.

Absolute love for "God" in the same way subjugates our individual greed, selfishness etc because it is not completed except the "love your neighbor as yourself" comes into play! In effect, because your love God, you will then love His creation just as you "love" yourself because you see yourself in them!

My summary is that our friend from Mars is confused and doesn't even love himself. The responses above show simple respect for more moderate views is obviously lacking - yet in the same breath, there is allusion to respect and tolerance. But where is that respect for DeepSight? or for the one you label "Fool"? Or even for yourself?

Agape. Love base on Principle
of good toward others.
2. Philia. Love that exist among family members.
3. Erros. Love due to intimate attraction. intimate love.
4. ?? This love appeals to jealousy and greed

kay17, on the bible's authority.
When taking oath people swear to greater entities as a guaranty that they are saying the truth,
in the case of God since he says he is almighty he can not swear to smaller entities that he has once taken a challange to and destroy to show that there is no other greater than he is,
as such he usually swear by himself or to hlmself.
since he said that the bible is his word
who does he need to attest to lt to varify what he says?
However, Jesus christ is called the faithfull witness.
Do u want to stand on his way to default him on

Enigma: Posted elsewhere previously.



John Dunphy, “A Religion for a New Age,” in The Humanist (1983)

vescucci: Let's just say God will find himself in a very awkward position

edicolove: Please where is the evidence for the existence of atoms? Can you see air? So what is the evidence for air? What is the evidence that your dad is your dad? (No offense intended). Have you not seen people who after 40 years were told the person they ve called dad all these years was not their dad? That is why the bible declares that the visible things are the proof of the invisible. That there is an intelligently designed world and an intelligent man is the proof that there is God. You can choose to believe it just the same way you have chosen to believe everything else in life. Or you can choose not to. But many who have believed have experience Him after the believe in amazing ways!

edicolove: ^^^ Brilliant. Just to add. How can anyone even assert that intelligence came from unintelligent matter. The concept is the peak of folly and self deception.

Secondly, the basic definition of science dispels Atheism. Science is discovery. That means science will continue to evolve and update itself as new information is discovered. That is why the theory of logic itself is a contradiction. When someone says be logical, he is simply saying, explain or deduce based on available information. The problem with that statement is that five people with five different kinds/levels of information will give five different logical answers. And they will all be "right" based on the principle of logic. That is why the world was once believed to be square and pluto was once called a planet. But they turned out to be wrong. That is how many scientific principles today keep changing. Including what we were taught in school about atoms and neutrons and electrons.

What the bible presents is available information for a "higher form of logic". Those who don't understand it says it contradicts itself. But when you understand the foundational principles, you suddenly realize there is no contradiction but absolute cohesion and harmony. The danger and foolishness is to assume that what you cannot understand or explain doesn't exist. The spiritual world is a higher level of intelligence than the physical world and its existence cannot be denied. When you understand and accept the basic fact that man is a spirit being, the rest becomes easy. But when you claim man is soulless like animals, then you limit yourself to only getting knowledge and information from the five senses available in the physical realm!