₦airaland Forum

TV01:
My post are always good - don't you remember from our unfinished chat on abortion !


I didn't say they had to, neither did I say it could not "work" - another subjective term - if neither of the two adopt a "submissive" or the corresponding "authoritative" position. Did you not read my intro and endng?

What I said - and my position is - biblically, the husband is head of the home, tasked with overall leadership with the attendant authority. I have no issue with others subsribing to a different model. My challenge is against a re-interpretation of the Christian one.

See above. I don't know about "position", it's more of an attitude, but like I said, your notions of what submissive means in the Christian context need to be thorougly parsed.

Your position is very progressive and PC sounding, but would be a rare exception even in a non-Christian setting. Human nature and the dynamics of relationships between men and women mean it's very rare that there is not someone "wearing the trousers" in a relatiosnhip.

If it's not the man, it's most likely the woman, even if it's by stealth manipulation. Even in same-sex pairings, there is typically a parody of normal male-female pairings, with one taking the lead/being dominant.

It's also worth noting that attraction in women is in part stimulated by a notion of her mate having higher status. And the respect she accords him rests to a great degree on that status - exactly why the bible enjoins wives to respect their men.

For men, being men is a large part dependent on them beaing allowed or tasked with being so. Many women whine that men are intimidated by successful women. Actually, to a large degree they are not - they just feel that such a relationship will be hard due to the dragging of headship.

That in a nutshell is why Western marriages crash so frequently. The more like a man the woman is, the more frustrated they both get. Subsuming biology to progressive ideology and PC notions. It's why we strive here . Most of the women now can't engage in a debate without predicating their position on the notion of "equal rights"

Not to personalise it, but please tell us that all your own relationships have been totally egalitarian. Or better yet, let any woman on NL come and tell us her marriage is such


Oh the sacrifice


TV

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female-led_relationship
http://www.aboutflr.com/Guided-Training.html
http://wife-led-marriage..co.uk/2013/07/blog-post.html}

The biblical position you endorse, sounds to you not just as the natural way of things but divine way of things, isn't it? Now on what premise is the headship granted to men? Of course it is not arbitrary, right?

KingEbukasBlog:
@bolded -x1
R1
Not really for someone who has experienced it because that serves an evidence .

John 20:29



Will you believe if you
1. See Him
2.Healed instantly through prayers

@bolded -x2
R2. If x1 is proven to be true then the universe cannot be self-existent

Still boils down to this(for me)
→ Supreme Being
→ Creator
→Wonder worker
→ Highly intelligent being

When one has been proven to be true then all are true - This is me !

If I see Jesus, how would I realize him? The internet is not filled with his actual pictures to compare against. Besides, what if it is the Devil and not Jesus? What is the difference between the two's appearances?

Again how does a human being without metaphysical senses, experience a metaphysical being?! What if I pray and a miracle does not occur, wouldnt that be proof for me that there is no God?!

UyiIredia:
Wrong. Only 1 has the premise that order has intelligence behind it. 2 has the premise that codes have intelligence behind them. Your allusion to an infinite regress of intelligent causes is illogical for a reason I hope is obvious, namely an infinite regress of causes can't reach a given effect. Yes, I think the cause of consciousness was conscious.

At least you find a code to be some form of order and arrangement, that is what makes it special, isn't it? Now since there will be a regress, it means NOT all forms of order or arrangement is formed by intelligence.

Again read what you wrote. "Consciousness has a cause and its preceding cause is conscious." That does not make sense. because what you said was an existing consciousness is the cause of consciousness.

KingEbukasBlog:
God is a
→ Supreme Being
→ Creator
→Wonder worker
→ Highly intelligent being
These are basic characteristics of Him every Christian knows . If obviously he performs wonders/miracles in our lives , seen we are created in his image , and have witnessed how He got us through problems . So why shouldn't we see Him as the creator of the universe?



I believe you bro


faith ?



I suppose cavemen stories of women being physically weak because they took care of the kids in the caves are not true then


strange names of people

But the Christian reality is built on Faith. But we are not talking about Faith but an objective reality that speaks for itself.

KingEbukasBlog:
God is self-existent

When "God" is said , basic descriptions of Him should come to mind

→ Supreme Being
→ Creator
→Wonder worker
→ Highly intelligent being

If these are understood , then you have no problem . Can this be proven outside the bible? Yes and BASICALLY

→Existence , Design and Complexity of life forms
→Miracles
→Effects of His Power on Nature
→Personal Experiences

I mentioned this somewhere --- https://www.nairaland.com/2285941/atheism-religion-kolooyinbo-explains/5#33380518

Saying God is self existent is not enough. Anything can be said to be self existent. The difficult part is substantiating it. Also why can't the Universe be self existent as well?! If that sounded absurd, similarly is what you said about God.

UyiIredia:
I made the same arguments on another site and couldn't convince atheists there. Maybe I'll have better luck here . . . OR NOT !

1) The existence of the universe demands an explanation. The order of the physical universe which ensures it adheres to laws which can be inferred suggests an intelligence behind the universe.

2) The genetic code in living organisms precludes the possibility they arose naturally. Natural processes CAN'T give rise to codes which don't follow natural laws. As humans, we know that codes are always made by conscious effort so the presence of codes in living things is grounds to infer that God exists.

3) Consciousness in man is not explainable by materialistic means. Emergence can't explain consciousness since typically it deals with new physical properties that arise due to complex interactions. But the consciousness isn't physical and so can't be explained by purely material means moreso since physical things lack consciousness. This is good grounds to believe that a God that effects consciousness exists.

1. and 2. have hidden premises that all forms of order and arrangement must have intelligence behind it. The difficulties for these premises, is where the intelligence is embedded, whether in a human or non human. And intelligence itself is a form of order, therefore intelligence must be created created by an intellig....

As regards 3. do you think the cause of consciousness was conscious?

buchibrand:
And that's what they actually are. That's one of the reasons they don't stop "SUCKING"... Have you considered the mystery behind mothers still having control over their son even after they are married and have kids?

And God in his infinite wisdom decided to place this "sucking child" over the full woman. I can only guess the results.

ihedinobi2:
The agitation for equality with man is, from a Christian perspective, very puzzling. It makes no sense because apart from the fact that you can never equate different things, woman is in an incredibly privileged position. She is made so important to the man that it is instinctive for him to forego his life and comfort for her to have both for herself. As a matter of fact, the man is always under a pressure to make her as important as God to himself. That makes it so weird that women want to be more. What more can you become? Men have broken old friendships and alliances over women, gone to war over women, died deaths - sometimes foolish, shameful deaths, over women, given up their pride over women. What more do women want then?

By privileged position, what does that mean? Is she above or below the man?!

@ the bolded, men have done the same for money, properties, fame and any other object.

TV01:
Before I respond let me say this; I'm a marriage advocate, there is no gainsaying that - here on the Family section anyway. That does not mean that I subscribe to, or endorse every model of marriage.

Nor does it mean I ever mean to be prescriptive about how individuals go about their marriages or feel that I am able to appraise the dynamic of those marriages.

And neither do I feel the need to comment on or quantify the love or happiness therein - not least because they are at best subjective, and not actually integral to any definition of marriage. So if a woman in a polygynous union or a man in a polyandrous one claim to be madly in love and deliriously happy, I have no reason to question or dispute that.

No, and not only have I not alluded to that, I have plainly stated the opposite - that I don't, not that she's superior .

The pejorative use of the word "lower" is for you to tackle on your own. I said no such thing and hold no such view. As men and women are "different", but complimentary, so are their attributes, relative strengths, roles and responsibilities.

As you can see, my first response somewhat obviates this question.

The model I subscribe to and endorse is biblical marriage. Hence, I am always ready to challenge and be challenged on it's particulars. The scriptures clearly outline certain responsibilities and authority to the husband in plain contradistinction to an expectation of submission and obedience from his wife.

If anyone has pejorative notions or preconceived positions as to what those terms imply, or how they are meant to play out on a union, again please tackle those in your own time, projecting them into debate here just makes things drag.


TV

Good good.

In a relationship amongst equals, because you have clearly said women are neither inferior nor superior to men, therefore are equals to men; neither of the equals needs to assume a submissive position for the obvious reason of being equals. Their status does not allow. Since you have accepted this basic premise, why then do you advocate for a submissive position for women?!

TV01:
You introduced an interpretation of scripture which attempted to reconcile feminist ideology and Christian doctrine. I disagreed with that and explained why.

This is not primarily about your home – or mine. Nothing has been twisted, your points have been clear and clearly wrong IMO. And I have taken care to outline my points – even when you make reference to prior discussions I can barely recall.

This isn’t about you, it’s about the obviously feminist reading of scripture you present. Through a mix of scripture and your own marriage you have clearly stated as follows;

“A husband leads by submitting, setting an example and loving his wife”
“One has equal rights in marriage and decisions are always jointly taken”
“Submission = love” – with an emphasis on love as the determinant

You have found no place for distinct male leadership, wifely obedience, or differences in authority - all scriptural. You reject all those notions, and usually not in a plain manner, doing so stylishly.

Even more oddly you allude to a husband earning leadership, which is not actually distinct, but a function of submitting, setting an example and loving his wife. Effectively placing the wife as the authority in the home.

Feel free to refrain or quit, but whenever you post what I consider to be scripturally suspect, I retain the right to respond.

Greet Oga


TV

You find a woman to be inferior to a man? if however you find her merely different from a man, why does she assume a lower position in the matrimonial arrangement?

Do you think love can exist only between equals?

Darkrebel666:
I never said it did

You did in your quint demonstration of how males are "more equal" than females due to their physical strength, mental fortification etc.

Darkrebel666:
• Yes, I said I believe in equality of the sexes, but i strongly disagree that women are being discriminated against in Nigeria. you are given equal platforms, sent to school and can secure jobs as well.
I also don't think Nigerian feminists know what they really want. I think they are pretenders that just want to feel westernized, because I still don't know what they are vying for.
How can a free man be lamenting all day and begging for freedom?

• The "likes" and social media aspect was an analogy to prove to you that women(Nigerian) are shown preferential treatment and favoured and aren't discriminated against.
Why should a woman get 100000 likes on Facebook just for saying "she's thirsty online" and why should a man get 10 likes for his picture that's been up for 2 months?
. Isn't that gender discrimination against men? But are we crying. Yet we continue to like your photos cos unlike you we aren't nagging or cry babies. or you think its the Seraphim in the 7th heaven that likes the photo?

• Don't even include the house chore thing. its totally irrational and without a droplet of logic
How can you compare mere house chores to venturing out daily to face the asperity and harshness of the Spartan world to source for bread?. even if its not a manual job, house chores isn't close to that. Don't include it at all

• You said the inequality and discrimination is a mental thing?... correct. That's what you should have said sincr.
In as much as it isn't manifested physically in Nigeria here especially, its still ingrained in the cerebrums of every male in the spiral galaxy that we are superior to these people.(women)
I accept and agree. but I'm sorry you can't change that and I don't think that mentality is changing anytime soon.

(I'm not a believer) but even the Bible said youknowwho took from Adam's ribs to create 'b1tch'
The same bible said women should submit to their husbands.

• My point is: feminists should apply the animal farm theory which is: All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others

In this case we males are more equal, no matter how equal the society may seem or you want it to be. that utopian society feminists want is never gonna happen.

We are biological animals and its all about survival of the fittest. Why would you think you are equal with someone you are physically stronger than, faster than, emotionally fortified than, and most times more smarter than?

If you really want equality then I should be able to slap a woman without being called names.

Lalai Ali should be ready and able to get into a ring with Floyd may weather or Vitali klitchko

Venus Williams must be ready to play with Rafael nadal

women and men should also play soccer together and compete. I.e Lionel Messi play with women and against women etc

That's when its gonna be equal, but why are we deceiving ourselves though.? no matter what , we(males) would still come out on top...
.feminists/women would never own a phallus or be men.
Cheers.

I strongly doubt physical strength implies mental fortification

buchibrand:
The truth is that we all pretend online to be saints, but real sinners in practical terms. Even in the advanced world not africa alone, men often cheat on their spouse. Now lets come home, most african men see no fault in having women outside there matrimonial home bit when a woman does same, the whole community will label her evil, prostitute..... Even your mother endured such to keep her marriage alive.... This advice is for those who want peace to reign in there home

Depends on how you define 'peace'. Peace can mean 'suspended tension' which will eventually explode or implode whichever is suitable.

buchibrand:
APOLOGY IS KEY IN EVERY RELATIONSHIP.

To apologize is to say "Am Sorry", it also means, "I respect You", I still "love You", I value this
Relationship and i want it also to continue

If you love and cherish your relationship, you must
do all it takes to protect it. One of the things you must
do at any time the situation calls for it is, APOLOGY.

You must learn to say "Am Sorry" to your partner or
spouse each time you err.

Saying "am sorry" when you are wrong is compusory and must be adhered
to, if love and peace must thrive.(but this is not the
best, because it has no extra-ordinary effect)

SAYING "AM SORRY" WHEN YOU ARE RIGHT: here is where the key lays.
Ladies, this is the sacrifice you have to make for your relationship to succeed.
"Am Sorry", say it to him when he erred and refuse
to say sorry to you.
When he is arrogant and so
proud, despite the fact that he remains the offender. go ahead, say it to him and keep your marriage forever. Men are naturally Egoistic, you can't take that away
from them and at the same time , you can not contest
it with them. Yet you can ride on a man beautifully,
just by making his ego of no effect, How?

At that point when he is waiting for you to detonate
the already made dynamites (he erred, refuse to say
sorry but waiting for you to say a word that will set
the relationship on the fire of destruction). If you can,
go to him, bow down and say "babe"(or what ever
way you wish to sing hs praises, tell him you are sincerely sorry. Just do all you can at that poit in time
to get him off that arrogant mood and before you
knew it, he's in your arms again. Men are exalted babies.

Source: www.successbookz.biz/2014/10/apology-key-to-relationship-success.html

Wouldn't that be dishonest? You place a thread about furthering dishonesty in the Religion section.

What religion do you think endorses this sort of dishonesty?

craziebone:
that's just a near by hole into which feminists run to hide anytime their excesses are being pointed out to them. They become ashamed of their hate and run back like a threatened rat into that hole.

When you say men need to be made to feel GUILTY to balance work and family, that shows deep sitting hate and jealousy somewhere. A hate and jealousy deeply rooted in deliberate ignorance an denial. Fact is...men have always been asked how they balance work and family? You think Omotola's husband wasn't askedthe same thing? The last time i went on night journey back home from school, it was the question the main driver had to answer in a discussion that broke out between some of us passangers and the driver. Men who do very demanding jobs are asked that same question. Soldiers, pilots, etc. Truth is...anyone that does demanding job will get asked that question. Women who do not do demanding jobs don't get asked that question so aslo men who do not too demanding jobs. But no, Chimamnda won't see that, better still, she saw it and decided to over look it. And that's why i said it is a deliberate ignorance or denial.

You think she was encouraging men to spend more time at home to take care of the kids? I am not a big fool, my dear Bukynte. She used the word "guilt" for crying out loud and that's a negative word. It is associated with hate and resentment. The lady chimamanda may be a literary icon, but she is capable of hate and bitterness.

Do women or anyone else feel guilty when asked the curious question "how do you manage work and family?" i can tell you that no one feels any guilt. The only ones who say they feel guilty are the ones like chimamanda who sees gender in all things! Just as only her saw gender in "...you are a small girl". I have already proven it from my first post in this thread that she is obsessed with the idea feminism and we just can't take such people's words without looking closely at them. You put someone down every single time you attack their conscience and you make them to feel guilty for what they never had a hand in. It is simple for you to pretend you do not get me and that's because you are at the other side of the divide. Every single time you claim someone has got privileges, you put him down and insult his struggle. Have you ever had to pay your school fees as a secondary or even primary school pupil? Have you ever been left to grow up on your own? If you call it a failure of fatherhood then i will also call it a failure of motherhood! Have you ever been manhandled by the police or even extrajudicially killed just because of your gender? If you doubt me, why don't you take a strole to the anatomy department of your school and count the dead bodies having bullet holes. See how many are males and how many are females. You think they are all guilty? Even if they are a suspect, what happenes to innocent until proven guilty?

A young lion is expeled from the pride as soon as he begins to grow the mane (hair around the head). Even though now he is a bit bigger than his sisters of the same litter, you can see he is still a boy. The period between his departure from the pride and the time he teams with another male to win a pride, how was he living really? How did such a young cub survive the dangerous jungle? Nobody knows! And that's because nat geo wild doesn't care very much. You can see that this attitude of "the man doesn't matter" is also in our attitude to the male animal too.

I am not saying some should come and help us, no! In fact, how do you want to begin to correct it when it is basic? We men are not complaining about it. We see no problem with it. We actually need it to be who we are and who you all TRUELY wish to have (i can prove this point too). The only reason we bring it up is because you accuse us of having privilege. Meanwhile, this thing you call privilege is simply a reward, on a closer observation.

Taking that gender roles are indeed social constructs, aren't there circumstances whereby a man within a family steps into the typical role of the mother and vice versa for the woman in the absence of such figure due to death or divorce. The reality is that social roles are inherently flexible.

craziebone:
The change came in when western education came around and society started moving from rural-agrarian to urban industralized. Suddenly, the man realized the farm doesn't give political and economic power anymore and as part of his adventuousness and quest for fulfilment, which are an integral part of him and not a social construct (i am NEVER GOING TO DEBATE THIS), he went to school at all cost, even if it means being branded a deviant, lazy and disrespectful like i explained above; even if his school fees were not going to be paid; even if he had to work and pay for it like he is even doing today! Fact still remains that most of the people paying their school fees are still males! An some people like Chimamanda is still being obsessed about a false male privilege. It is important to note that at that point, not many ladies showed interest in formal western education. Why should they? Why should most people, especially when they did not need to read and write to be able to function properly in their rural-agrarian society? Yes, i said "most people" because initially, and at independence, only 7percent of Nigerians were literate. And that means of the 93percent illitrates, men could account for about 46percent.

You can get angry all you want about my assertion that women are 'grounded' by nature hence their intrinsic desire for stability and security. They don't seem to be worried about this and they don't have to. It is also natural that are 'grounded' as such. Evolution frees them for that. That's why if mars becomes inhabitable today but still presents harsh condition, most people who will go there are start a life even in that harsh condition would still be men.

The problem with men like you, is ignorance. Your arguments begin with false premises of what women are. You are suggesting women lack drives to be powerful and successful. For example you said men desired and worked hard at being successful while the women have an intrinsic desire for stability. Where the hell did you discover that?! That was made up!

At least you know men are at a higher level than women in society.

thorpido:
I'm for equality and i support the movement that empowers women, protects them and ensures they have a voice in the society.

What I just disagree with is the movement that wants a woman to do whatever a man does.An example is the free the nip.ple movement that some are promoting.Just because some men do not wear a shirt in public(not that it is right), a woman also should do the same.
Another example;in the home,if it's time for dinner and food is to be cooked,should there be a need to throw a dice to pick who should do the cooking?I'm not saying it has to always be the woman who should do the cooking or that she should even cook if she is not in a good position to do so but to say because she's a woman she shouldn't have to do it will be ridiculous to me.

in as much as equality brings everyone to an equal footing, it also regresses the exceptional to the ordinary.

i think we should support a system whereby everyone gets a fair opportunity but like a race, the best man wins.

Intendy:
says who

because the supposed victim was not injured. the money to be awarded is to compensate for the injury. Now back to common sense, if there is no injury no compensation

meshacha1:
Sue them, no time.
Get your self a good lawyer and a media (i.e radio or TV station) to back you up.
That's all you need and you're done.

Unfortunately you are not going to get money from it.

The level of self entitlement is suffocating! This is one of the reasons why most international oil companies do not set up oil refineries because of the level of hostility in most oil producing regions.

ozoigbondu:
I still don't get why people kill their innocent unborn child.lf you want to bleep around like a goat do it responsibly with condom or better yet zip up

Don't abortion and contraceptives serve the same end?

Sweetguy25:
In summary, Tinubu wants government to print more naira to support and develop critical infrastructure. He thinks that government should not depend on revenues from crude oil to develop critical infrastructure, government should rather print money to build infrastructure like roads etc.

I like the idea but I doubt Buhari will.

Print money?!! Money without corresponding value in goods or service?!

oladapolif:
Its left for you to have a sensible mind about this man Ojukwu and what really triggered the Nigeria Civil War, that have wasted many igbos lives by putting them on a line. I am Yoruba and today, I decided to re-read about this Biafra war and why the Nigeria government did not want igbos to leave, because I am tired of Igbo cries and I want Nigeria to break up as well. I went on Wikipedia and to what I can gather about the causes of the war, was that Ojukwu doesnot like the Northerners in Power and he wants the igbos to be charge, due to the natural resource "Oil" is in the Eastern Region. The igbos were collecting Royalties from the Oil production even before the war. Most countries that supported Nigeria Govt. during war, was because of their Nations' interest. Uk was supporting Nigeria Govt cos of their Shell Company, USA was partially supporting Nigeria Govt cos of their Investments in Nigeria, Isreal was supporting Biafra cos of their nations Interest as well. Take a good look at these nations supporting each party, Do you think they give a fkkk about Africans, if they have nothing to gain from us?.( tell me about other Africa civil war and what Europe country give a fkkk, if they have nothing to offer to the Europeans?) Biafra claim they lost due to Starvation, will you feed your opponent when you are fighting, but Biafra refuse to acknowledge the fact that they went to war with less ammunition. Biafra have continue to blame Awolowo for their failure and forget the power of propaganda. We should be more focus on Ojukwu, who rushed the Biafra youths to war without better plan, We should also remember Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi, who is power hungry as Ojukwu and he also betrayed his fellow Biafrians, We should talk about how Ojukwu released Banjo to fight his own people. To me, I believe Ojukwu should have been held accountable when he was alive for leading Biafria to war when they are not fully ready, I believe the causes of the war should be more focused on and if Biafra want to create their nation, they should do it in a diplomatic way. I am not been biased in anyway, just according to what I could gather online about the causes of the civil war.

But you have to discuss the July coup and the pogrom and the effects on a young Nation. There was the Aburi accords which the federal government at that time rescinded unilaterally

@koloyinbo.

KoloOyinbo:
God sees everything that was, that is and that will be. So His will cannot contain errors. Perhaps he may test us (for our benefit and the benefit of others) but he already knows the result!

I will open a new thread on the topic God.

Jackeeh:
And who decides when one's time is up? His name is JEHOVAH. You can pity Christians all you want. on judgement day, we will equally pity u. But I pray u have a change of heart before that day. I don't know about those who died due to accidents. I don't know about Nepal. All I know is I have a very close and personal relationship with the Creator of this whole universe. I tell Him what I want and as long as it's in line with His words, He honors them. I don't have to wait for anyone to tell me about this God. I personally seek Him everyday nd I've found Him. We are living in a corrupt and wicked world. We humans have spoilt this world for ourselves. And since satan is the ruler of this world, anyone who hasn't chosen God, is a pawn in Satan's hands. The only thing we have is choice. In a terrible world as this, I've chosen God and life. So I'll live till I'm ready to go. Not before. It's my decision and choice. If everyone can choose God, our time on this earth would be much sweeter

Is a prayer a command or a petition?

If it is a command, then all that matters is the validity of the authority and whether it is recognized.

If it is a petition, then it must be pleading for a correction of an error. Otherwise what would be the point of a petition against total perfection?!

bushdoc9919:
UAE, and Norway also have diversified economies. (The Saudis wish they had one too....that's why, for example...they opened a University of Science and Technology several years ago.It certainly was not for show).

UAE produces about 800,000 barrels per day more than Nigeria does....for a population of 11 million, compared to Nigeria's 170million people. Saudi and Norway are the world's no 1 and two oil producers....ie they produce far more oil than Nigeria....and BOTH of them have populations less than 12 million people.

Our oil is definetly not ENOUGH for all of us.....even for the South South. That is why we need to diversify. Resource dependency is sooo 1960's.

And don't start signing about agriculture....or even solid minerals...that is even another resource dependency.....especially as Science renders raw materials useless every day.

No...Nigeria has to develop an industrial and innovative economy. Oil is a CURSE.

You are missing out the connective here -- Good Governance System.

Assuming UAE and Norway had no GGS, there wouldn't have being a diversified economy. UAE was formerly an impoverished state, and with the development of her oil industry, she geared towards tourism etc. Norway on the other hand, was able to manage its resources in such a manner it did not interfere with its already diversified economy.

Oil resource --> GGS ---> Diversified economy.

Oil resource --> no GGS ---> Monoeconomy or dysfunctional economy.

Nigeria once had a diversified economy but upon the development of her oil industry, everyone got hooked.

The only substantial difference with Nigeria, Angola one hand and UAE and Norway on the other is GGS.

Orijin101:
During our Sunday school service in church today, this question was being asked by one of our members and it leads to a serious argument. So, I've decided to share the same question with you guys also.

Is it possible to change God's will through prayer?

your opinions are highly welcome.
cc: lalasticlala

It should depend on how perfect God's will is. Wills do change in order to avert error, and if God sees his will contains errors, prayers might shed light to this and God would then change.

UyiIredia:
Wrong. Since God is God there's nothing He cannot do.

Except logical absurdities of course.

rabbuy:
Easy... Arrest all current politicians ..... Kill em by firing squad for those wey get jazz I go make dem die by bomb blast..
Then I will ammend the constitution and enforce a salary of 200k for all senators and 500K for presido all in naira and the rest of the money used for making Nigeria a paradise
I will privatized all the sectors neccessary make sure unibersities are lower than polytechnics so as too boost graduates that can DO something with what they learnt ... That's why we re behing in engeering university cert is al what majority of engeering frims are after which is not right....
That done I will ipmprt solar roofs for all who are ready to ditch Nepa which will be heavily subsidized.. And electric cars so crude oil would be as water... I will make top notch enginneers from all parts of the world come down here to teach my people the field efficiently and effectively... Scholarships will be the other of the day.. Agriculture will improve.. I will encourage urbanization for the rural states so as to depopuate lagos.. Then boost the rail system making sure it is more welcomed than buses... Infrasturcture will also enjoy transformation I wil make underground tunnels yeah I Ike it... This is just 1/4 of what I will do by the tie four years elapse Nigeria wil vote me in again ten times over... Amen!

And also create schools for written languages.

TheFilmmaker:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse

How then do you explain healthy economies with natural resources?

The wiki article concedes on the role of a good governance system.

TheFilmmaker:
This is the best article I read on nairaland this year, followed by your verbal and venom laced biography of Barcanista a while back. I'm sure you remembererd.

Nice one people.

Mizmycoli, Tallesty, MrPresident1, Trusted, Okija_juju.

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/institutionsandenvironmentalefficiencyeppresentationdecember6-131206081811-phpapp01/95/christopher-a-hartwell-institutions-resource-rents-and-cleanliness-the-institutional-basis-of-efficiency-in-resourcerich-countries-4-638.jpg?cb=1386318121

Is resource wealth the cause of underdevelopment?

No, the true cause is poor governance system. States that have good systems manage their resources better. Examples UAE, Saudi Arabia, Norway etc.