₦airaland Forum

bukatyne:
Yea

Did not get your other question though

Besides, I am trying to understand how submission works in s.ex

No you have excluded premarital sex as being sinful. So submission is not blind obedience but reasonable.

shaqhead:
OP Ur post makes so much sens especially d part where u syd people who dnt believe God for small things overnyt become Faith Practitioners just because someone said this or said that. Have heard of a Mrs Kunle too. D problem is informatn...too many uninformed and misinformed folks. I think the issue of Faith and Medicine complement rather than conflict each other because it takes Faith to take Medicine for it to work.
Hey OP dnt regret following u!

If Jesus can heal with a touch why can't any other faithful Christian do so? Jesus never recommended a hospital bed for a Christian and for a Christian to be the son of God, wouldn't a benefit include healing.

bukatyne:
How can the man ask for punnany? We are talking Christian here and even if he says so, lady has the right to say no. Submission is not blind obedience and it is 'as to the Lord' Afterall, a married woman will not steal because her husband said so. As much as we are one in marriage, salvation and judgement is personal

I do not understand your last question

So we can conclude that during every dating and courtship phase a woman goes through with a man she loves, she must submit to such man, right? And such submission must not be total submission but reasonable submission, right?

bukatyne:
Hi Kay17,

Welcome to the thread

Since Christian marriages are in discussion, I would always say love first before submission becasue that is the order obtainable in Christ & the Church's relationship. The marriage has always been in the husband's hands because he is the leader and should lead by example. There are bible verses that tell us that God loved us first before we reciprocated and I do not think that negates the principle of love.

If a believing wife married an unbeliever, she has the duty of upholding the marriage whether he loves her or not
A woman loving first? Well, the husband should reciporate.
@Love & submission in courtship, I believe and encourage it. Once a couple is in courtship, it is believed that they have agreed to get married and are getting to know themselves. There is no magic in the vows that makes an unsubmissive woman become a submissive wife and vice versa. Both of them must start learning how to relate with eachother from the courtship which will be carried out in marriage.

What are the consequences of a woman submitting to a man during courtship, aren't you delivering a dangerous advice? The man can command for the "forbidden fruit" which isn't a legitimate request.

In respect to the bolded, the woman does not need to wait for a husband's love to reciprocate to but why does the Bible say to the contrary?

Horluwahighdee:
Almighty God 0f c0urse?.obatala z a tin,a man-made g0ds,dey r jz 0bjects. 4 example,0gun(g0d 0f iron)& u knw 0f course dat G0D creatd ir0n...

Obatala is not the idol, rather the idol is a mere representation of Obatala. Obatala is not the same with the man made idol. Just as Jesus is not the rosary or the statue. Ogun is the God of Iron because he created the Iron.

So in effect, you misunderstand these Gods and give their credit to your own God.

koikoi2:
It's a pity u all sound like atheists. U wake up in d morning, breath d air u don't know how it came abt and wait for ur parents to feed u. I don't blame u. Do u know how u are formed ? Do u know how many millions of person struggled in Ur mother's womb to enter this world d way u came?
It takes a spiritual minded person to understand what am saying not a babo*n like u guys.
There are thousands dat God has healed wen modern medicine failed to. I am a live witness to dat.

Ok, good

jesussaves22:
THIS IS WHAT KILLED MY UNCLE OOOOO. WHENEVER HE GETS SICK HE WILL NOT AGREE TO VISIT THE HOSPITAL ,THIS HAPPENS SO MANY TIMES BUT HE REFUSE SIMPLY BECAUSE HE IS A BELIEVER WITH WATCHMAN CHURCH. EVEN HIS PASTORS TOLD HIM TO VISIT HOSPITAL BUT HE REFUSED. ONE DAY HE WAS IN THE CHURCH AND THE ILLNESS STRUCK HIM DOWN INSIDE THE CHURCH AND WAS RUSH TO HOSPITAL BY THE CHURCH MEMBERS AFTER TWO DAYS HE REGAIN HIMSELF AND THREATEN TO GO AND WAS DISCHARGED AS HE WISH BUT LO AND BEHOLD THE ILLNESS STRUCK AGAIN HE NOW DEMANDS TO VISIT HOSPITAL. WHEN THEY GET TO FMC OWERRI HE WAS DIAGNOSE WITH A DETERIORATED KIDNEY FAILURE HENCE THERE IS NO MONEY FOR TWO KIDNEY TRANSPLANT. HE WAS DISCHARGED TO GO HOME. SO HE RESORTED TO NATIVE MEDICINE WICH TOOK LARGE SOME OF MONEY BEFORE HIS DEATH. MY BROTHERS DO NOT BE DECEIVE OOO BECAUSE GOD ALMIGHTY CREATED PHYSICIANS AND GAVE THEM THE KNOWLEDGE WHICH THEY ARE USING TO HEAL DISEASES AND ILLNESSES. IN THE BOOK OF EZEKIEL GOD INSTRUCTED HIS PEOPLE TO USE HERBS AND EAT FOR THERE DISEASES TO BE HEALED. WE MUST DIE BUT NOT TO DIE FOOLISHLY. THANKS

What would Jesus have done? Asked the man to go to the General Hospital? Wouldn't Jesus lay hands on him? I don't know why Christians do not practice their faiths but are adept at propagating it.

Horluwahighdee:
kk.but God created this ones 2...den ao can we answer d questiom?

Which God created them?

koikoi2:
My dear op, there ar certain illnesses dat can defy modern medicine. There is physical sickness and spiritual sickness. Evil forces can send u cancer,tuberculosis, epilepsy, barenness, HIV,etc dat ar incurable. Only God can heal such cases.

If modern medicine can cure all sicknesses, then YarAdua wudnt hv died, Dora Akunyili wudnt hv died either.

So let us be careful, pray for God's healing wen we sick while taking our medication also.

I will sum up your post in one question: Can you wholeheartedly rely on God alone to cure from HIV or cancer or malaria without any resort to modern medicine?

Besides what is left of spiritual sickness. Because they are now classified as multiple personality disorder, cerebral malaria, psychosis, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, etc.

Faith has become a superstition.

Modern Science has destroyed the old almighty images we once had of God. To tell the Truth, the almighty God has been reduced to this individual that likely dispenses healings and miracles via the hospital bed. Where is that almighty being that created the Universe and can heal any disease with a single touch. Such a being is no more. He is effectively dead. The more Science understands our bodies and the Universe, the less we need from God.

I do not mean to provocative but the truth is: Faith is dying. And we should admit it.

Ymodulus:
1. To fellow ATHEIST.
Would you like your partner / girl friend to be an ATHEIST?

2. Would you like her to convert after marriage?

3. If your wife is Not an ATHEIST what will be the religion of your children?

3. Are there really female atheist in nigeria?
------------------


Now let me start by answering the question.

Personally i dont see a problem in marrying/dating a girl of any religion (as i can marry / date a gal of any religion or beliefs) however i have some preference.

1. ATHEIST GIRL.
I wud love my girlfriend / wife to be an ATheist. (Though in nigeria u hardly find female atheist ).

2. A Non -ATHEIST (Who is a good Thinker ).

3. MUSLIM GIRL (ShIa muslim is preferable)

If i cant find a female atheist i wud so much want a Muslim girl (SHIA muslim will be preferable ).

4. CHRISTIAN GIRL
lastly a christian.
For me, the chance of dating / marrying a christian is xtremely slim.

------Question 2-----
No. Her beliefs / religion is her business.

-----Question 3----
If my wife is not an Atheist. I think the children can follow their mother to her place of worship.

BUT i would not tolerate her forcing the belief on the chIldren.

Note!!: If the children accepts her belief fine. But she shud not force a belief on them no.

Even if my wife is an atheist i wont allow forcing a belief on my kids. They should however read on different religions and belief and accept theirs.


----Question 4 -----
I am yet to see one.

It is misleading to suggest all atheists are thinkers and a theist is antithetical to thinking. and thinking is not a necessary quality of atheism. I think your actual aim of your OP is targetted at Freethinkers not all atheists.

Horluwahighdee:
Am nt clear. xo u mean obatala/sango also create?

They all do. Obatala is responsible for all the invalids and disabled. Sango is for lightning and heavenly phenomena. Same with Zeus, Gaia, Mazda, Sun Gods, Odin etc; they are essentially creators.

I'm saying the god is the same with God because they both create.

Ubenedictus:
are you aware that the scriptures actually record "morning came evening came, the first day" even before the sun was created?

This simply means that the detailed explanation you see well penned now is mainly a transmission of religious truth not science. There is no morning and evening without a sun, but scriptures record this, this is why christians for centuries (atleast i have read the works of augustine) have believed that while the scriptures do describe true things and events it isn't particularly interested in the science of it or it sequence for that matter.

And yes, creation is anything but natural, i did a little study on the big bang some time ago and i found that the theory itself is self defeating unless the scientist believe that the laws of the universe were suddenly suspended in the earlier times of its existence. I found this interesting amongst other things.

The scientist may assume all he wishes, but i have a feeling that before they finish their arguement about if the bang was true or not, they will still find that their theory lacks something.

Besides, the word "natural" seems very hard to define.

Pls try to be clear. My argument goes together, cosmology is a natural event which is drawn up by the bigban.g and subsequently evolution theories. This goes against the Bible (Conflict 1) because the Bible sees creation as a supernatural event.

Secondly, the Bible explains in details how the Creation took place and in supernatural fashion. Since Genesis 1 talks about cosmology and cosmology is not a religious topic, it is fair to say that Genesis 1 is an attempt at science. If the Bible had restricted itself to moral and ethical tales etc, it would be fair to say it isn't a scientific literature.

The Bible says God created Heaven and Earth (not the Universe) is 7 days which is in stark conflict with our modern scientific theories. The Earth was not formed in 7 days, life on earth did not sprout on just one day.

Horluwahighdee:
please there is a problem with the question... the question is what is 'god not God?
answer:god is an object of worship. for example, some people worship sanngo so sanngo is their god
who is God?
answer: God is the creator of all.
answered by my pastor

I doubt the clarity of what you have said. Virtually all Gods create and their ability to create and dominate is the essential quality of their supernatural beings. So you have to rethink and throw your pastor's definition into a bin (where it rightful belongs)

Ubenedictus:
there is nothing new here.
The issue of gays and lesbians have been long resolved, their inclination is disordered and their acts sinful, they should be accepted with sensitivity as it isn't a sin to be attracted to someone of the same sex.
On the issue, this isn't a new teaching.
When it comes to creation, catholics are bound to believe the following.
1. All that exist outside God was whole produces out of nothing by God.
2. God was moved by his goodness to create the world(prov 16:4)
3. The world was created for the glorification of God ps18:2
4. He created the world good gen1:31
5. The world is temporal and God alone created it and keeps it in existence.
6. By His providence he protects and guide the world.
These are the basic truths every catholic christian must hold as regards creation.
On the other hand the bible is not a story book, nor is it a science book, it is primarily a religious book, detailing the relationship between God and his people.
It is left for each individual catholic to excercise an informed faith and chose for himself how he believes God created the world in as much as it doesn't contradict divine revelation.
Pope johnpaul and francis thinks the big bang explains how God did it, pope benedict thinks the big bang and evolution is deficient to fully explain what happened at creation.
This part isn't theology, it is science.

Yet it was explained in details the manner and timing of the creation, this sufficiently conflicts with scientific accounts and scientific assumption of naturalism. The Bible takes creation to be a supernatural activity unlike the scientific theories that claim cosmology is a natural event.

Ok, we understand the ideals of love and submission from the OP, now to the practical aspects. The OP seems to suggest that the love and consequent submission of a wife to her husband, is entirely a reciprocal nature. That the husband must take the first step of love and without this first step, the wife will not submit nor love.

I think this places the fortunes of the marriage in the hand of the husband because an unloving husband automatically creates an unloving wife. This also conflicts with the Christian ideals of love. Love is supposed to be ubiquitous amongst Christians. A Christian is a lover of Christ and of his neighbours. And the Christian is of both sexes/genders. So irrespective of the gender, a Christian must be loving.

Now, back to the context of marriage, the wife is placed in a very difficult position by being asked to be a Christian (who must love all her neighbours) and at the same time a wife who must only reciprocate to her husband's love.

Assuming the wife decides to initiate the first step by loving the husband, does the husband reciprocate by loving her and then submitting or not? How will this be resolved?

And as a last issue, the relevant bible verses only touch on marriage and not on courtship, what is the priority of love in courtship and what is the priority of submission?

There is the labourious task of reconciling the Bible with modern Science. And somebody has to try it otherwise the Bible is steered in opposition to modern Science. A secondary crisis within the Christian conscience is telling the truth. Sometimes telling the truth pits you against Faith.

The theory of evolution and the big ban.g theory prove how complex the workings of the Universe are and how beyond the wift of a wand they are.

striktlymi:
Yeah but it doesn't make it legal.

Of course I know that.

@UyiIredia

How is it possible for a universal truth to be stolen?

asalimpo:
only atheist respondg!!
Where ar d theists.

Anyway, the parallels fit and negate such arguments as "if God exists y is there so much evil on earth".

A: there is evil on earth, therefore God doesn't exist.

B. there are unkempt people, therefore barbers don't exist.

This is the essence and it fits.

It is a mere analogy and the atheists are protesting that it doesn't fit with God's case. But it all depends on what evil is. If Evil is whatever is against God's Will then God as an omnipotent being does not exist.

striktlymi:
Is committing murder a crime if a man track down and kill the man who murdered his child?

That can be owed to irresistible impulse

@italo,

It is strange to find a merciful and Good God to have as his will the evil of ra.pe, and even try to promote some form of happiness behind it. It leaves the question, is Evil necessary?

Ubenedictus:
the "love the sinner" part is so the sinner may be saved, but not everybody wants salvation. For some sin has become a new kind of "normal". And like those of sodom love may not save them, their sins just call for justice.

This was what you ought to have said from the beginning; that your understanding of "love the sinner, hate the sin" meant the sinner was given a redemptive opportunity. Rather than haggle with me over responsibility and love.

Lex11:
Tell him/her to look around... there is evidence of God's existence and creation everywhere.
"Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened." - Romans 1:19-21

Of course thus is believed by Faith, right?

The New Testament is the testimony of the Christian Church, most Catholics see it in this light, hence most of the problems attached to inerrancy of the Bible doesn't afflict them.

aisha2:
A woman decides to dress up and its somehow the fault of the " west" the same west that gave you phone and internet to type this epistle.

If only Africans will put their house in order instead of thinking se- x how to born and oppress others we will be too busy achieving things instead of turning out half baked theories on how bad the west is. Common malaria vaccine we cant develop we will be importing champagne, range rovers and all the latest cars from stolen money and still find a way to blame the west for our stupidity.

Please get your priorities right put your house in order and stop looking for scape goats as usual.

When do we take responsibility for our actions? Why must we always find someone or something to blame?
Please drop your western invented car and drive keke napep at least that is assembled in nigeria even though the parts are not made here.

What phones have we developed in africa again Please go and get that and use.

Shameless race we are. We will defend all sort of backwardness then still look for those developing their world and even sharing some of that development to abuse.

If not for Bill Gates an athiest for that matter Nigerians and Africans will be dropping dead from HIV TB and Malaria, the counterpart funding we are suppose to provide to substatiate what they give only 15 percent na war. Still some wicked Nigerians will go and be chopping the money donated by these same westerners and even be using it to pay " tithe".

Go and get busy invent something and leave the west alone. If you hate development abandon all these oyibo gadget, clean water and go live in a cage make we hear

Actually all that is irrelevant to the topic at hand. It is sentiment driven and therefore useless.

akinsadeez:
Bro, judgment is not retrospective. Whatever the collusion between him and inec, His inec certificate only became fraudulent in the eyes of the law the moment it was declared so by the court and not a minute before. This means that until that very day that he was declared illegal, he had all the rights and privileges of a state legislator.
I didn't give an example of someone who stole a car. I gave an example of someone who bought a car at a legitimate public auction not knowing he was buying a stolen car. Yes, he can argue in court that he bought the car legitimately and was given proper certificates. The best the court can do is to tell him to return the car to the original owner. the court cannot tell him to return money he earned while using the car. Why? Because until the court declared the car to be stolen, he was driving a legitimate car.

All judicial decisions are retrospective, they decide/determine the rights and liabilities after the fact. But it is presumed the law is merely interpreted and not declared by the court.

The law is abstract and is dependent on the facts to bear substance. In the scenario, the legality of the certificate is reliant on the string of facts preceding it, the legality does not appear from the sky nor in defiance to the relevant facts. In other words, the failure to contest and win the election tainted the legitimacy of his certificate. Hence he was working in a constructive trust on behalf of the election winner, the law acknowledges the hard work and labour but it is on behalf of the beneficiary.

Ubenedictus:
and lastly i think it is possible and even a frequent thing that people bear different emotions for the action and the person. My mum is a prime example, when i was younger a wasn't the best kid and sincerly speaking, i'm sure my mum hated most of the stuff i pulled back then...that didn't stop her from loving me with every thing she could muster.
Her approach ensured i was never enstranged from her, i knew that when i got the rod it wasn't because she hated my guts.

Ubenedictus:
i'll probably say i get the point you are making.

The problem with sodom and gomora wasn't because of some individual sin, but because the sins have become a culture, it was a civilisation that found itself happy in wrong doing. From the biblical narrative what happen there was hardly a case a hate, maybe punishment, but not hate. They had accumulated their sins and there weren't 10 good people in the cities. It was years and years of wrong doing, God had given then ample time for repentance, at a stage justice has to be served.


The bible doesn't teach a goody goody love, love isn't the absence of punishment, it is the superabundant balance for justice. Sin has its punishments even though God would prefer the repentance of a sinner and give him ample time for that.

Ubenedictus:
and lastly i think it is possible and even a frequent thing that people bear different emotions for the action and the person. My mum is a prime example, when i was younger a wasn't the best kid and sincerly speaking, i'm sure my mum hated most of the stuff i pulled back then...that didn't stop her from loving me with every thing she could muster.
Her approach ensured i was never enstranged from her, i knew that when i got the rod it wasn't because she hated my guts.

You seem to forget that the so beloved people of Sodom and Gomorrah perished; and you place your own story side by side with that as if both had the same consequences. Whatever love that existed for the people of Sodom was far less than the example of hatred. At least the hatred of the sins did not save the sinners.

akinsadeez:
Salary Refund? that's weird.

I am of the opinion that the supreme court justices in this case have allowed their emotions to override their sense of law. I quite understand that they are very displeased with Inec's blatant complicity in denying the petitioner his right but they awarded 650,000 naira cost against both Inec and the respondent in this case. The salary refund is like double killing.

The salary that the man was paid was for basically for the services/functions that he rendered as a member of the state house of assembly. Now can the supreme court also order that all comments, arguments that the man proffered on the floor of the house be erased? Can they order that all the bills and motions that the man might have introduced be wiped off the record.

Oyinlola as governor of Osun state had spent almost the four years of his second term before the court declared Aregbesola as the rightfully elected governor. Imagine the court now giving an order that he should return all the salaries he earned for the three years he illegally occupied the seat. To justify that, you have to find a way of also reversing all the projects he did in those three years because he was paid for functioning as the governor.

To me, this seems like another Amaechi kinda judgment. The supreme court might be setting a dangerous precedent.

You do not know much about law. A constructive trust automatically operates on profits, remunerations, etc whilst occupying an illgotten position. So the court is not applying its sentiments but a century old law regularly recognised and applied by all the countries in the world.

BraveGuy:
There is nothing for me to authenticate. The Bible authenticates itself.

Do you consider all the scientific and literary commentaries on the Bible all false?

“Traditionally, spirituality has been defined as a process of personal transformation in accordance with religious ideals. Since the 19th century spirituality is often separated from religion, and has become oriented on subjective experience and psychological growth. [b]It may refer to almost any kind of meaningful activity or blissful experience, but without a single widely-agreed definition.” (Wikipedia)

I think spirituality differs from religion in that religion is more concerned about being loyal to a god, and his instituted rules and regulations while spirituality is more of a personal value thing – being loyal to what we view as important for personal inner peace, happiness and compassion and justice towards others.

Some of you know my story, but for those who don’t here’s a brief flashback. I was born into a intensely religious Christian home. I said the sinner’s prayer at age 6 and actually personally and individually surrendered my life to Jesus’s Lordship at 14. My life prior to my ‘deconversion’ has been lived under the dictates of the Bible to the best of my ability (with the enablement of the Holy Spirit as I thought then). Christianity as a religion and as a lifestyle through the edicts of the bible provided me with a ‘full’ blueprint/manual as to how a life should be lived; how I was to relate with God, fellow Christians, “the world” and myself. I knew that I had to love God and my fellow man and to hate sin in all its appearance because that was what was required of me by God.

Long story short, I ditched Christianity awhile back… with its prepackaged morality and spirituality. As a Christian the motivation and incentive to be good is obvious – blessings, reward and recognition in Yahweh’s heaven or fear of punishment/banishment in his hell fire. Now that my view of morality has turned subjective and I see that we all pass away and are forgotten whether we do good or bad (and even if we’re remembered like Mother Theresa or Hitler to what end, how does a good memory benefit us after we’re gone) and it ultimately makes no difference to us, does it?

Now that I’m calling the shots in my life, I still feel inspired to do good, and live a deeply meaningful life based on my own truth. I have to say that even though I missed some aspects of Christianity, especially the part that pertains the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (who doesn’t want an all knowing friend that understands and accepts him/her TOTALLY and feel the sense of accomplishment for blabbing gibberish for hours on end?) and I missed the esoteric, rhema talk with brethren too…but I have moved on and I have to tell you, I feel my life is much more better in every way after religion.

Will you care to share your post-religion spirituality experience with us? I’ll like to know how you’ve found a way live a ‘good’, full, satisfying and meaningful life outside religion?

What do you understand by "Good"? why is it necessary to be good at all? Wouldn't you be adhering to the religious rules you found rigid and unstimulating?

BraveGuy:
I am not subjected to his experiences, I have a stronger basis, which is the Bible. I can believe in his claim to a point and that is up to where an established precedence has been (in the Bible), beyond this, I can't argue against or support his claim. However, we have a common belief in that there is more to life beyond our physical realities, especially in the notion of heaven.

The reason I pulled up the post is to affirm the claim that there is a spiritual world, and if there is a spiritual world, then as an atheist, you should rethink your belief system and relearn what you think you know, and that would not be complete without acknowledging the existence of a God who sits atop of spiritual realities.

But you didn't demonstrate nor describe the spiritual world you are trying to prove. Because nobody on Nairaland has been able to intelligible talk about spiritual realities. I read your OP and saw that it was not the doctor's place to claim he was brain dead and somehow conscious of that fact. It is not just plausible.

Thank you exposed your thinly veiled agenda of trying to authenticate the mysteries of the Bible.