₦airaland Forum

forgiveness:
Although, I expect either Mikel Obi or Ahmed Musa to get closer.

Mickel should get closer this time.

justiz5:
[b][size=14pt]
Gent Star, Awelewa Doubtful For Falconets’ Camp
[/size]
https://www.completesportsnigeria.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/image-41.jpeg
By Johnny Edward:

Gent forward Valerie Awelewa is a major doubt for Nigeria's national women's U-20 team, the Falconets' camping in Nigeria as her Belgian school is threatening not to release her, Complesportsnigeria.com can report exclusively.


Awelewa who is one of the foreign based players named in the preliminary squad for the FIFA Women's U-20 World Cup also risk repeating a year in school if she opts to report to camp next week against the school's decision, it was also gathered.


The Nigeria Football Federation last Thursday sent a formal invitation to Awelewa's school, University College Limburg in Diepenbeek Belgium, seeking the release of the 19 year old Chemistry student.


But according to a close source, the school claim that the request came late, hence can't find a supervisor in the spate of five days to monitor her studies online while she's in camp in Nigeria.


"It's a bit tough now for Valerie because her school is playing hard ball in releasing her for camp," the source toldComple tesportsnigeria.com.


"I don't think she will make the list and if she's going to do so her school will have the final say."
www.completesportsnigeria.com/gent-star-awelewa-doubtful-falconets-camp/
[/b]

Now that Valerie is doubtful, can't Sophia take her place at least in a friendly? I hope the coach is not just taking her out simply because of her size. I believe a friendly game would be all that is needed to judge her performance. In any case, the final decision lies with the coach.

safarigirl:
I think next year's CAF APOTY should go to Mahrez unfailingly, Aubameyang may come a close second

Kelechi and Iwobi should be ecstatic that they even made the list at such young ages, certainly a sign of great things to come in a couple of years (especially Iwobi who's new to the CAF scene)

Yeah it should be Mahrez, Aubameyang, then mickel third. Kelechi can come fourth, but l don't see how iwobi and Musa could make the list, maybe l'm missing something here though.

ItsQuinn:
No....you can't compare men's football to women's ...it's a man's game and they play 1000x better, accurate passes, nice tackle skills, good crossing and they are aggressive when they play

Of course you can't compare both, but female football has improved over the years, it definitely cannot be like the men's game but it is still unique in its own way. They are not as technical as the men, but they do show some good technique still. The Japanese team of 2011, and the Brazilian Olympic team of 2004 were very technical teams, and the U.S national team over the years have scored some really great goals, even our own Nigerian falcons in U.S.A 1999, with the likes of Mercy Akide were quite exciting to watch.
I would say, while not of the highest standard and quality, the women's game have impressed me a little bit more than l expected considering the fact that we never expected them to be good at all and the female world cup only began in 1991.

Sharming95:
I pray day win....cuz our women have always make us proud in this tournament....buh day do fuckup wen day get 2 d final....bcuz day all want 2 score...nd this as cost us 2 final 2 germany

This is the u-17, l believe you are talking about the u-20 team

ItsQuinn:
Women football is crap! I will rather watch motor GP than to watch women play

This is not always the case though, l have seen women play real good soccer and score some fantastic goals you would hardly find in the men's game. It is rare to find men scoring directly from corner kicks, but the women do this a lot, they score some very fantastic goals. Even the flick throw where you somersault and then make a long throw is common with the Brazilian ladies who on their day are even more skillful than their guys.
Yes generally, women's football can be boring at times, but l have seen some explosive and technical games. And mind you, men's football even at top level could be boring sometimes.
The reason it seems the women's game is not exciting, is because it is usually slow since they do not have the stamina to run all the time like the men and we are used to the very fast tempo of the English premiership.

hismail1:
PHOTO-SHOOT: Check out our Flamingoes k#FlyNGAFlamingoes #U17WWC

Wow l can say a lot of them really look the typical 16 year old, that's nice to see.

olapluto:
I predict that the U17 women will get to the semi finals. Ajibade to be the player of the tournament. She is that good!

I watched England U17 women recent highlights on Youtube, and my world those girls are BIG, HUGEEEE. I think they will be easily beaten though.

Don't be so sure, we continually played against local sides and had no grade A top friendly. But still my hope is that we don't just get to the semis but win this cup.

This is the problem with Nigerian football, when they should be graduating to the super falcons, they'll rather keep playing several age grade tournaments. Each of them keep playing twice at the u-20 and u-17 level. Even Rashidat Ajibade, are we saying she was 14year old when she represented us the last time? Though she looks very young sha.

Ronaldinho and okocha are the two most skillful players l have seen. Ronaldinho first then okocha second. These two have raw talent.

A baby talking? That's quite hilarious, some powerful magic right there.

But ye shall know them by their fruits. Truly, this verse has been ignored by the said Christians in the op, and indeed it is a shame.

mctowel01:
Yea you can

Just sent you a pm boss.

pendusky:
Reserves

Ikechukwu Ezenwa

Shehu Abdullahi

Jamiu Alimi

Wilfred Onyinye Ndidi

Moses Simon

Nosa Emmanuel Igiebor

What about Brown ldeye?

beeblah:
1. as if you've never seen an amputee in your church

2. what about the woman JESUS refused to heal claiming she's not...u no....I tot u said he came to serve

6. can u give me the definition of an idol pls, the standard size inclusive imagine you die, and your friends decided to make your image, and walk about with it around their neck how ll your relatives feel

7. da part where JESUS was insulting PAUL, !maybe you've forgotten!

8. 15million killed over Christ ish!!!!

don't be a slave to your pastors...seek the truth with an unbiased mind, and it shall set you free, I'm begging nio

1) So if there are no amputees being healed in his church, then that automatically correlates to God not having the power to heal amputees?
2) Do you mean the syrophenician woman? Jesus actually healed her daughter, it seems you have no point to make
6) Well the catholics may have their reasons why they go about with the image of the cross, but not all Christians practice this.
7) Where did Jesus insult Paul? Jesus never even met Paul. What are you saying for heavens' sake, gosh.
And where did you see Christ, his apostles or the first generation of Christians killing people?
Maybe you should also heed your own advice, don't be a slave to everything you hear or read about on the internet. It is obvious you know nothing about what you are so eager to criticize and yet ironically you want to make us believe you are a freethinker.

malvisguy212:
Thank you bro for your wonderful post, what about Luke 12:47-48 ? the parable seem to point to two different people. those who know the will of God but did not do it and those who did not known God's will. Their punishment is different.

Nice one, so would that mean there are different levels of punishment in hell fire or could it mean the fire is a form of purging through pain that comes from regret and gnashing of teeth, since everyone shall be salted with fire? (Mark 9v49). Or does it mean some would stay in the fire longer than others? If you are to beat your house maid or house boy, would your intention be to keep flogging them continually forever and ever or to correct them? making them better after suffering the consequences of their works? There are many things to ponder on here, that's why l said the nature of hell even from the bible is not really clear. What we do know is that when God's judgment takes place, the world would then learn true justice. If we are to invite people to Christianity let them come because it offers a new way of life, let them come because they want to take up their cross. Let them come because they want to die so that they may find a way to truly live. This is what is Paramount.

It is apparent you are ignorant, you opened this thread because Christians accuse Muslims of violence, hence to show that Islam is not uniquely violent you quote Deuteronomy which addressed a theocratic Jewish era, and in your little perspective, this is enough to show that Christianity is also violent. Hence it is of little wonder the Christians who have responded so far do not take you seriously because it would surely be a waste of time.

AnodaIT:
The belief in the Messiah was never supposed to be a different religion from the beginning

It was to be a sect under Judaism, The "Rock" upon which the sect (Church) was built ie Peter was very much involved in establishing it in Jerusalem first before it was taken to other part of the world. Peter was still worshipping in the Temple and doing Jewish rituals (Just as Christ did in his time) even after the Pentecost.

The more reason Peter was initially opposed to Apostle Paul taking the Gospel to the Gentiles because, the Gentile were not "Jewish" enough to share in the Gospel. (Follow up to Gal 2: 11)

If Peter had had his way, this is how it would have been

The Pharisees: The Pharisees also maintained that an after-life existed and that God punished the wicked and rewarded the righteous in the world to come. They also believed in a messiah who would herald an era of world peace.

The Sadducees: The Sadducees were elitists who wanted to maintain the priestly caste, they did not believe in an after life, since it is not mentioned in the Torah. The main focus of Sadducee life was rituals associated with the Temple.

The Essenes: A third faction, the Essenes, emerged out of disgust with the other two. This sect believed the others had corrupted the city and the Temple. They moved out of Jerusalem and lived a monastic life in the desert, adopting strict dietary laws and a commitment to celibacy.

The Christians: Believers and followers of Yeshua the Messiah. According to them, the Messiah has already come and brought with him message of peace, love, grace and forgiveness.

But as a result of Paul taking the Gospel to the Gentiles, the Romans hijack it and made it into a state religion, openly separating it from Judaism.

Since we were all brought up with literatures from the Holy Roman Catholic Church, all books were burnt and till today, no one really know what happened except for what the organized catholic church allowed to remain (including the Bible)

Exactly, and it seems at the beginning both Jesus and john the Baptist were of the Essen sect. The Essenes believed the more the jews separate themselves from the world or lived a peaceful Holy life, the closer the coming of God's kingdom which would overthrow the Romans and create a new world order of peace through Israel.

Pharisees also desired God's visit to his people but believed in action and a warlord messaiah. But Jesus seemed to have his own free thought, he had different ideas from both the essenes and Pharisees, he believed the kingdom of God had begun already, hence there would be no need to wait for it anymore, he saw himself as one who had a major role to play in all these, and urged his people to believe him and start living as though the new era had begun.

For Jesus, the kingdom of God in reality is here and now, then extends to the future. And to make it even more ridiculous, he is the king of this kingdom. This was unbelievable to the Pharisees and Sadducees because he was not a warrior and didn't act like one who could overthrow the Romans, nor was he even interested in such, hence they saw him as a deceiver who only used sorcery to lure the people away.

The Essenes would have believed in him, but he seemed not to have had respect towards their opinion of staying away from the world like john the Baptist, rather he went to parties, ate and drank and even visited sinners, it is easy to see why Jews didn't believe in him. Even when he taught, he did not teach in the traditional pattern of the rabbis who quoted Torah and Talmud, to analyze them, rather he told stories, some the people could relate to, some for the purpose of confusion.

To summarize, Jesus was a true Jew, immersed in the culture of his people, but had other ideas of his own for which he even died.

Nice one there.

Paul's argument there in context was that becoming part of the Abrahamic Jewish covenant is not necessarily by the mosaic law, and that many even without the law took actions that showed they had conscience.
That was just an example to teach the Jews he argued with that the law itself is not the only criteria in pleasing Yahweh and may even be the slowest formula, because even the gentiles can unknowingly do things which the law requires. His argument just like that of the author of Hebrews was that men in the hall of fame or men who really pleased God in the old testament above the average folks had a secret formula, and that is faith.
In that sense, faith inspired these men and women to do things that pleased God. Because they were inspired by what they believed in, they impacted their world and didn't just live only by mere adherance to a ''Thou shall not formula''. Paul was telling his people the Jews that if they believe the good news of Jesus Christ ( that he has ushered in a new era through his ressurection) that this would be a better mode of inspiration to do the works of faith like the heroes of old and automatically makes one a child of the Abrahamic blessings or promise. In this there is no discrimination, both Jews and Gentiles.
I do not think Paul was thinking about heaven and hell when he made this argument. It is not just about accepting Christ, it is about inspiration by faith. It is not all about going to heaven, it is about doing the works here on earth that pleases God, or living fully in this world but not being part of it, because you know that all things are temporary and they passeth away. In summary, it is about a shift in paradigm.
My Two Cents.

Lennycool:
The religious will always try to justify the unspeakable when it comes to their God. If God had so much power why didn't he just kill the pharaoh or magically teleport the Israelites since anything is possible for him. God does not exist

Lol, and if he magically teleports the Israelites, you would still call it a Jewish myth.

malvisguy212:
In the old testament, on whose Authority the old testament saint cast out demon ? Christ death and resurrection is the reconciliation of God to man, God wrath is fulfill. If God should judge us base on the law of moses, can anyone claim, he or she has never break this law ? This is Exactly what the children of israel is doing, they cannot keep the law. The bible say God is a righteous judge, those who died (Pre-calvery) before the coming of christ, God will judge them base on their work.

Romans 3:21-28: “[21] But now the
righteousness of God without the law is
manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; [22] Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no
difference: [23] For all have sinned, and come
short of the glory of God; [24] Being justified
freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

I never said we are under the law, nor did l say keeping the law of moses is what saves one from hell. My argument was that the rich man was condemned by his deeds not necessarily his belief in a particular faith confession. The faith confession is only useful when it produces true repentance in us, or help us fine tune our consciousness daily in our spiritual walk with God. If you confess with your mouth and believe in your heart that Jesus who rose from the dead gives you power over sin and death then you are saved. The confession and belief is for the purpose of doing righteous works, the criteria for automatically becoming children of the covenant of Abrahamic blessings ( like the Jews) is now by faith and no longer by race or just the laws of moses which wasn't even universal.

malvisguy212:
The rich man is a sinner, in fact his brothers are all sinners, that is why he request lazarus should go and warn his brothers to change their way.

Good, and in what way were they sinners? They didn't act righteously even though they had the law of moses to guide them. The rich man failed to show love, and this was the problem. In Matthew 25, Jesus said l was sick, hungry and naked and you did not help me. People go to hell because of their works and not a magical formula they fail to recite. Besides we know very little about hell, what we are sure of is that God judges sinners.

malvisguy212:
our perspective will change, we will be in agreement with God rule. Concerning the rich man and lazerus, what request the rich man made ? He need a drop of water to cool his tongue. And what was the reply of Abraham ?

Luke 16:25
But Abraham said, Son, remember that
thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things,
and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is
comforted, and thou art tormented.

This is God perspective, this is God rule, Abraham gave a righteous answer to the rich
man. Note that Abraham did not tell the rich
man that God was unfair and that God should
let the rich man come into paradise. Abraham
knew that the rich man chose to go to that place of torment. The rich man did not have to go there. IT IS EITHER YOU ACCEPT, JESUS PAY FOR YOUR SIN, OR YOU WILL HAVE TO PAY IT YOURSELF. Can you ?

I don't think you understand, tell me, why did the rich man go to hell? I agree it is necessary to accept Jesus as lord and savior but the purpose for this is to be saved from sin so that we can live unto God and not simply to escape hell.

morgan77:
what is required of an undergraduate to apply into bsc degree, i will be very grateful for an answer please!!!

Visit the other thread Nairaland German visa enquiries, then read up. For a start, most schools do not accept waec alone, a first year transcript or an HND would do. There is also the popular option of studentkollege, and other options as well. For more information, visit that thread.
Allies Gute.

AnonyNymous:
The author of that piece first of all does not understand atheism and morality. Apart from that, it was a desperate attempt at retranslating the original Greek. . . the same way people retranslate a passage where Jesus said 'some men are born eunuchs' to justify their homosexuality. You know that you're lying to yourself, and that basically anything you want to do can be justified in the bible. What would you say about a raped girl having to marry the person that rapes her? Its in the bible you know. Morality evolves. It's not stagnant. Deal with it. The bible is just the conception of morality of a bunch of Israelite herdsmen. Some of the 'letters of Paul' are based on the conception of morality by some scholars, YEARS after Paul's death.

Actually there were some popes who condemned slavery to an extent even before the 16th century. Google popes on slavery.

Jesuobu:
He is not asking for too much. All He ask for is just believe but you choose to see first before you believe. Blessed are those who don't see but yet believe.

Hmm well l wouldn't say all he is asking for is just belief. Belief is not the end itself but a means to an end. The goal is to have men who are led by the spirit of God, so that they are known as the sons of God. The goal is much more than just making heaven or avoiding hell.

[quote author=malvisguy212 post=48780795]Concerning our love ones in hell; the bible say in revelation 22:4 " God will wipe away Every pain and sorrow" This mean, in heaven our perspective will change and will be replace with a holy ones. And in verse 5, the bible say everything will be made new, sin will not be a factor, Everything will be in AGREEMENT with God. If you love your love ones, your focus will not be on how he will spend eternity in hell, rather how He spend the rest of His life in heaven, that's our focus. Why did I preach to you ? Why did I warn you of the danger at hand ? Because I want you to be in God perfect heaven, but if you reject this, whose fault it is ? Me ? Or God ? [/quote
Malvisguy come on, my man, what if you have an uncle whom you admire and respect so much, he is a nice fellow, and though you have preached Jesus to him, he still doesn't believe in Christianity, he doesn't accept Christ as his lord and Savior nor does he recite any christian formula, but says that Jesus is a good man, and God forbids he dies in that state. Would he go to hell? and if he goes to hell, wouldn't you feel sad even though God promised to eventually wipe away your sorrow?
Note, l'm not saying there's no judgment for the wicked after death or that God doesn't judge sin, rather this is a bid to understand your viewpoint properly.

frank317:
What I have against it is that it is just your guess work and it is false. How did u know its timeless... Timeless, immaterial are all human constructs... Who told u it's timeless.? What if timelessness is a strange concept to this first cause... I am against u because u have accepted that u dont know... how can u not know the first cause and all of a sudden u now no he is eternal, it is obviously false because it's just a guess work except you tell me u are the first cause.

I didn't say l now know, l'm only saying that l deduced this from the fact that matter, space, and time itself all began with the big bang.

frank317:
Stop lying, atheists do not say first cause is nothing... what do u gain by arguing out if misconception?

Religionists call nothing God? How does that sound to u... How can anyone give nothing a name... Guy we don't know how we came about... It could be aliens, it could be tiny beings, it could be energy, the fact is that however we came about is beyond our imagination... Calling it God is guess work, why then do they argue that it's a fact... Atheists just reject what religionists claim they know because the religionists do not have prove for this claim... Atheists do not believe nothing was the first cause, they don't know and they prefer accepting they don't know than accepting your guess work that I claim is a fact.

Cool so you agree there's a first cause but you don't know what it is, and you are still learning. Then there's no need for this argument. Religion and science albeit in different ways are methods by which we search for this first cause. It seems you don't just like the name God; no problem l would no longer use that term with you, but rather l would just call it the first cause.

frank317:
I really don't get ur point. You claim there must be an extraordinary first cause, how does that answer the question: how did we come to be? You would quite agree with me that whatever this extraordinary first cause is, you have no idea, you don't even know why u think it's extraordinary. Now some people actually claim they know this first cause, they have spoken to it, it loves them, it gets angry, it protects and all that. Most cultures have come up with different models of extraordinary first cause and we know it's just guess work.
Now the atheists would rather just say we don't know... Why are y against that? Do you know this first cause? Didn't you just guess, like most primitive cultures, that it is extraordinary?
Why personify this so called first cause only to end up causing confusion amongst ourselves?
Further, how does guess and accepting that this fist cause is extraordinary help humanity? Since the fist cause has chosen to remain our if the picture, why do we still insist on making a guess work about what it is and bothering our lives, killing each other for it? What do we hope to achieve by dwelling on being right about our guesses?
Why don't we just accept that we don't know and dwell on making our world a better place until this first cause chooses to reveal himself to us.
Thank u.

Yes l accept l do not know but l came to the idea of an extra ordinary first cause deductively. By extra ordinary, l mean a timeless, immaterial, uncaused eternal first cause capable of giving life, this is reasonable if the universe was caused at all and has a beginning. What do you have against this?