₦airaland Forum

MaxInDHouse:
Data when there are billions of atheists hiding their resolve compared to less than 9,000,000 claiming JWs.
Try to use your brains now?
How many people are out playing in the streets on Sundays without going to churches?
Or how many don't practice any form of worship at all?
Do you think they shouldn't be counted along with atheists?
So go back and do your statistics well because in the real sense there are more atheists hiding amongst Churchgoers, Muslims even in the gatherings of JWs but afraid of publicly declaring their resolve.
Even here on Nairaland, how many do you think is known in their neighbourhood as atheists if not here on FACELESS SOCIAL MEDIA?

You should share your concerns with the data gatherers. LoL!

Janosky:
He forgot to mention that Atheists practice all sorts of debauchery in the name of open marriage which JWs must NEVER practice.

Doesn’t change the meaning of divorce or are you saying because your marriages are more stringent people don't like them more?

MaxInDHouse:
So where is the evidence that the source is truthful?

Check the source yourself, where they got the data is linked.

Janosky:
It's pointless & means nothing!
No dey use atheists who practice 'open marriage' (& 'free love' , whatever that means), to compare JWs.
The biblical matrimonial standard JWs hold to, means nothing to atheists.

LoL! Well OK but divorce is still divorce and has legal definition that doesn't require personal belief.

MaxInDHouse:
I missed this while on my way to work, but it's really really funny the way you just fabricate things and think it will be useful during fruitful discussions

I posted the source of those statistics, I am not a storyteller like you.

TenQ:
Because I have the power to react based on my judgement within the constraints available.

Like, if you slap me, I could retaliate or choose not to retaliate. The constraints available may include whether the person who slapped me is my Father, a Military Officer, an Armed Thug, a Mad Man, My Wife etc

Since my Will cannot cause someone else to slap me, my response is completely passive UNTIL the slap is activated. Even then, if a Military Officer is alone and he ventures to slap me, my response could be different.


In summary:

The expression of my Will depend on my Knowledge, Emotion and Intuition all which I ACQUIRED as I grew up in life. For instance, my knowledge as a Christian may prevent me from retaliating a slap even when every logical reasoning says I should retaliate.

It's still my CHOICE except you want to agree that every knowledge a man has has been preprogrammed to happen

The question is how do you know?

elated177:
What precipitated this question, Reed?

I have gone through the current four pages of this thread and I observed something is kinda missing.

Reed, give some instances of what you have in mind bordering on the premise of your op.

You probably have particular foods you like eating and when faced with a choice would more likely pick them over other foods. To you you are freely making that choice however my question is asking, if your ability to choose is part of a causal chain you had no hand in bringing about how do you know you are freely choosing those foods? How do you know that your predilection for those foods is not a result of the causal chain? How do you know that your choice at any given moment was not influenced by the causal chain of events that brought about the situation in which you find yourself having to make a choice?

As for what precipitated the question, I guess I can say it's a question I have been trying to find a way of presenting but didn't have the words till I heard someone ask a similar question.

elated177:
A good question. I suspect this was your aim all along. Am I correct?

That is the summary of the OP.

YourWriter:
I met this girl in the beginning of 2021 and our bond of friendship has grown strong since then. I never had the intention of dating her to start with, but as times goes on I found myself catching feelings.

I really do want to let my feelings known but I'm scared of rejection. Besides, this girl is like an anti-relationship activist. Most of the times her posts on WhatsApp is mostly against love and how she's not ready to get into relationship.

Also, as a beautiful person she has lots of options which includes rich guys with lexus and Benz. Although I'm also not broke but I'm far below the level of her suitors. What I could say is my only advantage is that I'm handsome.

Should I just go ahead against all odds and let my feelings known or I should just let the feelings die?

Do you know why she says she doesn't want a relationship? May be she is just scared of being hurt. I'd say go for it, nothing to lose and more to gain.

tatatar:
Wether it's under something else control or not,I do things because I want to. I AM FREE.
You won't argue before a judge to absolve you of a crime because,well... It's all just cause and effect. Would you

I am a compatibilist so no I won't argue that before a judge but this discussion is how you justify your concept of free will against the backdrop of a universe you seem to believe (if you are a theist who believes so) is based on a series of cause and effects which is practically determinism in another language. So another way to put the question will be how do you know your will is not being affected by the chain of events that led to your existence?

TenQ:
A Will is not an organ of the body. My Will is my RESPONSE or DECISION to external events it is not an object or item that can be caused into existence. The Will is an ATTRIBUTE/CHARACTERISTIC of a living BEING

The WILL is demonstrated in my choices to LOVE, HATE, GIVE, WITHHOLD, TRAVEL, HOLDON, RESPOND, CHEAT, HELP, etc

So your will is caused by your being which you obviously didn't will into existence. So another way to put the question will be how do you know your will is not being affected by the chain of events that led to your existence?

hupernikao:
Good question.

In determining the meaning of a text, 3 things are key.

We have
1. the author
2. The text
3. The reader

The author firstly determine the meaning. But when not available.

The text will assume the position of the author not the reader. What this means is that we will have to depend on the usage of the text in other sources and references.

Every good interpretation must depends on this and not on any imagination.

A true Bible study is to be able to access the mind of the author by the help of tools available in your study. Hence you aren't seeking a new inspiration but finding out.


Having said that.
Bible text even though inspired of God, it was written in human language using human literacy. This means, the Bible will agree with all rules of literacy when interpreted. So how do I know what good interpretation is.


I gave you one basic rule of interpretation early.

A text interpreted must agree with other places and book where such concept is explained mentioned or alluded. This is to preserve the singular inspiration.


Now, let me state some of the basic literacy rule that even the Bible must follow.

1. The meaning of a text must be derived from its surrounding text. That is I cannot explain a text outside its usage in its surrounding.

For example. I can use the word ball in various form.

He has balls.
Can mean boldness
Can mean football.

The surrounding text is what will deliver us here not an imagination.


2. The meaning of a text must be taken from its context. You cannot have a meaning outside the context of discussion. This is the reason the Bible must be read as conversation but not in verses.

For example.
He killed it with his dressing and appearance.

The word killed here must be explained in context not given an omnibus meaning.

3. The interpretation or usage must be taken within the culture, age and language of the writer

That mean

for example
when I see, the word "rather" which is to mean to prefer in our own days. I won't interpret it to mean such because in the time of the bible writers, it simply means, much so or much more.

Paul use this in teaching prophesying and tongues.

1 Cor 14:5
I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied:

Rather here simply means much more not a preference over the other but an emphasis on one.

This means, I must observe how words were used in other ancient writings of their time to ascertain exactly how the Bible writer used those words in their days.


I can go on and on.

But the key thing is. Interpretation outside literacy rules are only imagination since the scriptures is written within the languages of men.

I am sure you know that all these I wrote aren't rules I set by myself but a universal rule to interpretation of text. This can be a guide to us in Bible interpretations.

So based on this what is your position on speaking in tongues, are all Christians supposed to be gifted with it?

MaxInDHouse:
Of course we are imperfect but a divorcee will not be comfortable in our midst because we don't appreciate divorcees in our midst. That's part of the reasons why many do leave our organization because once you're a divorcee there are lots of privileges you can't have in our midst, so each person who wants to be viewed as a bonafide member of our global family must fight really hard to keep their marital vows!

JW divorce rate is 9% while atheist divorce rate is 2%, make of that what you will.

PoliteActivist:
Right here, see below.

BTW did u see this my advice on travel?
https://www.nairaland.com/6834464/traveling-abroad-guidance-needed#107330473

Seen.

Dinner!

MaxInDHouse:
That's what many often say when they realized that they're chatting with a true believer but i don't just leave you in doubts i present the benefits of real faith that you can never find anywhere else!

Do JWs divorce one another?

MaxInDHouse:
Keep deceiving yourself!

Nah I leave it to you, you do an excellent job of self deceit.

A001:
Yea

Workch:
Lol, he’s interested in just winning and not more.
Just ignore him

It's like playing chess with a pigeon. It scatters the chess pieces, shits on the board and declares itself the winner.

The simplest way to demonstrate it is for you to produce evidence of the correctness of your statements in your OP. I'll bet you a $1000 you'll begin a song and dance about how it requires spiritual eyes to see it won't you.

MaxInDHouse:
Atheists can't make peace reign in their gathering~ Maximus

We (atheists) can make it work~ LordReed

Can you present a gathering of atheists working towards that?~ Maximus

The Church of Satan~ LordReed listing their agenda.

All these are common ideas in all human society yet none has ever worked~ Maximus

But we can come together to reason~ LordReed

Sure you'll meet but it will not work because racism and politics will hinder you~ Maximus

You said we can't meet together~ LordReed

Nothing stops people from meeting together but achieving LOVE, JOY and PEACE is what is impossible without the spirit of God~ Maximus

LordReed is correct~ Acholardey

Do you believe it's possible for imperfect humans to achieve PEACE without the Prince of Peace~ Maximus to Acholardey

It's not necessary for Jesus to be in their group for them to achieve PEACE~ Acholardey

OK let me here a YES or NO then explain~ Maximus

Jesus said the atheists are wiser than believers~ Acholardey

That's not what Jesus meant~ Maximus

It is just accept that you were wrong for insisting that atheists can't make peace reign without Jesus the Prince of Peace~ Acholardey

Maximus

Liar, liar, pants on fire. LMFAO!

PoliteActivist:
I guess u the only one doesn't know about autocorrect - that's why we don't sweat minor grammartical or spelling errors, as long as u can understand the guy!

I'd have thought you smarter than this. How many times will I have to tell you this - the word "SAYS" would have won u the argument. Without it, you lost ab initio!!
"ANYBODY following Jesus' teachings would not be greedy" is 100% incontrovertible FACT!!!
"ANYBODY who SAYS he is following Jesus' teachings would not be greedy" is 100% FALSE!!!

LoL. You're so stuck up and self righteous you can't even take a simple correction in good faith yet you'll SAY you're a true follower of Jesus' teachings. Ain't you a prize. LMFAO!

Where did you tell me about this difference previously?

TenQ:
My Will is MINE to make!
My Will is what I CHOOSE!

You didn't answer the question. Did you cause your will to come into existence? In other words did you will your will into existence?

elated177:
Object to what?


Do you think there is truth in what is portrayed in the op?

Objected to your OP.

No, there's no truth to it.

PoliteActivist:
You have already conceded, why still going on and on.
There has to be conclusion to discussions.
This discussion was about greed and Christ's teachings.
You have already conceded: There is no part of Jesus's teachings that encourages greed. Everything else is mute. If the greediest person on earth says he is going by Jesus's teachings, it doesn't change that fact. Just as a god-worshiping person saying he is an atheist doesn't change the fact that atheists don't believe in god.

The correct word is moot not mute.

You said ANYBODY following Jesus' teachings would not be greedy or hateful and I showed you people who follow Jesus' teachings yet are greedy and hateful, negating what you said. Not my fault if you can't track such a simple argument.

hupernikao:
Exactly what i am saying.

There are rules that must govern interpretation.

I gave you one that is very central to anyone who claim to be a believer. We all accept the fact that God inspired the scriptures' hence all writer's interpretation of the scriptures cannot contradict each other else it will negate a singular inspiration.

So, can we have people with different opinions? Yes, but does the bible have more than one opinion on a text? No. So our duty is to find the opinion of the bible and the writers, that is when you have the right interpretation. And what guides you, is the fact that all writers say the same thing.

The writers aren't here to be asked what they meant so by necessity you are interpreting their words so would someone else who doesn't agree with you. How can we know who between you 2 is correct?

armyofone:
All 4 ripen at once...how i fit take eat am ?

Price - less than $1.50.

Plantain or banana?

Bishopkingsley:
Everything you have belongs to God

Your freewill which is inside your life is under God control infact before a word comes to your lips God knows about it

How can freewill be under someone else's control and still be free?

TenQ:
I have quoted it several times within this post
Here it is again

Ok so did you cause your will to exist?

PoliteActivist:
THANK YOU!!!
QED!!!

What seems to be eluding you is that others are using Jesus' teachings for avaricious and hateful ends nevertheless nor is it apparent that anybody following Jesus' teachings will automatically be a good person.

achorladey:
Na denial remain for MaxInDHouse. He needs a reminder of his post earlier

You (MaxInDHouse) said "Atheism gives no room for interchange of encouragement or how to cope with life's anxieties..."

and my (LordReed) question is what specifically about atheism says we can't meet? Can you now answer the question?

MaxInDHouse this is what you kept running away from until posted the below ........

Of course you(LordReed) will meet but it will not workout because the only person who can make it work is missing in your gathering...... MaxInDHouse

You even added another clause by introducing but it will not workout.

Mr MaxInDHouse can keep the denial going na him way.

Na so im be.

TenQ:
Sorry, I don't know if you are deliberately feigning ignorance of the definition of Freewill or not

Did anyone compel you you reply this post?
If yes, then your will was caused by that person.

Was it done by force or duress?

If not, then your will was yours only to make!

What is the definition of freewill?

MaxInDHouse:
Walahi talahi you're a real clown!

So when someone rephrased something to get you out of your atheistic thinking box that makes the person a LIAR, shey?

Hilarious!

You wrote what is patently untrue so the clown here is you.