₦airaland Forum

See these sheep.

ijawkid: Lol..

As usual u come up with ur slave wahala....na u sabi....

If u culd mention 1 slave d apostles had I'll be happy...

So slavery is just 1 thing u culd pick out that d 1st century christians did wrong??

Mind u they were persecuted for following christ nt because of paganism....

Paganism crept into christianity durin d 3rd century....

Are you that ignorant? Christians were called pagans because they were not the major religion at the time. Christianity was seen as a cult of Jewish man worshippers in the first century.

Slavery was rife in the Roman empires that those christians lived in.

tobechi74: Asking what is the point of christianity is like asking what is the point of religion

Yes and what is the point of religion

[quote author=PAGAN 9JA]ofcourse exorcism is real. you should also read this account by european explorer William Thesiger when he was travelling among the Mahra tribe of Arabia.[/quote]Nope. Fear is real

[quote author=PAGAN 9JA]i heard they even stictch it up in East Africa for women, leaving a small gap for defecation and when the man wants to produce a baby, she painfully removest he stitches. . [/quote]https://attentionmax.attentionmax.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Vomit.png

vedaxcool: ^
Oh dear this is an unusual display of extreme incapacity to comprehend (EIC) no wonder atheism became the only nothing left for cryer to follow lol chai!

Aww sorry! I didnt know that you were a gay muslim. It must be difficult living in a religion that hates you for your sexuality!


Aww. I wish I could help but I am not a gay. Sorry men!!

[quote author=PAGAN 9JA]most Pagan people dont do circumcision. i wonder why we Africans do it[/quote]Perplexes me. Take a look at this muslim sheep;


https://www.nairaland.com/989706/persecution-muslims-west

tobechi20: Lets start by understanding atheism

Why dont we start by telling us why you are in anyway advantaged by being a christian? What does christianity have to offer an unbeliever?

Ptolomeus: In the 1st century there were many Christian groups fighting against each other for exercising the primacy.
It was Constantine in the fourth century, who appointed the official religion and Catholicism in the Council of Nicea, 325, organized the Catholic church.

Thank you!

ijawkid: @¶oster....what do u have to say about the 1st century christians??

Isn't there steadfastness worth emulating??

Shove d 3rd century professed christians aside and focus on the 1st century guys who practiced real christianity...
Christianity alienated from d world.....

1st century christians were slave owners. They were even called pagans by others. They were persecuted.

Ihedinobi: Very gracious response, thank you. I'd be glad to take on your objections to the arguments for the existence of Yahweh (that seems the more widely accepted tag for Him I actually prefer "Jesus Christ", but no matter). And I promise to let you have full rein with your arguments. I won't mind if you throw curves. It can be private or public whichever you prefer.



Pardon my saying so, but it's not a bad thing to dispassionately expose the lies. It's counter-productive to react with insults.




I assure you I have not. And I do not disagree that men have committed atrocities in the name of Jesus Christ. But even so, does any of that preclude the fact that you would too in the name of your atheism? You show enormous spite and anger at Christianity. Is it unreasonable for me to say that if you had power like the papacy had in the Dark Ages you would not try to "get back at Christianity" for all the hurt you lay at its door?





I did read your comment and I read your response to my thoughts on it just now. I'm sorry if I have misunderstood you. But pray tell, why raise ask the question at all? What are you countering, what are defending with the question?







Ok. And my question is why you think it could be?

Look, if you want to argue for argument sake, I will not engage you. The nonsense in the original post is clear to anyone that has sense.



As for christianity, it is and forever will be the bloodiest religion known to mankind. Even if Jihadists destroy a whole country, They would not even touch the disaster that Christianity has done. This is one truth that christians will never accept and I will keep hammering it. Hypocrites.


As for me, I have never ever wanted to kill anyone or wipe out any religion. If you notice, I am even more tolerant of the pagans because they accept that their religion is not perfect. Christians will defend slavery rather than admit that leveticus was evil.

You can lie and bear false witness about me but I am not a killer neither am I Stalin

davidylan: ok we don hear abi.

Even if my father was an unrepentant hardocre christian, I would call him a brainwashed tool and proudly

When i told my father that I am an atheist, he asked me why.


When i told my uncle that I am an ateist, he told me to stop the devilish talk.


Clear difference.

Enigma: ^^ Despite the young fella's self arrogated "logic", I thought the post was too devoid of logic to be worth a proper response.

What the fella does not realise is that every time he calls most (ok, perhaps some) of us Christians here "a brainwashed tool", he is saying exactly the same about his father ---- despite the trotted credentials of working with Europeans etc etc etc.

lmao. You assumed wrongly, my father doesnt go to church or read the bible. Fail.

davidylan: This post was a head scratcher.

1. Most christians know and believe that speaking in tongues is a gift so not everyone is meant to have it.
2. Magic healing? I dont know a christian who believes in magic
3. What has your father's journeys around the world got to do with faith? Did he travel as widely as apostle Paul?
4. and the color or ethnicity of his colleagues has to do with?

My father hardly talks about religion. Hardly even goes to church. Either he's a skeptical christian or an agnostic.

Did apostle paul meet an aeroplane? Dont be foolish. Dont compare my pops to some biblical caveman that travelled by donkey (not even horse)

Rubbish.


Mass killings in America by gunmen are a dime a dozen. TB Joshua needs to try harder. This is a joke

Enigma: I imagine you also call your father a "brainwashed tool"? If so, no problem then.

No, my father, quite a christian but he does not believe in speaking in toungues or magic healing. A skeptic christian/probably an agnostic. He has travelled all over the world and realises that his religion is one among many others. Half of my fathers colleagues are Europeans who are mostly not religious.

Enigma: When evangelical atheists say they have read the Bible but only ever come up with the same "contradictions" or what we Christians call "difficult passages", they wonder why we are tempted to laugh at them for their ignorance or to shake head sadly for them for their duplicity/dishonesty

What is dishonest about saying that the bible has contradictions? You are a brainwashed tool and your quote makes little sense.


Simple contradiction;


Incest is bad in the old testament but Abraham married his step sister Sarah

Ihedinobi: Your speed to hurl insults and cast aspersions on any reasoning that questions the position of the atheist is not very commendable. Are you sure that if you had the power you would not set out on an extermination campaign to blot Christians out of existence just so you can sleep easier in the dark? Your attitude says you would.

Please, do not come and act like I am the aggressor here. Mr. Anony posted a thread that is nothing but lies on the skeptics/atheists and their position.

Furthermore, thank you for comparing me to a mass murderer. You talk as if Christianity has not been the worst religion ever to exist in terms of torture and wars. You must be sipping on some hypocrisy juice.

Ihedinobi: I could have bolded more parts of your comment but there are so many bolded already. I can't even effectively address them all and breaking your comment into chunks so that I can address each issue separately is a task I find unappealing right now for the simple fact that it's a grand difficulty to address an emotional argument.
So forgive my saying only that everything I bolded is doubtful as to their truth. The "principle" that I bolded was to ask you if you actually subscribe to any principle and why. Because principles are things that cannot be proven empirically, so implying that you, an atheist, subscribe to any tantamounts to saying that you have faith and that questions your position as an atheist.

WTF? Seriously? When did philosopy = atheism? Did you even read my comment? I asked which philosopical principle suggests that one should commit suicide rather than be killed by someone else.

Ihedinobi: The first bolded is a very questionable statement both as to its truth and as to its relevance. The opinion expressed by Mr Anony addresses the sense in skepticism positing that it is a contradictory and self-defeating stand because it cuts the ground off from under its own feet.

The last bolded is not a smart comeback. You were not the origin of the story so how do you presume to assign sarcasm to any character in the story? Or were you an eyewitness or the character himself?

"could be"

Read my comment again----I said that it could be sarcastic.

davidylan: Did you read the entire chapter to understand what it is talking about? Nah.... just quote one verse and make urself look dumb trying to build a mountain of ignorance on it.

Are you not fired of this failed defense?


Whenever someone exposes a contradiction or evil in the bible, it is always "misquoted" or "out of context" or "it has a deeper or metaphorical meaning"


Since when did only christians have the copyright to understanding the bible and its literature?

caezar: I can only conclude from this that MacDaddy has no appreciation for poetry and must be an absolute literalist. Which would imply an intolerance for metaphor or an inability to comprehend it. I am leaning towards the latter but I leave room for hope... Is that foolish?

Huh? The article is to be taken metaphorically? Wow.....wow......wow.......the lengths that some people will go to defend an obvious lie is amazing.


What is the article a metaphor for? It has to have a meaning however non-literal it is

Enigma: @ toba

It is not even worth wasting too much time on that kind of post and misuse of "statistics". It is actually stupid (or simplistic, to pretend to be polite) to say that a nation is poor because its population is "religious" or that a nation is rich because its population is "irreligious".

Take just two things into consideration (there are several other factors actually):

The population of Denmark is about 5 million (probably less than half the population of Lagos); the population of Nigeria is about 180 or so million. Does that not already tell you something about the share of national resources available to individuals in the respective countries? On the other hand the USA which has a huge population is still considered "rich" (despite its debt) because of e.g. the size of its GDP when compared to Nigeris. But guess what is more important here in the context of this thread? America is a predominantly religious country!

Th second thing (even though there are many others I could point to) is that the people who rely on these "statistics" are either misinformed or duplicitous in not pointing out that (a) the countries they are relying upon actually built their wealth and its foundation at a time when their people were religious and (b) many of them e.g. Denmark actually still have a state religion --- which is usually Christianity.

Oh and for those relying on those kind of statistics I give you one more country to add to your list ---- Monaco (one of the richest countriesand a nice place too ) .

1) America is quite a secular country when it comes to law despite the religiousity of its people
2) America is the 4th country in terms of human development. 3 European countries surpass it. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index)
3) America is not even in the top 10 peaceful countries on the global peace index http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index


These statistic clearly suggest that God is not necessary and sometimes a hindrance to human development. You argue that many of these countries had a christian history but Japan doesnt. You argue that America is has a very religious population but America is secular. Secularism is the common denominator among all the prosperous and peaceful countries. Secularism and freedom. Majority of those countries have gay rights. Christians/muslims should be ashamed because the best civilizations exists when there are gay rights. All countries with gay rights are better than your religious Nigeria

OLAADEGBU: Do you call this intelligence?

https://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/images/media/cartoons/ltbt/let-there-be-truth-v3-n2.jpg

Yes, because Romans 1;22 was talking about evolution or scientists.


Thanks for the foolish cartoon. By the way, evolution is a scientific theory. Keep living in the stoneage

OLAADEGBU: The highlighted is a typical response you will get from these skeptics, even if the doctor uses a knife to cut the skeptic until he bleeds he will still say "I guess that dead people bleed after all" This just shows how skeptics cannot be intellectually converted except one makes them to reason with their conscience.

See this anti-intellectual. You talk as if skepticism is not the more intellectual between it and faith.

dead people bleed could be a sarcastic reply

buzugee: see thats your problem. you read the bible literally. satan being cast down by God is not a literal statement.

lol.....Really? Then we shouldnt also take "God" as literal.

buzugee: satan believes in himself. thats the worst kind of atheism. he is egocentric. he worships himself. thats atheism.

The weed is failing your brain. Atheism is the disbelief in God.

Satan is said in the bible to be cast down by God. Surely Satan can not be an atheist according to the bible.

buzugee: ACTUALLY SATAN IS AN ATHEIST. HE IS THE WORST KIND OF ATHEIST. HE IS AN ANTI-CHRIST. HE TOOK ATHEISM TO THE EXTREME.

Satan that is supposed to know Yaweh is an atheist?


You on weed or something?

Copy and paste.


Why cant you use your brain and read the silly thing you posted?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]“But the new rebel is a skeptic, and will not entirely trust anything. He has no loyalty; therefore he can never be really a revolutionist.[/quote]How stupid. The very fact that there are revolutionary atheists debunks this nonsense statement. Furthermore, a skeptic is loyal to evidence.


Also, just because someone is skeptic, it doesnt mean that the person can not find a cause to fight for.

Richard Branson, a revolutionary businessman with his unconventional business practices is a skeptic
Bill Gates revolutionized the computer world with windows.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]As a politician, he will cry out that war is a waste of life, and then, as a philosopher, that all life is waste of time. [b]A Russian pessimist [/b]will denounce a policeman for killing a peasant, and then [b]prove by the highest philosophical principles [/b]that the peasant ought to have killed himself. . . .[/quote]Russian pessimist? What is with the xenophobia? Is there any difference between a pessimist and a Russian pessimist. Or does the idiot that wrote this think that all Russians are godless? Or that the only godless pessimists are russians?


Furthermore, which philosophical principle espouses suicide as an alternative to being killed? WTF? Do all philosophers feel that life is a waste of time? Seriously, is the writer such much against intelligence or what?





[quote author=Mr_Anony]The man of this school goes first to a political meeting, where he complains that savages are treated as if they were beasts; then he takes his hat and umbrella and goes on to a scientific meeting, where he proves that they practically are beasts.[/quote]Savages? Wow Mr, Anony, in this 21st century do we refer to any set of people as "savages". The writer hypocritically does so!

As for beasts, when has "beasts" ever become a scientific term?



Keep copying and pasting nonsense by anti-intellectuals

Ihedinobi: Both points are independently big debates. Which shall we pursue from hereon out?

Pick your choice

lilcutie8916: so u agree with me that some things are just beyond comprehension

No, some things are yet to be found out.


Religion never finds out anything, but science does.

Ihedinobi: I'll add to Mr Anony's comments.

Earlier in this thread you said, "time is meaningless to God". I'm saying this in answer to "I never said that God knows nothing of time". It's an instance of how much untangling needs to be done just to straighten out our arguments. It's why I said that I would need to harvest the inconsistencies from all your comments so far. It's really tedious to set about that.

However, let me see if I can make this whole thing a little clear.

- The thread is intended to show that Yahweh/Jesus Christ is weaker than Satan.

- To show this you have unsatisfactorily used the Bible to say that God being an omnipotent being cannot rest or in fact do anything. This was further to show that the quality of omnipotence renders God an impossibility. While none of this has been conclusively proven, you have neglected to show its relevance to the issue under examination, viz, Satan is more powerful than God.

- You also questionably used both the Bible and bogus (given the lack of citation and defence) statistics to posit that there'll be more people in hell than in heaven. While this is not in any sense established as an irrefutable fact, you have gone on to base on it your submission that God loses ultimately to Satan and thus is weaker.

I have put together the foregoing observations without going over the whole thread with a fine tooth comb. They are just the most glaring difficulties. I don't even want to think about what I would find if I were to examine the thread exhaustively. Suffice to say that we have debated everything, inconclusively too, without addressing the your position that Satan is more powerful than God appreciably. And as the starter of the thread, it was your responsibility to keep the thread on point. You not only shirked that responsibility, you positively began and perpetuated the derailing of the thread, twisting issues so much that it became a near-impossibility to have a sensible debate with you anymore.

Now, permit me to request that you pick one issue to deal with. Are we to exhaust completely without distraction God's omnipotence with your position that omnipotence as a quality renders God as an impossibility? Or are we to take the thread back to whether or not Satan is more powerful than God using your opening arguments as your position?
I ask so that we can argue effectively and exhaustively. It's really troublesome to just throw words and conjectures about and imagine that because someone refuses to continue to deal with all the twists and incoherence of argument that they have been refuted or disproved or whatever.

lol......My points in summary are 2;


1) Satan is more powerful than God because
a) More people will be in hell
b) Satan never rests (according to frosbel)but God rests, according to the bible. Original point of the thread but not my best argument. Just something to troll the christians.



2) God can not rest if he is beyond time and always alert to everything in the universe. However, God should have the ability to rest if omnipotence means the ability to do everything. This contradiction is why God can not exist to a logical mind.

LagosShia: as a Muslim,the sins or wrongs,or mistakes humans commit cannot all be attributed to satanic inspiration or the temptation of the devil.the human being have the power to resist the temptation of the devil and also choose to act in a way other than the other way.the Quran makes perfect sense on those and we see that even though the devil tempts,we share the blame either partly or fully sometimes.

Holy Quran 15:42
"My servants – you shall have no authority over any of them, unless it be such as follow you being rebellious (against Me, as you are). "

Holy Quran 91:7-10
"And [by] the soul and He who proportioned it.And inspired it (with conscience of) what is wrong for it and (what is) right for it.,He has succeeded who purifies it,And he has failed who instills it [with corruption]".

You miss road or something?