₦airaland Forum

[quote author=Be who u r link=topic=428658.msg5877966#msg5877966 date=1271088213]Here i was sitting quietly in my office until my life was altered due to something silly my supposedly fiancee wrote exposing ourlives for no just cause and setting me up for christians who dont know me to insult me to the highest heavens. If she even spoke to me about this, i wont be this demoralized and shakey at work reading all these evil statements made by people calling me this things. Why would she go this far to do it. And your saying i shouldnt blame her. You all forget the 6 pages of insults that strangers from no where have been pouring on me and the people that know me reading this. How far this write up would go is something else. From all your advices she is getting married to a devil because i am not a christian, why should i just let her be in peace since that would stop all these slanderous statements and let me be. We have done so many things together as a couple and this issue of the christian or no christian thing has never cropped up until now on the internet. How would you feel if it were you that you just woke up one morning and found your life being the centre of the storm for no just cause. Do you guys forget things easily? Have you not gone through all the name calling and atheist bashing due to her story. Why should she do this and your telling me i should chill and am childish because she praised me. What sort of praise is that? If she truely loved me why should she lay me out bare for people to castigate me because of my views and these people dont even know me. What sort of advice is she looking for that we havent weathered together for 4 years and we are still going on. In fact what ever. Am done with this episode. Whatever. I will fulfill her wishes so that this castigations will end and i will be in peace. Because there is no way i can ever forgive her for this humilation and if we are even together back, this issue will now truely rise every now and then. It was never an issue to me but it will now be an issue to me. I will have to accept that religious discrimination is truely alive and i am an endangered specie because of my views. I was deluded it will work and was planning to make sure it works to prove people wrong. I accept i was betting on the wrong horse and for those insulting Labake, she has done more for me today that i could imagine. Showing me this website makes me appreciate her more. I could have continued living a false life with Sia and not knowing she had the capacity to stab me in front of strangers. Now i know better and who i can truely call my friends[/quote]And how many of the deluded people here on nairaland that are calling you names truly know you? How and why should the opinion of faceless and anonymous people that have NOTHING to contribute to your life what so ever on an internet forum affect you in any way at all?. . .Mr man carry on with your life and allow the delude people here to keep on ranting about nothing. . . .How deep is your love for her if the opinions of faceless people that don't even know you is all it takes for your love for her to be gone?

Because women are more interested in social groups and social gatherings which the church is. . . . .

streetwize:
I can now see what atheists do. . . U guys actually ignore the tolerant christains and their advice because as the intolerant atheists you just love to slander christainity and what better way to do that than to find people of your kind on the other side. . .
what about the advice of the christains who told her to think carefully, ask God, and choose wisely, the christains that didn't throw insults at the man. .
U so called atheists just crack me up. . . abeg continue to delude urselves. . .

Will you shut up!!!

[quote author=Be who u r link=topic=428658.msg5877193#msg5877193 date=1271082224]I dont believe this Fantasia. I dont believe this. When labake told me this morning that you went to a public forum to diss me, i didnt want to believe it because i was so sure you wont do anything this incomprehendable. She sent me the link to this site and i couldn't picture it had anything to do with me until i saw the nick name you used and the issue of the surgery before i knew it was truely you. After all we have been through and the promises we made not to involve third parties in what we do or say, you still went online to bring our whole lives to the world and to make matters worse for no reason i have been called unprintable names from being a devil to an antichrist to an occultist and that i would destroy your future and so forth and on. I really dont believe this to be honest Sia, i really dont want to believe this. We spoke yesterday night for almost an hour and this issue did not come up remotely and here i am reading falsehood about me and you setting me up with so many christians abusing me for no reason when they dont know us. I am still visibly shaken by this and it will take a calm head for me to properly respond to this unless i might end up regretting my words. I have never hurt you this past 4 years and have always adored you despite our religious differences but for you to take it out publicly when i have done you no wrong and allow people insult me tirelessly is quite shallow of you. I might be godless as you put it but i have never ever allowed anybody decide things for me or alowed anybody insult, confront or attack you privately or publicly and i have always respected you in everthing i have done in words and deeds. Even telling the whole world that your family hates me is just the height. Anyway before i come back to state my case, i will have a call with your brother Kenneth and show this website to him and dont worry the way things are going, your wish would be granted very soon since your website supporters think i am the most evil thing for you. Its funny how you forgot to tell them that the family that hates me so much did not fund your university education but i did and even got you your present job. You forgot to add how i take your brothers and sisters like my own family and would do anything for them just to make sure your happy. You forgot to tell them we have discussed this issue of having children and how they should be raised and i have told you that i dont care if you take them to a mosque or a buddist shrine to educate them on the religion of your choice and the only thing i would teach them is to follow their mind and embrace the concept of free will. Instead you have let people here abuse me so much and discriminate against me because i chose not to embrace any religion. I am truely pained by what i am reading and more worried how you have smeared me. Labake told me someone sent it to her before she passed it over to me to read and i have been recieving calls all day trying to diffuse this bad situation. There is a limit to what a man can take and do for a woman and i am more than convinced now that you dont want a real man who would love and cherish you and be faithful to you like i have been all these years. You tend to forget what brought us together and how your ex pastor boyfriend messed you up so much but i kept faith with you and stood by your side and this is how you pay me back by allowing people who dont know me or what i have done for you to abuse me. Remember i always tell you the reason i dont appreciate christians is because of the level of intolerance and discrimination some of them posses and you always say its not true that Christians are the most tolerant people in their words and actions and even christ mingled with sinners and unbelievers. I hope i have been vindicated . Anyway Whatever. Your friend's wishes would be granted. Everybody is saying i would spoil your future and make you unhappy because i dont believe in  religion. You know what Fantasia, i also have a right to be happy too and seek peace and have someone cherish me too the way i cherished you. I will leave you to find the christian brother your new friends so crave for you now while i seek my own peace and quiet else where. I will not be bethrote to someone who sees me as a devil and an occultist when i dont even believe in that concept or practice it. I will save you the trouble of your questions to the world for advice. I will leave you peacefully and seek someone else that appreciates who i am and not what i am. Life is too short for me to worry about all these kind of things. Somebody out there would appreciate me and if you look back this past 4 years and think of one horrible wicked and terrible thing i have done to you that will warrant you to make people say these mailicious things to me , may propserity never forgive me and may i never progress. You can now call your parents and tell them the good news that the so called evil devil is out of your life.[/quote]Mr man did you read the OP, Where did she insult you or call you names? All she did was come here to seek for advice from her fellow religious brethren. . . . .Why the heck are you revealing her real name and talking too much? . Don't you think this is childish?

What I don't quite understand is if people are willing to be accept that others have some right to practice other religion without openly demonizing and castigating them why aren't they tolerant of a lack of faith? If say, you were a Hindu, Christians and Muslims will be like "oh wow, I've never met a Hindu before and will begin to as Hindu related questions, even though they kind of believe that you are on the wrong side of things and on your way to hell already. You still wouldn't believe in their own version or concept o God but they will kind of tolerate you except for the militant and fundamental types that will like to convert you or tell you that you are on the wrong side of things, Most will tolerate you to a certain extent. Say I am an atheist and every body will run away What different does it make really? Why the ridiculous assumption that a person is immoral because he is without a belief in some imaginary and man made entity?

[quote author=Tudór link=topic=428658.msg5871849#msg5871849 date=1271005870]Are u an illiterate? Did u even read the OP at all? Are u brain-dead?

How can a normal human being relate what u wrote to the OP?

Walahi, i just weak as I read your post.[/quote] . . .I laugh tire I wan die. . . .

But what is it with this puerile talk that atheist are bad, evil, dangerous, wicked etc . Evidence to show that religious people are more moral that atheist is WHAT?. . . . .If you want to marry the fine man then go ahead and do so, if your mythical beliefs and way of thinking is paramount to you then fine. . . . .Do as you please. . . .

OLAADEGBU:
The only "chance that they are the same body" is between slim and none, and slim had long checked out of town.

The difference between the real God and allah is that one is the uncreated Creator while the other is an devil in disguise. One has a Son while the other hasn't got a son. One is the triune God while the other was created by the former.

So yahweh created allah and allowed him to "deceive and lead astray" the over 1.2 billion muslims alive eh?. . . .Interesting. . . .

noetic16:
You are very wrong.

How do u explain what happened in the garden of eden? Eve chose by her own volition to accept the serpents counsel and eat the fruit. . . . .the same way u chose to post on this forum by your own FREE WILL.
The garden of Eden story shows clearly that God sets the parameters of possibilities . . . .by stating the things that would be (consequences) if the fruit is eaten or not eaten. What God says here is called a word of wisdom.

Eve exercised free will and so did u.

The adam and eve story is already redundant. First nothing happened in any garden of eden, according to some story unverifiable story something happened in a garden. Eve according to the bible had free will but the bible very clearly stated that she did not even know the difference between what is right and what is wrong. The concept of original sin itself is contradicted in the bible.

"The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself." (Ezekiel 18:20)

Does this passage not kill the concept of original sin? Does it also kill the idea that sin is passed down to the children and say that if Adam and Eve lost eternal life, that lose is not passed on to their children?. . . . .This quote seems to clearly say that people are all responsible for their "sins" and that none of that responsibility can be taken away and remains their own. . . . . . It also indicates that no sin, or original sin, is passed on to our children.

The garden of eden myth is just a primitive explanation to events the people tried to explain back then.

I like to think of it like a very primitive form of science in that science asks questions and then seeks answers. The problem was that the people who wrote the Genesis story didn't have the processes that we do today so they had to use their imagination to come up with answers. Example

Q: Why do women have pain in childbirth?
A: Because God (or gods) stated they would.
Q: Why would God do such a thing?
A: Because way back when there was this garden . . . . .

or

Q: Why do men have to work?
A: Because God said so.
Q: But why would God say such a thing?
A: Well, you see, there was this garden . . . .

Its not that they knew it was a lie, but it was a story that, to them, explained the evidence as they saw it. . . . .

1) The Free Will defense is NOT supported by the Bible. The God in the Bible is much more concerned with obedience than he is with free will. The word free will as Christians use it does NOT appear in the bible. It is just one of the clause used to explain absurdity and some of the hypothesis and claims of the religion.

2) The Christian who uses the Free will defense must sacrifice a belief in the existence of heaven. Unless they want to claim that evil happens in heaven??. . . .I do not believe in any god therefore the argument is invalid. In the animal world, it is the parents who train their offspring to make the right decisions and with a human brain, that is possibly of a higher decision making organ, we are able to learn right from wrong. The free will argument is used by Christians only as an explanation to the problem of evil.

3) Predestination is a very clear biblical concept and that concept alone destroys the free will argument. The bible it self talks about some people created to be so that they should be destroyed by the God of the bible, how then does that fit with the free will concept?

davidylan:
i have to admit . . . the devil is a smart dude!

What is this deluded fellow saying . . . . .Once the bubble of his delusions have been burst open he still closes his eyes and attributes things to the mythical devil. . . .So its the mythical devil that is telling the people here to write what is in your "holy book of god" eh? Id it the mythical devil that is telling the posters here to write that your supposed all loving creator much more erratic than the allah you love to hate? . . . .Keep on swimming in your bubble of delusions. . . .

viaro:
@toneyb and mazaje,

I'm not going to tell stories, but please hear me out.

In particular reference to the thread topic (ie., on Psychokinesis), I woulod say that a subject of this sort is basically pointing to just one thing: are such things as psychokinesis 'real'? And is there any evidence from any study at all published in a recognized journal as evidence at all for psychokinesis?

What does the paper say about the scientific evidence, The journal you posted gave some vague explanations and nothing conclusive to show that psychokinesis can be scientifically supported. According to wikipedia there is no convincing scientific evidence that psychokinesis exists and it cites this as its reference. Vyse, Stuart A. (1997). Believing in Magic: The Psychology of Superstition. Oxford University Press US. p. 129. ISBN 0195136349. "Most scientists, both psychologists and physicists, agree that it has yet to be convincingly demonstrated.".

It does not help us to keep arguing on and on about Randi - you have your praise for him, I have reasons why I'm not impressed by his theatricals. But as regards the question of psychokinesis, one would be asking in particularly (if you're like me) - "is there any evidence of sorts for psychokinesis?"

Enough of the endless banters about Randi. . . .Do you have any conclusive evidence to show that it exists from a peer reviewed scientific journal?

Perhaps it seems pertinent to state the obvious, that discussions on psychokinesis might as well have a bearing on such things regarded as 'paranormal', and this takes many forms. It is not just a stereotypical idea which some of us might hold, especially if we're inclined to pride ourselves as 'skeptics' on such things. Basically, some sources present the paranormal as involving events which are 'impossible to explain by known natural forces or by science' (Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary). I am not asking that anyone "must" adhere to only that definition - and readers are quite free to think differently.

Therefore, examining the phenomenon about paranormal and psychokinesis is not just a matter of whether "someone is claiming" to have a paranormal ability which they personally possess and are able to demonstrate at will. Beyond that, the question of whether the 'paranormal' exists at all should move us to want to examine cases where such things might have occured independently of anyone making any claims of possessing a paranormal ability. Are you agreed on this?

Sure I agree. . . . I will like something more concrete and substantive not some anecdotal references.

So what happens where certain events are reported (from rigorous studies, of course) that cannot be explained by known natural forces or by science? Perhaps we might agree that the weight of such studies is in the question of whether they are published in credible journals.

Let me leave you one example:
^^^
The investigators were:

   ~   Ian Stevenson, Department of Behavioral  Medicine  and Psychiatry,
        University  of Virginia, Charlottesville:  VA 22908.

   ~   Satwant Pasricha, Department of Clinical Psychology,
        National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences
        (NIMHANS),  Bangalore,  India.

  ~   Nicholas McClean-Rice, Department of Behavioral Medicine
       and Psychiatry, Universily of Virginia, Charlottesville,  VA 22908.


Please just objectively go through that published study - and then think of your own reasons for any conclusions you may draw as to whether such a phenomenon is possible or not possible. Also note here that the subjects involved in that study do not claim to have 'abilities' which they could demonstrate at will.

In proffering the case study above, I have this from mazaje in mind:
Further, I am not asking anyone to 'replicate' anything, since here we are only seeking to establish any inferences about 'veracity'. Cheers.

Interesting. . . .Let me begin by saying that I am not dismissing their claims without completely reading it. But I will like to note that the authors published for JSE,(The journal is not indexed in Web of Science, an indexing service for leading scientific journals, and is not considered actual peer review) there are no real details in the "study" other than first names and vague village names from what i have read so far, and the bulk of "evidence" provided is by hearsay of "witnesses".

I remember the monkey man that caused widespread panic in India a few years ago. We had plenty of witnesses for it as well. Did a monkey man exist and make hell for a few days only to evaporate? I like tony will read it, when I feel I am informed enough to drop my comments I will definitely drop them and then we will continue from there.

viaro:
Thanks for trying to advocate for Randi. The thing is that Randi is a liar all the same.

Randi might be a liar but so are the other psychics no?

It is not in reference to the said case of hot coals that I drew that inference; but on other cases that cast doubts on his credibility as an objective seeker of genuine cases.

However, I wonder that Randi came to the conclusion that the guy's case was fake - just because he believes it so. Not that he could demonstrate it, replicate it, or explain it away with credible protocol. Just Randi says this and that, and voila! he's alright, no? Please. Randi's claim that what he saw was fake amounts to nothing - afterall, there are cases where he has believed others to be frauds and went on to demonstrate them. Why does this one case elude him, and then he thinks he could just yap and leave it at that?

No, not because he believes so but because it is. A guy that uses supernatural agents to enable him walk on hot coal for 30 seconds should be able to solicit the help of the said supernatural external agents to protect his feet against and enable him to stand in one position on the same coal he walked on for half the time. What part of that do you not understand? . Hot coal is hot coal no?. . . . .Debunking people's claims does not always have to involve a person replicating what they do, Intelligent points can be noted and such intelligent points can be used in debunking such claims. It happens all the time.

Anecdotal news have their place - but not here and not now, sorry mazaje bro. I respect what you want to conclude for yourself; but that does not have any value just because he says this and that. If Randi is actually after the truth, he could honour the invitation and challenges of those who are willing to show him certain other phenomena. He went elsewhere outside his 'studio' and you met him in London - he could also go anywhere he has been invited. Why is he evading those other challenges if he does not have something to be ashamed of? Playing hanky panky works well for those who wishes to pander to - but he would not do honour the challenges where it really matters.

Like what? Using the name of Jesus, Allah or Vishnu to heal amputees and make their amputated limbs regrow? How about using Juju to immediately stop hurricanes or deflect bullets fired from a gun?. . . . .So walking on hot coal is also a super natural ability eh?. . . . . .What challenges is Randi evading?

Randi knows too well that if that guy had done that same thing, there's always another silly request up Randi's sleeve. The question at all that the said guy walked on hot coals for 30 secs says so much for Randi to do the same. Asking him to do so with boiling water is also dubious - Randi himself has said that he would refuse any scenario where there's a potential for the persons to get hurt. If that guy did what he knew best, and did so for 30 secs, and Randi could not deny the evidence of what he saw, one should expect at the very least that such a 'trick' could be replicated. That is where it truly matters much more than standing idle and asking someone to do this and that before you believe anything. What happened to the one that he saw but could not deny?

If the guy was for real and had the ability he would have done it just to prove a point. His refusal is very telling. . . .Will he just do it and shut Randi up forever? The same lame talk of replication. . . .How many times are you going to sing that stale song? Maybe your name needs to be changed to vairo-replication . . . . .

I've already explained that issue with regards to materials science. I wonder that this should escape you guys and you don't seem to recognise that hot coals and boiling water and oil are not the same. Please refer to my previous comments, thanks.

What ever why not stand on the same coal for half the time he used waking on it? Its the same coal no?

You're carping, dude. The conditions he seeks is what those other challengers offer him. Randi is too much of a dubious fellow to face up to those challenges. Period.

Stop crying. . .Randi is no psychic, And he does NOT know all the tricks involved, If the guys are for real they would have simply agreed to his challenge and shut him up instead of setting or throwing their own devious and empty challenges. . . .By the way paranormal challenges were also put forth by John Nevil Maskelyne and Harry Houdini and no body ever stepped forward and acceped the challenge which is very telling. . . . .

I did not assert anywhere what empty noise you are alleging here. If Randi believes that the paranormal exists, he would do well to address the divide that indeed such a thing exists although there are frauds. You yourself have stated that Randi confided to you in your acquaintance in London that he suspects these abilities to be "mere charade". He did not tell you that he believes SOME are frauds but was rather happy to make a sweeping remark about their being charade - you were impressed because that is what folks like you wanted to hear from him. If I were you, right there and then I would have posed the obvious question to him: Randi, are you saying that ALL CASES in all possibilities are mere charade, since that is what you "suspect" them to be? Rather than talk sensibly, you're arguing an empty case that keeps Randi's amazing duplicity at large.

Is there any that is NOT a charade? If there is why not accept his challenge and take the test under test conditions agreed to by both parties? Will you and them stop crying and take the challenge already?. . . .All these empty talk from a distance and endless crying is tiring, take the challenge and shut him up forever. . . .I don tire abeg . . . . . .

Then he should go to where it matters and put himself out of his misery instead of hooting that he suspects them to be mere charade. A man who draws such sweeping conclusions is obviously dubious, no offence.

. . . .My man you need to take a cold drink its obvious that you are tensed up. . . . .

Of course not - and I agree. But again, the fact he is unable to replicate them is the more reason he should not be dismissing them hastily and emptily. He calls them 'tricks' - how does he know? If that is what that particular case was, then let him use the same tricks to replicate what he witnessed. QED. Either that, or he should just shut up about "using the same tricks" (as in toneyb's earlier) comments.

How many times are we going to hear the word replicate on one thread alone? . . . . .he does NOT need to replicate because that is NOt what he is after. . .he is after the veracity of their so called supernatural abilities. . . .

If Randi has any case to make, the challenges are there - he should just simply take them up and put his old drunken heart at rest. The challenges I have seen are not asking Randi to demonstrate that he has any psychic ability which he believes to be supernatural - that is not the point. Please see the link in my initial replies and see what it was all about (you [or toneyb] seemed to have hastily dismissed it as new ageism WITHOUT even giving it a good look over).

Pls just outline what the challenge is all about and lets have a look at it, thank you. . . . I don't really have time reading long new age drivels. . . . .

Please shut up. The 1 million dollars is a farce - just because Randi told you he would be happy to give a million dollars he does not have does not therefore settle it. He can keep his boast about what he cannot give - does not surprise me, judging from his records to lie anyhow. Someone (ala toneyb's report earlier) walked on hot coals - Randi did not deny what he saw, but he simply would find some way of discrediting so that his million dollars would not dissolve through his fingers. Please.

Will you shut up and stop blowing hot air? Facts can not be discredited no?

The fact that Randi has NOT answered those who have invited him to what he was seeking actually speaks volumes about his cedibility - more as a sham, a dupe and a liar whose theatricals appeals to those meeting him in London.

As somebody rightly said If you believe ghosts exist, it's up to you to prove it. I should not be the one to prove the non-existence of ghosts. . . . .Will you tell your people out there to go take the test and stop the endless crying and biting of their tails?

viaro:
So it is your own anecdotal evidence of meeting Randi is London that is not bollocks? Please pass.

If you and Randi want to be serious, stop sitting lazily in one dark corner and congratulating yourself on what you have not found out. There are free passes where Randi could prove his mettle by taking up the challenges offered him on fairness and objectivity. What is keeping the amazing Randi from such simple issues?

I heard you mention that you know people that have supernatural abilities . . . . .What supernatural abilities exactly do they posses? Can they use their so called supernatural abilities to heal amputees, heal blind people that have lost their eye balls, stop raging hurricanes, Tsunamis, build destroyed buildings, fly around, walk on water, make people grow taller by layimng hands on them, make barren women istantly get pregnant?. . . .Ohh I know you will come here and start telling us how some psychics or pastors you know instantly healed a person from malaria, or headache . . . .Or how some pastor predicted the future after the event had alread happened . . . . .By the way if christianity is true then you yourself should be a magician walking around doing magic as your god promised you guys in his alleged book no? . . . . .

Fortunately, no one else translates them as such - only lazy atheists with ready-made pat-answers for their laziness often do so. No big deal there.

Dude, wake up. Randi will not tell you where studies have been carried out for EVIDENCE. That is because you're too lazy to check, simply don't care, or far too drunk on your own bollocks to be man enough to source Randi out. Enjoy your misery.

. . . . .

When you do wake up and desire to find evidence on the same plane, please search - you may surprise yourself far beyond your anecdotes for Randi. The case below is not a nightmare to the atheist, but it might help to take a peak and see that what Randi claims to be looking for has been studied and applied ALREADY - just an example:

The conclusive evidence that psychic abilities are axiomatic from the paper you pasted is WHAT? . . . .Stop trying too hard my man. . . . .

viaro:
Howdy my man?

Actually, I'm not spinning or dancing around - my case is simple and factual. Please identify where you disagree and make some case for what you want to present. That would be more interesting to read rather than argue in empty box.

What else do you do around here beside crying, singing, spinning and shouting? And please learn not to abuse the word factual because its very clear that you do not understand what it means at all. What have you stated that is a fact? . . . . .Look who is talking about agruing in an empty box. . .Mirror, mirrior on the wall .

Did you read me make a claim that Randi stated that the paranormal does not exist?

Yes you did. You also stated it as the reason why he dropped 1 million dollars as a challenge.

I hope you saw clearly the first part of the quote from my comment that you quoted? I said "The question is not that this or that exists or does not exist - no." And by that it should be clear to any objective reader that I did not lay a direct charge at Randi for such a claim as you supposed.

Then what exactly are you crying and ranting endlessly about?

For those clamouring after Randi, my direct call to them is for them to smart up and stand for what they are saying. Example, toneyb (as well yourself, I suppose) is convinced that the abilities which have been demonstrated in the presence of Randi are "not real" - therefore, he wants to convince himself that such a thing as could be defined as paranormal or psychic does not exist. I may be wrong; but IF either you or toneyb are not saying that such a thing does not exist, then why all the pains to defend the what you cannot credibly dismiss on any objective grounds other than the usual sob atheist stories you have been singing all along?

Will you shut up already? How does walking on coal equate to paranormal? . There are documentaries on National geographic (Super Humans) where a US navy seal survived for an hour inside ice, something no normal human can do by employing some tricks coupled with the help he recieved with his training as a navy seal. Even Randi himself was encased in a block of ice for 55 minutes and that action bagged him a Guinness world record award. IF a person can use external or supernatural agents to walk fast on hot coal for 30 second I bet the same supernatural agents should be able to protect the person and make him stand on the hot coal for 15 seconbs no? Instead of addressing that part you are busy crying all over the place and chasing your tail with your empty talk about Randi replicating the tricks involved. If there truly is a supernatural agent that can make a person walk on hot coal why not stand on it for half the time you used in walking on the hot coal? Why can't the same supernatural agent protect against other hot substances of the same degree? . . . . .That irony escapes cry babies like you I guess. . . . . . . .So what you are saying is that Randi should replicate ALL tricks? . . .How lame. . . . .

I have not met Randi in person - nor do I need to. Your good fortune that you did and got to hear him say for himself that he suspects those abilities to be mere charade. Yes, you also said that he lectured and demonstrated - whatever. But with reference to the case presented earlier by toneyb, I would have been delighted to see him replicate the case of walking on coals in the same manner that he witnessed and could not have denied!

You are now sounding like the broken record that you are. He does not have to replicate anything. He is only interested in the truth about the person's so called supernatural ability. I have seen frauds openly demonstrate magical things that I could not understand talkless of replicating but they were later exposed as the fraudsters that they were. Those that live in the Northern parts of Nigeria know very well about Maitasine and Ahmadu Maye. . .these are people that openly demonstrate their so called supernatural abilities in the open for all to see, abilities that others could not even understand but had to take as supernatural only for the fraudsters to be later exposed. One of them was killed while the other was permanently put out of business and shamed. Your lame and empty talk about replication is asinine because it makes NO sense at all. . . . .Must every body replicate every trick? . . . .I can't even believe that you are sounding this vacuous. . .

Anyone could try to discredit another person - that is easy-peazy. But it is quite another world to go beyond mere talk and replicate what someone else has done which you cannot deny. That is where you convince the objective person that you're not preaching to the choir merely because Randi "suspects" that those other cases are mere charade. Objectivity does not rest on someone's "suspicion" - otherwise, if it did, then anyone could dismiss Randi on mere suspicion and call it a fine day!

Thanks to Randi we know that Uri the spoon bender is a fraud, Randi has also exposed other people whose abilities he could NOT even replicate for the frauds they are.

Because toneyb on his behalf claims that he (Randi) uses the same tricks to discredit others. Let him therefore use any number of that same trick to walk on hot coals - then we know that he understands what he is saying and there would be substance in what he claims.

The tricks he used does not have to be the same as the ones the tricksters use. He uses his own special tricks to get them and that is what pisses you and them the most . . . .You guys can not just accept that some guy can cleverly use your own methods to discredit or expose the various frauds or myths you strongly believe. . . . .Back to the guy that walked on hot coal, If the guy is for real and not a fraud what is stopping his supernatural agent from protecting his foot against for 15 seconds and make him stand on the same coal he walked on for 30 seconds? Instead of answering the obvious you are busy chasing your long tail. . . . .

Please I beg you - I deeply beg you, mazaje. You guys are changing your diapers far too quickly for me to keep track of anything. I don't think toneyb claimed that the guy walked on hot coals for 50 seconds - rather he said it was Randi that threw the challenge to the guy "to do the same with boiling water and hot oil, stating that if the guy could walk on hot coal for about 50 seconds (or there about) without hurting his feet, he should also be able to put his feet in boiling water or boiling oil for the same duration and come out unscathed." Randi was the one (supposedly in toneyb's account) who yapped about 50 seconds, not that he said the guy walked for 50 secs on hot coals. Yet, I don't see where Randi denied that such an event did occur.

Will you shut up already and stop sounding like the broken record that you are?. . . . . . . . .Is it about occurance or about the veracity of the claim of an external or supernatural agent?. . . .Randi himself was encased in a block of ice for 55 minutes and survived. . . . .If he were someone that ascribes all his tricks to the supernatural. I bet you will be on your knees licking his boots already. . . . .Abeg go siddon for corner make we hear word. . . .

Okay - here's wishing Randi some good luck to walk on hot coals for 30 seconds as did that guy! It does not matter how fast Randi does it - 30 seconds is scientific enough! Okay, Randi .[color=Black].[/color]. over to you. Roger me when you're done!

When you get tired of sounding like the broken record that you are you can pls let me know. . . . .

^^

The crazy slaves of allah and their insatiable hunger for bloodshed. Deluded F.O.O.L.S. . . . . .

What I can personally say about these things is that there is that the veracity of such claims is zero. There is only anecdotal evidence, which is ALWAYS the evidence you have when you have no evidence. It's bollocks. Basically, if you translate the words "religious", "spiritual", "mystical", and "supernatural" as meaning "great steaming pile of crap" you won't go far wrong. The problem is that there is NEVER any verifiable evidence? ONLY special pleadings and them say them say. My point is that pretending that their is verifiable and objective evidence for the supernatural is no way to get around the fact their is isn't objective evidence to support any supernatural activity or process.

Why is viaro dancing all over the place? . . . . .The same convoluted spin master is at work. . LOL!!

viaro:
But I don't necessarily agree it is that simplistic. The question is not that this or that exists or does not exist - no. Rather, if one is saying that NOTHING defined as paranormal or psychic exists, then it is up to him to explain those which he has witnessed but cannot deny their existence. This is where he ought to replicate what he claims he "uses the same tricks" for, just as he witnessed in those cases (walking on hot coals a ready example).

Where did Randi state that the paranormal does NOT exist, Pls produce any source that says he ever made such a statement. Thank you.

Let me quickly address some points here. I have meet, listened to and watch so many of Randi's videos. I was opportuned to meet him in London about 2 years ago(2008) when he came and delivered a lecture in London, I did not really know who he was at that time, A friend happened to be a member of the association(The Skeptic magazine) that invited him. He got the tickets for us and we went. After the lecture and demonstration from him and other speakers we went forward and meet him. We took some pictures with him and chatted a little. I personally asked if he was truly willing to give out 1 million dollars to any body that could stand his test and he said yes, In fact he said he will be very happy to. He told me that he truly wanted to know if these abilities are real. He is a skeptic who is willing to see if those alleged abilities can stand for themselves or if they are mere charade as he suspects them to be. . . . . . . .

Why does Randi need to replicate anything? . OK let me address the talk about the guy who walked on hot coal. Toneyb got it wrong when he said that the guy walked on hot coal for 50 seconds. The guy walked very fast on hot coal for 30 seconds not 50 as toneyb said. I watched a video on you tube soem time ago where one of the guy's fans was calling Randi a dishonest criminal for throwing a challenge against the guy(I will look it up and see, If I get it I will post it here). After the show according to the guy Randi was interviewed on TV, when asked if the guy's abilities are supernatural or fake Randi said that he believes that all these demonstrations are fake because the guy had to prove to him beyound reasonable doubt that his abilities were real. When asked if he could replicate the guys ability Randi simply said no. The guy went on to say that Randi was a dishonest liar just because Randi said on another TV show that the guy's ability could be relpicated. He did not say that he could replicate the guy's ability but he said that any body that knows the trick behind it can also walk very fast on hot coal like the guy did. How then is Randi a dishonest lair?

I have meet Randi and from the discussion we had I can conclude that he is only after the truth behind the claims people make or some of the abilities people have demonstrated. Randi's first challenge to the guy who walked on the hot coal for 30 seconds was stand on the hot coal for half the time he walked on the hot coal so that he can see if his abilities were true. If the guy has some spuernatural agent or agents protecting him from the heat and allowing him to walk fast on the hot coal as he claims, such supernatural agent/agents should also be able to protect the guy's feet and allow him to stand on the hot coal for half the time he spent walking on the coal Randi said. As expected the guy refused, His second challenge to the guy was to place his feet in boiling water or hot oil for the same duration he used in walking over the hot coal. His reason as pointed out by tony is that if the guy's supernatural agents could protect his feet and make him walk on hot coal they should also be able to protect him and make him stand on the hot coal for half the time he used in walking on the hot coal or protect him from boiling or hot oil that is of the same tempreture.

You keep coming up with this bizzare talk about Randi lacking the ability to replicate what others have done. That does not even come close to making any sense at all because Randi has never claimed that their psychic abilities do not exists, all he wants for them to do is to come and demonstrate evidence of their paranormal, supernatural or occult power under test conditions agreed to by both parties so that skeptics like him will accept and forever shut their mouths. That is all what he is after. He is only after the veracity of such claims. The fact that he is unable to replicate their tricks does not give credence or legitimize their tricks as supernatural events. I may not be able to replicate the so called abilities of 419 tricksters that used to trick people back in the days when we were kids by openly demonstarting their ability to turn ordinary paper into naira notes and claim that the source of their ability is juju or some other external agent but that does not stop their tricks from what it is. Randi does not have to replicate anything, If the psychics are so sure of themselves why not just take up his challenge and shut him up for ever as tony pointed out?

His challenge still remains, If you claim to have or have demonstrated supernatural abilities(Such as the ability to withstand or deflect bullets fired from a gun, walk on hot coal, heal blind people or people who are suffering from paralysis) come and demonstrate evidence for this supernatural under test conditions and win a million dollars. The fact that people are all over the place making noise from long distances as my man tony said instead of standing up to his challenge is very very telling. Non of them will like to go and embarass him or herself as expected.

Extremely brilliant!!!!!!! MyJoe is the MAN. . . . .

viaro:
I wouldn't bet a dime on James Randi. He's much too controversial with simple truth, if he ever was genuinely interested in finding evidence for the paranormal.

Randi pats himself with the offer of US$1 million to anyone able to prove the existence and reality of the supernatural and/or paranormal; but the same Randi has never been able to take up the challenges offered him by others. An example: go to Survival_After_Death and find 'The Ultimate Psychic Challenge - A Challenge to James Randi'. Has Randi taken up the challenge at any time?

Of course, there are a number of serious challenges - following intellectual and scientific protocol - thrown at Randi. The dude has not attempted any serious answers or responses to them; and his theatricals are vanishingly (and astonishingly) abating and far less impressing .[color=Black].[/color]. except, of course, to those who just want to be entertained by Randi's dishonest skepticism.

See, here is the problem.The charlatans know very well that they do NOT have any verifiable evidence so in other to save face they decide to attack the integrity of James Randi. The cannot give Randi's challenge legitimacy because it demonstrates their claims are false so their only choice is to discredit him and the challenge and what is offered as proof? some cranky new-age website! Randi does not need to take up any challenge from any body. If you can prove the existence or reality of supernatural powers do so and you will have 1million dollars.The believers in these things don't accept Randi's change as legitimate,they see him as the charlatan because he is willing to use trickery to unmask, debunk and otherwise humiliate psychics and paranormal researchers, the irony escapes them. Funny how all these name brand psychics all charge (a lot!) for their "gifts from god" LOL. . . . . Thanks Randi for his efforts to expose these frauds preying on people. The claim by Randi is a direct reply and statement to those fakes who claim 100% accuracy and go on media and are frauds. If they claim they have amazing gifts Randi counter claims that they are amazing BSers and that is what the challenge is for.

Anyone with true gifts should be able to go in and show a CLEAR function of their gift and if they had to do it 1 time or 100 times they should be able to demonstrate it. The test is there so that no luck can occur, the test is there to prove the claims of these fakes who say they don't use luck themselves so the test makes sure there is no luck or random chance at all. If your guide can tell you the answer to a question once then surely the guide can tell it to you 100 times and heck, win the million and donate it right back or give it to charity. But as usual since they know very well that they can't stand up to the challenge its easier to attack Randi than to just go and simply reveal their so called supernatural abilities. If you go about lying to people that you can fly or suspend in the air go and prove it and win 1 million dollars end of story.

noetic16:
Lets not mix the issues at stake here. . . . . . . . we know that

A. There is a God who inspired the bible

NO, You were made to believe that there is a god who inspired the bible by others. . . . .You don't have any evidence for your assertion all you have is your personal belief is ONLY as a result of very long conditioning and indoctrination. . . . .

B. This same God helps His sons (for whom the bible was written) to understand the message of the bible

When then do Christians interprete the bible differently? We don't have to go to far, There are people here on NL like OLAADEGBUU who believe that you will rot in hell for not believing that the earth and the universe are 6000 years old. . .Tell me is it the same god that tells people like daidylan, vairo, debosky etc that the earth is not 6000 years old and that that kind of belief has nothing with the christian message of salvation? I know a lot of people like OLAADEGBU who tie the message of salvation with their own young earth creationist views. . . . .

C. There are those who FRAUDULENTLY claim to be His sons (false prophets) and offer antagonising interpretations of the bible.

Is OLAADEGBU a fraud for tying his message of salvation to his young earth creationist views. . . .He believes that for you to be a true christian you have to be a YECnist. . . .

D. The fact that these false prophets (in C above) offer LIES and FALSEHOOD as God inspired biblical translation does NOT dispute B (that God enables His sons to understand this message)
E. God did NOT ask anyone to depend on anyone for the meaning of biblical injunctions. . . . . all He did was ask u to accept the gift of salvation.


1. understand what word? the ever living and incontainable word of God , . or the revealed (bible) word of God. my dear, to be a Christian is simply to hav accepted the gift of salvation and to be led by the HS.

2. And is it ontologically contradicting for a xtian to state that all the plans of God are limited and contained in the bible?. . . this is to imply that God has no thoughts outside of whats in the bible? really ? . . . .does the bible give a graphic detail of the reign of JC?

and whats the difference between these two skools of thought?

lol . . , is this where your hope lies that u could still manage to make heaven?

1. first u limit this same "all-powerful and all-knowing God" to the "container" of both your imagination and understanding. what makes u think that it is believers and not God Himself who has been doing the evangelising? . . . . .read phillipians 2:13

2. it is also impossible to know God . . . .cos God cannot be "realistically" revealed to our limited sense organs. . . God is spirit. The closest we can come to God is through the manifestation of JC . . . .and a detailed relationship with Him

3. Salvation was designed by God (in human coinage) as a rational thing. That explains why u have no reason to be saved. . .and I have every reason to guard my salvation with my life.

I will reply to some of the points here but I have to take the girl friend out for dinner. . . .Will be back to post my rejoinder. . . .

noetic16:
I am afraid I cannot change your sentiments. . . . .but I can at least highlight the errors in your arguments.
I chose to debate with u in the hope that if we could separate your hate for God . . . .we could look at the moses case objectively. . . but I guess I am off on a long shot.

Sorry there is NO god for me to "hate", there are only writings and stories that men wrote down for me to point to, criticize and condemn where I see that their actions are worthy of my condemnation. . . . .

Lets put the God issue aside as it seems to be the basis of your lack of objectivity. . . lets look at it from a civil and intellectual perspective.
A group of people are living in the wilderness without food, water, a permanent roof on their head or the normal smell of home. , .they are living on a promise, . . . . . . .on a promise for a better life. . .

No, we wont put the issue of god aside since most of the wars they fought, they did so allegedly because their god told them to fight the other people as a result of worshiping of other gods by the other side. . . .

a. is there a need for these people to have a sense of defence and caution?

Yes. . . .

b. is there a need for these people to play the game of war, with the intent of the survival of the fittest?

Another lie. . .Where does it say in the bible that Moses and crew were fighting for survival of the fittest? In the bible the Jews were commanded by their tribal God Yahweh to go to war with others because he has given them the land of the other people since they had no land of their own or because they worshipped other gods or enticed his "chosen men" to worship other gods. . .Nothing like fighting to stay alive or survival of the fittest. . .It was mainly bacause they worshipped other gods or because Yahweh had delivered their lands which was flowing with milk and honey to his alleged chosen men. . . .I would have thought that a god that is all powerful and and all good can do all things will effortlessly and without bloodshed build a land flowing with milk and honey for his "chosen men" instead of allegedly telling them to go and steal the land of others, kill, rape and despoil them. . . . .

c. considering their antecedents as having upstaged pharao (the world's super-power), should they let their caution of guard at the detriment of their safety?

They were NOT guarding them selves according to the bible they were killing others simply because thir god told them to do so on the account of worshipping other gods. . . .How is Yahweh different from allah in this case. . ,

1. you did not tell me why u would give that advice to moses. . , . . . .why would u advise him not to kill since these same people could come to kill u and your kids tomorrow as an act of revenge?. . . .why do u find it so hard answering this question?

I said I will tell moses NOT to kill the innocent children and sacrifice them as a burnt offering unto Yahweh because they are innocent. . . . .Why do the prsent day IDF try as much as possible NOT to kill the children of those they wage war against for fear of the children coming back to till them when they grow older. . . . .

2. you take for granted the ignoble fact that we presently live in a civil society, where there is law and order. was there any local or international law to protect the rights of the children of israel?. . . .your attempt to draw comparisons at ease is NOT objective.

I thought the supposed creator of the universe , human moral values and all that is in it was the one commanding the jews and giving them injunctions directly?. . . .If humans today can make such civil laws I bet that the alleged creator of human morality will creater better civil laws of how to engage in wars instead of telling his "chosen men" to kill people, despoil them and sacrifice some of them as burnt offering unto him. . . . .

noetic16:
1. quite wrongly, I did NOT imply the above. Do u accept that God inspired the bible?. . . if yes. . then u need the help of God to understand what He inspired in the bible. . .if no. . , .then u can make any meaning of anything u find in the bible.

I KNOW that people own their own for various reasons's sat down and wrote all the books of the bible, I don't want to use my self when disscusing these issues. . . .If there is a god that helps people to understand the bible then why are people interpreting the message of the bible VERY differently? Why are people HEAVILY relying on others to tell them what some passages mean if there exists a god that can do that himself to those that are truly seeking? All I see around are people self projecting themselves as god and making the bible to say or mean what ever they want it to say or mean. . . . .If there is truly a god that explains anything to people about the bible I doubt we will have the endless versions of Christianity we see around and the endless confusions we see around which is as a result of people interpreting the bible differently and claiming molopoly of understanding of what they believe the bible actually says. . . . .

2. u dont need a holy book to become a Christian. . . u need to accept the gift of salvation. reading the bible comes after u know your place in God. . .the bible is designed for spiritual growth and not for intellectual exploration.

This is your own personal interpertation and opinion. . , I know a lot of christians that believe that you can not become a christian without understanding the word, plans and mind of god which they believe are contained in the bible. . . .Your opionion and what ever you chose to make of the bible and how you relate it to the christian life or christian belief system is NOT in any way better than theirs. . . . .

this has nothing to do with denominational doctrines. . . . . , just salvation. u are told of the gift and then u make a rational choice to either accept this gift or reject it.

The problem is that a lot of christians do not even know what to make about the issue of salvation anymore. . . .some believe that faith alone will lead you to salvation while others believe that works and faith will lead you to it. . . . .There are some that even believe that unbelievers will be saved for some reasons they have formulated. . . .The confusion even amongts those that believe is endless. . . .

is this a joke? . . . .Christianity is an epic fail because of evangelism? says who?
perhaps u need to understand the creed Jesus gave His disciples when He ask that they Go into the world and preach the gospel.

The christian hypothesis of a god that wants to save all of humanity is an epic FAIL because people will have to go and spread the so called message of salvation of an allegedly all powerful and all knowing god who can do all things to others. . . . .If there is an all powerful and all knowing god who can do all things as touted by the christians that created people and wants them all to get to know about him and his alleged salvation(which is nothing but a method of keeping people in line) sending other people to do the job will not be on his to-do list. .He can even make people know about him and his alleged plans for them right from when they come out of their mothers wombs. . . . .Christianity like every other invention of men will have to use men to spread its message which is nothing but some kind of cultural way of living and thinking invented by some people. . . . .

noetic16:
blah blah blah.

. . . . . .

There is absolutely no basis for comparing moses to the fulani herdsmen.

There is both of them killed innocent women and children. . . .The difference is Moses and his fellow men even burnt some of their enemies up as burnt sacrifice unto their god. . . . .

moses was the leader of a people without an identity, who wanted liberation and was travelling within hostile communities. . .in a season where the only language understood by all parties was war.

Must you always lie through your teeth? I thought Moses and his people were identified as "God's chosen men"? What other identity do they need?. . . . .Those other communities were considered hostile only because they worshiped different gods no?- . . . .And yet you guys go around crying and complaining when muslims kill you for worshipping a differnt god no?. . . .The language understood by all parties was not war. . . .The Jews are the only ones that justify killing others because their god told them to kill them for worshiping other gods. . . .How is Yahweh differnt from Allah here?

can you let your hatred for God becloud your objectivity?. . . .what EXACTLY is the basis for the comparison u made?

Sorry there is no god for me to hate, there is only sick and crazy stories which people wrote about some god they invented according to their own culture and tradition telling them to kill other people mostly because they worship their own gods whom they also created in their own image and according to their own culture and traditions. . . .The fulani herdsmen that killed the children and women in jos are no different from moses because they both refused to allow the innocent live. . . . .

noetic16:
1. Mazaje, u can read the bible and make any meaning of it. but if u think that God inspired the bible, is it not write that u depend on Him for the complete understanding of such bible.

2. on the contrary and as I pointed out to krayola, the bible was not designed for unsaved persons to read and get saved. . . . .twas largely written to groups of believers to increase and inspire their faith.

3. there is only one brand of Christianity. . . . .and thats the salvation through JC.

4. my position on this bible thing is like a law student trying to make sense of a medical text-book.

You say that the bible is not designed for non-Christians yes? Please tell me then, how anyone is supposed to become a Christian if the holy book is inaccesable to all those not buying it?

On wait, I know. Indoctrination. You know, being told by OTHER PEOPLE what to believe and how to do it and what to believe in.

There is no other way by your criteria, to become a Chrisitan. You made your own trap and fell into it. People need to be told about Christianity, just like any other religion, which therefore makes it an epic FAIL.

Noetic you are fighting a lost battle, What is the difference between Moses, Yahweh and the leader of the Fulani herds men that attacked and killed women and children in Jos?. . . , NOTHING. . .So many christians I know don't even try to apologise or justify such passages in the bible, they prefer to say that these are some of the actions of Yahweh that still remains a mystery to them, If many had the power they would have removed such passages from the bible(So many people do not even know that such passages exist in the bible to begin with because they hardly read such passages to tem in church). . . .Knock it off, you are not helping your self or your beliefs here with this empty statements of yours. . . . . .

InesQor:
Most of all this magic stuff has two components:

1. RUMOURs, FEAR and the PLACEBO effect
2. Illusions, tricks, sleight-of-hand and theatrical gymnastics

And that is one point where it is very clear that Jesus' miracles and supernatural interactions were real. To achieve all those effects using spurious forms of magic, he would have required tonnes of equipment and other stuff to carry out his magic. But rather, unprepared and moving from place to place (without trailers carrying magical equipment), He did wonders.

It is only a person that is ignorant of how magic works that will think that Jesus' miracles were tricks, because magicians are just like you and me. In every era, they just have some tricks up their sleeves: e.g. in the medieval ages some "magicians" actually knew advanced science, with which they cheated the masses in the name of magic, and passed the secrets to their own children.

Your evidence to show that the alleged miracles of Jesus are real is stories written by unknown men in a book that is about 2000 years old and your belief in those stories no?. . . . . . . . . .I wan laugh die. . .

MyJoe:
I have learnt a great deal about the Bible here and considered issues I had previously not. Thanks JeSoul, Krayola, InesQor, PastorAIO, chukwudi44, nuclearboy, mazaje, imhotep, and the others.

I am certainly not qualified to question an individual’s faith or any of the assertions about the Holy Spirit inspiring the Bible or helping anyone to understand it. While my personal observation is that talks of Holy Spirit said this Holy Spirit did that are all in your head, I do not know enough to dismiss the possibility, altogether, that there is a Holy Spirit who inspired the Bible and also explains it to you. What I do know is that folks I know who say God speaks to them always relate what it is they wanted to hear, or what those whom God does not speak to, would have figured out in seconds on their own. I am also aware that my level of disagreement on Bible points with Christian A is often about the same as that between Christian B and Christian C. Now, I am one of those the Holy Spirit has never interpreted the Bible to. And I am not here about questioning whether or not all the miracles in the Bible took place, as I have no proof that they did not. It is my view that if the historicity of the Bible is false, it follows that the Bible, or that part of it, is not the inerrant word of God whom nuclearboy has reminded us is all-powerful. If there are interpolations, it does not void the authenticity of the entire Bible but brings “Biblical Inerrancy” under the spotlight.

The above observations made, JeSoul’s position on subjectivity and faith applies perfectly to our apprehension of God, a transcendental being. One is unable to see how it applies to the Bible, a book open to all humanity.

Which is why the assertion combatively made by noetic16 that the Bible is meant for the elect and the unsaved have no business exploring it must be seen for what it is: a fundamentalist brand of neo-Calvinism which will find more resonance among the draftsmen of the discredited apartheid system than in biblical Christianity. While the book of Ezekiel had messages for Oholah and Oholiah (Jerusalem and Samaria) at the height of their “prost[i]i[/i]tution”, Jonah’s message was addressed to the “unsaved” people of Nineveh. (The concept of “saved” and “unsaved” as used here is not biblical, but that is another matter.) Paul, who is credited with the spread of Christianity, along with his companion Silas, used the scriptures extensively in his ministry. The weight placed on the scriptures as authority is demonstrated by their activities among the Beroeans. I have already cited Luke. The Ethiopian Eunuch was helped with the aid of the scriptures to accept Christianity. When rebuking Satan, the Pharisees and other contrarians, Jesus told them “it is written”, not “the Spirit told me”. Those who converted to Christianity in the first century did because they had read of the coming of the Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures. Nobody ever went around in their mission to reach the “unsaved” with the good news citing the Holy Spirit. That is why Christians have been spending millions producing copies of the Bible and distributing them to the “unsaved” far and wide.

And like Krayola has pointed out, the opposition to scholarship is often based on the wrong premises. I am questioning the Bible, and not the lost books of eden, because of the value I attach to it. Moreover, there is some hypocrisy involved. There are countless events in the Bible that have been attested to by archaeology and science and many Christians cite these. Many developed their respect for the Bible through examination of some of these. When the converse is shown, the honest thing is to examine them. If there is any book which ought to be questioned, therefore, it is the Bible. That is not to say, God will judge people on whether or not they accept Biblical inerrancy. To be sure, the Bible is a good book. I think its moral values are sound for the most part. To rephrase the undying words of Mohandas Ghandi, if we live by its precepts, we may just have solved half of our problems.

The historicity of the Bible is hard to sort out due to certain factors, including the paucity of information available about the Middle East at the time of the events recorded, and also differences in Biblical records. For example, Joshua 1-12 tells us that the entire nation of Israel marched into Canaan and conquered the land. But Judges 1-2, which is the version supported by some traditions available, tell us the different tribes marched in at different times and effected a gradual takeover. It was once generally thought that Moses wrote Genesis, but scholarship has now shown convincingly that it was compiled from several sources dating from between the 10th century and the 5th century bc. If you read the Epic of Gilgamesh, an ancient heroic poem written around 2000BC, for instance, it may surprise how much of the stories in Genesis and some other OT books is in it. Indeed, many of the stories in those Books of Moses can be found in mythological stories from various cultures. Do all these tell us that the Bible is a fake book? No. They offer us several possibilities, one of the most obvious of which is that those accounts are not meant to be taken as literal history.

This post is brilliant. . . .I just want to talk a lil about this holy spirit stuff. . .Most Christians love throwing the holy spirit card but I just don't get it. It makes no sense at all. . . . .My man Noetic came along with his usual "explanations" . . . . .All I have to say to him is that if the bible is the holy word of god that wants people to know about him and his "salvation" why shouldn't it be an easy read, and only engrossing to the chosen people as he just said?. . .Or why is it that only they are able to read the "deeper" truths christians claim exist within it. Isn't that why they tell us atheists we should read the bible? If we lack the holy spirit why tell us to read it or use bible quotes to defend their positions?. . . .If your holy spirit actually enables people to understand the bible why are their so many different brands of christian or so many different interpretation of the same narrative or verses of the bible? Shouldn't the spirit send the same signal to all those that read the bible instead of the endless confusion that we see around today?. . . . .

noetic16:
first u claim its not about God. . yet u end your assertions by talking about the koran God. . . . , who do u think u are lying to?

I am not lying to anybody, and yes it is not about any God, Its about people and it will always be about people. I was just trying to show you that you will NEVER justify the actions of Moses if Moses were changed with Mohammed, You will see the action for what it is. . . . .You are only trying to justify the actions because moses happens to be one of the most revered prophets of the holy book you subscribe to as the word of God. . . . . .

The above is irrelevant in light of my primordial submission and poser raised to u.

The ever evasive Noetic. . . .

u did not answer the second part of my question. . . . , why would u give this advise?. . .and pls dont relate it to jos yet. . .I am just interested in moses case.

I will tell Moses NOT to kill the innocent children simply because they are innocent. . . .Why do people complain bitterly when innocent children are killed in wars today? . . .Even the present day IDF try their possible best not to kill the children of their enemies(Hamas, hisballah) when they wage war against them. . . . .

noetic16:
I also find it funny how many of these guys refuse to be realistic simply because they reject every thing related to God,

It is not about God, And no, I am only rejecting the bias that Ancient Jews wrote down about their alleged history. No God wrote any part of the bible, Men wrote everything and ascribe it to what ever concept of God they imagined. . . . .If this passage were in the Koran, I know for sure you will be all over the place reminding the Moslems how evil and blood thirsty their God and Prophet is. . .But since it is written In your own bible, the best you can do is try to spin it. . . . .

denial is a crime. . . that mirror was showing you

Mirrior mirror own the wall. . . . .

Mazaje. . . let us assume God did not give those instructions.
. . . moses was a man leading a bunch of people he had just delivered from the world's super-power Egypt to a land he (moses) has in mind. . . . . .moses comes across a group of people who refuse him peaceful access through their city. . . .they end up fighting a war. . .and moses and his army prevailed and overcame their opponents.

The problem is that wars are still been fought today and there are conventional methods of fighting wars. If humans can set up laws like the geneva convention which disallows the killing of innocent civilians, Not just women and children you would expect an allegedly all knowing and all merciful god to give better instructions on how to deal with innocent children and innocent women who are victims of war no?. . . .what you are doing here is ignoring reality and making your scripture perform gymnastics to fit something you can live with. . . .as I said if this passage were in the koran your approach will be different. . .

u mazaje, u are moses chief adviser . . . . .what advise would u give moses on the captured women and children?, . . . and why would u give such an advice?

What moses did is NOTHING different from what the comander of the fulani herdsmen that killed people in Jos did, I will advice moses and also the commander of the fulani herdsmen that invade Jos(Since their attrocities are almost the same) NEVER to kill innocent children, simply because they are innocent. . . . . . . . . . .

;d ;d ;d

Its very funny the extent which these guys go just to justify ancients myths and fables even if it means throwing away their common sense.

noetic16:
nope. . the thread just shows how simple issues could be manipulated to suit out dogmatic beliefs.

Mirror mirror on the wall. . . .

the children and women caught were the remnants of a city that lost a war. . . . . .what were the options. . . .keep the children, let them grow so that they come and revenge tomorrow? . . . . . . .must u be dumb in the name of atheism?

What do you expect the fulani herdsmen to do with the children they killed in Jos? Let them grow old so that they can come and revenge tommorow? Killing and despoil is wrong only when Muslims do it or when it is written about in the Koran, But it is always right when the so called chosen men of Yahweh do it or when they write about it and tell people that it is their god that told them to kill others , rape them and pillage their lands in their alleged holy books. . . . . . .Wow, Just wow. . . .