₦airaland Forum

Tudor my man? Happy new year in advance. . .Sorry to hear about your accident. . .Your really were lucky. . .

beneli:
The issue is that nobody is sure what 'reality' is. When Tonyb talked about 'subjective reality', I just wanted to indulge him a bit. Most of what we consider 'reality' is afterall 'subjective'.

That may or may not be true. . . .The point I was trying to make is that subjective claims don't really amount to any evidence. . . .

What is a 'soul'? you ask? Nobody knows. Just like nobody knows what constitutes the 'mind'. The field of Psychiatry, where by the way you find specialists in things relating to the mind, understands that 'science' itself is unable to unravel fully the mysteries of the mind. That's why there is an increasing interest in 'Spirituality' among Psychiatrists. I should know, because i am actually a member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Not that it's of any significance.

What is the mind? These are just expressions people attribute to the brain. . .All thoughts weather known or unknown are generated from the brain and that has been explained in detail with empirical evidence to show for it. . OBEs (out-of-body experiences) have been pretty much debunked.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6960612.stm

This article explains how they've recreated the experiences. So basically, if you're having a near-death experience, you're not "seeing the other side". Your brain is just being fried.

I don't know how much exposure to the unfolding field of particle physics you have, but if you are following some of the developments in that field, you will agree with me that our previously held notions of what constitutes 'reality' is changing. You may also have gathered that 'belief' is actually a lot more powerful than previously thought.

Of course I know very well how belief affects reality and how beliefs themselves are constantly changing and evolving. . .

It has the power to make things happen. So, my friend, let's agree that we are all trying to understand the mysteries of life and death. Some of us believe that there is more to life than 'corporeal'  and time-bound' existence. Those, like you, who don't accept this are at liberty to do so. [b]But discoveries in science are pointing to the fact that we may be more right than you[/b].

What are the discoveries in science that support your hypothesis? So Far there is NON what so ever. . .Most situations like this can be attributed to neurological or psychological events. Or even chemical. It's not evidence for a soul at all. It's just that our bodies (and brains) aren't nearly as fine-tuned as a lot of people seem to believe.

For me, the extratemporal and extracorporal realm, is the spirit realm. The one that holds everything together i call God. 'Scientists' in the know are at liberty to call Him the God particle. It doesn't matter. What matters is that there is 'something' out there.

And your evidence for this extratemporal and extracororal realm is?. . . . .Because you believe that there is something out there does not mean that there is something out there. . .That's why I said that reality has nothing to do with people's beliefs. . . .And your evidence to show that there is something that holds everything together is?. . . .

[quote author=mama-gee link=topic=370932.msg5176250#msg5176250 date=1261611986]What converts are you talking about? [/quote]Didn't you read the OP?

alafin- Unknown. . . .

Merry Christmas to you too. . .Enjoy your holiday. . .

beneli:
The subjective realities' of more people on earth make room for such things as 'soul, spirit etc'. So, my friend, you are wrong when you say that they 'have no evidence at all in any reality'. You are very wrong!

Let me come in here. . . . So what is a soul? In what part of the human body does it reside? Belief is very different from reality hope you know? Over a billion people believe that mohammed once divided the moon into two and made it bow down to him, About a billion people believe in Hinduism and the Hindu gods as the creator of the universe, Over a billion people believe that Jesus died and rose from the dead. . . .That is not reality that people believe in all these things does not make them true. . .Reality has nothing to do with people personal and subjective beliefs. . . .

Where are the other atheist in the house? Will love to see your own contributions. . .

This is not about me (an atheists) gloating that I am smarter.  I am Just trying to state what I now feel.

I'm really interested in the views of agnostics and atheists here who once had faith and believed in the religion they were brought up in but have since converted to atheism or agnosticism. I just want to know how that change has affected your over all attitude towards life and your world view in general and your level of intelligence by intelligence i mean your capability of thought processes, thirst for knowledge, and actual knowledge of things. I say this because It is hard to separate out intellectual growth that would have occurred naturally with the passage of time and experiences regardless of faith and religion. 

When I look back on my religious days I feel acutely aware of the stupidity of some of the stuff I entertained in my mind and accepted.  Some of it is quite embarrassing to me I must say.  Had I not broken free, I feel there are so many questions and angles of thought I would have denied myself.

If I were a Theist

1. I would have believed and held deeply unto answers given to me by someone else and accept them as the facts.
2. I will be homophobic.
3. I would have been judgmental and disrespectful towards others by looking down on them just because they do not share my beliefs.
4. I would have been very superstitious and believe in things that do not agree with the reality I see around me.
5. I would be less curious about the origins of the universe and life - certainly less open-minded to new ideas and avenues of speculation. Because back in the days I was less curious and accepted everything I was told and the god did it mantra seems to explain away everything even though  the god did it answer sometimes did not explain anything to me personally.
6. I would have been somewhat anti-science - let's face it, it's a war of considerable animosity even if some scientists somehow are able to compartmentalize their religion and their work
7. I would have been depending on prayers to help me out when in need or in trouble.

Now that I am a firm atheist, and very confident in my atheism, I now know more about and think more than ever about:

1. Human morality and how it is constantly evolving.
2. Human beings who happen to be born in other parts of the world and which I used to consider the wrong parts of the planet.
3.  All religions and their social and societal impact and how they affect people.
4. The bible and the Koran(their origins and how they were written and put together)
5. Conservation and sustainability of planet earth.
6. Different cultures and different people and how the try to function as a unit.
7. I am now loving myself and my own intellectual growth.
8. The origins of religions(Islam and Christianity) I was brought up in.

I want to know how your atheism has affected your world view and changed you as a person. . . .so my atheist friends I will like you come come and contribute to this thread. . . .Thank you. . . .

donnie:
Such things are the work of witchcraft.

I have seen and heard of stones, lizards, pins and even earrings being delivered or vomited.

This is not something new.

It does not have to have blood or fluid or watever. Besides, that close shot might have been taken after several minutes of observation. Watever fluid might have dried up.

What should interest you is how the snail got in there in the first place.

Growing up, i remember i woke up one morning to find finger nail scars all over my back. How did they arrive there. I didn't even know it until my elder sister who dressed me up saw the scars.

Is Nigerian really going to progress with this kind of mythical make belief LIES?. . . .Why should any body believe what you have said? Just because you said so?. . . .People do not gave birth to snails only in back ward societies where endless myths and delusions abound do people give these kind of lies and myths any attention at all. . .

[flash=400,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsPn5dXfTvA&hl=en_US&fs=1&"[/flash]

[flash=400,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVneRahxz1w&hl=en_US&fs=1[/flash]

[flash=400,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLsanX4ZMxQ&hl=en_US&fs=1[/flash]

[flash=400,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnbXlkNavwo&hl=en_US&fs=1&"[/flash]

I don't understand the criteria for nominating the 3 of us. .  .Why are people like Noetic, Wirinet, Toneyb, OLAADEGBU, Viaro, KunleOshob and Tudor not on the list? 

Going by the comments here, It seems like TB Joshua has to try another new trick because this one didn't go down well at all. . . 

aletheia:
At least you agree that Peter was an eyewitness. Consider the following passages:
Luke 1:1-4
Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.

Luke does NOT say that he was personally an eye witness. . .He never said he has meet Jesus. . .

2 Peter 1:16
For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty.
1 John 1:1
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life-

I have already talked about this. . .

So because the bible did not state that Jesus was born on say, October 25th so-and-so year, it's not a historical document? Your reasoning is weak. Modes of historical reporting in the ancient world was different from how we do it today, as you no doubt are aware if you 've actually read Thucydides or Herodotus.
The point of the bibliographical test is to demonstrate the manuscript authority of ancient texts. On this criteria we see that the NT far outstrips all other ancient manuscripts. Most historians accept the textual accuracy of other ancient works on far less adequate manuscript grounds than is available for the New Testament. Concerning the purported discrepancies as recorded by Bart Ehrman: Textual critics Westcott and Hort assert that the parts of the NT "still subject to doubt can hardly amount to more than a thousandth part" of the NT - which would be less than a third of a page. When one compares the extant Greek manuscripts, one finds congruency in over 99% of the words.

This entire statement is false IMO. . . .There are so many discrepacies that exists in the different manuscripts. . .

@Krayola

Why are you getting all personal on me? . . . .I have stated that you are one of the most open minded people who I respect their views here on this forum. . . You have made some statements that are incorrect. . .I never said that you have no case or point to make about the historical Jesus outside the gospels I only said that you should go ahead and present your sources or make your case. . . . Where did you get the idea that I was writing off what you said out off hand because you are not using the gospels as your source?

If you want to make your case go ahead and do so, Personally I will be very interested in seeing the case you are going to make. . . .So pls carry go and fire on. . . .No dey go dey hide for toilet dey smoke marijuana. . . .

I think Abuzola could not stand it after so many people voted him as the worst poster of the year on the religion section, He must have thought he was sending some message but when the jury came out and he realized he was only a noise maker he decided to move on and carry his e-jihad to another forum. . . All the best Abuzola we will surely miss your very passionate posts here. . .

Kay 17:
Islam is a peaceful religion and which shares love and mercy around the world, and offer 72 babes in afterlife!

Very true. . . .

aletheia:
It is my view that the initial post raised four distinct points, which I 'll breakdown as follows:
 
Geisler points out what is wrong with your initial proposition. Suppose there are four eyewitnesses to a murder. There was also one witness who arrived on the scene after the actual killing and saw only the victim’s body. Another person heard a second hand report of the killing. In the trial, the defense attorney argues: "Other than the four eyewitnesses, this is a weak case, and the charges should be dismissed for lack of evidence." Others might think that attorney was throwing out a red herring. The judge and jury are being distracted from the strongest evidence to the weakest evidence, and the reasoning was clearly faulty. Since the New Testament witnesses were the only eyewitnesses and contemporary testimonies to Jesus, it is a fallacy to misdirect attention to the non-Christian secular sources.

Beside the letter of either 1st or 2nd peter there is no where in the whole NT where the writers of either the gospels or the epistles ever said that they have meet Jesus in person while he was walking the streets, so how can they be eyewitnesses?

The New Testament provides the primary historical source for information about Jesus of Nazareth.  You exclude the New Testament as a document that records history, but the question is: How valid is that exclusion? C. Sanders, in Introduction to Research in English Literary History, lists and explains the three basic principles of historiography - the bibliographical test, the internal evidence test, the external evidence test. The New Testament can be tested by these same criteria that all historical documents are tested by.

Which history exactly did the new testament records? A book that fails to say when exactly Jesus was born does not seem like a book that is recording any history to me. . . .When exactly was Jesus born was it when Herod the great was king or when Quirinius was governor of Syria?

The bibliographical test

The bibliographical test is an examination of the textual transmission by which documents reach us. In other words, not having the original documents, how reliable are the copies we have in regard to the number of manuscripts and the time interval between the original and extant copy? We can examine the manuscript authority of the New Testament by comparing it with other notable sources. There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament.

This says one thing and that is there were people who wanted to spread their religion and the message it talks about, They made so many copies of it and kept it, It does not mean that it is an actual historical document or what it reports is true. . . .By the way there are as many discrepancies in the manuscripts as there are words in the New testament it self according to my man Barth Ehrman. . . .

Interesting topic here, Hmmm lets see. . . .

Krayola:
I never disputed that.

I said this earlier. 
You are caught up on the theological Jesus, the Jesus of popular Christian belief. I'm talking about the actual person that lived, and not what certain Christians, including the gospel authors, believed about him. I'm not carrying on this debate anymore because your anti-christian sentiment is too blatant. I haven't even made one argument yet about Jesus and u're just going on and on about stuff that I have never claimed to subscribe to. Where have u ever heard me say the gospels are an accurate historical record?

What really can you show about the actual person without the gospels? Your sources that talk about the historical Jesus in details(How he lived his life and all the things he did) are?. . . .List them so that we can say what they have to say and what we can know about them. . . .

What makes Jesus so important is not so much what happened during his life, but what happened after his death. During his life there wasn't much interest in him outside the Jewish community. He was a nuisance only to the temple authorities in Jerusalem, and the conservative Jerusalem pharisees. He wasn't a political figure. . . there were tonnes of religious leaders at the time that had followers and were believed to perform great deeds. That there is nothing written about Jesus during his life means nothing. He was a hit among peasants during his life, he became a smash hit after his death.

From which source outside the gospels did you know that Jesus was a nuisance to the temple authorities and the conservative Jewish pharisees? Pls bring it forward lets see. . . As toneyb has mentioned no story about him appears in the Jewish Mishnah. . . .

Again, when have I ever claimed the Bible is accurate historical information. Have u ever heard me say i believe someone walked on water and raised someone from the dead? I thought this thread was about the HISTORICAL Jesus. If you do not believe the Bible is an accurate historical document, why do u take everything in it to point at the historical figure of Jesus. You, my friend, are confused.

Pls bring forward your sources that talk about the life of the historical Jesus outside the gospels and stop wasting time. . . .Time is money baby

I really can't be bothered. This debate just clued me in to the fact that u guys are just anti-christian crusaders, and really have no real knowledge of the stuff you yap about. Just anti-christian propaganda that u get from anti-christian websites that clain they are "rational revolution". 

Pls will you bring forth your own source outside the bible that talk about the life of the historical Jesus? Stop wasting time. . . .

The funny thing is that you would probably have agreed with a lot of arguments I would have made, because the portrait of the historical Jesus of scholarship is quite different from the one of popular Christian belief. I thought that was what this thread was about. . . I was obviously mistaken. It was just an opportunity to make the same noise and repeat the same stale arguments u make on every thread.

Au revouir. 

Nothing can be really known about the historical Jesus outside the gospels correct me if I am wrong here. . . .

@Krayola

The passage about Josephus is a clear forgery. . .A simple reading of the text will show that to you. . . let's go through it together. . .

1. But now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the army from Cesarea to Jerusalem, to take their winter quarters there, in order to abolish the Jewish laws. So he introduced Caesar's effigies, which were upon the ensigns, and brought them into the city; whereas our law forbids us the very making of images; on which account the former procurators were wont to make their entry into the city with such ensigns as had not those ornaments. Pilate was the first who brought those images to Jerusalem, and set them up there; which was done without the knowledge of the people, because it was done in the night time; but as soon as they knew it, they came in multitudes to Cesarea, and interceded with Pilate many days that he would remove the images; and when he would not grant their requests, because it would tend to the injury of Caesar, while yet they persevered in their request, on the sixth day he ordered his soldiers to have their weapons privately, while he came and sat upon his judgment-seat, which seat was so prepared in the open place of the city, that it concealed the army that lay ready to oppress them; and when the Jews petitioned him again, he gave a signal to the soldiers to encompass them routed, and threatened that their punishment should be no less than immediate death, unless they would leave off disturbing him, and go their ways home. But they threw themselves upon the ground, and laid their necks bare, and said they would take their death very willingly, rather than the wisdom of their laws should be transgressed; upon which Pilate was deeply affected with their firm resolution to keep their laws inviolable, and presently commanded the images to be carried back from Jerusalem to Cesarea.

2. But Pilate undertook to bring a current of water to Jerusalem, and did it with the sacred money, and derived the origin of the stream from the distance of two hundred furlongs. However, the Jews were not pleased with what had been done about this water; and many ten thousands of the people got together, and made a clamor against him, and insisted that he should leave off that design. Some of them also used reproaches, and abused the man, as crowds of such people usually do. So he habited a great number of his soldiers in their habit, who carried daggers under their garments, and sent them to a place where they might surround them. So he bid the Jews himself go away; but they boldly casting reproaches upon him, he gave the soldiers that signal which had been beforehand agreed on; who laid upon them much greater blows than Pilate had commanded them, and equally punished those that were tumultuous, and those that were not; nor did they spare them in the least: and since the people were unarmed, and were caught by men prepared for what they were about, there were a great number of them slain by this means, and others of them ran away wounded. And thus an end was put to this sedition.

3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

4. About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder, and certain shameful practices happened about the temple of Isis that was at Rome. I will now first take notice of the wicked attempt about the temple of Isis, and will then give an account of the Jewish affairs. There was at Rome a woman whose name was Paulina; one who, on account of the dignity of her ancestors, and by the regular conduct of a virtuous life, had a great reputation: she was also very rich; and although she was of a beautiful countenance, and in that flower of her age wherein women are the most gay, yet did she lead a life of great modesty.
- Antiquity of the Jews, Book XVIII; Flavius Josephus, 94-100 CE

The first thing that you should notice is that the passage about Jesus interrupts the flow of the writing. Paragraph 2 leads into paragraph 4, while paragraph 3 is an interruption that goes off on a tangent that is not related to the subject at hand.

[quote author=noetic15 link=topic=368196.msg5143879#msg51
43879 date=1261179079]1. I dont have to tell u how the spirit speaks since u also can experience it urself. All u have to do is get saved . . . , . the rest will follow.[/quote]Let me come in here. . . .If the holy spirit truly communicates to people as you are claiming then why are you unable to tell us how he communicates to you personally? You should be able to do that no? Or only are is the person that is making the claim about the holy spirit the only person that is able to understand the "deeper" truths christians claim exist within the holy spirit entity?

2. Toneyb, u are conveniently ignoring the point here. where did the YEC or OEC claim that they heard from the holy spirit? why are u so certain that everyone hears from the holy spirit? what are the chances they could be lying?

Have you read any of OLAADEGBU's post? He even makes the claim that accepting that the earth and the universe are both 6000 years old gives a person a proper foundation for believing in Jesus. . .He makes reference to the holy spirit and claims it is the one that is communicating to him with regards to this things on so many occasions. . . .Have you watch any of Ken Ham's debates? He evokes the holy spirit as his source of inspiration with regards to the age of the earth as 6000 all the time. . . . .

3. The numerous sects and denomination in xtianity have no connection with the words of the spirit or the true intent of the gospel. The gospel is centered around salvation, the gift of eternity and the establishment of God\'s kingdom. This is a universal doctrine in xtiandom.
The spirit asks a person to start a ministry. . .he/she is given a message. . . he/she\'s ability to interpret the message is what we see manifest.

The numerous sects of christianity is an evidence that shows that the holy spirit is non existent. . . .The so called road to salvation is not even accepted by all christians, some believe that grace alone will save, some believe that grace and work will save, some believe that it is only god's will that can save a person etc. . . there is NO universal christian doctrine with regards to salvation every sect has his or her own interpretation and opinion. . . .Why does the holy spirit tell people to start different ministries?. . . .

4. what is it the xtians do not agree on?

The nature of Jesus is still in dispute. . . some believe he is the same person as god while others believe that he is not. . . .

noetic15:
the above is very unobjective mazaje.

1. u dismiss the biblical accounts on the basis of Jesus not writing them. . . but u give credibility to other historical accounts of Jesus (which Jesus also did not write) by comparing it with the bible.

2. All the above are simply innuendos u CANNOT prove. Jesus died, was buried, resurrected and is alive today. He was seen by over 500 people as recorded in the bible. many today attest to seeing Him in visions and revelations and some physically. how do u intend to explain away these sights?

I just said that how exactly do we know that Jesus said that He is the son of God or that God sent him to save mankind? Jesus did not write any word in the bible did he? All what is written in the bible were only second had accounts beside the authors of these books remain unknown till today. . . .How do we know that it wasn't some gentile somewhere that were trying to get around the Jewish laws that put those words into Jesus's mouth. . . .All what we have about Jesus were words that were ascribed to him. . . .He did not write anything by himself did he? I am not saying that He MUST write anything himself to make what was written about him credible, I am only trying to state that how do people know these things for sure, Since during the time or period when the gospels were written so many other people were writing about anointed men ascending into heaven for example Josephus wrote about one emperor whom he called the messiah and said that the guy ascended into heaven alive just like the bible said Jesus did. . . .

As for the 500 people recorded in the bible what makes you feel that it might not be a false statement? If you read the story of Joseph Smith you will read about eye witness account who said that they saw when the angel Moroni from heaven came and gave him the golden plates. . .Even in our world today eye witness accounts are so unreliable that they are almost useless, Talk less of some account 2000 years ago where NON of the so called eye witness was mentioned. . . .

again u refuse to allow the evidences speak for itself.
how do u explain the spiritual potency associated with the name of Jesus 2000 years after His death?

It says that the tradition was passed on from generation to generation and it became the system for so many people that bought into the story. . .The same could be said of (Siddhārtha Gautama)Buddha and his teachings. . . . . .

your assertions are contradicting and your position comes across as confused. first u claimed that there is no indication that Jesus did anything said in the bible. . . yet u claim others did the same thing as He did. thats 2 opposite positions.
Its either He did it or He did not. . . . .

The evidences and facts abound as to the actions and life of Jesus. . . . but facts do not say anything. . . . , any deductions from facts can imply anything.

I said others were also recorded to have done what Jesus did. . . .All of them like Jesus did not write most of the things themselves it was their followers that wrote about them long after they died. . . . .How do we really know if they really said what was ascribed unto them?

It is in lieu of this that I state that your above assertions was FALSE but your opinion is respected.

Nothing do you. . .I never claimed that my assertions were true. . .I was just making an observation. . . . 

Krayola:
This ^^ , my dear friend, is BOLLOCKS!! At least most of it . . . . ok,   about half of it, or a lil more/less. Basically there's some truth mixed in with some bulls.hit. I don't have a scale here so i'm not sure what the exact ratio is, but I'll try to get back to u on that 

I will be waiting. . . .

okeybenny:
Well, I think we have spent so much time on this matter. Since the very day this article was posted so many other people have died and gone forever. Listen attentively, don't be deceived there is HEAVEN AND HELL. If you don't believe it now and repent of your sins and accept JESUS CHRIST as your Lord and Saviour, one day you will definitely see the reality and you will remember this article. As I'm writing now so many other people are departing. I can't say for sure whether the next person will not be you or I. I can hear you say "It's not my portion" whose portion is it?
[b]God doesn't want you to kill yourself because you have sinned. He understands that it is not your fault that you were born in sin and so became a sinner automatically from birth. However, He will send you to hell if you refuse to repent because He sent JESUS CHRIST to come and pay for your sins and also give you power to overcome sin but you rejected Him.[/b][color=#990000][/color]

I think you are not telling the truth here. . . .First of what is this nonsense claim about people being born into sin? This christian selling point is so ridiculous that christians themselves find it absurd and untenable. . . . No one comes from the womb knowing about any God. The bible says that only by knowing about Jesus will one be saved. The only way to know that is through the bible. Therefore, there are plenty of people damned by their daring to be born at the wrong place/time. There is nothing that the Bible says about getting a free pass and plenty it does say about not getting that. You have just made up your own version of what the bible is actually saying. . . . No one can search for something that they don’t know about.

The bible clearly says that the god of the bible can send you to to hell if HE WANTS Regardless of what you do or your circumstance and situation. . .

14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18[b]Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden[/b]. 19[b]One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use[/b]?

There you have it written in the bible in black and white. . . .According to the bible it does not depend on what you do but on what the god of the bible wants. . .His will supersedes man's will and is the ultimate according to the bible. . . . .In fact the bible says that it is the god of the bible that allows people to accept Jesus not based on their own efforts because he is the one that hardens people hearts or haves compassion on those he wants all according to his will. . .

muhsin:
Hi, Realtol

What IbrahimB said is true. I, for example, saw this OP since yesterday but I ignored it. Why? The way you pose questions to Muslims about their faith carries neither seriousness nor respect. Unless you rafrain from doing so you'll not be getting answers.

Remember this popular saying: respect begets respect.

Your guys give yourselves too much credit you don't deserve at all. . .what "answers" do you really have beside special pleading and crying that your irrational beliefs should not be questioned and respected at all times. . .

Why do people dedicate their entire lives to ancient myths and legends?

[quote author=Tudór link=topic=363748.msg5134438#msg5134438 date=1261071802]This doesn't qualify. . . Jesus NEVER ressurected, any statement credited to him after his death is clearly fabricated.[/quote]You are assuming that a man named Jesus ever said any of the things people said he said. . . .The stories about jesus were written very long after he died by unknown authors, how are we really sure that a person named Jesus really said any thing that was ascribed to his name? How do we sure that it wasn't some gentiles that were trying to create a new religion out of the Jewish religion that wrote those gospels? He(Jesus) never wrote anything by himself and the stories written about him were written very long after he died and are completely contradictory to the actual history or historical events at that time. . . .The stories about Jesus is nothing different from the stories about Hercules.  The stories of the wondrous deeds of Hercules are indeed fantastical and magical like that of Jesus.  They spark the imagination, but outside of the stories themselves, there is little to no evidence that those deeds were ever performed, or that most of the characters even existed.  There may be good lessons to be learned through the story of Hercules and Jesus (bravery in the face of danger, the strength of the human spirit, the power of love, etc.), but it is obvious to anyone who looks at the evidence that these stories are not based on reality.

There is absolutely no indication that Jesus did anything the bible said he did.  There are indications that other men did similar things. . . .  apocalyptic preachers in that area of the world at that time were pretty much every where.  All of them are attributed stories of miraculous healing, resurrection (themselves and others). . . .No one has ever found the empty tomb of Jesus and there is no record of its location.  His miracles are no different than those reported by other (and many popular) religious figures of the time.  Appolonious of Tyana is a good person to start with. . . . .

Who is this pervert that is always talking about beautiful women in church? Go toats them if you want and stop crying all the time and boring us to death with your fantasies about the beautiful women you always see in church. . . . .

Another tales by moon light. . . . . @ Poster Next time read up stories and confirm their authenticity before coming here to embarass yourself. . .

http://www.thefeejeemermaid.com/

toba:
I now know we have frivolous people on nairaland.Imagine some religious bastards in an african country decided to kill&terminate d lives of fellow human beings,yet some fools are trivialising matter.What concern jesus with these? Was it him that told them to kill/was it God that said they should carryout jungle justice.I implore all christians to ignore unfruitful arguements.Very soon they can start another BOKO HARAM.Pls ignore these idle people

The bible says that "witches" should be killed is that a false statement?. . .

https://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2009/10/17/image5392566g.jpg

https://www.steppingstonesnigeria.org/files/GD5485334web_In-the-Nigeria-9449.jpg

This are christian torturing their children to death in some cases in Nigeria because the bible tells them to kill witches. . .