So when exactly did the old testament start?

Pls truthislight ignore the question.

Even 8, 12, and 16 are vague general statements. Na wa...

Boxing day isn't really about punching people. The box is actually about gifts, you know, boxing gifts. Sorry for being a spoil sport

Reyginus: Lolololol. Dude, what is actually happening?
Then why were you laying emphasis on the difference between a dead person and an unconscious anaesthetisized patient?
If all you've been speaking of all along is their similarity in the lack of pain why didn't you indicate it in any way?

It is like somebody asking the similarity between a sick man and a healthy man. After providing him with 6 similarities he goes on to say that all he expected was a single similarity. You must agree with me that such a person even have to be made to understand his question.

Please let's have a honest discussion, Mr Troll.

dude, seriously I think you're trolling me now. If after so many pages of discussing euthanasia and somebody gives an analogy of a case of general anaesthesia, I expect that an averagely intelligent person would get the point that was being passed across but no, you say I didnt indicate it in any way. Really? After trying so many times to explain the pain relief connection?

Lol. How you ask a question with only one of the options necessary to make it meaningful. Your question is highly misplaced.

One reason is that, we are talking about Euthanasia and an unconscious patient and not an unconscious patient and a terminally ill person. And don't tell me again that unconsciousness is the same as death or Euthanasia.

did I ever say they were the same? We are talking about euthanasia of a terminally ill person, not so? Guy na wa o!

And you have still not answered the question...

Omooba77: There is God,death and life after in Heaven or hell depending on your choice Revelations 20:11-15

There is no God, no after life and no after death anywhere. It says it here in my holy book of the divine Pikinity.

^^^

Sorry for the font style. Copy and paste is a biatch

Also,
http://www.livescience.com/25779-christmas-traditions-history-paganism.html

Many people suffer from the misconception that Christmas is a Christian holiday. The earliest history of Christmas is composed of "pagan" (non-Christian) fertility rites and practices which predate Jesus by centuries. The truth is, in short, the real history of Christmas has nothing to do with Christianity. Many of the traditions which we hold dear, such as decorating Christmas trees, singing Christmas carols, and giving Christmas gifts, are rooted in the traditions of non-Christian religions.We do not observe Christmas on December 25th because it was the date in history when Jesus was born. Nobody knows exactly what that date was, but references in the Bible show it most likely did not take place in winter. Rather it is because this was the date that the Romans historically celebrated the winter solstice. This celebration was about dies natalis solis invicti: the day of the birth of the unconquerable sun, which took place on December 22nd. The winter solstice held the promise of the return of springtime and earthly renewal. In Roman history, this was the time of Saturnalia, honoring the God of Agriculture, for the week before the solstice, and Juvenalia, a feast in honor of the children of Rome, around the same time. On the 25th of the month they celebrated the birth of the sun-god Mithra. Masters and servants traded places temporarily, and everybody had a rollicking good time. It was during Saturnalia that the tradition of exchanging gifts was established. They gave one another Stenae or fruits which were intended to bring good luck. The Romans placed an enormous amount of pressure on the early Christians to rejoice along with them, and around the time of the fourth century, they began to celebrateChristmas around the same time. It was inevitable that Christians should make a connection between the rebirth of the sun and the birth of the Son.In the Middle Ages, Christmas was a raucous, drunken celebration which resembled a carnival. Poor people would go on a Christmas"trick or treat"around the richer neighborhoods, causing them misery if they didn't get what they wanted.Many other pagan traditions have been incorporated into Christmas. Yule was celebrated by the Norse in Scandanavia around the time of the winter solstice by bringing in large logs for the fire, in recognition of the eventual return of the sun. It could take as much as twelve days for the log to burn down. Meanwhile, the Norse would feast. The holiday usually lasted through January.The Germans did not so much celebrate as honor the winter solstice. They believed that their god, Oden, flew through the sky at night passing judgment on his people. Generally, they would stay indoors during this season. When the Germanic people were converted to Christianity, their winter festival was naturally adopted as a celebration of the birth of Christ.To the pagans, evergreens served as a symbol of winter's inability to stop the cycle of renewal. They were important fertility symbols which were highly revered by many cultures, including the Germans and the Celts. They helped to soothe the pagans' fears that the sun would never return, and that winter would reign eternal.Contrary to popular belief, the tradition of cutting down a Christmas tree, bringing it into the home and decorating it is not pagan in origin, and did not appear until centuries after Christ's broth. The Romans decorated their homes and temples with evergreen clippings, but allowed the trees to remain intact, often decorating live trees with religious icons. The Druids tied fruit to the branches of live trees, and baked cakes in the shape of fish, birds and other animals, to offer to their god, Woden. We also inherited the tradition of kissing under the mistletoe from the Druids. The Christmas tree tradition we currently practice had its origins in 16th century Western Germany. "Paradise trees" were cut down to commemorate the Feast of Adam and Eve, which took place on Christmas eve every year.Many Christians were opposed to the merrymaking and pagan origins of theChristmas festivities, especially the more solemn Christians such as the Puritans. In England in 1645, Christmas was actually canceled. In Boston between 1659 and 1681 Christmals were sung in a circle dance by European Celts in medieval times, as a part of their fertility rituals, and were later adopted as a way to celebrate Christmas. As a result they became unpopular among Christian authority. Over the ages multiple attempts have been made to ban Christmas carols. Christmas carols enjoyed a revival when St. Francis of Assisi began to favor a more joyous celebration of the Christmas season. Another pagan custom called wassailing, or singing from door to door, also became very popular among Christmas celebrants.Many people mistakenly state that "Jesus is the reason for the season." They do so, because they believe people have lost sight of the true meaning ofChristmas. It simply isn't true. Christmas can be celebrated as completely secular because ultimately it is not a Christian holiday. Christmas goes beyond religious and cultural differences, and addresses something universal in all of us. For this reason it has become popular in non-Christian countries such as Japan. The truth is that Christian and pagan traditions have a great deal in common. The real need behind all of these traditions was to find a source of joy, happiness, hope, goodwill and generosity. There was a need to find ways to cope with our fears about the darkness and cold of wintertime, and to celebrate the return of the sun and the longer days of spring.In fact, Christianity and pre-Christian pagan religion have a great deal in common. Various pagan religions shared the Christian practice of worshiping a god-man who could offer salvation inny different religions spanning the globe. These concepts are universal, except to those who are extremely divisive and have a tendency to pick nits.The pagans were smart people who had quite a few good ideas. They respected the earth, and we have benefited greatly from their practices. There is no reason for Christians to fear "pagan" universal and earth-centered traditions. At Christmas, rather than fretting that non-Christians have forgotten about Jesus we should focus on the deeper purpose of the holiday. The main problem is thatChristmas has become far too commercial and this has gotten us away from the pagan tradition of connecting with the earth. Instead, we spend the whole holiday trashing the planet with excessive buying, and cutting down millions of Christmas trees which must then be discarded less than a month later. Environmental destruction and consumerism has passed for merrymaking for many years now, but it's an empty tradition. Celebrating the fertility of the earth is better by far. There is a strong need for a return to the family- and society-centered traditions which were established in Rmericans to establishChristmas as a time of giving to those who are most in need, and bridging the gap between the rich and the poor. These traditions had their roots in the practices of the real St. Nicholas, who lived in Myra in the fourth century A.D. He was born rich and inherited a great deal of money on the death of his parents, all of which he gave away. St. Nicholas is said to have thrown bags of gold into the windows of dowerless girls to save them from lives of prostitution or slavery. He was also well know for his love and protection of children. St. Nicholas is the figure behind our modern day Santa Claus myth of a generous man who delivered hand-made toys to children all over the world.So rather than viewing Christmas as a time to break the bank, we can take advantage of it as a time to help the less fortunate. Many people ask that their friends and loved ones give to charity rather than buy them a gift. This sort of gift giving is popular among yogis who see Christmas as a way to extend their practice.Fortunately there are many ways to reconnect with the original purpose and meaning of Christmas. Small traditions, such as placing apples or cookies on the tree, or decorating a live tree instead of a cut one, are a good way to get in touch with the way that our ancestors celebrated Christmas. Respecting the planet and understanding its powers and its limitations are important. The pagans were aware of the changing seasons and found earth-centered and social ways to cope with them. They were aware and appreciative of the sun. They exchanged gifts, but their gift exchange was not commercialized. Instead the focus was on bringing good fortune. Giving gifts of fruit has been a common practice throughout history, and is still popular today.The Christmas holiday season is about unity, not divisiveness. At the holiday season we should forget about our religious differences, abandon commercialism and think about what is best for the planet and for humanity

http://m.voices.yahoo.com/the-history-christmas-its-pagan-origins-646539.html




Also, you may want to check out this thread
https://www.nairaland.com/1131216/christmas-without-jesus-paganism-re-asserts

Sorry, Jesus is NOT the reason for the season. I mean this in a nice way

^^^

Like I said, the joke is on you. I was on that thread. It seems you forgot why he asked the question...

Anyway, lets stick to this asswhooping here

Logicboy03: *pours liqour for fallen soldier*


Goodbye ihedinobi....took me 2 years to spell your shinobi rhyming name properly

the guy don go? Chai!






















Nah, give him 5 days

shdemidemi:

What exactly is a testament? Can you have a New Testament without the death of a testator?

Who died to kick start the old testament?

Joshthefirst:
You just made my day. I remember wiegraf asking a question like the one you're ecstatically supporting; why can't God create sinless freewill. Tehehehehehehehehehe.


Abeg ooo.

bros, the joke is on you.

cyrexx:

Guy, it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to
speak out and remove all
doubt.

bros, I said it first in this thread.

^^^
While your distinctions are correct, it is irrelevant in the context of this discussion. Nobody ever said that an unconscious patient is exactly like a dead man but where my question still stands is in the aspect of feelings and in this case, pain. If it is acceptable to render a patient unconscious in order to prevent pain in surgery why is it now wicked to do same to a terminally ill patient under severe pain? What in your opinion will be the best line of action?

maclatunji: @Cold, your epistle has already been debunked. It has been established that whatever you are part of, you cannot totally master.

God is not a part of the universe. Hence, your epistle is Useless within this context. All those rules get thrown to the dustbin.

see ignorance on display. Mcheew!

Keep la laing.

maclatunji:

Hahahaha... In science an hypothesis or even theory serves as a bridge between what we know and what we do not know. If a scientist does not have faith in his theory, he would not postulate it even if he cannot prove it.

^All of this is beside the point. It is proven that human beings cannot truly understand the universe. Hence, there is no basis to say: "we will only believe when we have total proof". It is proven that the "total proof" is beyond your comprehension or capacity to comprehend.

At this stage, you must work within your constraints. #LOL

this is nonsense.

There is nothing like faith or belief in science.

All you, Mac have done here is simply making silly strawman arguments and lolling away your ignorance.

Where is it proven that humans cannot truly understand the universe?

Who has said they will believe when they have total proof?

Who has proven that total proof is beyond human comprehension?

What the heck is even this total proof?

Kay 17: 1. joshthefirst, you made a very poor premise and that the truth. It does not mean I don't believe the universe is without cause. Yet you premise was too poor

This is why I said you are trying. He's simply too dull to see it. He keeps repeating the failed premise over and over again, even after you have told him like 5 times now.smh

Reyginus: Okay. Seen. I misinterpreted your question as you didn't use the word. But your further question still fails.

You know why? Because in my previous post I have already distinguished a dead man from a patient under anaesthesia. I also made mention of anaesthesia not always implying the loss of consciousness but pain. Use my
experience.

What has local anaesthetics got to do with what you are saying, remember we have speaking of anaesthesia without respect to any?

gosh! You're trying so hard to obfuscate and its getting irritating.

I clearly said UNCONSCIOUS anaesthetic patient. To the medically inclined, that simply means a patient under general anaesthesia. Pls show how the question fails.

Nobody here is talking about local anaesthesia, I only mentioned it when you gave the example of a patient under anaesthesia being awake.


Now, to the question again... How is an unconscious anaesthetic patient not similar to a dead man?

Reyginus: Lol. Let's deal with your first statement. Are you saying you didn't call the patient under anaesthesia unconscious?
Your response will determine how I react to your second sentence.
Why didnt you recognize this before asking the previous question.

Mr Troll:

@Rey, how is an unconscious anaesthesized patient not similar to a dead person?

see the previous question. I clearly mentioned unconscious there.

Now answer me.

Deep Sight:

Hey there! I asked you a simple question! Answer it.

after you tell us how you came to the conclusion you stated in the very first line of your OP.

Chrisbenogor: If only people will start by saying "It is possible that"
The way I see it, philosophically explaining that there is a self existent cause would not quite cut it in today's world.
There has to be hard evidence of some sort put down on the table else its a case of my logic vs your logic.
re: cause vs being

End of.

I wonder why Deepsight states his intuitions amd conjectures as proof of anything when he knows the history of how man, from antiquity has always explained what he didn't know.


And @DS, no. It is not a case of self existent universe or self existent cause. The cause could have been any number of THINGS, which of course we know nothing about.

Why do some Christians think we hate Yahweh? Do they hate Zeus?

Sushieater sef, you no de talk?

You go just de do like spirit

^^^

Does eternity exist? If so, where? Within or outside this universe?

If outside, how do you know?

If inside...

Reyginus: Hmmm. I hope you know the implication of this statement.

No. The patient is similar to a dead person but he is not a dead person. It is similar only in the sense of the physical expression. But not in the mechanism of their respective physiologies.

It is similar to having a facial resemblance with your dad but exhibiting different characters and not being the same person. You two can never be the same no matter what.
Not only because you exhibit different character but also and most importantly, the person is distinct.

now, did you see where I wrote 'unconscious'? Do you think the patient in such a state is being relieved from pain although he is not conscious to witness it?

On another note, I don't know between the both of us who has a flawed or patterned understanding of how anaesthesia works. When I did my second year I.T in gwagwalada specialist hospital abuja, UNIBUJA T.H, there were times when patients were administered anaesthesia and they will still remained awake. They literally witness the surgical procedure. The only thing they seem not to feel is pain. Correct me if you have a better explanation.

In cases like this, can you still compare it to death?

there's something called local and general anaesthesia. Do read up on the differences.

Reyginus: Hmmm. I hope you know the implication of this statement.

No. The patient is similar to a dead person but he is not a dead person. It is similar only in the sense of the physical expression. But not in the mechanism of their respective physiologies.

It is similar to having a facial resemblance with your dad but exhibiting different characters and not being the same person. You two can never be the same no matter what.
Not only because you exhibit different character but also and most importantly, the person is distinct.

now, did you see where I wrote 'unconscious'? Do you think the patient in such a state is being relieved from pai?

On another note, I don't know between the both of us who has a flawed or patterned understanding of how anaesthesia works. When I did my second year I.T in gwagwalahere were times when patients were administered anaesthesia and they will still remained awake. They literally witness the surgical procedure. The only thing they seem not to feel is pain. Correct me if you have a better explanation.

In cases like this, can you still compare it to death?

there's something called local and general anaesthesia. Do read up on the differences.

Reyginus: Hmmm. I hope you know the implication of this statement.

No. The patient is similar to a dead person but he is not a dead person. It is similar only in the sense of the physical expression. But not in the mechanism of their respective physiologies.

It is similar to having a facial resemblance with your dad but exhibiting different characters and not being the same person. You two can never be the same no matter what.
Not only because you exhibit different character but also and most importantly, the person is distinct.

now, did you see where I wrote 'unconscious'? Do you think the patient in such a state is being relieved from pain although he is not conscious to witness it?

On another note, I don't know between the both of us who has a flawed or patterned understanding of how anaesthesia works. When I did my second year I.T in gwagwalada specialist hospital abuja, UNIBUJA T.H, there were times when patients were administered anaesthesia and they will still remained awake. They literally witness the surgical procedure. The only thing they seem not to feel is pain. Correct me if you have a better explanation.

In cases like this, can you still compare it to death?

there's something called local and general anaesthesia. Do read up on the differences.

Deep Sight: ^ You consider your self -(the person that you are) to be the sum of the parts of your body?

Do you have evidencd for this 'spirit' man that inhabits the body?

fuq me!

How come I ignored this thread from the beginning?


Atheist: I don't believe in your god


Christian: you're just angry with God. You have an erroneous perception of the loving God.


LOL

wiegraf:

My experience may only include playing 'championship manager' religiously a few years ago and also actually scoring with torres, but on FIFA (not sure I managed that on CM), but I say we get rid of mou and hire myself.

Mynd_44:
There is no politics to this section. Insults on other religion or your religion will not be allowed as it is in the rules. Same goes for Personal insults

ok then. Get ready to be real busy. You might wanna ask HBG how it goes...

The amount of times Josh mentions Reality in his posts sha...

Reality, Real People, Evident in our lives....