₦airaland Forum

noetic15:
1.  There are over 100 instances in the book of psalms where David stated that the end of the wicked is destruction and the path of the wicked shall perish. But that does not suggest that once a person mocks God, he is struck to death, neither does it suggest that such a person would live. What happens to him/her still remains at the discretion of God. but be it in this world or the one to come judgement awaits such, unless they repent.

2. what u deduced as every day occurrences are what others deduced as an act of God. That it is an act of God CANNOT be faulted. . .while u are also entitled to make any conclusions.

Now we seem to be on the same page. . . . the choice of what happens to such people remains the prerogative of GOD.

1. the above suggests that u have a complete understanding of God. . . .that notion is FALSE.

2. God can do as He pleases in numerous ways. remember that Jehovah is the LORD of HOSTS. . .and that include the hosts of heaven and the hosts of hell.

3. God did not have to send an assassin to a pop star,  . . .all He had to do was a say a word of judgement to whoever.
my dear, as inconceivable as it may sound. . .God also still remains the God of both mercy and judgement. It is you that should choose what part of God u want to see. . . His mercy or His judgement.

JeSoul:
I take particular exception to this.
 It is not christians that peddal this teaching, IT IS THE BIBLE! Please see John 3:18 "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

 I don't understand why some would pick certain parts of the scriptures they like and chant love love love, when the bible taught so many other things first and above - SIN, SACRIFICE, REDEMPTION, THE CROSS etc


  It would be wiser and more honest to reject the entire bible, than pick the parts that suit you and then proceed to declare that "the way".

---

 I just pointed this out:  Jesus did not tell that parable to establish the foundation on how to be saved! not by any stretch of the imagination. I dare you to prove otherwise. He told it to express who was one's neighbor, and how to show love to them, even neighbors the Jews had scorned, showing how even they with their expression of love were better than the so-called "called and chosen".

 And please salvation by faith is not my position, you keep trying to make it such. It is the biblical position and it could not be more explicit:
Luke 7:50
Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Ephesians 2:8
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God

Romans 5:2
through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God.

and the greatest of them all

Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is[u] impossible[/u] to please God  

  How does Heb 11:6 square with your insinuation the Samaritan's good works, divorced from faith was what will save him?

 I certainly didn't write Luke, Ephesians and Romans.

mavenbox:
@MyJoe: Lol. Thats no doctrine. Its faith, without which no man can please God. Doctrines interprete the basics of faith, howbeit from varying perspectives. Faith unites our view.

mavenbox:
Thanks, Kristonium, if we were physically discussing I would have stopped. But since this site may be here for years, you do not know who may visit in years to come and find answers here. Someone willing to understand, someone who found this page via google.

Jesoul, as you have truly said, no doctrine can save any. In fact, all that is required to save one is to accept that Jesus died to pay for their sins and has thus reconciled them to God if they mentally accept the offer (how Adam mentally accepted to sin). My entire explanation was background, which i tot DeepSight would appreciate cos he appears meticulous. Obviously i didnt need to do that.

noetic15:
@ Deepsight

I feel for u. . .your soul must be troubled.
This is probably the 100th time u are bringing up this Ghandi issue.

Nezan:
And nowhere did Nezan claim authorship.


You can see that these facts were verified on the net by Lagerwhenindoubt, so why spew out those useless comments.


What is of outmost concern is the veracity of those stories which can be verified on the net. Just google and you will see these are not lies.

Nezan is more interested in the verifiable facts than the prayer and wants the facts to be relayed on NL.
Our Nezan obviously wanted what happened to Lennox to be read on NL, maybe our Nezan thought prayer is his personal concern with his God.
God was giving him time to repent.
Bring out your evidences, not just conjecturing words from your computer.
As for the other mockers, God was giving them time for repentance, BTW, you are too insignificant to question God’s actions, remember Job?
God was giving her time for repentance. You shot yourself in the leg when you concluded that she was later murdered.

Nezan:
You can never order God, He only does what He wishes.

noetic15:
1. This piece has been in circulation on the internet for ages . . . but no one posted it on the forum. . .nezan did. . . .kudos to him for that.

2. again u speak with a vain and beclouded world view. it still remains the perrogative of God to do as He pleases. show mercy unto whom He pleases cos its not of he that willeth or runneth but of the Lord that sheweth mercy. What all of the above people have in common is their fame and willingness to openly mock God. This illustrates that they knew who God was and chose to disbelieve to the extent of publicly mocking Him. they would not be the first or the last.

3. quite unlike your distorted analysis. God is not a manual or text book that has a finite/limited or defined way of doing things. that explains why we say that His ways are numerous. So God's decision to strike one mocker today, another mocker 15 years later or to spare a mocker is not dependent on your flawed understanding of God, your preconceived notions or dogmas or your inherent misunderstanding of God's will.

4. again u goofed in the marthin luther king scenario. I ask u, what does the will of God entail? do u know if marthin had done all that God required of Him and His time was up?
True xtians do NOT fear death. . . . .for death is described as an ENEMY of Jehovah and the last enemy to be destroyed.
true xtians learn to submit and live by the will of God. . .do u know the will of God for martin?

noetic15:
@ Nezan
beautiful piece.

P.S I hope our own resident mockers would learn.

viaro:
_{<viaro shrugs his shoulders.>}

'Men who mocked God'.  There are many 'Christians' today who are mocking God and yet not even having a clue what they are doing. Let me look at it another way:

We understand what it means in Christian parlance to 'hold onto Jesus', don't we? The question that has been crossing my mind for a while now is this: how are Christians today holding Jesus before the eyes of the world? Luke 22:63 highlights this problem well in just one line: "And the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him."  Astonishing. It just shows that even today, many who have "held Jesus"  are the very ones who are both mocking and smiting Him in public eyes.

How is this possible? Yes, we mock Him when we tell 'beautiful lies' on His behalf in order to defend our faith as 'scientific' when everyone knows we're cheating on such matters. We also mock Him when we prefer to employ fundamentalism, facade,  fabrications and face-saving in our public lives instead of fidelity to His love.

We mock Him when we make so much of our own denominations and yet be out of reach with the very people we ought to be reaching out to. This mockery goes on every week when the only thing that drives our enthusiasm these days is the other 'master' - mammon.

Before we get too concerned about how 'others' are mocking God, perhaps we need to wake up and address our own mockery of God. How do we stand to mock Him and yet not feel the pain of our own loss? How do we ever stand to bear the shame of such mockery from ourselves in quoting verses against people who interpret matters differently from our own dogma?  How is it that many of us would applaud these mockeries against Him and expect the communities around us to be positively impacted? Is it not such impudence against God from Christians that make many people complain that the increase of churches has not lessened crimes in their countries?

When will these 'holy men' be ashamed of their own mockery of God before pointing out the same thing in others? Would it be said of many of us that "the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him"?? How are we as Christians holding Jesus today in the eyes of the public?

Pastor AIO:
so when we learn in the book of Job that the sons of God were gathered and Satan was amongst them does that mean that they are all God, and most shockingly of all, so is Satan?

beneli:
I doubt that anybody will be bold enough to say that they know the answer to the question of whether 'numbers' exist irrespective of the human mind. To be able to answer that question one has to be able to say with authority that they understand what 'the human mind' is. Who really knows what it is? Who knows what consciousness is?

Is the 'mind' something unique to each individual or is it part of a universal entity? Does consciousness exist irrespective of the limitations of biology or is it integral to biology? Who can answer that with authority?

So back to the question of numbers. No body has enough information to be able to say whether they exist because of us. Or irrespective of us. That's my take.

KunleOshob:
David, she definitely is. It only makes sense that since she is trying to hide her identity she would try to differentiate her posts a bit from that of Pilgrim.1, hence she stopped using colours and one or two other minot practises. But the truth is that she has done a very poor job of diguising herself. The similarities are far too many and uncanny for it to be a different person.

bawomolo:
but the problem is what the hell am i searching for?  Why waste time searching for knowledge about a being whose nature i'm not supposed to be able to comprehend.   The nature and qualities of this supreme being has to be established first before one begins to explore it.

Deep Sight:
In much the same way as if we hear scratching within a box, we may logically infer that a creature of some sort is within the box. We may not be able to infer its nature.

But we may be able to infer that such a creature has paws with which to scratch. Or some other ability to make the scratching sound.
. . . .
We may not be ble to apprehend the quantity, what it means and its nature: but we can certainly apprehend that it is there and this we can do empirically, but better still - intuitively.

koolchicco:
@Banom

Nice one Bros, hence I have forgiven you for all your insults/bashing on me the last time, all 'cos of Opelove.

Bless!

beneli:
Neither the so called Atheists nor those who believe in a God have the ‘evidence’ to back up the things they choose to believe-or not believe-in. The choices made have nothing to do with ones level of exposure, education, or as somebody mentioned earlier with ‘being a slave to rationality’.

Those who, like Richard Hawkins, say that belief in God amounts to a delusion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Delusion, should have the humility to admit that they don’t have the evidence to support their stance. In other words by using the word ‘delusion’ in connection with people who believe in God, they only reveal their own ignorance of the meaning of the word. (http://www.answers.com/topic/delusion)

The fact is that Science has not disproved the existence of God; neither has Philosophy nor History nor Archaeology. And until there is evidence that God does not exist, belief or unbelief in God will always boil down to personal choices, made in spite of the evidence or lack of it. That is where the faith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith) thing comes in.

It certainly takes a lot of Faith to believe that the universe was created from a cosmic explosion of a subatomic ball that hurled space, time, matter and energy in all directions. Those that believe in God say that this explosion happened because God said ‘let there be, ’. The 'atheist' is not quite sure why it happened. Current ‘rational’ thinking is that matter came out of 'nothing', possibly from the other side of a Singularity (a black hole), that connects the membranes of different universes. The ‘why’ for them, is that this event was ‘random’. And this is accepted as ‘rational’ thinking.

The only thing that separates the ‘atheist’ from ‘theist’ is what they have chosen to submit to. The Atheist holds his own power of reason and intellect as supreme and submits only to himself and to 'logic', while the 'theist' believes in someone or something that is greater than himself, to which he submits.  What that someone or something is, is a matter of choice that has been influenced by so many intermingling factors. The several influences of my life have lead me to submit to the Christian Faith.

‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’. I am content in this knowledge. For those who have a problem with that, it's their choice which has nothing to do with a 'superior' intellect.



'Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish'.
-Albert Einstein

sauer:
Hey, it's Richard Dawkins, not Hawkins, or are you perhaps carried away by hearing too much of Stephen Hawking??  

And also, Just so you know, Albert Einstein never believed in your god. Was a jew, and only talked of God in place of Nature. Substitute "God" with "Nature" in that quote, and boom! u have it!

viaro:
That's easy and presents no problem at all. Besides seeking analogies for the Creator as regards His nature and attributes, men have sought to understand issues of a *universality about the cosmos from a telluric standpoint ('telluric' - that is, as relating to matters of the earth) It is from the earth that men have sought to understand the cosmos.

But of *'universality', I have in mind the idea that it is "the quality ascribed to an entity whose existence is consistent throughout the universe". This extends beyond religion and embraces even the metaphysical, in which case we can see that men have tried to infer the attributes or properties of any entity in the universe from a small portion of the cosmos. So, the 'small portion' of the universe presents no problem at all in seeking an understanding (or inference) of that which is beyond the earth.

Krayola:
The highlighted part I agree with 100%. . . . The difference is that I strongly believe we know too little about the WHOLE to be able to say anything with any bit of certainty, talk less absolute certainty. My issue is not with any world-view or idea, per se. . . . It is with the certainty and authority some proclaim these things, and try to ridicule others for not subscribing.

bawomolo: are you saying black holes don't exist?

bawomolo: including the hindu or jainism system?  I don't see why one god has to be supreme.

bawomolo: how does one observe karma?

bawomolo: what's to be gain by believing in it if God can't be comprehended.  Isn't an attempt to comprehend God the reasons dogma's exist.

bawomolo: but how do we really know this.

Krayola:
Karma is not a universal philosophy. Pre -Islamic Arabia had a tradition of tribal Vendettas. Murder, theft, genocide, were all permissible and seen as necessary for survival. As long as it wasn't against a member of your tribe it was kosher. They has no concept, to my knowledge,  of their actions having unseen future consequences.

Also, universality of an idea is no proof of it's validity, or truth. All it means is that a lot of people accept it as valid or true. . . kinda like a lot of people, back in the days, accepted and believed the earth was flat

Krayola:
The whole idea of karma needs other presuppositions to even make the slightest bit of sense. "Escape clauses" like the after life and reincarnation (ideas that I have no reason to believe in as valid) need to be applied to deal with the obvious flaws in the whole concept. What do we do with people who do evil and live happily ever-after? we just defer their karmic baggage and it's consequences to their next life, or "spiritual" life. How convenient.

Marlbron:
Mavenbox,

Nice to hear your views, but with ALL due respects, they appear to me to be inaccurate and in conflict with the teachings of God (Jesus).

Here are my rebuttals:


1) Understand that man is made up of Spirit, blood and water. The physical building can collapse, but the inhabitant moves to another house in another plane. A snail can shed his shell for a one, huh? The spirit component of man is the only part that cannot be seen, but it is real. It gives life. Note that when Christ woke Lazarus from the dead, it was Lazurus's spirit that returned and he rose from the dead.

2) After, each existence, the spirit gives account and faces judgement by God. Whether good or bad, it can be returned to earth, through birth to live another existence, during which it will face the judgement. Take for instance, a Man X , kills two people at a point in his life. Later in life, he falls sick and dies. God's natural law does not give him the right to take a life, so at death, spirit X faces judgement. On reicarnation, he could be a pastor with a large congregation.living a very righteous life. Perhaps married with a good family, with a name- Y. One night, two armed gang attack Y and he is killed. His relation cry their heart out, but the guy is gone. THe armed robbers, unwittingly carries out God's assignment. Mr. Y's death confirms the saying you quoted from the bible: , after death, judgement , Elijah murdered some 30(?) worshippers of Baal in the guise of fighting for God. On his return as John, his head was cut off.

You and I know of a nice man, very pure, and lowly called Jesus, who was judged unjustly and subsequently murdered for "equating" himself with God. God subsequently promised to promote him and give him a name that is above all names Phil 2: 6-9. In Rev 19, we are told he became the king of kings and lord of lords. He got his own judgement. Now the judgement can also be instantaenous while on earth, God determines these things not man. That explains why God has his own elects.


3) Mathew 8:11,

How would Abraham, Isaac and Jacob be in the Kingdom of God? By incarnation!

Mathew 12:42

How will the queen of the South that came to hear Solomon out be in the kingdom? reincarnation!!


4) 1 Cor 15: 35 

But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? 36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: 37 and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: 38 but God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.

Ressurrection means separation of the spirit from the body by death. The body is made up of water, blood and spirit. It is the spirit that gives life, so it is only the spirit that can ressurrect. After ressurection, the spirit can come back via birth to the world for a fresh assignment as directed by God.

5) I Cor15: 45

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Adam was the first incarnation of Christ, after his death, the spirit reincarnated as the spirit of the son - as a quickening spirit



6) John 8:56.

56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

Which day was Christ referring to? Of course you know that Abraham saw Melchisedesec and paid obesiance to him in joy. He recognized his priesthood, which is in all ways similar to christ's priesthood. Was that not an incarnation of God? Jesus says so, not me



7) Mathew 11: 13.

13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. 14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. 15 He that hath ears to hear let him hear.

Note that Christ knew the doctrine was not easy for them to comprehend and said ïf you will "receive it", know that John was the Elijah that was to come. Of course John did not understand that he was Elijah. It took God to reveal the truth, which is not always accepted or received.


Mark 9:13.

13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.

Again Christ, after the transfiguration comfirms that the expected Elija was already coime and the people maltreated him. Why? Because they did not understand. The question is this, will God stop or pause his program because of our ignorance? Again, reincarnation is confirmed by the creator.



9) John 12: 23-24 .

23 And Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified. 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit

Christ was speaking metaphorically that He needed to die, so he can ressurrect in a better role. That death was necessary for him to re-incarnate into the world as a King. How many Christians were there during his days? How many are do we now? The increase is astronomical. God's abracadabra na wao! Note Hebrew 1:6,, And again when he bringeth his fist begotten into the world, Note also that in his previous incarnation at the arraingment he told his disciple that he could possibly ask his Father to give him angels to free him. from Hebrew, we are told that in his re-incarnation, he will not need to ask, as all angels have been ordered to worship and obey him



10) Mathew 19: 28.

28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Note the word regeneration. It means in another incarnation or a reincarnation, his disciples will be glorified. Everything Christ talked about was always about the next coming. Israel refers to the whole world.

Davidylan: Wow congratulations mr Banom. You bet you have inspired so many here to think again about their atheistic positions. I particularly loved your initial post. At least now we know that christianity isnt devoid of critical reasoning.

VALIDATOR:
But Banom, on a lighter mood. Now that you are a born again christian do you now have answer to the question
"Are we gonna have sex in heaven?"

Deep Sight:
There has got to be within a man that resident hunger to know what the truth really is, and without that; every discourse is worthless.

bawomolo: i have a few questions, How did this "force" become God?  Are these laws really perfect? who says the laws of conservation of energy can't be violated in a dark hole?

bawomolo: there are atheists from Hindu, Sikh and buddhist households.  The last time i checked, those weren't Abraham creeds.   Atheists come from different backgrounds.

bawomolo: how does one know Karma exists, is it observable? karma is an hindu philosophy, so are you hindu or deist (do deists borrow from Hinduism now?)

bawomolo: if the nature of God is unfathomable, how do you know its a "he". We don't know it's True nature right?

why is there is only creator God? can't there be more?

MyJoe: That force created the universe and everything in it. And It then abandoned it? No. It did something logical – put perfect laws in place to govern it.

bawomolo: so you are making the assumption that the earth is proof God exists?  The concept of intelligent design has being discarded by the way.  

its safe to say deism isn't free of assumptions that are made in atheism or theism.   Deism is an attempt to reason a God in which you have admitted is unfathomable and unapproachable.  Seems like a futile attempt to even think about such God.  Deism also seems trapped by the concept of monotheism found in Abrahamic creeds.  Why aren't there polytheist philosophies among Deists?

MyJoe: How do I know? I can say I feel it inside me – but you don’t, so that is not a useful response. There are several reasons, but I will give just one. The atheist says the universe does not have to have a creator. Given a serious thought, that argument is reasonable. But the complexity, and more importantly, harmony, in nature speak of an intelligent mind. A piece of glass can come out of nothing, but not an electric bulb – that needs putting together. Oh, you have heard that one before. Ok, we know that man came here last of all, that is, after oceans, plants, animals, etc. Yet, you find that the earth was clearly designed with man in mind. There is food for the animals and all else that creatures need to survive. But there is more – beauty. From Cashmere to Niagara, from Obudu to Jerusalem, it appears only an intelligent being would have added such beauty in place as it serves no purpose other than to make man happy.

bawomolo: Oh that's interesting, what's the deist concept of the afterlife.  Maybe deepsight can drop in on this

MyJoe: In the physical realm the world governed by the laws described in physics. In the spiritual realm it is governed by what they call Karma in the East.
When you die, you come back. The life you live now will likely determine the amount of difficulties you will face in the next life. If you were born into circumstances that afforded you a lot of comfort and happiness, it is likely because you deserve it. Same goes for those who experience suffering. If you close your palms to your fellow man, you may have nothing in your next life. If you share your last, you will have abundance so that you can continue the good work. If you are wicked, you will come back where you will suffer much difficulties so as to learn power is not your sole right. Many, on learning the truth about reincarnation, realise that their life encounters may be the result of Karma, accept it and try to move on - this is known as "meeting your Karma".
But the above should not be taken too literally to mean that someone who is born into wealth is being rewarded and someone who is born poor, blind or sickly is being punished. Sometimes it is all meant to teach you a lesson. It may be that you are poor and you think all rich people are wicked. You may be born rich to show you that is not so and to give you the chance to use money well. For example, I have a friend who has never tasted alcohol in his life. He said he had an uncle whose life was ruined by alcohol. Now, it is possible he was a drunk in his last incarnation and was sent there so he may learn early on in life.
My observation is that prayer changes nothing, except, sometimes, the person praying. God does not intervene. Religious people can afford to wicked to their fellow man because they claim to love God whom they can't see. If only they know that all God requires is that they love their fellow man.
This makes sense TO ME much more than the heaven taught by the Abrahamic faiths.

naijatoday:
Are you serious?

I can understand Punch, but Guardian and especially THISDAY?

Deep Sight:
^^^ Indeed, thanks alot: you are on point, sir.

I think what he meant to say is simply that as humans, the quality of goodness and conscience rests naturally within us and we can accordingly live in such goodness to our fellow man without reference to the existence of a "God."

Or the Abrahamic ideal of "God."