₦airaland Forum

BARRISTERS: @Myjoe
i still wonder why you quote bibles and think it will partly surport your appologetics only to leave you with plenty holes to fill,see below;

An “apologetics” is a piece of theological writing aimed at proving the truth of a religious body or its tenets. What does one make of your use of word the word, then? That I have been defending my religion on this thread? Or that you are using the word to pre-empt others from referring to your apologetics as apologetics? What does one make of your understanding of words, then, as you have carried on using them in this hit-or-miss manner all along?

Act as free men, in what areas and why?
verses 5-9 explained the transformation from the old law to faith in christ, while the old law required circumcision to be called among the 'sons of God' christ sacrifice has opened the door to
12,the gentiles who were formerly required to circumcise before now were declared to have freedom from the requirements of old law.

and that is still the same thing that paul was also emphasizing below in your quote;

Yes…

just as the isrealites of old celebrates 'new moon'and 'sabbath'etc....

1 Chronicles 23:31 1 Chronicles 23 1 Chronicles 23:30-32 and whenever burnt offerings were presented to the LORD[color=#000099] on Sabbaths and at New Moon festivals and at appointed feasts. They were to serve before the LORD regularly in the proper number and in the way prescribed for them.[/color]

I’m still waiting for the “holes”.

your bible quote below does not even support your point;

It does. I’m surprised you can’t see it.

you should have even given some thought into the directions given through paul earlier in the book of 1 corinthians 14:34-37


if you compare your statement with the other direction given through paul below;

1 Corinthians 14:34-37

34 [size=14pt]Let your[a] women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive[/size], as the law also says. [size=14pt]35 And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.
[/size]

[b]now, has paul burdened down the church members,isn'nt it? or even deprived the women of their right?
or maybe paul has assumed the 'centre brain' for women knowing fully well that 'he will instruct them not to allow theirself to be judged or determined by leaders including paul himself, is that not how you understood it?

can you see parallels with paul's case below;
34 Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive[/size], as the law also says. [size=14pt]35 And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.

you would have asked same question from paul,questioning his authority,and accusing him of ''assuming the centre brain''brand.
not so?

Look, you have no point. The scripture text I quoted showed that Christians are not to be burdened by anyone’s dictates in personal matters. If I have to spell it out for you, the mention of eating, drinking, Sabbath and new moon are mere examples of the kinds of things we are talking about. The message is clear: Christians are to be free to choose in such personal matters as they are not under the old Law system. Paul was clear about this. Now you are asking me to remember that Paul legislated on the matter of women speaking in the church! Whatever happened to your understanding of the basic rules of interpretation. The way church services are ordered, and how Christians make their health decisions, are not in the same category, Barristers. “Only men should serve as elders” and “don’t take organ transplants”. Those two don’t sound alike, sir. One concerns the ordering of church services, while the other concerns a personal health decision on which the Bible is not clear.

Whatever I would have accused Paul of is of no moment here. Deal with the ones I have accused of control. I just showed you that even Paul did not legislate on personal health decisions. He forbad such oversabi. Thank you.

Ubenedictus: Dear myjoe please end this thread and if u have a case against d JW bring it on another thread, one topic per thread thatway u position wont b misunderstood.
Peace.

If my being misunderstood is what you are concerned about, opening a new thread will not solve it. Some people have elected to ascribe to me things I have not said at all just to rubbish a discussion they have nothing left to contribute to. Anyway, I did not open the thread and I’m not talking to myself, so asking me to end it is amiss. And, no, I don’t have a case against the JW. You may have noticed that I am responding to issues as they arise and I will continue to do so as I see fit. Try to relax and read the thread like everyone else. But if you choose to open a new thread to discuss any issue you believe deserves one, I will be reading the thread and may even contribute to it.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Hey guys, just wanted to share a message I came across


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zI_RNE5smw

The video features Michael Ramsden responding to the definition of humanism as the new religion of a post-modern Europe, Michael quotes Prof John Gray to say that a truly secular worldview does not permit the hope of humanism; humanism, says Gray, is simply the Christian faith delivered in secular terms.

Give it a look and tell me what you think.[/quote]Why does humanism have to be a total repudiation of Christianity to be valid? But, then, I have not watched the video.

Lol @ child abuse, child, abuse child abuse, how strange.

@Nimshi
I am aware of most of these things. I was framing my statements to draw you out on that issue because when I think of the JW, dangerous is not something that comes to my mind. I am not defending anyone and I think it's better exagerations and incidental inacuracies and generalisations are avoided in discussions like this because it pushes the deluded further in his delusion. It "vindicates" his position, having heard countless times that he will be "persecuted".

I think you misunderstood the Africa ra.pe thing I mentioned. I wasn't "sanitising" anything. I agree about the freedom to think and choose matter. I have written considerably on it over recent weeks in frosbel's watchtower thread and won't rehash it here.

But at the end of the day, people make their choices. There are people who believe if they don't hand over 10% of their salary every month, bad things will happen to them. Who do we blame - them or their deceivers? Like you, I have argued on this forum that it's their leaders. But I recognise that the other side has a good argument. Philosophically, it is a tough question. What we both agree on, though, is that the deluded should be helped, if possible. But you must keep it whiter than white to avoid firming up the position of their captors.

The child abuse matter is fairly well-known in the West, particularly the US, where it has been reported by the major networks, with people like Barbara Anderson - thanks to her for blowing it open - interviewed in some cases. Three or four years back it was even mentioned in district conventions in the US about the payout to victims - it was already in the media, you see. No, Nigerian JWs know nothing about it since it has not been in the local media. But, still, if something is on the international media and the internet... Now you have brought it here, just look at the reaction you are getting: "it's in your head". That's the individual issue I talked about earlier.

I will report my findings on the investment matter when next I come on, likely on Monday.

Repeat

I know about disfellowshiping and shunning. For anyone who has been a long time member or even been one all his life I think losing all his friends can be painful. A good point there. But I think most people handle it well and just move on. Many we have spoken to or read seem to.

I think the surrender of one's freedom of thought is bad, but then you can always give it all up. Oh, well, I have tried to and really can't put a gloss on that one. Maybe I will come back to it. On blood transfusion, I think what medical treatment an adult decides to accept is his business. My concern, though, is about the children. But this shouldn't be a problem if legislatures are alive to their responsibility. The courts should have the power to do what is right when children are put in danger by their parents. Some countries have already made progress in this area.

We know how dangerous beliefs can be. For example, many babies have been rap.ed accross Africa because people believe having sex with a virgin cures Aids. Societies seem to face no threats or dangers from having JWs around. Please expound on what you wrote.

truthislight: thanks and no thanks.

I wasn't doing you any favours or defending your religion - I don't care about the religion, only about the truth as supported by verifiable facts. I was just pointing out what I honestly believe is an error. If the person I quoted his post comes back and proves me wrong, I will accept and update my knowledge. See the difference between iron-cast dogma and genuine enquiry?

Nimshi: Your religion is dangerous, even though you may not know it.

I have observed the group and I don’t think they are particularly harmful to the individual or the society. It may be the case that I have not given enough thought to the matter. Why do you think they are dangerous?

Most of the things Nimishi wrote is as written. However,

Nimshi: --- It is not a joke that when you're out preaching (i.e. misleading the uninformed), your members point to houses, saying stuff like 'that will be mine after Armaggeddon; such is the delusion [/color]

I’d be loth to believe this, since (1) I have been this close to countless JW’s and I have not heard anyone do this. (2) Their official teaching seems to be of the view that “physical structures” will not survive into “the new system”.

Nimshi: At the moment, your Brooklyn masters are indicating that 2014 has some significance. [/color]
This one is new to me. I thought that with the passing on of F.W. Franz they had gradually done away with date setting, having learned from their past mistakes. Well, I guess things never change.

[quote author=Nimshi]- The JWs keep this silent; yet, the JW leaders have a list of up to 30,000 JW rapists of children in a database.

Right. But I doubt any group would publish such things on the pages of its Watchtower or take out newspaper ads to announce them. The church’s child abuse problem is now fairly well known. CNN, ABC and other major networks have done stories on it, if my memory serves me right. If there is ignorance about such matters among the rank and file, I think that should be blamed on their tendency to refuse to listen to, much less, believe anything bad about the church, as the church is equated with God in the subconscious without the person even realising it. Just look at how someone reacted to an extract showing a specific prediction the church made – that it was a forgery since the church would not be so silly to publish that.

Nimshi: They also have shares in companies producing weapons of singular and mass destrcution; yet, they criticise war. Do you see the hypocrisy?

I’m not aware of this and I’d be surprised if it is true. I will do some findings.

Maximus85: …the ‘battle of the great day of God Almighty’ (Rev. 16:14), which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth’s present rulership, is already commenced.
MEANING THE PROCESS TO COMPLETELY OVERTHROW EARTH'S PRESENT RULERSHIP STARTED IN 1914.

You may want to re-read the post you were responding to, then re-read that^^^ one and amend it. They don't take kindly to this sort of thing in NL.

Maximus85: if that God is greater than Jesus is a doctrine, i will follow that path till the end.

Yes, but I wasn't on about "doctrine" in that post. I see you don't like the word as used there. Fine. Now, here is the matter: do you think it was proper for the new world Bible translators to translate Theos as "God" everywhere and translate it as "a god" in the one place? Thank you.

Ola, since the "are one" statement and the "greater than" statement were both made while he was on the earth, why do you pick and choose one over the other, saying the father was greater because Jesus was on earth?

We are still waiting for Maximus on the Theo matter.

Maximus85: See how accurate it is?

I very much doubt he will see it - what with that arcane mathematics up there and the wonderful linking of the Ezekiel and the Revelation. But let's keep our fingers crossed. He might just see it.

Maximus85: Are you saying that John 1:1 implies that God was with himself in the beginning and that he sent himself to the earth? Because if we are to accept the definite article "the" for the two characters then God should be with himself. If you re further, the 2nd character was refered to as the light which is Jesus. If i may ask you. Is God Almighty and Jesus Christ equal?
We need the guide of God's holy spirit to really understand the bible. Jesus is not the God. There's only one God and there is no equal.
Note that if 3 different people were to translate a sentence of English to you in Yoruba, you will get 3 different translations. Your translation may be based on your understanding of the subject matter.
Tell me if we are wrong by saying God is greater than Jesus, even when Jesus Christ himself confirmed it?

Jesus did state clearly that God is greater than he is, so you are on a solid footing about this equality matter. But Ola's initial question simply raised the issue of mistranslation. His Theo post shows clearly that the NWT people translated a word to fit their church's doctrine, a fact that has led many biblical Greek scholars to lampoon the NWT. Was it right to translate Theos differently in just one verse? I think you people should address this matter before moving on to whether Trinity is true or false.

Another reasonable response. Just a little correction: it is the person disputing or rejecting a reference that does the checking and points out what is unfounded. Anyone reading that extract up there will accept the references as genuine if you don't do that.

Maximus85: Jesus didn't ask us to prophesy. Matthew 24:14 says " And this good news of the kingdom (of God) will be preached in all inhabited earth for a WITNESS to all the nations; and then the end will come.
Read 1 Timothy 4:1-5. Lets analyse verse 3 and 4 "for the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, 4. And will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths. Where do you belong? WE AS JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES TALK ABOUT THE PROPHESIES IN THE BIBLE AND WE PREACH ABOUT GOD'S NEW KINGDOM. THIS IS OUR WORK JUST AS JESUS DID WHEN HE WAS HERE ON EARTH AND HE COMMANDED US TO CONTINUE.

That was a trap question and I think you just bought it. Maybe you are new around here but Ola is an old warhorse in these matters and you need to be careful.
:-

Maximus85: We have anti-Jehovah's Witnesses who publishes lots of unfounded articles and quotes.
Even Jesus doesn't know the time when God will bring an end to this system of things, but he gave us signs to watchout for. Matthew 24:3,7-13. So how could Jehovah's Witnesses now pick a date on their own? Its so so impossible.

I was enjoying you till I read this. In fact, you almost fall my hand. Nothing in that wiki extract is unfounded. Not one. You will note it is well referenced. Please read it again and write a befitting response.

Maximus85: Before i say anything, you must agree that John 1:1 was talking about two characters.
And again, the original languages of the Bible were Hebrew and Greek. These two languages does not respect capital and small letters.
Now lets analyse, first, Psalms 90:2 said God has no beginning. Do you agree? John 1:1 said "In the beginning" meaning God was before that Beginning. "Was the word" Who is the word? Jesus. "the word was with who? God. And the word was God/god. Read verse 2. He was in the beginning with God. Verse 4 and 5 refers to the word as the "LIGHT" Now read verse 12. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God" verse 14 and 15 described that "word"/"light" turned flesh, dwelt among us and that John bore witness to him.
People use John 1:1 to proof that God and Jesus are equal. If you read John 1 vs 29-34. Jesus the son of God cannot be equal to God. Jesus said it himself. See Philippians 2:5&6; John 14:28; link John 10:30 with John 17:21-22. God and Jesus are not EQUAL.
So our translation is very understanding, we didn't change anything. The reason why the 2nd God was written in small letter is that after reading extensively, Jesus is a smaller god to the Almighty.
Throughout this answering, i used and quoted the RSV.

I think this is a brilliant handling of the matter.

Martian: The earth's orbit is perfect for us to survive and it just happens to be "orderly" from our viewpoint.

Right. From our viewpoint.

Martian: You say I have to look at the whole but you are not.

I am. I wrote this:

MyJoe: I mean, you say there is disorder somewhere in the universe, but have those disorders brought about any disorder to the whole?

Martian: You're infering for the whole universe based on the habitability of this planet but ignore the other planets that are devoid of life.

I am inferring for the whole universe based on the whole universe. I am not ignoring them planets devoid of life or the ones you say are chaotic. I said there may be a purpose to their chaos in relation to the whole. I don’t know. You have not argued, much less, demonstrated, that the whole is chaotic. So why do you insist on using the chaos in isolated planets as the basis for analysis?

Martian: You are implying that the purpose of the universe is to contain life instead of life being one of the possibilities or probabilities.

I’m not sure I have done that. I don’t know what the purpose of the universe is. I actually share your view that life on earth is just one of the possibilities or probabilities.

Martian: We have eight planets in this solar system but only one contains life as we know it. Does this point to design or just the laws of nature as described by physics? Birth defects are deviation of what a human looks like but does the existence of the human point to a particular orderly plan? Does human physiology suggest purposeful and orderly design,

The earth seems to align perfectly with our needs. As for the other planets, I don’t know their purposes. I agree a lot of things seem purposeless, even chaotic. But, still, that is just “a lot of things”. Human physiology does suggest a purposeful and orderly design. It will be interesting to hear your reasons for thinking otherwise.

Martian: or does it align with scientific theories that don't need the existence of a designer?

I don’t think there is any scientific finding that has demonstrated the non-necessity of a designer.
____

And what I said about the subjectivity of personal spiritual experiences earlier should not be taken to mean that there are no reproducible spiritual “things”.

@BARRISTERS
I hope to read and comment on your post during the week.

truthislight: @major.
It is interesting to see how this your passing interest on this Thread with Dehomer is turning out.

First you had started by using a religion catholic as a reference for comparing with the JW, but since u notice that none of those religion can withstand the comparism with the JW you have abandon that rational method that can help other readers on the thread and said you are of no religion, then what is you interest?

What standard are you using to judge the JW? None:
you are grabbing anything that come your way.
Started by saying that they dont use there brain, later you stated that their prophesie are false or that they will defend Elijah.

I had wish your argument had been on their doctrine being wrong or that there are better options in the practice of christian religion, it will have benefited us cuss then we will have come to know how to worship God.

Unfortunately that is not the reason you are here, but rather the following are the virtues i have come to learn from you.

1. The JW should be allowed to decide on if they should have abortion or not base on individual basis not minding what the bible says at Ex21;23 and psalm 139;16
about the unborn child, that if a practnant woman be hit it should be soul for soul.

2.that th JW should be allowed to eat blood or take blood not minding what the bible says at Acts 15;29 as though it is not blood fractions that made up the blood mention in acts.

3. that the witnesses be allowed to have more than one wife not minding what the bible says, at Mark 10;8 that the two will become one flesh man and wife, not three becoming one flesh.
(Solomon desires)

4.that marriages should not be registered not minding what the bible says giving certificate at mark at 10;2 to 5

5.That the JW are not preaching all the time as such they should be involve in politics, that it is right. John 17:14
when Xtian are suppose to b seperat

that fornication is not a sin, not minding what the bible says, Acts 15:29 and 1thess 4;3, 1cor10;8, Galatians 5;19.
and befor now all none virgin were commanded to be pelted with stone in israel
, that they will not inherite God's kingdom.

this are some of the things mention by myjoe that the JW do not do that are bad.

He said that the fact that the JW elders makes mistake disqualified them from being acceptable by God and man, that moses never made a mistake.
Please lets read where moss made several mistake both in words and in actions. Numbers 20;7 to 12.
meaning that true servant of God do make mistakes but should be.

On this same thread he then accuses that because the witnesses taught what is contain in Jesus prophesie of luke 21;32, matthew24,34 that to him or them has not yet fulfill that it makes the witnesses false prophet

please, for you with your wrong bible knowledge this is what the witnesses belief and what the bible say a generation is = Exodus 1:5,6, means people of varying ages whose life overlap with the young ones that they can relate to.

So, your lack of basic bible knowledge is very Dangerous couple with the fact you claim superior intelligence.
Dont you know that half knowledge is denderouse?

Just like the JW the apostles wanted to know what God's plans for the futile is, Thats why they went asking Jesus are you restoring the king to Real at this time?
Acts 1:6
JW simply believe 100% that the bible is God's word and they teach all that is in it, including the prophesies that give so much faith.
Faith that you dont have. They are interested in what the future holds as Jesus apostles did.

You are a corning deceitful man. If you are honest why will you answer a question or a statement that you were ask or was told about people using BB this way?
"most people dont know the bible because they go to church with blackberry and instead of listening they are pigging"
but you answered with a statment that "the JW will defend Jehovah for slitting the throat of 21 children that laugh at Elijah" why?

Is that the answer for that obvious misplacement of priority by the people using BB in church?
Is it good to be testing in church or to listen?
Was that statement of Elijah not made to lead the unwarry readers on the wrong direction?
If the JW dont defend the word of God whose name they bear who then will Defend Jehovah? Satan or you?

Is it that when Jesus was on earth he did not know that his father killed that number of kids for Elijah that you are now a better judge than Jesus!

Your Interest so far shows the kind of person you are made of, your argument here is even worst than what the atheist do since they dont claim to believe in god.
But you, you say you believe in God but you dont even stand for the truth, u will condemn Jesus prophesy saying it was not well copied or it was added or it was change just to build your claims that are base on false hood.
In doing that any that ride on your back is surely heading to the pit because you are blind to what the bible says.

Your kind are the type they send out from JW but there rage will lead them to embark on a damage mission.
with all the lie you have posted so far and will still post what is the gain you intend to have?
Afterall you dont belong to any religious group that you will say you want to direct people to, meaning that you are on a damage mission.

Any way, from what i know from the JW they dont west time on people like you but use there time to help honest hearted people to know the bible.
No peace

@all
This post is made only to clear up things wrongly said about me for the benefit of the person reading this thread.

The above post by Mr truthislight is a false representation of what I have said in this thread and the way events have transpired. Anyone who wants to know what I have said should read my posts. Mr truthislight’s post is a piece of jaundice, lies, and distortions. Many things he has accused me of saying in this thread are directly contrary to my views. I have argued the case against abortion on this forum and nowhere have I said anything at all about it on this thread, for or against. I have not said anything about my intelligence, inferior or superior in this thread. Nowhere have I said “fornication” is not a sin or that that anyone should marry more than one wife or that people should not register their marriages or that anyone should go play politics. Nowhere did I disqualify anyone by their mistakes or qualify Moses by his non-mistakes or stated that people should use their BB in church. And I have never claimed to be a better human person or to have a better argument than atheists to warrant a comparison with them. Apart from these, all the other things contained in the post are a complete misrepresentation of my views, stated on this tread and otherwise.

Martian: Can you fully love god and treat your neighbor fair? What if your neighbors beliefs goes against your god's?

How do you go about loving a god?

I have explained what loving God comprises for me – loving my neighbour. No, I don’t believe anyone has all the answers. I certainly don’t believe I do. There is no way I can be prejudiced against anyone’s beliefs as long as they are peaceful and respect others. If you try to recruit me that is when I have something religious to talk with you – not to push my beliefs but to interrogate yours.

Martian: I hold the same opinion......if there is anything like gods.



You say you don't believe in Jewish myths, but, forgive me if I'm wrong, it seems your concept of "Him" is the Judeo Christian one based on the jewish myth of Yahweh,even though you claim it's hard to take it seriously.
You mentioned the bible and the quran as examples of what god is and made no mention of indigenous African ideas of "Him".

Anyway, about the necessity of God and the pattern. What pattern exactly proves God? Why is God a necessity? Why invoke a supernatural cause to explain natural occurences when there is no evidence of the supernatural? If the supernatural exists, is there any way to show that it interacts with this natural world?

You talk about order but you ignore the mounting evidence from research that the universe isn't "ordered" and some parts are what humans will find chaotic and even "hellish". What do you mean by order? Our planet being habitable for humans?

I knew you would ask me that. Well, we have to refer to him/she/it somehow, don’t we? He, she, it, I am perfectly comfortable with in reference to the supreme being. My choice of “he” is not a carryover from a Judeo-Christian background. It is simply because I am comfortable with that. When I write I normally in English, I don’t write he/she since I consider that clumsy. I simply use one. To cater to societal sensibilities, I choose to alternate he and her throughout the piece. I don’t capitalise the “he” for God because I don’t think such exercises are necessary. I write God instead of god in reference to the supreme being, not because I see the capitalisation as being of any consequence, but because English grammar or its convention demands that.

African traditional religions have played little or no role in my life. But, yeah, they need to be talked about considering the fact they are the font et origo from which much of the superstition you see around came. You see a Pentecostal Christian who says nothing else besides binding the devil and killing witches, that’s all from the old indigenous beliefs. It was African traditional religion that made our minds fertile for the foreign religions to take roots and prosper on. ATR may not be in your face like the imported religions, but it lives on in their hearts without their even knowing it – the superstitions, the high-decibel mode of worship and prayers, the power dancing, etc. By the way, I am not putting down ATR or the foreign religions, just stating facts. The religions have their good and bad points.

The indigenous African ideas of “him” are different from the Abrahamic ones.Africans see him/she/it – note you don’t have the three as separate words as we have in English in many African languages, even in some European languages such as French you have the same word for “him” and “it” – as a Most High who is far away. So they look for lesser “gods” who can be bothered. I don’t know about the usefulness of these gods but their view of the Most High resonates with me in a way.When something is out of your control, for instance, you “leave it for God”, not because you actually expect God to handle it, but because the matter is out of your control. When something good happens, you “thank God”, not because you know God did it, but because you realise your own efforts didn’t solely bring it about.

I would think the necessity of God is obvious and undeniable. I recognise that an entity has to exist as a first cause. I have not resolved the question of whether this entity is separate from his creation or is simply an essence that pervades everything. I lean towards the former view, although I often think the answer would be somewhere in between. Doesn’t matter really. I don’t believe anybody can “prove” God to another person and I have never laboured to do it. There is nothing we can take to the lab. For example, there is a pattern to the things I see around me every day that convinces me that there is a mind at work behind everything. That is a considered statement but it might mean nothing to you. You ask about order, but, of course, there is order, even in the chaos we see around. I mean, you say there is disorder somewhere in the universe, but have those disorders brought about any disorder to the whole? Alexander Pope particularly captures this point well in his poem “Essays on Man”. You are a scientist and would know the laws of physics – that is order. The plant being habitable is order – bring the earth a little closer to the sun and we turn to steak, if not ashes; take it a little further away and we freeze. I have heard the counterargument – the deviations and aberrations we see; for example, birth defects. But these are merely deviations from the order, so rather than defeat the argument that there is order, they reinforce it. When you talk of order you have to look at the whole.

There are people who claim to have spiritual experiences and I think some of them are believable. The "supernatural" does interact with the physical. No, there is nothing you can take to the lab, so I won’t belabour it. Such “experiences” are, I think, meant for the person experiencing them so the matter is way too subjective for anyone to try to “prove” to someone else.

Maybe that is largely a matter of sheer numbers. I mean there are far more Christians than others where you live so they're most likely to be seen actively promoting stuff. But, yeah, atheists are more tolerant of gays generally. Generally.

It's because God is incomprehensible and unknowable. That is the short answer.

When I think of God I pull back. It's hard to take much of the descriptions of him you find in the Bible and Quran seriously. Loving God for me means loving his creation, and nothing more. Making the God entity an object of love is what I'm not sure I have the rudiments of. No, I don't do Jewish myths or any myths. Belief in God is not all about any particular concept of him. It's about recognising the necessity of God and apprehending the evidence from, not just the amount of order you see around you, but the pattern - now, that is subjective in my view.

When I read that verse I see a commandment to love God and my neighbour. I don't bother about the Israel bit. Whether Jesus lived at the time and place alleged does not matter. What is is that statement attributed to him which is useful.

Thank you, manmustwac. The post, third one on this page, is fine now.

ijawkid: Oboy who dey disturb u?....lol....

There's a robot on my case in that thread - you won't believe it. If I write one line it kills it before I even land and then it won't let me anywhere near Nairaland for one hour!

Purist: Exactly my point.

And I agree with the rest of your post. We're pretty much on the same page, I believe.

Have a good evening, sire!

Good evening to you, too.

I appreciate the fact that not everyone will appreciate the commandment to love God. Those who don't believe in the the existence of God certainly cannot. I have believed in God, although mostly in a different manner from most religious folk, for most of my life, yet I still struggle with that commandment. A lot of people do. That was why I chose to focus on the second commandment which I believe most people can agree on, as I was taken aback by your reception of it.

Now you state you have no problem with it, fine.

As for the homophobes, while a valid argument can be made linking their actions to their religious beliefs, since they themselves would state so, tolerance and intolerance towards LGBT people cut accross people of diverse views, including atheism and agnosticism.

The portion following the first portion of my response is missing; that is, immediately following the word extortion. I will post it when I find the time and means to get it through the robot. Darn the robot!

And, manmustwac, how do I deal with the robots stressing me in the Watchtower thread?

You join the Illuminati! Just kidding. You need to find out why you are giving up the religion. Is it because you found out they were telling you a pack lies and the ideals are like a hole in the head? If that is the case, you are free already. If, however, you are leaving because you want to “experience” things elsewhere,  the fears implanted in your mind will haunt you because you will always wonder about the day God will come for you for leaving his group or the devil for leaving and becoming vulnerable.

As for the moral codes to live by, they are already in your heart. If you refuse to live by them it might just be that you left your religion with the wrong motives.