₦airaland Forum

chrisd:
Look at the initial discussion, long time ago. I am sane don't worry

I see... and I didn't even respond to that walking billboard of ignorance. Must have been sleeping.

allonym:
this requires an incorrect assumption that people who don't believe in God have some "emptiness" in their lives

I am very empty... empty stomach, empty wallet, ...
There's a fix for that though

chrisd:
What might come as a shock to many modern-day Christians, the early Church also placed more emphasis on the message of scripture over actual words on pages. The early Church was not so much concerned with the words, but rather with what the text tells us about Jesus and the Christian faith.

But you know how distorted that original message was by the institutionalised Catholic Church? And the Protestants use a slightly modified version of the same Bible, while sticking even closer to orthodoxy. If you want to know what the orginal churches were like, you'd better head to Ethiopia; there's hardly anything left of the gnostic tradition (btw, many early gnostic churches even believed that there was an actual physical historical Jesus in the first place)

chrisd:
Bluxx knows nothing about evolution

Bluxx?

chrisd:
Not really.

How then do you know what the real teachings of Jesus were?

@ chrisd
Do you consider the Bible as codified as an actual historic account of the life of Jesus?

Might makes right I guess knowing your rights would help in such a situation. Anyway, Bibi, do you know of successful legal interventions of that kind?

Please allow me to introduce myself....
I'm a man of wealth and taste ...
I've been here for such a long time...

PrettyH [/i]debating [i]chrisd ... I'll love this

Haven't used Opera in a while. I agree Opera is really cool, but it was a little too different. They also focussed so much on speed that pages need to be 100% standards compliant to load properly in Opera (at least it used to be like that).
Firefox allows you to view almost all content, except for the rarities that were only designed for IE.
Is Opera up to that level yet? If so, I'll definitely give it another try.

If you cannot be detained for longer than 48 hours, how can you exercise your right if they illegally hold you? What are the available avenues?

@ chrisd
please do post your references.

I'm sure the late Stephen Jay Gouldn't would't be too happy about you using his exact words without giving him due reference

Dobzhansky is only a theologue, so don't bother about him

AbbeyMarie:
He only knows what you will do. and that does not create an illusion of freewill. it simply says that you choose what you do, God just understands your soul, who you are, so completely that he knows what it is you will end up choosing.

If he knows what you will do, you have no choice but to do what he knows, otherwise he wouldn't know. The understanding you talk about is not omniscience. Omniscience implies knowledge of the future. Knowledge of the future implies predetermination. predetermination contradicts free will.

AbbeyMarie:
When you were born, as a child. You did not understand anything around you. As you grow older, you learn things, but still, there is so so much you don't understand, when you are an adult. you know many things, and yet there's alot you still don't understand. When you die. there are so many things you never got the chance to learn or understand. All our lives, we learn and learn and learn and learn. People discover new things every day that have never been discovered before. Knowledge seems to be unlimited so we will never be able to know it all.

and yet simply because we don't understand why someone who is omniscient does something, you say it is impossible. that it's contradictory. But he knows everything. Do you not understand that? He. Knows. Everything. and we do not. So why is that impossible? Why is that contradictory?

Omniscience is determined in the cognitive sphere of humans. It is a concept that was invented by humans, it is a property with a specific meaning (all knowing). That concept has certain implications. One of these implications is predestination and thus the absence of free will. Now, perhaps the omniscience of God is different of our human concept of omniscience. If this is the case, we have nothing to say about it. It is beyond our understanding. If this goes for all his properties (omnipotence, omnibenevolence) we cannot talk about God at all. He is totally unknowable.

AbbeyMarie:
Why do we believe in wind? We can't prove it exists, except that we can feel it, and it moves things. Other than that, we can't prove it exists, we just have to put faith in the fact that we can feel it.

No we do not have to believe in wind. We have a very good understanding of what wind is. We can detect it, we can predict it's patterns and we can know it's properties. There is absolutely no faith required.

AbbeyMarie:
Why do i believe in God? I cannot prove God exists, except that i can feel God, inside my heart, and God i can see God changing people. i just have to put faith in the fact that i feel God everyday in my life. and i have to put faith in the fact that i can see God change people.

This is a subjective feeling you attribute to God because you interpret that feeling within a theistic framework. Nobody is capable of objectifying that feeling and make it communicable to anybody outside that framework, because the framework is different, the concepts used are different and there is no mapping between these frameworks. You call it God, I call it a mass delusion.

AbbeyMarie:
If someone never left their house, and didn't have a TV. but someone called them on their phone and was telling them about the wind. They might not believe it existed. They might say, no matter how many people can testify that it exists, unless you can give me solid proof, i won't believe in it. Until they feel wind for themself, or see the proof, they will not believe in it. But we have no proof for wind, except that we can feel it, and see it move things.

This is not true. Wind is a phenomenon that can be tested and operationalised very easily.

AbbeyMarie:
Someone who has never felt or seen how God works in someone probably won't believe in God. Unless they see proof, or feel God themselves.

This is self-referential. I will feel the same thing but interpret it differently and label it differently.

AbbeyMarie:
I actually must tell you, that it is truly obvious to me, that God wants you, right now. I mean, you are on here every single day, debating the existence of him, who he is, the affects of him etc... You have already taken the first step into discovering who he is. Although you are not convinced of who God is, who Jesus is, let alone God's existence, you are at least have not closed your heart completely to the possibility of him. There are so many people who would have seen one of these discussions, left the website and never come back. I almost think that you might.... want to be proved wrong? i don't know about that, but i can say that just by listening to and reading all this, you have allowed God in your life, it is truly now your choice on whether you listen to it.

As I did not grow up in a theistic environment, I find it extremely hard to understand why people believe in God. A majority of the human population does. Many are outright ignorant, but many are intelligent human beings. I want to understand where that comes from. Intellectually, it's so far of the scale that there must be another reason. I will probably not find it, but I keep looking.
My parents did grow up as good Roman Catholics, but they have been dealt such nasty blows by that church that they left. My father is extremely anti-catholic and feels nauseous every time he's close to a man of the cloth. I do not have that negative feeling towards religious people, I just don't understand them.

AbbeyMarie:
You are absolutely correct, it is uncalled for because it is nonsense. We all are evil, and evil moral characteristics come from Christians just as much, and probably as often as any one else... to say that they Started from? that their origins are from atheists? Well... that makes no sense in the least.

I am very glad to find a Christian who's not into the fire-and-brimstone approach and who does not need to attribute evil to the others and especially to atheists. You make my day.

AbbeyMarie:
How is THAT and illusion? I am not grasping your argument on this, and i don't know why.
[SNIP]

See above. It follows out of the definition of omniscience.

AbbeyMarie:
I actually must confess that i, myself, am not Nigerian, nor do i live in Nigeria. i was researching about Nigerian culture for my English Final when i found this website. (We are reading the book, "Things Fall Apart" ) So, i was not aware that it is difficult for Nigerians to deviate from the norm. And i agree that it is senseless to be treated as social outcasts for a position on any subject, because... ha! It's Senseless because we Have. Free Will!!!!!!! to choose to have any position on any subject we want!

Neither am I, my wife is Nigerian and we do not live in Nigeria, but I do have some knowledge about Nigerian mores
I also agree that we have free will, but not for the reason you do. Anyway, for what it's worth, even if we wouldn't have free will, it would appear to us we have free will, so why not live as if we have it

AbbeyMarie:
By interesting, do you mean that he and i disagree on things? Because, i am not saying that i am 100% right on this, this is just what i believe and why i believe it. infact i am probably wrong on many things, just as we all are.

I wouldn't know, but he's definitely against the anti-intellectual position some Christians on this board take. That's also a reason why, in general, I like it more to debate with Muslims than with Christians, they never consider ignorance a virtue.

AbbeyMarie:
Do you know of any threads that Chrisd is a prominent debater on? I love interesting discussions (exspecally on this website).... they are so exhilarating!

He's one of the newer members. Just look up his profile and look at what he posted.

AbbeyMarie:
So i didn't agree with you on this, so i looked up the word ignorance on-line... sometimes when i have the definition of words right next to me, i understand things much better. and i guess you are right. i technically do retreat into ignorance. because my conclusion is that i am not educated enough to understand the nature of God.

This is the only sensible theistic position I can think of, agnostic theism: you cannot possibly have knowledge about the nature of God, but you can believe in him. All attempts to understand the nature of God are futile. This would probably be my position if I grew up in a theistic environment, but I didn't.
I'm an agnostic atheist. I cannot have knowledge about a supreme being, either positive or negative, but I do not believe in a supreme being.
I cannot have faith in a supreme being, because faith is belief without evidence. I could believe in a supreme being, if there were evidence indicating his existence beyong a reasonable doubt. There is no such evidence.

AbbeyMarie:
but this is true. I can't understand the nature of God. I haven't even come close to learning all the possible things you could learn Inside! the realm of human knowledge... let alone in the realm of God's Knowledge. and neither can anyone who is only human either.

this was originally referring to the comment you had made on when i preparing to say why God would create people who he could predict with 100% accuracy, would go to hell. and so yes, i am retreating into ignorance when i say that i can't understand the nature of God, that you can't understand it, that no one can understand it. But i only retreat into that ignorance, because I, along with everyother human being, am ignorant. I am only stating the truth.

Ok. Your point being?

AbbeyMarie:
I'm sorry, but i see absolutely no facts in that except for that people suffer. The rest is purely opinion. It is your opinion that God being omnibenevolent would not allow his creatures to go through torment and pain. That is not a fact. Nor is that if God is omnipotent, he would prevent suffering and pain. They are both very eloquently said opinions, to the point that at first glance, you do not recognize that it actually is an opinion.

It follows directly from the meaning of the words omnibenevolent and omnipotent. If you want to remove omnipotence and omnibenevolence out of the human cognitive sphere, then you may have a point. If he is omnibenevolent, he would do all in his power to prevent suffereing and pain. Omnibenevolence is all-goodness, the supreme goodness, what ensures no bad exists if he is omnipotent as well.
Bad exists. This means that either he is not omnipotent and/or he is not omnibenevolent. It could also mean that omnipotence and omnibenevolence in the context of God are different than in the human context., but then we cannot understand or communicate about these properties of God.

AbbeyMarie:
Yes, it is my, 'opinion' that God can be both omnibenevolent and omnipotent, and allow people to suffer. i do not have facts.

This is false if we use the human meaning of omnipotence and omnibenevolence.

AbbeyMarie:
this is because we are both ignorant. We both do not understand enough, we both do not know everything. We only know that God is omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and also omniscience! God says that he gives free will, being omnibenevolent, it must be true. So the fact that he is omniscience doesn't change that.

You're turning in circles here.

AbbeyMarie:
I actually would like to create a thread on that... however i have never created a thread before... what would i call it? Like "Does Creating humans limit God's future possibilities" ? is that a good title or is there a better phrased question that you can think of?

Maybe later. This debate is already taking up too much of my time.

AbbeyMarie:
Also, i would like to ask you a question.... that's off topic. As i mentioned before, I'm researching Nigerian culture because my English class is reading the book "Things Fall Apart" written by Chinua Achebe. In it they mention that when twins are born they murder them. Do you know why? Also, in the book, they talk about the titles of each clan. Do you know, by any chance, how they Acquire the titles? If you by any chance know the answer to these questions, i would greatly appreciate it. =)

=)

=)

=)

Beter ask my lovely Nigerian forumites. I haven't read the book yet (don't shoot, I will )

Firefox. For several reasons:
- most standards compatible (should be important for all you coders out there)
- customisable interface
- memory requirements (compared to IE)
- tabbed browsing
- master pwd

and not unimportant for someone who went through the ugly browser war years - it continues the legacy of Mosaic and Netscape

sage:
[SNIP]
THESE MUST BE THE EVIL AND SATANIC EUROPEANS WHO WALK ABOUT IN A BLACK MAN'S SKIN AND ARE GOING ABOUT PRETENDING TO BE NIGERIANS. iT MUST BE THE 'UNGODLY EUROPEANS AND AMERICANS. IN FACT IT IS ANYBODY BUT NIGERIANS. NIGERIANS ARE ALL SO HOLY THEY CANT BE THE ONES.

WHO IS DECIEVING WHO

I must confess... Finally my devious plan has been uncovered.... Finally someone has popped up with the wit and foresight to see through my satanic intentions...
at last my witchcraft has been exposed ... I am who I am

nicetohave:
I agree with you nferyn but you cannot make categorical statements about the man based only on what the woman has said, you may however give her counselling on what she should do but not about the man himself, that is both unfair and unwise.

Obviously, I can only go by what she has said, but consider the following (if she wasn't liberal with the truth):
* he beats her
* he throws her stuff out of the house
* he makes implicit death threaths
* he stopped her in her education
* he prevented her from making her own money
* he seized her mobile phone
* he does not give her enough money to take care of the kids

If all of that is true - regardless of what she did/does - I stand by my statements on the man.

kenflavor:
@Nferyn
I had never said she should let her husband know about her packing

I thought the implicit message was: wait to act untill you've passed through all counceling sessions with your spiritual advisor, including sessions to make your husband change his ways.

My advice is: act immediately.
She cannot live in such an abusive situation. That man is a egoistical monster on a power trip, pure and simple.
One thing made me think that this situation was beyond redemption: what self respecting man can leave his wife home alone without even enough money to take care of the children. The man is not fit to be in a relationship with anybody.

kenflavor:
Dear Cecillia, I wouldn't advice u leave this man for now. I will advice you seek God's face (intervention). Everyone has his or her own CROSS, may be this is yours, so, u need go see a very good man of God in your area or most especially the one you think your husband respects a lot and explain your problems to him. May be through this God might intervene on your behalf and see you through your present predicament. After enough prayers and men of God interventions, if he refuses to change then you can now leave him finally, but make sure u have a good preparation and plan for yourself before u leave his house.

Kenflavor, I [b]strongly [/b]disagree with you here.

Cillia, If you are a strong Christian, by all means go and seek out spiritual help but [b]never [/b]let your husband know that you are considering to leave the house in any way. Make your preparations, but ensure that he does not know. If you think that guidance by your pastor can help him change his way, try it out. At the same time, prepare to leave him. If it doesn't work out, don't let that man destroy your life. He is not worth having you as a wife.
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best. And do not waste any more of your precious time.

Also, seek out legal council immediately. You should know what your rights are and what his obligations are.

@prinseth2003
Get out of that marriage. There are never any excuses for that kind of behaviour.
Make sure you plan everything properly so that you won't be suffering even more because you left.

AbbeyMarie:
How is free will an illusion in this context? in this context God knows/understands what we will do. but he doesn't command us to do this. he allows us to do it.

He knows beforehand what you are going to do. This means that before you even do it, before you make any decision, you can only do what he knows you will do. You have no choice, you only have the illusion of having a choice.

AbbeyMarie:
When you say "There is no way to avoid your faith." what are you saying? Sorry, but i really don't understand.

See above

AbbeyMarie:
Yes, actually many people do question the properties of God. An acquaintance questioning exactly why God creates people who he knows will go to Hell, is what got me started thinking about how free will and predestination can co-exist.

Exactly, the creation of free will does not make sense for an omniscient, all-seeing God. It is in contradiction with his property of omniscience.

AbbeyMarie:
Why shouldn't we question the properties of God? That would be like not trying to fully understand your personal beliefs. and that would be ignorant, because not understanding what you believe. makes no sense. That's actually one reason why this site invigorates me so much. i love it, because it allows me to question my own beliefs, to strengthen them, and learn more about others beliefs.

I have no intention whatsoever to change what people believe. If only they can reason thoroughly about the foundations of their belief, I would call it a success. What I dislike is the theism by default, where people ascribe al kinds of evil moral characteristics to atheists. This is uncalled for. It's already difficult enough for Nigerians to deviate from the norm, they don't need to be treated as social outcasts for a perfectly reasonable position. If I can - in my small way - help accomplish that, I'm happy.
I think you can have interesting discussions with your fellow Christian chrisd.

AbbeyMarie:
I do not retreat into ignorance by saying we cannot fully understand the nature of God. I simply come to the conclusion that our knowledge cannot compare to an all-knowing God's!

It is [/b]a retreat into ignorance. You say beforehand that you cannot fully understand the nature of God.

AbbeyMarie:
1. How does omniscience imply predestination? Doesn't it imply that he knows everything, understands everything? Which doesn't mean that he forces us to do anything. It simply means that he knows everything! If that is all it means, i can't see why he wouldn't allow people to choose what they want to do.

Exactly for the reason I posted above. If he knows the choice before the choice is made, there is no choice.

AbbeyMarie:
2. Why wouldn't he allow sin on Earth? He doesn't allow it in [b]Heaven and that is why after we all sin, we need to receive Jesus Christ so, we can be perfect before God, so we can go to Heaven. But on earth... Earth is not Heaven, so why is there a reason he wouldn't allow sin on Earth? He allows sin in Hell.

If God is omnibenevolent, he would not allow any of his creatures to go through torment and pain. He would do everything he can to avoid that. If he is omnipotent, he can prevent suffering and pain. Fact is, people suffer. Either God is not omnibenevolent or he is not omnipotent.

AbbeyMarie:
3. How do you know that would limit his possibilities? From your knowledge and your perception, maybe it would. but, if he is all-knowing, maybe he knows that it wouldn't limit his possibilities. maybe it would create more. If it did limit his possibilities... he might not want those possibilities.

This is a difficult discussion that can take a thread of it's own. If you like, you can create a thread on that. I will expand the argument, but it will take quite some time to do so. Just let me know.

AbbeyMarie:
Oh, and nferyn, i would just like to say, that i am so glad you participate in the discusions, you always bring such... intensity to them! It is so fun talking with you, (and everyone here too).

The pleasure is entirely mine, m'lady

AbbeyMarie:
I love hearing everyone's ideas and opinions. How they differentiate so much. I am so thankful, that we can express our opinions freely and openly without fear of being... harassed or even murdered like people can be.

Kudos to Seun. This forum is a shining example of how people with very different backgrounds and convictions can have an open, polite debate about practically everything.

@ panthress
Use your brain instead of your gut to do the thinking
Am I killing a tree when I remove a germinated seed from the ground? Your statements don't make sense

You people take all of this way too seriously. I was just saying that if you agree with the reasoning about pre-marital sex being prostitution, you would have to conclude that marriage is slavery. Not something I think it is

On the other hand, there is nothing bad about prostitution per se. It can have some nasty side-effects, though. Now, assuming the theoretical case where I would be in a position to marry a (former) prostitute. Would I?

I honestly don't know. Those side effects would probably prevent me from marrying her, but I know that her having been a prostitute would not be a major factor in my decision.

bebee:
guess u must have heard of the term "paying in kind" ? indeed prostitution is commercial sex, sleeping with someone u aint married to is also commercial sex. there is an exchange, in this case not monetary but emotional. u talked to the other guy tongue -in - cheek. anyone that engages in premarital sex is a prostitute.

If you think along those lines, then marriage is slavery. You are bonded for the rest of your life and you're not getting paid.

@ Advinchi
I used to play chess a lot in secundary school. I thought I was reasonably good untill I got beaten badly by a 8 year old of a chess club. That was a humbling experience