Joagbaje:

The boldest part is true . Christ is the end of the law to righteousness . The key word there is RIGJTEOUSNESS. That doesn't mean The law is not good.

The law as was given by Moses, with it's interpretations and derivatives/ordinances were definitely not good. It cannot be good because it defines sin in man's naturally given attributes, the same attributes that God himself declared to be good. The law is the condemner, not the giver of liberty and life.

jayriginal:

Oh claims are made.

Is it not a claim of christianity that I will go to hell if I do not accept Jesus as my lord and saviour?

Lets start with that.

You are not a christian. There is no where in the doctrines where non-christians are threatened with hell.

jayriginal: InesQor,

I have always held that an atheist is one who doesnt believe. Once that qualification is met, such a person is an atheist (and agnostics so called, qualify as atheists). It is not essential that the person must have a positive belief in the none existence of God.

I see no compelling reason for God but I leave room that there maybe one since I cannot state otherwise with certainty.

There are some Gods I reject outrightly. All Gods who have even a single attribute ascribed to them (except for the attribute of existence) must necessarily be false/non existent in my thinking.

My reason for this is that no one knows but we can deduce. You will note that all attributes of God are human descriptions; loving, powerful, good, bad, kind, vengeful, jealous, intelligent and even, existence itself. We give whatever God we choose human attributes as makes sense within our own particular experience. These are things that we take for granted and usually without consideration as a result of indoctrination.

Is the world evidence of God or evidence of itself? To most, it is evidence of God. To a few, it is evidence of itself primarily.

So yes, maybe an all knowing ball of energy or even a grey haired floating man in the sky did create all that is, but we cannot know and I cannot believe that. People just intuit, and convince themselves, then convince others then deduce what this God likes and doesnt like and how to please it and next, you have a standard religion.

The only God I can "allow" to exist is one whos sole attribute is existence (at least at a point). I wouldnt even give it the attribute of power unless that power can be used deliberately. Pretty much like I wouldnt call a completely paralyzed person powerful even though he may inadvertently produce physical effects occasionally.

The whole point is that we do not know. We can only speculate using our everyday experiences as tools to intuit. There is nothing to show that nature must follow our fantasies. It can be nice when we argue the merits and demerits of a particular worldview but not so nice when we force same worldviews on others or preach them dogmatically.

We dont know for sure and we may never know for sure.

As such, I advance no position, I merely ask for proof.

What sort of proof might you be asking for. I speak as a christian and it seems to me that everyone who criticizes the christian doctrine, these criticisms are for things that are not christian. They seem to require a proof of claims that were never made(nor attributed to) by this christian God or his doctrine. Bottom line, no body understands this God, else they'd be asking relevant questions of him/his doctrines.

obadiah777: just cuz he made you does not mean he is your God. there is a reason why people are going through all kinds of craziness like plane crashes etc. its cuz they are on their own. no protection. no God.

GBAM!!! But you still crazy man . You see what you see and what you see is truth, but you don't understand them.

obadiah in all his madness and worship of shadows, still manages to drop deep truths every once in a while. Yes!, God is not the God of all but of a select few. Definitely not of mainstream christianity nor any religion for that matter. In fact the true worshipers of God today would be branded cultists, (as if cultism itself is an evil practice). smh.

FOLYKAZE:

I dont know if we have same view on spirituality. Spirituality doesn't refer to spirits in the sense that you're referring to. It's the ability to wonder, to marvel, at actual facts and reality as revealed by modern science. I define my spirituality as the exploration and appreciation of the fundamental underlying nature of reality and the way in which we are all connected in the part of existence that goes beyond our normal perception. Ergo:
The feeling you get when you look up to a clear sky at night and realise that those points of light you're looking at are how they appeared many years ago.
The astonishment you get when you consider the immense variety of life on this planet, that you are demonstrably connected to every other form of life, and that 99% of the species that ever lived are now extinct.
The humility of knowing that you (and all homo sapiens) are very, very recent arrivals on the geological clock, and that an unbroken line of successful reproduction going back billions of years has emerged with you as the end product (so far).
I could go on all night... there are literally thousands of thoughts like these. And the fact that they're all based in reality is nice.
So my answer is that by learning about the universe, the Earth and the pursuit of knowledge, requiring no appeal to anything supernatural, you hit upon a 'spirituality' (search 'Spinoza's God') more pervasive and wonderful than anything you'll find in the world of religion.

Spiritualism is nothing more than communicating with your subconscious.....thats what it is to me. Cheers

Chaii!! Bros you completely missed it. You are expressing an emotional appreciation for quantities, for numbers, for sizes, when they seem extreme or impressive. This is like a person's reaction when he enters an elevator and is taken up to the top of a sky scrapper for the first time in his life. He is impressed by the feat man has attained with building structures, impressed with man's creativity and genius. The word hear is impressed, not awe and therefore this is not a spiritual experience. You get a spiritual experience or awe(or as yoruba's put it: iyanu ) at phenomena that are beyond your literal/empirical comprehension. It is not enough, what you have written above, to express wonder at things that are clearly understood and surmounted by man.

Ubenedictus: what exactly are you saying? That we were redeemed when christ purchased us from our conscience with his blood?
Pls explain.

Sorry for introducing the conscience part there, as I now see it is confusing/digressing. I did not intend to portray the conscience as the party from whom a purchase was made but rather as the witness(trusted instrument/tool) to the transaction.

Like I said before, this purchase is not about trade between two parties, that is a rather too literal interpretation. Spirituality and faithfulness cannot be validated by an external party(which was why I introduced the conscience, but disregard now..). The bottom line is that an object of value is given up in exchange for another object of (greater) value. It is not important to me who picks up the object that is given up(it is not in the spiritual equation) because it is garbage to me now, just like the Law of Moses is garbage to me now, I have simply dumped it, it is waste, even if some other fellow might find value in it. So in a literal transaction, you give up money to acquire a useful merchandise. If we want to introduce a supplier for this merchandise(salvation), then it is God himself, but God has no use for the Law of Moses that is given up for Grace.

The person who is saved is Jesus Christ(in our place), he has effectively demonstrated salvation to us and expects us(the believers) to follow the path of this salvation he achieved. Jesus is the one who was bought/ransomed (in our place). In a literal ransom, you expect an external party to come save/buy you, but in a spiritual ransom, you are the one expected to save yourself by trading one master for another, just like jesus did when he traded the Law of Moses for the Law of Grace (in our place).

plaetton:

I could not have said it better.

I would like to add that the subject of alchemy is the precurser to modern empirical science.
Alchemy was a blend of physical science, philosophy and the spirituality.

Although derided today as a pseudoscience, My personal opinion is that alchemy is still a valid science, in fact, a higher science than our conventional textbook science.

Alchemy is still actively studied and practiced today under the guise of more exotic sounding names.
As far as I am concerned, alchemy is so powerful a science that it is deliberately taken out and hidden from the public domain .

Alchemy , known as spirituality to some, and occultism to others, is nothing but higher dimensional physics.
Scalar physics to be exact.

My position, which I have stated severally, is that the line between science and spirituality are getting increasingly blurry as we go deeper into areas like quantum physics and scalar physics, and as we deal with phenomena such as torsion fields, superconductivity, etc.

Take for example, the human brain. Brian cells and neurons are made of crystals and arranged symmetrically for optimum modulation and conductivity of electrical energy.
In addition, recent findings are suggesting that the brain , unlike modern computers, processes information through quantum mechanical processes.

In other words, the brain is a one of a kind room temperature superconductor of electrical energy, as well as a transmitter and receiver of electromagnetic impulses within and beyond our physical medium.

The brain, aka, the mind , as a superconductor, is capable of transmitting and receiving cosmic impulses beyond our physical space, inter-dimensionally.

This, if true, implies that man , when his mind is finely tuned, is capable of projecting his consciousness into and beyond the physical medium, to partake of , or merge with the primordial energy, even if only for a micro-second( in timeless phase).

This extension of consciousness beyond the physical medium is, what I suppose, the origin of the religious practices of meditation, prayer, revelations, and many other religious practices.

This is what the shamans, the prophets, the swamis of antiquity were practicing.

Interesting. Some author(I don't remember who now) once said: There's a degree of knowledge/science you can achieve by your own efforts, but to go beyond that, you'd have to be invited to partake. In other words: Invited to join an occult group.

InesQor: @OP

I think you've conflated pantheists, panentheists, polytheists etc with atheists in your simplified redefinition. In short it seems like you bundled all non-monotheists into the same pile.

For instance Ifa worshippers are not atheists though an Ifa worshipper can have atheistic leanings. Same goes for Buddhism, the Buddha had strong atheist leanings but buddhism is not necessarily an atheist worldview.

Probably. I was just going by the simple definition of atheism which is the non-belief in deities. But spirituality and religion are not confined to the recognition or worship of deities only. If one doesn't believe in deities and yet conducts himself according to paranormal principles he believes judges and influences his karma, wouldn't you agree that is deeply spiritual/religious though such a person identifies as an atheist? A typical example being buddhism which you agree has strong atheistic leanings, Now taking away the denominations of buddhism that later introduced deities in their rituals, what do we have left if not atheist buddhists? My examples may not be perfect but the underlying principle(as I understand it) is still that one can believe in occult/paranormal spirituality and still be an atheist. No??

But on a serious note, you guys have been analyzing this in a rather shallow manner, drawing exact matches to literal/legal/secular transactions, thus you lose the spiritual operations therein. So I break it down here;

Looking at a transaction spiritually and faithfully now, what actually happens? It means you give up one object of value; eg: money(In this case: the blood/life) for another object of more useful/needed/greater value(in this case: a new life in christ). The other party with whom you make this exchange/transaction is not an external party(this is why it is spiritual), It is your conscience, the perfect judge who measures your sincerity and faith.

FOLYKAZE:

occult? Chai....spirituality is a personal thang.

Im sorry, my spirituality is not about yours.

From your reaction, it seems you are still living in the lies told by mainstream religion, media and culture of society. They use the word "occult" to scare us, make us believe that we are either diabolical or crazy when we practice or believe in occult phenomena. You need to free yourself from the herd control system of the majority. Occult and spirituality go hand in hand. A read through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occult wouldn't hurt.

Hmm, it seems God and devil are using us to play football. Two to beat one...

italo:

Do you BELIEVE that there is no God? Yes or No.

Lol in advance.

GBAM!!! ;

The answer to this question CANNOT be: "I know there is no God...". Since nobody knows everything, therefore "I believe.." accounts for the rest of everything you cannot possibly know.

FOLYKAZE: Im just a spiritual atheist. I dont give a damn about what hater think about that.

But wait....whats is spirituality to you?

Spirituality is the belief in phenomena and consciousness by methods outside of what is literally or scientifically reasonable. In other words: occult or paranormal phenomena. Spirituality is symbolism intensive, The basis of religions.

I literally had an awakening yesterday from participating in this thread: https://www.nairaland.com/1464785/atheist-why-embracing-buddhism-not , I had to investigate whether there was more to atheism than meets the eye, beyond what seems the obvious and oversimplification of the meaning of atheism. I used to think that atheism was the absolute lack of belief in anything spiritual(though I still think there are atheists in this category. I suspect @weigraf, @logicboy ), but I got better educated to know that atheism is just the lack of belief in deities, in other words super, omni.., omni.. spirit beings. But they do believe in spiritual activities, spiritual entities, spiritual cause and effects. So by this new knowledge, a buddhist is an atheist, a hindu is an atheist, an Ifa practitioner is (probably) an atheist and any other religion/philosophy without regard to the type of christian/islamic/jewish super absolute controlling God.

I must say this is a fresh air to my view of atheists. I'd always thought that since atheists had no spiritual/abstract guidance or conscience whatsoever, then they had no morals beyond what is forced upon them by the law of the land. This must incite some kind of phobia on the minds of religionists/spiritualists to think that somebody just doesn't give a damn what he inflicts on another person as long as the legal system does not catch him. So for the reason that there is (, I thought,) absolutely nothing in common between my mindset and that of an atheist, i had tended to forgo threads about atheists/atheism.

So nairaland atheist, am I unto something here or am I just deluded? Let us know.

macof:
I didn't mean to use the words "don't recognise" but the truth is u would never see a buddhist praying to a god or worshiping any deity.

And why the attack on me? Even if I made a mistake, u should give corrections. Afterall am not a buddhist, am into Ifa(not a babalawo tho)

I wasn't attacking you, I was addressing you.

No offense meant .

macof: Buddhism doesn't recognize God or any spiritual being, It all about trying to be vindicated from the suffering of this world.

Buddha taught about striving to live a moral life by being mindful of ur actions and thoughts to achieve wisdom and understanding.

Buddhists strive to attain true happiness as the world is Hell itself

Every Buddhist strives to be like The buddha who gained enlightenment after connecting with his inner consciousness through meditations and other mediums.

Buddist do not care about material things, most buddhist are what u would call poor, because they find no use for theses things because it doesnt guarantee happiness and peace of mind

Buddhist are seekers of Knowledge and peace, trying to make the world a better place. that is why u can never hear of forced or compelled conversion, wars or discrimination in areas where Buddhism prevails. (afterall wisdom is not for everybody)

Buddhism is not science, but it deals with the main purpose of science which is knowledge, theories, and above all making the world a better place.

Buddhist believe in the law of karma(not as a spiritual concept but natural law of actions with consequences)

Its no wonder Atheist are fans of Buddhism, it supports their course

Ifa recognize forces that drives nature

Ifa also teaches the importance of good character

Ifa preaches that the most important thing to us is our consciousnesses and subconsciousness

Ifa teaches that connecting with ur subconscious makes life easy and the road to achieving ur destiny is smooth

Ifa to a large degree is science because it is all about gaining knowledge of everything knowledgeable

Ifa tells the truth using symbolism, it is left to u to interpret and understand its use of symbolism

Ifa however isnt into any known/recognised scientific method of discovering knowledge. Ifa is on its own league

You say buddhism does not recognize spiritual beings, but on the other hand this same buddhism recognizes spiritual activities in that we are all spirits and that this present life is not all there is, that our actions in this life will determine what life we will have in the next life. It is either buddhism is a lazy philosphy or you are just delibrately filtering the aspects you are comfortable with and ignoring the more embarassing/unasnwered parts. Why does buddhism not ask what the origin of all these cycles of birth and rebirth is? It doesn't make sense to simply assert that we are born and reborn, and reborn until infinity if we don't rectify our lives, yet it claims to be without spirituality, yet it doesn't ask: who or what determined this moral basis that we must conduct ourselves with in order to escape this infinite birth cycles. At least other major philosophies(science, christianity, islam, etc) are honest in their claims(whether stupid of not) by asserting that there is an origin, a first cause or creator. But buddhism seems not to have an opinion about cause/origin/creator of this nature system that it recommends it's morals for people to follow. It seems to say that nature system just is!! a nature without cause/begining/creator, yet we the micro-organisms within this uncaused nature need to live by cause and effects. And don't tell me that buddhism agrees with evolution because it certainly does not, evolution has nothing to do with birth and rebirth, has nothing to do with cyclic existences or life after death, or that we exist today as humans, then tomorrow as mosquitoes and the next as sharks, etc. I am not an expert on buddhism, but if what you claim above about buddhism is true and is the sum of it's philosophy, then I can safely conclude that buddhism is a deliberately evasive, unquestful and dishonest philosophy.

I am more suprised that @folykaze is praising this your summary of buddhism.

One more thing, it is virtually impossible to separate religion from buddhism and also impossible to separate religion from spirituality(@floyKaze) This is for the people (atheist, ...) who want to identify differently from christians, moslems and other religionists. Every religion is based on spiritualities/philosophies. The issue is not who has it right and who has it wrong but whether their behaviours(worships) is in respect with their belief systems which includes concepts/entities beyond physically/scientifically evident truths. You can flog christians/moslems/etc as much as you want but the truth is you are basically doing exactly the same things that you deride them for. You believe in conforming to a set of moralities by which you expect to be judged in the life after after death. This is true of buddhism, true of ifa, true of christianity and islam, etc. Yet you claim to be atheist and buddhist/ifa. Am I the only one who's detecting the confusion here(or is it dishonesty)?

@OP

Nice writeup. I am in fact impressed by this article, I never thought you could be this intellectual/analytical. I say this because your previous ventutres on nairaland was all about abusing christians and christianity and carrying on with your "I was born an atheist" mantra, a mantra characteristic of Richard-Dawkins/Sam-Harris worshipers. For these group of atheists, they think: If it sounds catchy and it comes from Dawkings/Harris, then it is absolute, airtight truth. Well done.

I do have some issues from your article that I must comment on:

Firstly, buddhism is a religion, as long as it is spiritual doctrines, no matter how people want to rehash it. But you seem to be of the opinion that Buddha did not intend to setup a religion; I disagree. Buddhism being a philosophical and spiritual outlook on life and life's purpose/value( in other words: a religion); If buddha did not intend to start a religion, then he wouldn't have sought to propagate this philosophy by teaching and urging people to follow it's doctrines and truths, urging that they abandon their established religious beliefs, to replace with the doctrines and practices of buddha. The emphasis here is that he actively taught and urged followership of his truths; If these truths are not scientific proofs, then they are religious/spiritual truths, thus it was his intention to start a religion, just like Jesus Christ, Mohammed, etc

Another issue is that you seem to mistake atheism or non-theism for non-religion. You seem to believe that religion requires an external deity to be qualified as "religion". This is not so. A religion is simply an organized collection of belief systems founded on spirituality(note: beliefs and spirituality, not scientific proofs). Such a belief system could involve external deities or could exclude external deities, however they are still organized spiritual beliefs, thus they are religious.

Again I credit this article for inspiring me to understand atheism better, as the unbelief in deities rather than the unbelief in spiritualities. So one can be an atheist and a buddhist(or any religion that excludes deities) at the same time. So you can argue that atheism is a religion, or at least there are religious denonminations of atheism, just as @folykaze is an atheist and an Ifa worshipper. Come to think of it, Ifa religion has deities nah Aren't you confused??

InesQor: @okeyxyz:

Thanks for your contribution. Can you clarify some things?


Salvation of the ego: does this mean preservation or protection of the ego? Can you expatiate on this please?

It's simple actually, True Christian doctrines teaches you to love yourself first, and then you can love somebody else. Like the commandment states: "Love your neigbour as yourself...". It is impossible to give what you do not have. So whatever you pass on to somebody else must be what you have actually heard, learnt and handled yourself and have found to be profitable for yourself. So when we say "we deny ourselves...", we are actually denying what is unprofitable and imbibing that which is good and pleasurable(whether in an abstract/intellectual, emotional or sensual/physical manner). Bottom line, All things created are meant to be used for our own(the self) learning and profit, there is no sin in nature because the law of Moses is abolished, and we know that the law of Moses does nothing but to accuse us(the self/ego) of being sinful for doing things that we are designed for, ie: abstract/intellectual and sensual knowledge including food, drink, beauty, sex, all forms of knowledge, creativity, etc. So the abolishing of the Law of Moses takes away that guilty conscience that gives the self/ego a bad reputation.

This is really interesting. Immortality of the body, as in to live forever physically in one lifetime?

Ultimately, we are meant to be immortal. But mainstream christianity do not teach this because they no longer believe it. We are so used to death that we disregard all scriptural references to physical immortality and rehash them as spiritual immortality. Christ taught a prayer "Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven...", we already know that that spiritual things/entities are immortal, the will of God therefore is that these spiritual principles be established in the real world and that they endure just like they endure in the spirit realm. Haven't you ever wondered why the spirit world/entities are obsessed with man? They seem to be battling for possession/rulership of man? Man really is the ultimate prize and the universe does revolve around us. We are not as insignificant in this universe, as secular/scientific wisdom teaches. Just as spirit entities are making efforts to possess man and become human, likewise God himself is going to become and establish himself as human, and it shall be forever.

The christianity of the Perfect Law of Liberty, which Paul preached and which I follow, has the same principles as the OP but different definitions and values. This christianity seeks the salvation of the ego rather than the denial of it, it seeks physical immortality rather than regarding death as the ultimate destination. In fact death is the ultimate enemy to be defeated. I stress here that I am not talking about the conventional/mainstream christianity that churches today teach. Conventional christianity is not in accordance to what Paul taught, the messages and meanings of Paul has been long lost after the Catholic institution absorbed christianity and made it a state institution, using the christian brand to propagate it's pagan doctrines and re-establishment of the Laws of Moses as christian, doctrine which forms all the values that mainstream christianity and humanity in general extols today.

So while eastern religions such as the OP, (actually all religions), strive for the immortality of the soul/spirit/abstract consciousness, the Law of Liberty(Paul's version of christianity) on the other hand strives for the immortality of the body. To achieve this ultimate immortality, we must start with a state of sinlessness. The state of sinlessness is the repentance from the Law of Moses. The Laws of Moses is the value system that defines sin and condemnation and death. So the first step in True christianity is the knowledge that this Law has been abolished through christ's death(ie: Christ was the personification of the law, thus his death is the death of the Law ) and you should hence disregard it's definitions and commandments. You should fear no sin because you have been set free from the laws of Moses, the definer of sin and the accuser and condemner of your thoughts and actions. The laws that commands: "don't look..", "don't speak..", "don't touch..", "don't eat..", etc, you get the gist nah . So just as God is above the Law(sin), you the believer are also above the same law. You have the liberty to look, to speak, to think, to eat the things you were forbidden by this law from doing without feeling guilty in your conscience that you'd done something against the divine laws. You have become equal to god by having the same sinless conscience as God. This is the starting point of True christianity.

turnstoner:

How does a mistake show that God exists?

Did you do any science at all or were you busy singing praises unto the lord in school?

Bros, He was busy singing praises to God.

How people just make make a boast of their ignorance. Next, he'll be thanking God for some unfortunate conjoined twins.

FOLYKAZE:

Ooman is a yoruba guy. Im a yoruba too. Whats wrong in finding sense in our spirituality?

This is yoruba not Igbo....the lost generation jew. Your language, culture, traditional and spirituality is lost.....dont troll here and go find your world.

Suddenly you have turned from bashing christianity to bashing the igbo, yet again distracting from the beauty of this thread. Maybe you are incapable of understanding that I don't need to be yoruba to enjoy/learn yoruba spirituality/mythology. I hope whatever you write next would be in promoting more learning of what the OP has started, instead of looking for a fight with christianity or with igbos. Cheers.

Ubenedictus: wow, great work, shongo is a bit of irony, how come the orisa who advises against rash decisions is in charge of an overcharge and raging force like thunder.
A yoruba man once argued with me that sopono is small pox and not an orisa, how did so many orisas become unpopular.
I thought olokun was alway a she.
Anyway good job.

Now these are the kind of questions/comments that bring about more analysis and learning, and more respect despite your religious/irreligious leaning. Nice.

Nice. Every once in a long while, nairaland surprises me by producing a beautiful thread like this one. Welldone @OP. Unfortunately The two idiots above me have already started trolling this thread and causing distractions from learning yoruba tradition/mythology/spirituality/ancestry. Please if you wanna bash christianity(as usual) go create a separate thread instead of digressing this one.

Now I wish somebody would create an igbo version of mythology.

@OP using "backhand" tactics to bash Jehovah's Witness. The development of the "Jehovah" name was a scholastic venture, not a doctrinal one. Jehovah is derived from nomenclature, not from a system of doctrines. It doesn't matter matter if this name was produced by an atheist, a moslem, Buddhist or Christian, it is still a scholatic product. It's like saying a computer should form part of christian/islamic doctrine because a christian/moslem invented the computer, this doesn't make sense.

plaetton:

Funny.
Everything I post is illogical to you, even though as a Christian, you are not required to be logical.

The very hilarious thing about Okeyxyz's post is that he completely agrees with every thing I wrote but still felt compelled to attack me personally for lamenting the national shame.

But where else could I do that than a public forum such as this?

Bros, your imaginations must be running out of control. How do I possibly agree with you? You are an atheist which shapes your opinion of TB Joshua. I am a religious guy which also shapes my opinion of TB Joshua. We both dislike him for reasons which are mutually exclusive, how can we possibly agree?

Surely, that is someone with a big chip on his shoulder. I know where it's coming from because I had been rather harsh to him on our previous encounters.
I guess he doesn't forget easily.

His ramblings did not make any sense whatsoever, except of course, expressing his deep animosity. Now, talk about low self-esteem?.

Not only are your imaginations out of control, but they deceive you also. I personally don't recall (perhaps you could remind me) any encounter with you that is worthy of any grudge. I just don't take you serious enough to engage you frequently on nairaland, simples!!. I actually clicked on this thread because it was titled like some intellectual article, perhaps from some smart social observer, in some reputable publication.

Now, what I hate most in my life are lies, especially against me.
I challenge Mr Okexyz to kindly past the thread and post he referred to where I stated that I joined atheism because it was trending in Europe and America.
If not, shame on him for lying just for cheap shots.

Okay, looking back at my post, I made a mistake by saying it was your sole reason for turning to atheism. So I hereby correct myself: You said it was one of your reasons for turning to atheism. Happy??

Logicboy03:


Talk about a senseless post.

Even Americans dont like what Jerry Springer represents. Have you seen any respectable American on that show? Oprah? Obama? The show is for trash people who have no future ambition.

Now is that the same like Nigeria where we have celebrities and important people bowing down to these false prophets in monumental s.tupidity.

You sir, are a clown

You sir, are an olodo!!, Americans don't take Jerry Springer show seriously, yet it's been running for over twenty years now. How do you think any tv show in America is able to maintain such longevity if not that subscription dollars are paying for it? This show is frequently being compared to Opera Winfrey show in terms of influence on american society. Like it or not, this show actually engages a huge number of people, not only in America but globally, just like TB Joshua engages people, Jerry gets interviewed on top news agencies like cnn, bbc, abc, etc. Bros, do some research.

SMH @ the OP. OP exhibits the typical symptoms of abject inferiority complex. The OP is so lacking in self esteem, so ashamed of his racial and cultural identity/origins that his is angered that some people(TB Joshua, Jim Iyke, etc) have managed to bring to light the same attributes he has sought so much to hide.

So you've watched the Jerry springer show, seen how unbelievably silly the whole logic and scenario is, how people come on air to trade blows and make a shame of themselves, etc, etc, yet you give it a pass, you let it slide, you forgive them by saying "Oh, it's the jerry springer show..", you did not judge america by the rubbish and shame displayed on the jerry springer show and other silly talk shows and reality tv shows abounding on american airwaves. But now enters the TB Joshua show, you refuse to let it slide, you decide this is an assault on nigeria's image, you weep that your demons has been exposed to the world and you have been made a laughing stock. Bros, why don't you wave it aside with the same levity as you do with the Jerry Springer show?? You cannot because deep down inside, you have very serious low self esteem issues, that is why you are so sensitive to silly matters such as the TB JOshua show which you feel reflects badly on you as a black man and as a nigerian, You believe your oyibo friend will judge you by the embarrassing displays of TB Joshua and our Nigeria celebrities. In short, you have no authentic identity of yourself, you are defined by trends, public opinions, celebrity craze, propaganda, mob frenzy, etc. I remember a particular thread you started many months ago, where you announced (with pride) that the reason you turned to atheism was because it was the trend in europe and america, "GAWD!!!" where is your own self determination?? Everything you do seems to be to identify with the "cool" crowd(ie: europe and america), So you come here crying, spewing your woes and misfortune that TB Joshua has embarrassed you. Bros, You need deliverance.

And before some other mumus come here to accuse me of being a TB Joshua follower, know now that I don't give a rat's a.rse about that man, infact f@ck him, he's a false prophet(though a rich powerful one ), but then the world is full of believers of falsehood, so it's only natural that a false prophet emerges to be their king.

@OP

Actually, the bible excerpts you used has nothing to do with atheism, especially "the fool says there is no God " verse that Christians always use to refer to atheists. But I'll explain later, no time now..

NL member:

Lol... Dem say post picture you come here dey toast babe.
Yeye man.

And Why not? Is toasting forbidden in Christianity? She could be flesh of my flesh nah..

Marthakings: Pose and take a picture for Jesus

Fine girl. Abeg where is this your church? I need to come check you out more

@PAGAN, @Uyi, @macof

I expect this sort of reaction from you guys. It's the normal reaction you get from a conventional minded person(the bible says carnal minded ). You minds have been trained to think in a linear, physical, scientific manner and you reject any other form of reasoning that does not fall in line. However, spiritual people like moi understand there are other forms of operations apart from what is physically/scientifically or conventionally acceptable.

Now conventional thinking tell us that if Mr-A was born before Mr-B, then Mr-A is older and deserves more respect than Mr-B right? But spiritual people know it is not necessarily so. Take the yoruba traditional regard for twins for instance, they know that though taiwo was born before kehinde, but actually kehinde is the older of the two, and that he(kehinde) sent taiwo to check-out the world first before he(kehinde) comes out. Nice!! init?? . Jesus also understood this principle when he said "before Abraham was born, I am.."(John 8:58) , and the people then thought him to be insane, just like you guys think I am insane by writing what I wrote (mehn!!, I'm on fire!! ). So the fact that one person or institution came before another does not necessarily mean it is more authentic than the later. It could be that the later sent the former to prepare the way for it's(the later) arrival. This principle is universal in all spheres of hierarchy, eg: You don't go to see the president directly, you must first go through his protocol officers, secretaries, security, etc. That you have seen these other officers first does not make them more authoritative than the president. This is how it is with spiritual matters too.

So pagans discovered science, mathematics, medicine, etc, I don't dispute this. My position is that these things must first be in place before the true christ doctrine(again, not conventional christianity, it seems you missed this emphasis in my second post) arrives.

I have a million more mysteries I could share with you guys, but you wouldn't understand them, they'd be foolishness to you. (Matthew 7:6, 1 Corinthians 2:14)