₦airaland Forum

@huxley,

huxley:
Have you got any more information about his position? I know there was a books ghost-published by some Christian writers detailing his conversion. Have you read it?

Lol, no - I haven't read Flew's book myself other than the reviews about the book. Nor am I qite aware of Christian writers who make such assumptions and publish them on Flew's account.

In any case, I was wondering how often is the case that many people often refer to Christians as "faith-heads" as if we are inimical to "reason". To make such an assumption of a "transition" is to pit faith against reason and thus make the case for Barker a very meaningless one indeed. Why? Because it is weak to assume that Christian theists do not reason and so should make the transition thereto in disfavour of faith. The point is that theists are thinking and reasoning people - so no transition there. To argue on such grounds is to make Barker a runaway on cheap arguments.

@huxley,

Precisely what I was thinking you might come to:

huxley:
San Diego has never feature in my dreams, as far as I can remember. Neither has anyone from San Diego, never mind Mr Vilayanur. Simply because, this city and its inhabitants are not part of my daily conscious experience.

I know people who have not had dreams of the sort you narrowly described, and yet they experienced events in their lives far removed from their daily conscious experiences. One should not assume that everything can just be narrowed the way naturalists tend to think.

huxley:
Dreams are essentially your wakeful thoughts played out at your moments of rest.

That's quite simplistic and untenable in the reality of events that prove to the contrary. Oneirologists (those who study dreams) do not think that is what dreams are about, though. You may want to do a little study on that, besides the way naturalists think about dreams.

huxley:
So the poster dreaming about mosques is not surprising. He is clearly a religious person and he probably comes across mosques, churches, and other religionist in the course of his daily life.

Lol, there are many people who have NEVER been religious and have had dreams ofa religious nature. There are also many people who have not been inclined to crime who have also dreamt about their involvement in scenarios as such. Others who were not ever involved in farming have found themselves running very large farms (speaking of myself). So, to have these ideas you have posed just doesn't satisfy the real purpose of issues like this.

Anyhow, @idupaul. . . great to see how you're coping. I won't make so much noise, but be refreshed and continually strengthen in Christ. Much blessings.

@huxley,

huxley:
Interesting. Have you ever had any dreams about Mr Cheungsui who lives in a small town in north eastern China?

If not, I wonder why?

It's easy to pose such questions to others when you know you haven't done so yourself. I may be mistaken; and if you have, try this one:

Have you ever dreamed of Mr. Vilayanur in San Diego late last autumn? If not, why not?

@huxley,

huxley:
But as a general rule of living, you should always prefer the natural over the supernatural.

That may sound so nice, but it does not balance off in the scheme of things when dealing with so many non-natural phenomena. There are issues that the "natural" does not account for and which seriously afect our lives. It would be unwise to ask people who know these matters first hand to really on the weaknesses of natural cures to deal with what is [i]super[/i]natural. I know as a naturalist, all there is in this world seem to be merely natural. No worries. Actually, there are many scientists today who are ringing a clear note that there are indeed issues which cannot be accounted for by "natural" means. If you carefully do a little research in this area, you might come off surprised.

Cheers.

huxley:
All I can say is that if a faith-head like Barker can make the transition to reason, so can anyone amenable to reason.

@huxley,

Lol, I've heard so many people make such statement on the assumption that "faith-heads" are not reasonable people or do not reason at all. Please check again: the real issues when it comes to "reason" might surprise you, though. I haven't read Dan Barker that much; but those who assume that having faith is controverted to reason are living in illusion.

Dan Barker may argue long and hard - reasons best known to him, certainly; especially after 20 years walking as a faith-head himself. But hang on: there is another philosopher who walked for many years as an atheist, but recently came to the conclusion that there must be a God. Who's this? Anthony Flew. No, I have not said he's a theist or Christian. But one just wonders why this 'statistics' seem so exhilarating to many of us without asking the real questions of the day! I think it's just about time for people to get serious and stop ducking behind the palm shades of such stale news. Dan Barker hasn't proven that the supernatural does not exist - he may argue against it; but an argument in itslef is not "proof" against the object of his argument.

@Nimshi and all,

I'm sure that huxley didn't intentionally invade this thread; so could we excuse the last two posts as asides? In anycase, we shall take the interesting points he raised to the appropriate thread(s). Thank you for your understanding.

Hi huxley,

Yes, I'm a bit free just now - the papers I have this week are walk overs; so I find time to relax with other stuff. I trust you're doing well?

huxley:
Are you a biblical literalist? In other words, do you consider the Genesis accounts (for example) as literal historic events or do you treat them allegorically (metaphorically).

That is a good question, and I was coming to it someday, albeit in another thread so that I don't help to derail this one. I'll just say briefly until such a thread comes up much, much later: it all depends on what is involved by "Biblical literalist". The Genesis account[b]s[/b] (pl.) have both literal and allegorical/metaphorical narratives. Secondly, for Christians who interprete these accounts differently from what I hold, suffice to say that I'm not an authority on Biblical eschatology - and that is why I've learnt not to overwhelm anyone or denounce them for what they are persuaded on any matter.


When I do have the time, then it would be quite interesting to dialogue on these issues and see what they hold for us. I already anticipate that we'll all have something to benefit us all either way, especially when the discussions are held in an enabling manner.

Look forward to then,
Warm regards.

@reindeer,

May God continue to enrich your experiences of His grace in Christ. You may not have realized it: but this was never about me - it has always been about Jesus Christ and His wonderful love for us all. I thought I was merely sharing my testimony, but reindeer. . I have to confess to you that your own testimony has touched lives beyond your imagination. Let me explain:

I wish there was a way I could forward some emails of a few people who have commented about you when they tried to encourage me for having shared my testimony. One of them said that she had regarded you as an atheist the first time she read our discussion in another thread - and she was kind enough to let me know that I was quite brash in my tone when I first replied yours. Infact, you had hinted about my tone in your subsequent reposte.

What surprised her was the change and peace that you have found! Although she commented that you came across to her as an honest fellow seeking seriously to find "something", she just could not believe that one person's testimony could bring about such powerful change of heart! So where did you reindeer come in? I'll just post a quote from her email:

________________________________________

. . . if Jesus can do tis for reinder, He can do just
that for me! I have been a careless Christian and
reinder's testimony has touched my life and the
entire family! I am not the same person ever again
and my life will be used to touch another person's.
You should never stop sharing your story, because
if reinder never told his story, maybe I would have
continued with my plan to **************!!
________________________________________

Lol, the highlights are mine, and I didn't want to correct anything (including how she spelt your username). Okay, the ************* was something I also don't want to share publicly, not suitable for public consumption. However, I just wanted you to know that your own story is touching many more people than you realize, reindeer - whether in positive ways or stirring the hearts of others.

I'm thankful for another "friend" who railed baptized me with calumny for leaving my former religion, and at the end he said that it is only a matter of time that that "stupid reindeer of malu will abandon christianity!" There are so many things someone who knows Jesus Christ will face; but even though so many people told me that it was only a matter of time before I ran back to Islam, every single year for the several years I came to know Christ has been glorious!! He has been faithful even in tough times, but I still know that He is Lord indeed.

God continue to strengthen you in all your endeavours - and the glory to Jesus for using your own testimony to help someone else.

Bless you.

Oh thank You Father for today - the 1st of October!
A new deay in a new month in the last quarter of this great year!
You have been so good to us all.
Bless our country for Your Name sake, and let all the glory ever be Yours.
In Jesus Name. Amen.

Hi Nimshi,

Hope you had a good evening yesterday.

Nimshi:
Adam is son of God because he was a special creation of God. The operative word is creation.

I think that is where many people make the mistake. Certainly, all of humanity are created by God; but the qualifier there is how and in what context. This was why I carefully underscored the fact that Adam 'special' in the sense that he was distinct in the way he was created. If one is not careful to observe the specialty of these matter and dwell only on 'creation', then the whole point is missed - and will predictably lead to this inference:

Nimshi:
Does this not also apply to the angels? You've already written that they are spirit beings (if I recall correctly); but they aren't sons because they are spirit beings only, are they? They're "sons" because they were created by God, no?

No, the "sonship" of angels is not predicated merely on their having been created by God. As I remarked earlier, all of humanity are the creation of God - so also are angels as the creation of God. But you notice that each group of beings referred to as "son(s) of God" is based specifically on a special context. Which means that Adam being a special creation (in terms of the way he was created) could not be called "son of God" on the basis of :

~ the Mosaic covenant (upon which Israel became the 'son of God' - Deut. 14:1-2)

~ the New Covenant (upon which believers in Christ are called 'sons of God' - Galatians 3:26)

~ the nature of angels (for it is they who are called "ministering spirits" - Heb. 1:14)

~ the Deity of Christ (for He alone is referred to as "μονογενής" (monogenēs) - John 3:18)

All the above are referred to as "son(s) of God" based specifically on the nature and context of their connections to those terms. Adam is called 'son of God' not on the same basis as are the angels called 'sons of God', for Adam was not made a "flaming fire" - the same term used in describing angels in their nature (Psalm 104:4 and Heb. 1:14). However, Adam is 'son of God' by virtue of his having been specially created by God in the way described.

@javalove,

How body?

javalove:
anyway pilgim i would get in touch with ya,

You're welcome to do so anytime.

javalove:
its like u feel we are bugging u on this forum and u making them feel we are uneasy. its no so aburo. u are not the first to leave islam so why the worry?

I have not bothered you guys, so what's been disturbing you that I suddenly have become a reference point for your troubles? I never claimed to have been the first to leave Islam; nor would I be the only one to ever do so. So, why is my own case such  problem to you guys?

javalove:
what me i really want to know, as i do when i meet ple that leave islam is what u saw, heared, felt or knew that made u leave islam.

Those are the experiences I wanted to share so that you guys would see it once for all; but what is the problem with doing so that you guys can't let the thread be before you begin to exhibit such restlessness until it is locked? If you really wanted to know anything as you indicated, would it not have been easier to do so without the restlessness from Muslims that would not let me be? It's not as if I even said anything profound about Islam before I received emails calling me names - and in this thread it shows. Yet, me I no dey worry, because such things are under me.

javalove:
all i can read from ur post na love love love, he saved me, and all that,

Yes, and more love - instead of the legacy of deep seething hate I had towards Christians and Jews that I was highly praised for before I converted.

javalove:
u were eaither a lazy non-practicing muslimah as opposed to what u claimed or u knew just nothing about it.

Thank you - it's nothing new, because a lot of Muslims have said even worse. I'm surprised yours is even mild. However, it does not change anything about my former experience, and those with whom I have shared off-the-forum have not returned to say a word after their aspersions.

javalove:
from ur posts about islam, i can deduce therein that u knew absolutely nothing about islam.

Thank you again - shows you had not read anything about my posts and just like to be pitifully noisy here.

javalove:
i would contact u sha, at least make we dey chat.

Welcome anytime. Jesus loves you.

@Nimshi,

Nimshi:
Let me offer an answer to my question (so that if it is wrong, you make take it up from there): Adam is different from all other humans because he was created directly by God and because he wasn't created from any existing human material. (Eve, I understand, was created directly by God, but with a "rib" from Adam). So, isn't this what makes Adam "special"?

I see your point, and this is what theology helps us understand. Adam is indeed special, and that my be seen in various ways - his special place as man created from no existing human material; his special place as head of the human race; and his special place as a reference point in contrast to the Last Adam. All these are ways of viewing Adam's special place in these matters.

However, as regards his appellation as 'son of God', Adam is called such in particular reference to the Genealogy of Christ. The interesting thing is that Luke traces the genealogy back to Adam, while Matthew traces it forward from Abraham. Yet, one who reads carefully would notice here that the styles adopted by both writers is obvious (as mentioned); but Luke aimed to present the true humanity of Christ in as much as he does not deny His deity.

What's the point? Simply this: Luke aimed at showing us that Adam came from God as His special creation, from whom descended Christ.

My vote: looks can be deceiving. ^{>can't find the option to press "vote"<}

Most of the truly holy people I have known do not look like businessmen or corporate moguls.

@davidylan*,

[quote author=davidylan* link=topic=86405.msg2873508#msg2873508 date=1222787803]na wa o. There are more muslims here than the islam section. What draws these people to threads about Jesus Christ so? [/quote]I often appreciate your balance and focus. You've just captured what someone told me while on YIM:

"They are drawn to Jesus. . .
so it's not about you, pilgrim.1.
If it was about you, nobody would have been interested long ago. .
there's power in that Name!"

olabowale:
@Pilgrim.1: « #239 on: Today at 03:37:33 PM »
lol. As much I love you as a daughter or a nice, or a young cousin or a very young sister, I read Arabic. I understand it. I study tafsir. You babe, by Allah is not qualify to teach me anything in Islam; Qur'an, Ahadith, Sirah, etc. I can research what I need to know on my own.

But am going to be in touch with you. Am a sucker for good conversation, from intelligent people. You are very intelligent. However in the matter of religion, you have chosen a wrong path. But it is your choice and I have no need to worry abot it, except the concern that you have been had!

Okay, I hear. Blessings.

@Olabowale,

olabowale:
And by the way, women are always the larger world population anyhow!

Thank you, that has now been confirmed even without a theological debate - by your own words, Islam teaches that women are the majority in Hell. Dear sir, the love of God in Christ will not send me to your Hell, so you can shout it all till your are done.

olabowale:
I will contact you by email. Then you will have no reason not to respond to egbon e o.

If you would, please do so by all means. I did not promise to oblige insults, though. So if you see my YIM icon on and I'm not responding, that indicates that pilgrim.1 does not respond to restlessness, eh?

olabowale:
No one is dogging your footsteps. If anyone should ,it should be me. But it will be hounding.

Okay, as you confirmed it, those who have been asking can now relax about the spirit in your blood.

olabowale:
You may have had this same attitude towards the Christians when you were a muslimah.

That is what I have always admitted to; when I posted it, you guys called me a terrible liar. Now you're happy to do the same and saying that you're hounding me - are you not making my testimony even more authentic? Olabowale, thank you for letting others know what Islam does to people - I don't need to argue it.

The difference now is that I no longer hound Christians and Jews. You may not want to hear this, but I love them so deeply now. . . and also love Muslims no less. Jesus Christ set me free from such a hounding spirit and seething hate.

olabowale:
Which touched your heart? Before you were talking about Jesus. Now you rae talking about "God!" Which God; Jesus, or Father or Holy ghost? Pilgrim, aburo, foju sono kon! You can be all over the map! In Afghanistan of today, the Christians are hard at work to "Christianized" this poor people. Now tell me what has Ahmad Karzai did to the Missionaries who are committing atrocities? Its all on youtube. Watch it for your own conscience.

Thank you again for the slurs. Jesus' love for me is ever so true.

olabowale:
Are you now doing "good," in return to the Jews? I have a good pool of Jews that will deserve "good," from you. Should I send the list of person. Show me that you love me, aburo.

You may hound me all you wish, but I'm guilty of loving you and will always love you in Jesus Christ. Yes sir, I cannot help it, but I owe you nothing but love in Jesus Christ.

olabowale:
Now, we see that you are preaching! Then know that the Lord of Jesus, the One that Jesus cried out to, and said "my God, my God, " on the cross, is the One that we, the Muslims worship, and direct our prayers to. We do not need a patron or intermediary. You, Pilgrim, you are still playing with petron and intermediary. Thats idolworshipping.

Thank you. I would rather be a Christian and love everyone than be devoted to a religious cause that plants hatred against Jews and Christians. Yes, I will always love everybody, regardless whether they are Muslims, friends of the Grail Message, Christians, Jews, atheists, the unloved and uncared for, . . . you name them, pilgrim.1 will always love and not hound them.

God bless you in Jesus Name.

olabowale:
Two, you are too emotional. And emotion does not produce practical benefit for those who exhibit too much of it, in any discuss. When we ask you questions, you do nothing but evade it. Yet you are the one who wa trying to analyse the verse 91 of Surah Mariam as if you an expert and scholar of both Islam and fusat Arabia.

Again, if you want to know anything about Surah Mariam v 91, all you need do is get in touch - is that too much? I'm not emotional, and that's why I'm level headed enough to invite you off-the-forum. Yes, I have refused to entertain arguements from Muslims since I returned because I don't want to encourage you guys to keep lying about anything.

olabowale:
I have news for you, as I believe that it is day time in New york City, right this minute, in truth, you and I, without any ability to refuse will have to be on that Warithduha (A bridge, a passage way, an overpass, etc) over the Fire of Hell. It is a hatman (An already determined thing) decree upon, you and I!

Sorry, I left Islam peacefully for you and if you're toppling over the bridge of Hell, you're going alone without me. Hey, there's a better deal - Jesus Christ saves. No hell over bridge or bridge over hell for those who know Him as Lord and Saviour. So, the warithduha you're screaming here is no worry to me, shalom.

olabowale:
And in 2001, 2008 would have been a long wait, my dear baby pilgrim.1! And in 75 years, you will closer to 100 years old. Then, just maybe, you will know that a god that does not know "the hour," is not worth worshipping. And the power of love of that god is inferior to the God Who is the Owner and Holder of "the hour," and many many more. That God who is the Owner and Holder and Determiner of "the hour," is whom we in Islam are worshipping.

I'm sorry, that god you are preaching gave me more headaches and heartaches while I was knocking my head daily to him. You can ridicule God as much as you like, but I would rather be saved and delivered from such seething hate towards Christians and Jews. Are you not demonstrating the same thing I have often said about the typical Muslim restlessness you're now exhibiting?

olabowale:
Continue and I remember surah Takathur. The surah before surah Asr. Its a very shot=rt surah of 8 verses. It talks about people who indulged in the joy (of various reasons. One of them may be the false salvation of a wrong "God" of this world.

You may refer to Him as a "wrong [b]G[/b]od", but I love Him for His mercy and grace in Jesus Christ.

olabowale:
See that you did not "interprete" or opinionate above? Now try doing the same about Mark 12 verse 29! O ba mi nbe o.

I told you, there's no amount of tricks you would come up with that would draw me into a theological debate with you. None. I am done with muslims who are restless and very irreverent when speaking about God. If that is your legacy in islam, please enjoy it and let me be. Accuse God of all your restlessness, and it takes nothing away from the joy of knowing Jesus Christ as my Saviour.

olabowale:
Thats just lack of experience in speech.

Thank you - the mercy I found in Jesus meets my every need. Jesus is Lord.

@Olabowale,

Good afternoon again. Like I have said so many times, salvation in Christ is not by force of by competition. Since that is what muslims like you on this forum have often tried to represent, sorry you guys should not waste your time.

olabowale:
@Pilgrim.1: « #231 on: Yesterday at 08:43:25 PM »
I thought "Christianity," would mellowed you down, from the days of your Islam, when you you used to overspeak your Christian friends, with rhetorics and information. Didn't your Christian Missionary "teacher," taught you that you can confront the muslims, except that you will find "big resistance?" Aburo, you have to behave like a lamb, while you are actually a lion!

You can resist all you like; but Islam left me nothing to be happy about. I would rather have a heart to love people than hate them - that is what Christ offered me, and I thank God there was no resistance there.

olabowale:
Salvation in Christ, as you Christians are presenting actually more than forcing people. Please go back to the Spanish Inquisitions and all the othr progroms in Europe. Then visit Afghanistan of today. I saw the christians missionaries and their atrocities on the youth of Aghanistan. "You tube" media will present a clear evidenceagainst your statement of the salvation is not by fore. Please have the strength to watch it.

So, what are you doing if not forcing your opinions on me? For what now? Just because I left Islam. Have I gone to the muslim section to type anything there? Why are you forcing yourself to always dog my post with your restlessness? You really cannot hold yourself, you know. . . and as long as you keep confirming that same Islamic restlessness, there's nothing for me to argue to convince anyone about the fact.

olabowale:
You are shouting, aburo. Rora. Pele pele o.
And please continue to share your testimony, soon and don't keep people like Davidylan, Plus_Queen, etc in suspense.

Olabowale, if you have a testimony, go and share it in Islam. I don't know why you guys are too bothered about my life. I left Islam, it did me no good, I was always as restless as you if even not worse. . . and after i met Christ I found nothing attractive in Islam for me to start disturbing you guys. So what is your problem? You guys make me laugh because you will always try to make your own testimony look like you're competing with yourselves. Christians don't have to force themselves to get your attention; and the way you are reacting only shows that there's something about the power of Jesus Christ that you guys cannot resist. Welcome to continue missing your Muslim section. For me, there's nothing attractive there and that's why I won't be missed there, thank you.

olabowale:
I am sure you guys are doing passy passy under under information between the "network," already established. Awa egbo e ni ko je ka join, se lo yarii. And your reason for not talking to me is my Islam. Oga o.

Please help yourself out of your misinformation, please. If there was anything at all, after I previously debated you guys, you posted a thread about a hornet that subsequently disappeared the moment I replied - from that moment you made a new religion of not talking to pilgrim.1. It was only recently that I tried to get your attention in light hearted chats; but as far as my testimony is concerned, you have always shown your restlessness and that is why I have often mellowed so as not to get you rilled up again.

olabowale:
What would Jesus have done? Oh. I remember, he was not a Christian. I know what Saul (Paul) would do. Excatly what you are doing now. One, being deceitfully camouflagging your real intension. If you are intending to convert, then come out to say so. Your Christian ministry teacher is a terrible liar, teaching deceit, while people can read your intention with a need for microscope.

Thank you for all the accusations. So, please tell me - what is so different between you and Abdul now? Tsk-tsk. . . ayinba1, did you say that real muslims never go out to vilify anybody? Thank you all the same. If people read my testimony and are touched without my shouting from a minaret, what is so painful to you about that?

@huxley,

huxley:
Hey, you live and learn, don't you.

You're not kidding me - we all do. Don't ever make the mistake of thinking me a saint or more intelligent. I have been really unpleasant at times; but I've learnt to seek to dialogue with people and am still a disciple of my own advice most times.

Hi @ayinba1,

ayinba1:
@pilgrim1

We muslims know Jesus better than you do, think about it,

First off, I have constantly stated that I'm not in the least interested in getting into a theological debate with Muslims - especially when you guys have not been able to impress your adulators with clear and simple answers. It is always the Muslim thing to seek for a debate, but I'm less inclined to do so these days. The one thing I often do is ask those who are still restless to simply get in touch so that I could share amicably with them about stuff they don't have a clue to.

Second, I'm not interested in arguing back and forth about who knows Jesus more than pilgrim.1 - I've never entered a contest about knowing Jesus; and like I said to javalove, salvation in Christ is not by force or by competition. The moment anyone is displaying such a spirit, they already have wasted their efforts even before they began. So, this competition about who knows Jesus more than the other is a waste of time.

The little I know about Christ has changed my life. I would give nothing in the world to return to my former life while a muslimah. That has always been the point about me. Good if you claim you know Him more than anyone thinks - what's my bother if such knowledge produces nothing but restlessness to be constantly antagonist to Christians?

ayinba1:
what Jesus (AS) called his Creator, sounds closer to ALLAH than "God"

Does "allah" sound close enough to "Abba"? Where in Islam is allah known to be FATHER?

ayinba1:
he didn't speak English, never heard of it.

Nor did He speak Arabic.

ayinba1:
We hope that Allah has mercy upon you so that you are not lost forever.

Thanks, I have extended an invitation to Muslims in love: get to truly know WHO Jesus Christ truly is; one taste of His loving grace and you will never remain the same person far from Him. He loves you - that's my message. Is that too much to digest?

The mercy of God in Christ Jesus is available even now: all yours if you would receive him.

God bless you. Jesus is Lord.

@huxley,

huxley:
The wikipedia article is rather a brief exposition of naturalism. I have got a very good book defending metaphysical naturalism by Richard Carrier.

Lol, I haven't really sat down to digest R. Carrier on his defence of naturalism. He still seems to want to impress his readers with the "-isms" of naturalism. Just as in the definition of atheism that we discussed recently, the one problem that many people struggle with is what exactly these terms mean. Often, when discussing with people, they start from the "-isms" before trying to look at the naturalism itself (same sometimes happens with atheism - people tend to look at the shades of atheism first before struggling to come back to the term itslef).

Anyhow, I was just wondering about this:

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=120610.msg2872605#msg2872605 date=1222775710]Okay, good to know. Just as one could describe me as a theist with particular reference to Christianity and hence Christian theist, would I be correct by any stretch to think about you as an atheist with particular reference to metaphysical naturalism and hence atheistic naturalist?[/quote]Cheers.

@huxley,

Asking questions also involves how those questions are posed. I noticed that people are easily put off where issues are not addressed but the enquirer projects the idea that he simply wants to ridicule what he's enquirying about. This may not necessarily be your posture now, but it goes without saying that we all know the difference between a dialogue and a diatribe. In anycase, let me show you how you would have started out as inviting a dialogue:

huxley:
And that is the question of the nature of humans in heaven. Are those lucky to get into heaven going to do so with their flesh&blood bodies, or just as spirits/souls. If it is just as spirits/souls them why would Jesus be talking about entry into heaven with dismembered bodies?

The highlighted part does invite an enabling dialogue (at least IMHO), and I'm sure that those who are interested would then be able to enter into a discussion thereto. That is why I offered initially that people should be familiar with the term "deixis" when asking questions of this nature.

For answers, you might want to check references such as 1 Corinthians 15. There are answers there to these questions.

helpee:
Time to move on. its obvious you  don't know what to say again so you can pick petty issues while ignoring the main show.

Thanks, I'm done already - nothing worth looking into here. A quick glance at your topic should have helped your reasoning if you had gist. Anyone would have wondered about the connection between Abraham and your herbalist alternative support programme. Pity it was a false alarm. . . which is not unusual. Anyway, enjoy.

helpee:
just remember next  that before you bump into a post and start insisting on BILL GATES as you did yesterday that you are up to the task.

This is hilarious! Are you still nursing bruises from the past? Awww. . . I was long done with that and left it. M-e-n!! I didn't know you could be this petty and still living in yesterday! Ok, does it make you feel better if I apologize for my not accusing and/or lying against Bill Gates? Okay then, I'm sorry, sorry, sorry. . . do you feel better now? Good. Hint: Bill gates has not told you that he's a satanist, so I won't flag up for your camp to accuse him falsely. Sorry again O!

helpee:
i warned you yesterday even agreed with your weak position so that we could moved on but you insisted and now you showing signs of frustration.

Lol, how could I agree with you when the facts clearly did not support your agenda? Won't that be below my station? We could have moved on, helpee, but at what cost - my pretending to subscribe to issues which are not there? No, I'm sorry again, but that is not the sort of discussant I project of myself. I don't go about hyperventilating with false accusations against people. We can move on if the gist invites an acknowledgement of simple truth without false accusations. Where that is vacant, I take my leave.

Cheers.

@huxley,

huxley:
Yes, therationa is tpaine is huxley. therationa was banned for taking a strong stance against the Mohammedans.

Uh-oh! Lol, please pardon my ignorance - I've been much too long gone for a break to have known. Good to have been updated, though - so I'll keep in mind as I peruse other threads.

huxley:
Christian theist and atheistic naturalist, while being precise, are tautological. A naturalist tends to be an atheist, although a deist might also describe herself as a naturalist.

Lol, so which is it? At least I offered that I'm a Christian theist.

huxley:
I like the following definition for naturalism from wikipedia.

Metaphysical or ontological naturalism is any worldview in which the world is amenable to a unified study that includes the natural sciences and in this sense the world is a unity. According to such a view, nature is all there is, and all things supernatural (which stipulatively includes spirits and souls and non-natural values) do not exist, or they are reducible to natural things. It is often simply referred to as naturalism, and occasionally as philosophical naturalism or ontological naturalism, though all those terms have other meanings as well, with naturalism often referring to methodological naturalism. This article presents only a basic outline of the definition and history of metaphysical naturalism and the major arguments for and against it. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_naturalism)

Um, that was not about naturalism but rather about the various shades of the adjectives added to the word to bring out various ideologies (such as metaphysical naturalism). It is the "-isms" of naturalism and not naturalism itself that the article seem to have highlighted.

helpee:
alliance of the defeated

Thanks. Are you satisfied now?

@helpee,

helpee:
i can see your frustration building. on the contrary you bundled your ass into my posts
there is nothing fantastic about your post that i will be pursuing

I hear. Nothing frustrating about me if you're just too unstettled to reason things through.

helpee:
if you care to know, your arguments are usually pretty obvious and when you started with me you thought it was one of those shallow minded you have been showing off to as if you are the only the born again with knowlegde.

I would rather be shallow than plain accusative and lying against people as your arguments show.

helpee:
ive only tackled you for less than 24hrs and you are getting angry.

Lol. . . try harder. I'm not angry; and if I asked you to look carefully before drawing the wrong inference, how does that translate into anger? And oh, you live to 'tackle' me? What a laugh!

helpee:
if you can't survive the heat, too bad. as for me, i am fun.

Good luck to your self-adulation. I must be too boring for not being too self-congratulatory. Enjoy.

Hi @TV01,

Great to see you pop in today. Sure thing, it's a great delight to have you constantly in my prayers. I'm glad to know things are looking up for you now - we all pass through those moments in phases of our lives. You be constantly blessed in Christ. Many hugs.

@huxley,

huxley:
I thought I was rather tamed but persistent on this thread, but not unwelcoming. I know some of my other thread were a lot more strident. Just look at my post under therationa

Wow! I apologise - I missed that actually, although I was wondering if there was a link somehow between therationa and huxley. Anyway, we all learn everyday.

huxley:
As to my worldview, I identify myself as a naturalist (metaphysical naturalist). On the god question, I am an atheist. I do not consider atheism as my worldview, as I derive little from the fact that I am an atheist.

Okay, good to know. Just as one could describe me as a theist with particular reference to Christianity and hence Christian theist, would I be correct by any stretch to think about you as an atheist with particular reference to metaphysical naturalism and hence atheistic naturalist?

@javalove,

How body? I thought about you today and hope you're doing well. I have you in my prayers as well that one day soon the love of Jesus will be your experience.

Regards.

huxley:
Many of these questions remain unanswered!

@huxley,

Yes, most other questions will remain unanswered - until people invite a welcoming attitude to dialogue. However, I've just been thinking lately about something I've asked myself long ago - let me begin by asking this:

What really is your worldview - atheism, deism, or theism?

Hi @huxley,

I think some decorum is very necessary when you actually want people to discuss issues with you. The one thing I avoid in such discussions is the undertones of silliness (I don't mean any insults) that is often mistaken for brilliance. How is it that often id the case that people who are non-religious would take the stance of first projecting a misrepresentation of what they assume to be smart about?

Here's an example:

huxley:
Anyone who has not removed some body parts as a result of the fear of sin, do they get to go into heaven with all their body parts, As Jesus say?

Have you ever heard of deixis? There actually is much we can learn and benefit one another; but as it so happens, I often find that there's always a knack with people to just say whatever comes to mind - not with an intent to actually be wiser at the end of the day; but rather to just be deliberately ridiculous. I don't think that is quite a pleasant attitude to adopt. Many atheists, sadly, are known for this attitude; and I had hoped that by now people would be a bit more open to dialogue and not just throwing words around.

I hope that there'll be a change in postures with a positive leaning. If otherwise, no worries. Do have a good day all the same.