₦airaland Forum

What exactly is the question?

Speeechless3:
None has answered my questions.

Still waiting

Omudia11:
God is awesome

Hahahaha. You are really funny. Na the only thing wey you see grab from the article be that?

urheme:
Sir plaetton...the power of God is coming for you.....you will use your intelligence for God.....this manifestation will not tarry.

i have spoken..and it will not return empty.....God does honour this kind of prophetic utterances.

better days ahead for you Sir.

The day wey Baba Plaetton go turn born again eh, I go know say rapture is truly at hand.

otemanuduno:
I have done the following transactions:

Adesewa, Lordcenturion, Joseff14, Jude, Gbenga and Chukwudi.
I am left with these four people: Goddy, Realmindz, CEOMYN and Kingjahzmineking. Pls be patient all, though Realmindz hasn't sent his account details yet.

For others who are asking for theirs, another time could be your time. Resources are limited, but there's always time some other days.

How you come create this kind list you no include my moniker?

JackBizzle:
Atheists; "Atheism has no creed or doctrine"

KingEbukasblog's translation; "Atheism lacks morality therefore, communist atheists murdered millions of people"

Lol. Atheism was their animus.

CONFUSSEEED:
Why is it that people talk without reasoning these days? Have u seen an atheist give to a church before? Did you see me discredit Christianity in any way in my post? With or without my money God remains God. I ask simply on the basis of would it be wrong if I asked for my money back since the church seems to no longer be interested in the project.

Abeg matured christians and intelligent people, please I need your opinion on this?

Simply ask them for your money back. You may have to change where you worship though.

promise10:
lol.


in atheists voice:
"Bleep YOU!! That's nollywood script being played here!! these theistic guys are gullible!! it was staged!! oh my seun, hardmirror, what do you have to say. oh my shit! Africans are gullible!! "


just imagine the rage, that's exactly how they sound. oya, atheists can come after me, let's do this.

Why do you always say nonsense things?

I still don't know why having a child is a do or die affair.

ambassagod:
but can you tell the science behind the event you watched ?

Is that science?

Why are you bringing these threads to the front board?

KingEbukaNaija:
woah !!!!

blueAgent:
The Nobel Prize laureate in Literature Thomas Stearns Eliot in his 1948 book Notes Towards the Definition of Culture, credited the prominent Christian influence upon the European culture:[9] “ I am talking about the common tradition of Christianity which has made Europe what it is, and about the common cultural elements which this common Christianity has brought with it. If Asia were converted to Christianity tomorrow, it would not thereby become a part of Europe. It is in Christianity that our arts have developed; it is in Christianity that the laws of Europe have--until recently--been rooted. It is against a background of Christianity that all our thought has significance. An individual European may not believe that the Christian Faith is true, and yet what he says, and makes, and does, will all spring out of his heritage of Christian culture and depend upon that culture for its meaning. Only a Christian culture could have produced a Voltaire or a Nietzsche. I do not believe that the culture of Europe could survive the complete disappearance of the Christian Faith.[. . .] The Western World has its unity in this heritage, in Christianity and in the ancient civilisations of Greece, Rome, and Israel, from which, owing to two thousand years of Christianity, we trace our descent."

Are you the same person as Tellemall? You spew the same kind of rubbish.

Follow do wetin? Weyrey

notoriousbabe:
abi messi follow do?

Have they met before? Shhh

ItsQuinn:
Again?

I watched the game, the little boy literally refused to leave Messi. He had to be carried off the pitch by the referee.

KingEbukasBlog:
Literal interpretation is

1. It was pre-incarnate Christ talking

2. It was theophany

Nobody is insisting that either the literal or metaphorical view of the text is incontrovertibly true Simple


And I'm not a deist . I'm just fascinated by deism .

Damogul disagrees with the highlighted. I am not familiar with the term 'theophany' and I am not in the right frame of mind for googling 'things'. A little explanation is required.

damogul:
Do you know what Rhema is? You saw me mention Rhema there did you not?

I did and I actually wish you did not, as it makes continuing my line of query unnecessary.

OtemWonyahweh:
Blessed be Atum, Olorun, Chukwu, Oghene, Iweya

You seem to be cool with all other presentations of the Divine. What is it about the Bible's presentation that 'enrages' you?

damogul:
Do you think this is the first time i am seeing that scripture or the first time i have been asked about it? Dude i am a bible scholar duly mentored and brushed up by Benson idahosa in all nations for Christ bible institute. I do not guess Gods word i know it by revelation for every word comes with a rhema...

This suggests that you were taught. Already prepared answers were given to you. Why do you think they are true? I have a feeling that some some other Bible Schools would interprete it as literal.

damogul:
A hand is a covering! It does not mean a literal hand. I already explained what he meant by face. Face is the beginning its like saying HEAD or TAIL. Moses requested to see his glory and he cannot do this without showing him the beginning and the end of God...in other words ALL ABOUT HIM which is impossible for a man to see and yet live.

Read my initial post again and put it next to this one. The problem you atheists always have is the inability to understand Gods words in relation to his person.

I believe the next logical question would be 'how do you know this' ? How does one determine what parts of the Bible are literal and those that are not?

dalaman:
Soon he'll be a Christain scientologist.

I think Ebuka wants to leave Christianity (at least the fundamental pentecostal type). He just does not know how to go about it.

JhyMedex:
Lol.. Yea right .. I think you got a better sense of humor Dan I though ...

Arsenal are synonymous to faltering.. I however think this current side got some kinda mettle...
Although we've had a couple of injuries in some key positions so far dis season.. The lads have managed to stay unbeaten in d league.. Well save that opening day debacle..

What u say?..

Lol...Yesterday's game must have answered your question. There's something champions have that Arsenal lack- 'grit', and it's the manager's fault. There's a kind of aggressive aura that top coaches transmit to their players. Wenger lacks it. Arsenal will NEVER win any major trophy as long as he's in charge.

Deicide:
Sometimes if i wan laugh i go just put that channel

I actually find it disgusting. I was watching one where a lady was chewing ice cubes as a result of demonic possession. Very disgusting stuff.

MrMontella:
check your mentions...
I know you love listing out logical fallacies to appear smart
Even though you're a well known commiter of fallacies...

Flesh and blood could not have revealed this to you...I thought I knew fallacies until I met that guy.

DeepSight:
And that has everything to do with science.



In the first place, this was not the statement for which the issue of logic and science arose.

In the second place, I make that statement with reference to energy and power - and how these require a source. In case it missed you, the word "heartbeat" there refers not only to your physical heart beat, but more importantly to the living energy that rests within you and enables you to be alive in the first place.

That living energy has a source and that is what I referred to.

What the heck is living energy and how did you arrive at it? Logic? Do plants and animals possess this energy? What about bacteria and fungi? Obligate intracellular parasites (eg viruses) are only alive when they are in a living host; does this 'energy' abandon them when they suddenly are, for one reason or the other expelled from their host only to reappear when they find another host? How do you know?

Sorry, I was banned by the moderators on some trumped-up charges... Back to the matter...

DeepSight:
How did I express it?
I spoke about philosophic logic. Perhaps the word "philosophic" conjures images of some fantasist staring into space and imagining things?

The law of cause and effect is at the fulcrum of logic and philosophic thoughts in this matter. So are several other laws. I thus have no idea how you can attempt to escape the obvious with this weak appeal to the words "as you have expressed it". In what way did I use the word logic other than to suggest its self evident meaning?

Your man, on the other hand, stated explicitly that science has nothing to do with logic. That is the most asinine comment I have ever read on this forum or probably ever heard in my life. But it does not surprise me: atheists on this forum have been so rabid in the past that they have even argued extensively and vociferously against the law of cause and effect! In so doing they have gone so far as to claim that quantum physics destroys the law of cause and effect, and also shows that things may pop into existence out of nothing. I laboriously showed that that they were very wrong on the science of the matter, nevertheless they carried on. I say this just to let you know that when people become rabid about any topic, they will deny even the most glaringly obvious facts, and controvert even the simplest truths, no matter how id.iotic it may make them appear.

For at that point, they have themselves become fundamentalist fanatics who will do or say anything to advance the view that God does not exist.

Logic simply put is the study of principles governing correct inference. When you begin to say things like; 'your heartbeat is proof of God' and then proceed to hurl insults at everyone who holds a contrary view one is then left to wonder how you define your own logic. Perhaps you'd do us the favour of defining logic in your own simple terms.

DeepSight:
You are the one being dishonest.
For even between the red and the blue, logic perforce is applied to arrive at anything.

Science relies on logic, and that he could say what he said is a sad commentary in desperation.
You are free to have your opinion though.

Personally I don't know how logic can be applied in the absence of facts. Logic is only applied in relation to observed things already. Therefore his statement pushes the boundaries of all absurdity.

As I said: you are free to soothe him if you wish. It would not change the obvious.

Logic ''as you have expressed it''. Did you miss this part of my comment?

DeepSight:
A curious spirit may have been in malevolent attendance around your eyes and within your mind when you read what he wrote, I dispel the spirit and I herewith reproduce again what he wrote and the lines that followed it. I highlight them specially, so please note and read carefully and slowly:

"No scientific fact is based on logic. Am sure if you are a scientist, you know steps things have to go through to become a fact right? AND LOGIC IS NOT ONE OF THEM

Logic is only applied when you have no fact or evidence AND normally, such things can't happen logically, so you disprove them, not the other way round, using philosophical logic to "claim to know" of a God!"

I believe he was referring to the steps in the scientific method of establishing facts; observation, hypothesis, experimentation and conclusion (arrival at facts). He meant that logic as you have expressed it can only be employed when these steps are not possible; ie God in this case, cannot be observed using any of the known senses hence your resort to logic. Attempting to portray his position differently is nothing but dishonest distortion.

KingEbukasBlog:
That is not cherry picking . Choosing what to reply and neglect in an arguer's post is not cherry picking .

When the two sentences are clearly not independent of one another? Do you apply this same logic when same is done to the Bible?

KingEbukasBlog:
That is not cherry picking

Yes. It's picking oranges.

DeepSight:
I did not say any such thing - please go back and read exactly what he said.

Yes. And you conveniently ignored the next sentences in his post. I believe you know what ''cherry-picking'' is.