Everybody read well ooooooo.

Somebody shouldn't come later to tell us that Amodu is a very good disco dancer and that she loves all his dance steps.

I think she got some things wrong there.

Its not about the education, though it can help in some cases.

A number of peeps who embrase religion based terrorism are actually very educated.

Still wondering how a 'logical' mind would think that question actually debunks religion.

Amelian:
Oga Bello, is indeed Oga... At least he took care of his children without complaining , woman what are u bringing to the table, if i marry you.
See how fresh and cool headed they all look... And nobody hear their voice outside, cause their dad is more than responsible.

Most men of these days are just so lazy and selfish... U never born, just to marry, u are asking the woman what are u bringing to the table... I wonder why God didnt bring me in the early generation where men are Men...marriage has lost its value these days, because the men are not willing to be the head anymore.
My late dad had 17of us and took care of all of single handedly until after we graduated from school, some of us went to Universitites, some polytechinics.. With such dad as my role model, u can imagine how perplexed i will look at a guy that will ask me what are u bringing to the table

For real?
Isnt your wife meant to support discreetly, must she be delegated a certain financial duty in the home?

Oga Bello, i duff my hat for you ooo
God almighty will continue to bless and empower you, amen.

Getting set to be a lazy house wife?

Even those days, men don't get married to lazy women who can't work at the farm.

truthislight:


So, from the above, it is very clear what your own deduction is.

you have made the following obvious from your post:

1. That giving of free will is a function of love.

2. that it will be impossible to know if some one loves you from the heart or that their show of love is an expression of fear.

3. That it will be impossible to know if the person's affinity is because of selfish accruement.

4. Hence, the giver of freewill is then not necessarily Slow considering that rationally most people feel they should not create what that could decide to destroy them.
,.............,..........................................

All that ^ haven't been considered.

1. Will you give freewill to your creations? the ability for them to turn against you should they so wish?

2. Does it make sense to do that to you considering the above? ^^^

3. To you, will it make business sense to do so? (give freewill to your products that they can turn against you).

Let's talk.

1) Will I give freewill to my creatures, such that they can turn against me if they so desired?

Well, I can only give freewill to creatures I love specially. I repeat, I MUST love them specially to grant them the freedom to go against what I want them to do, as it would require a great deal of patience to do this. Without that much love, I would be destroying and recreating those creatures, all too frequently.

Its just like having my vehicle choose to do whatever it likes, even doing stuff that I did not design it for, all in the name of freewill. I will definitely destroy the car in no time because it is useless to me. But if I have a special love for the car, I may just choose to allow it do stuff with the hope that it would, some day, love me enough to do as I ask.

2) The only sense I can make of it is LOVE. With love, I can understand why it is necessary for the creatures to have freewill, even if it means going against my will.

3) Hehehehehe...give freewill to my products?

No rational businessman would attempt to do that. Every rational businessman is out to make profit. To do this, there is a need to make products the consumers believe they need. For them to need those products, the products would necessarily need to conform with the desire(s) of the consumers.

If the products are granted freewill, then it would mean they can decide to please the consumers or not. Not pleasing them would lead to a dip in profit which may in turn put the businessman out business. So it won't make much business sense to give products the freedom of choice.

What exactly is secular or worldly music? We could say secular music is one that does not have a religious undertone to it. Probably, we could say a music that does not mention the name of God or anything related to God directly in it.

Now, if I catch my daughter singing the popular song:

I love you...
You love me...
We are as happy as can be...
With a great big hug and a kiss from me to you...
Won't you say you love me too?

should I scream blue murder and stop her from singing it because the song is not by a gospel artiste? Or should I stop her from singing it because the song in itself is secular? I am very sure an Atheist wouldn't mind having that song as his or her ring tone.

Better still, should I stop playing the below song:

All is right...
On the golden gate Chicago mourn as a poor little baby child is born in the ghetto...
...and his mama cried...for there's one thing that she told me, there's another little hungry mouth to feed...in the ghetto..
People don't you understand, the child needs an helping hand...for you are gonna be an angry young man some day...
If you look at you and me...and what you try to see...
Do we simply turn our heads and look the other way?...

because it does not mention God?

My point is, we tend to get some things wrong from the get go. Being a Christian shouldn't make one a recluse or stop one from enjoying some very good songs because the songs are not inherently gospel.

The only kind of songs a good Christian should avoid are songs that are vulgar, contains profanity and are downright anti-God.

If a song doesn't affect your faith or is not 'offensive' then by all means, enjoy it.

PS: Your post did not unravel any 'foolishness' in God's protection.

Who is really free...

Food for thought I guess.

Personally I would say freedom comes to those who choose to have it. Though the statement seem to beg the question but again it depends on the kind of freedom we are talking about.

From your post, I'd presume you refer to a freedom that cannot be influenced by a third party. A freedom that every man, woman or child is born with...a freedom to choose whom or what to be afraid of.

That kind of freedom has very little or nothing to do with whom one choose to worship or not worship. The freedom is not a sacred preserve of any one group. It is a freedom that the individual must decide to have or not have.

The fact that some Christians or Religious individuals decide to live every passing day in fear, does not necessarily mean that every Christian lives that way. I'd say if one calls himself a Christian but lives in fear then that individual is not a good Christian.

In same way, an Atheist or irreligious individual who lives in fear, cannot be said to be that good an Atheist or irreligious.

So if you see someone who you think lives his or her life in fear just because he or she calls on the name of Jesus at every turn, don't think that Religion or Christianity made the individual that way. The individual chose to act that way and should be responsible for the act.

Makes me wonder though how you know for sure that some religious exclamations are consciously done out of fear. Anyways...another food for thought I guess.

"Hypothetical blind and deaf man"

I don't understand.

truthislight:




LOL. Actually, I really did enjoyed reading your post as your mind was working extra time to resolve a perceived conflict-ion conflicting from deep withing you. Good one.

I agree with you for the Most part, especially on this: "Granting such kind of freedom presupposes a being that is necessarily Holy". To me, the above is a rational conclusion.

However, will withholding of freewill implies that humans will not wash their clothes even when they are still told to do so?



Well, as interesting as your take is, a close observation on nature and meditating on it may seem to point to the possibility that they can be told what to do and they will just follow. that can imply telling them to go wash their clothes, take their baths, etc. LOL. How
will they know when to stop

SMH seriously. Well, what say you?

Do i here see love in the endowment of humans with freewill??

Waiting.

Peace.

Well when I mentioned the washing of clothes, bathing etc I actually wanted to paint a scenario where no human being can be held accountable for its actions. No matter what the person does, whether a decision to be clean or dirty, the individual cannot be held accountable because all its decisions are made by me.

If I make all the decisions, it follows that I am the one who is actually doing the cleaning and the rest of the chores. Is it not amazing that in military court marshals, the individual who gives the orders, bears the full burden of guilt, depending on the extent of freedom at the disposal of the lower ranking officer?

Love and freewill?

Well, I don't believe love can exist without freewill. If I meet a girl whom I am desperately in love with but I put a gun to the ladies head and in the process, she professes love to me. How would I be able to tell if she actually loves me or she is just afraid of me? Precisely, it is impractical for me to say without giving her the freedom to choose.

If freedom is essential for showing love, then think of the individual who created freewill. It is only so true that freewill can only be created by one who is desperately in love and who is all too willing to find out the extent to which it's love is reciprocated. This being cannot definitively know those who return its love without granting them the freedom to decide whether to love it or not.

PS: I can only conclude that freewill is an act of love.

It is not okay o. Don't mind those who ask you to start from somewhere.

If my security guard who is very uneducated can get 20k a month, I wonder why you would want to accept that.

Abeg there are jobs that can offer you better....even some temporary jobs.

jayriginal:


There's nothing to think about here. It's like an armed robber saying a person chose to die because they refused to surrender their money to him.

If you search the forum, this freewill argument has been thrashed out, I don't have the strength or desire to do much typing.

Armed robber??

I rest my case.

jayriginal:


Coercion doesn't necessarily have to be physical. By making alternatives unattractive you are coercing a person into making the choice you wish.

PS: @Make alternatives unattractive...

Most times doing what is appropriate is unattractive but it doesn't mean we are forced to do the alternative.

We still have to make our own choices.

jayriginal:


Coercion doesn't necessarily have to be physical. By making alternatives unattractive you are coercing a person into making the choice you wish.

Nah.

Punishing an individual implies that the individual did something I'd prefer it didn't.

If I want the individual to do wrong and I go ahead to punish the person then that makes me a monster.

In this case, coercion would fly if I make the individual do wrong but this is not the case as there is an altetnative ...doing what I consider to be right.

If the individual does right by me, it won't get punished. So going against what I hold as right is actually the height of freedom.

Think about it.

If I am creating humans then I'd have no option but to grant them freewill, otherwise I'd be creating toys or something close to that.

Humans, by definition, are gifted with the ability to think for themselves and act based on their thoughts. Without this ability, a human siezes to be that...human.

However, if I am responsible for creation, would I grant any being the ability to act in a manner most pleasing to it? Irrespective of whether the beings choices are not in consonance with mine? I'd probably not.

I am a very impatient person, and I have very little tolerance for rubbish. Based on this, I would not grant any other being the freedom to choose. Otherwise I'd be destroying and creating humans every other day.

But again that would pose a major problem for me. If there are no free beings then I will be responsible for everything. I'd bath them, cloth them, do their jobs for them etc...that would be very tiring for me.

So maybe because of that, I may just grant the freedom and stick with destroying them, every other day when I find their Bshit intolerable. Lol.

I just realised that granting that kinda freedom presupposes a being that is necessarily Holy. I don't know about you mehn but that's my thought.

jayriginal:
How can it be free will if you punish certain choices?

Punishment for choices that are considered wrong does not necessarily mean a deprivation of the ability to choose.

The fact that you chose without someone forcing that choice on you, actually defines freewill.

Freewill is the freedom to choose not freedom from punishment.