₦airaland Forum

blackcat1:
I rephrase my last sentence

We need to rediscover our true ancestral God or gods. Only then can we find peace and progress.

Ihedinobi: @SNCOQ3

I would like to discuss a bit further on reason, if you don't mind.

Zophar, one of Job's friends asked him an interesting question in Job 11:7. The question is translated in the King James Version thus: "canst thou by searching find out God?"

I have a thought on that question. But I'd like to know what you think first.

Ihedinobi: Marvelous, bro. God bless you for this.

Your position on the existence of degrees of maturity is very sufficient and, taken together with my own position on what is normal to the Christian, tells the believer not to sit on his haunches and make excuses. I thank the Lord for that. It is marvelous indeed.

As for the sufficiency of reason, of course it is not. The only thing I know to be utterly sufficient is God. Reason is a tool and a good one and must be accepted and used as such. So your position on it is very correct.

One reason I am grateful for discussions like this is that we by them gain fresh perspectives and new insights on things we think we know. So I thank you for obliging me.

I exhort that the Christian not shy away from arguments. I exhort also that the Christian not insist on arguments and debates. I exhort that the Christian not run from reason. I exhort also that the Christian not idolize reason.

Are we in agreement, sir?

I appreciate your post. Please consider my responses. I hope they make sense to you.

I appreciate this position quite well. But I think it is abnormal for a Christian to become a doubting Christian under any circumstances. I'll explain later.

Experientially, this does appear to be true. But is it really possible for a Christian to drift out of fellowship with God under any circumstances? Consider that Christianity is essentially fellowship with God.

I, by fallen nature (you should meet my dad to know what I mean), am arrogant. I tend to want the last say. I almost have no conception of defeat in argument. But ever since I was found by the Lord Jesus, I have found that I care less and less about swinging a person's sensibilities by argument. In short, I come to argument with one thing in mind: answer questions. I do this because I have learned that the final decisions always rest with the individual decider. So, I do not try to win. I treat arguments more and more like interviews now.

This is natural to the child of God. It is abnormal for a child of God to shift into trying to win an argument.

This is what I tried to explain with my previous response to you. The Christian normally never reduces things. He defines them. He takes a certain thing or issue and produces the larger context in which it fits and by fixing it where it truly belongs gives it meaning. That is actually increment or elevation rather than reduction.


If this is natural to the Christian, then the Christian by nature can not understand things locked in reduction. Unless he can fit them in the context of the infinite God, he is incapable of appreciating them.

This appears reasonable until you take correct account of that first answer I made to you. Reason is normal, natural and essentially good. Without it the human person is less than human. But there are two types of reason: that which is found in fallen man; and that which is found in Christ.

The first is darkened because it lacks the enlightenment of the Spirit of the Lord. See Job 32:8. This is not the normal state of the human being. It is the state that resulted by schism between the human and God, the very thing that Jesus came to heal.

The second is enlightened by the Spirit of God. See 1 Cos 2:12. Upon our restoration to God, we were awakened again spiritually and we became truly intelligent and our reason was brought back to life.

In other words, the Christian cannot glorify reason at all. He will exult in it and excel in the use of it but it is awake and able because the Lord has breathed life into it. One beautiful thing about resurrected reason is that it is cognizant of things that it cannot fully know until we have been taken home.

If you have come to know the Truth by the operation of Faith, then you will reject everything that even only appears to disagree with Him until it proves that it does not do so. That is correct, good and reasonable doubt. Prove all things. Hold to the true.

Goshen360: You wan start trouble ni?.....

Goshen360: .....still following o, make una no think say I don contribute and run comot....I have one or more issue to contribute in my observation on this religious session as it relates to this the OP. I will like SNCOQ3 to conclude on his "Thomas factor" and more (if any).....God bless y'all.

Kentus: To all the Christians on this thread, remember that there's a difference between evangelizing and arguing.

The Word of God you believe clearly says that the things of the Spirit are foolishness to the carnal mind. They cannot be carnally discerned.

Therefore, if you truly believe the Word you preach you would understand that this is not a matter to be argued.

Remember also that the Holy Spirit does not convince. He convicts.

"And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. "
II Cor 4:3-4

...They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 2 Thess 2:10-11

Ihedinobi: ^ Now, I really wish you'd indicated what's wrong with the picture of dinosaurs in a young earth. I don't know if your problem with the picture is the same as the one I once had: that dinosaurs were synonymous with evolution given that they've disappeared, but there's evidence of their existence in rock strata.

This was a silly assumption by me, but I don't think it's evolution that's your problem. Perhaps it's the fact that there's evidence that some really interesting animals once existed but are nowhere to be found today.

If that's the problem, there's no need to go ahead and assume an old earth to accommodate their existence. Between the end of the Second World War and today, some species have gone extinct. It is a fact of science that the number of species currently in existence are a small percentage of the number that once existed. Millions of years aren't needed for species to vanish, just a handful of men with inordinately large appetites and an attendant poor sense of responsibility. Current times prove this out.

I'm not sure if I have answered your question about dinosaurs. I was hoping you'd clarify what your problem was.

Ihedinobi: I'm sorry I jumped in so unceremoniously. I do understand your question, but I don't see why you think dinosaurs don't fit into the young earth theory. That's why I asked.

Ihedinobi: Where do they not?

Goshen360: Click Here

Goshen360: All I want you to do is prove WITH SCRIPTURES that gap indeed exist between Gen.1:1 and Gen.1:2. When the language of time interval occurs in the OT, you will often read words such as, "in the process of time". By this, the scriptures intends a certain time interval but the bible doesn't say that in Gen. 1:1-2.

Goshen360: I, on the other hand intends to show/prove that gap didn't exist and the "without form and void"/darkness" in Genesis 1:2 is NOT as a result of divine judgment as a result of Lucifer's sin. All we have to do is use scripture to explain scriptures.

Mr_Anony: my oga, wetin be all this "sir" wey you dey use hail me na?

Goshen360: I agree with you what firmament means. What we are saying here is the proved of Gap theory which you supported and the pre-adamic world that happened between Genesis 1:1-2. I believe this is where your gap theory lies. This is what we want to focus on.

Mr_Anony: Lol, my brother how you dey na?

Goshen360: Now you agree that the beginning means when God created heaven (space), earth (matter) and in the beginning means time right?

Now, if God created heaven and earth already in verse 1, What heavens is this verse talking about if the same verse later called the "firmament" heaven in verse 8 and why did God called the dry land, earth again in verse 10?

Goshen360: Okay....seems Delafruita has run away. Let me take it up with you but I don't just want him come and take us in circle and in circle.

Now, let's start with Genesis 1:1

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"

The first question is, what "beginning" is this? What do you understand by the "beginning" of Genesis 1:1?

Let's deal with this question first and we kick off from there.

Joagbaje: This is a diffrent thing now. it is was not the original idea i got from your write up. you were talking about the support for isreal and not about favouritism.