₦airaland Forum

@Reverend,

It is up to the Iraqis to iron out their differences (which is primarily religious) and move on from there. Democracy is not their problem. This same democracy has been embraced by the kurds to their good while the Sunnis and Shias are busy using this golden opportunity to kill themselves and settle differences that dates back to the days of Mohammed.

@BigB1,

Can you please tell us how many would have been killed also by Saddam by now? Also tell us how many you project would have ben killed if he stayed in power for another 30 years form today.

babyosisi darling,

I've been wondering where you've been too. Any brotherlistically related news from naija? God works in mysterious ways you know!!

@Big B1,

You're absolutely correct.
During Saddam's regime, things weren't sweet and dandy, but things were very calm.
This is why I believe that DEMOCRACY is not for every country. It is sad, but it's the fact.

When people make such conclusions like yours, it gives the impression that the concept of 'elitism', that only favours the ruling class has deceived people who should know better. Even now, some will make us believe that a military rule in naija is better than democracy.

Now tell me, who will benefit from this concept of elitism? Is it the few who remain in power or the people who should be in power? Democracy may have its shortcomings and set-backs, but it is a lot better than dictatorship.

How much calm was experienced by those gassed during the times of Saddam? How about the million plus people who died after his invasion of Iran? That you were not fed with the images as is being done in Iraw now does not make those events less babaric than we see today. Let's not be shallow ini our thinking.

If Iraq was indeed a secular state, how come there is so much friction between the Shias and the Sunnis? Secularism does not favour one religious sect while effectively suppressing another for the sole aim of pushing forward an agenda for one of the parties. Are we redefining wat secularity is?

Six things does the Lord hate; seven are an abomination unto Him.

What are they?

@Bobbyaf,

How did you connect babylon to the RCC? Please do not go beyond that which is written. Backing up your pre-conceived notion with scriptures does not make it right.

You cannot pull me in with a fishhook or tie down my tongue with a rope. You cannot put a cord through my nose or pierce my jaw with a hook. I will never  be in a position to beg you for mercy neither will I speak to you with gentle words.  l will never make an agreement with you to take me as your slave for life, and you can never make a pet of me like a bird or put me on a leash for your girls. Your Traders will have no opportunity to barter for me neither will they divide me among the merchants. My hide can neither be filled with harpoons nor my head with fishing spears. If you lay a hand on me, you will remember the struggle and never do it again! Any hope of subduing me is false; the mere sight of me is overpowering. No one is fierce enough to rouse me.

So who am I?

I only hope his coffin wasn't 'made in the U.S.A.'

Even his lifeless body was flown to his hometown in a US jet.

And you forgot to add that the cell phone videos was taken by an American made Cell Phone. ^sarcasm

There were two prominent persons named James in the new testament - James the brother of John, the son of Zebedee and James the brother of Jesus. Which one of them was the head of the early church, and what was his nickname in the Church?

You are probably refering to "James the Just", the brother of the Lord.

"Out of the eater came forth meat, and out of the strong came forth sweetness" - Who put forth this parable and what is/are the answer(s)?

You need to grow your beards since a bearded bro is regarded to be more sexually virile than the shaven ones. This according to one of your own who provided a "scientific" proof to back his assertion.

@kaecy5,

Now it is America that killed Sadam. So it was in an American court that he was tried and sentenced? So it was an American President that ratified he death sentence? So it was Americans that put him on the gallows? Are you attempting to change history right before our eyes?

Let me tell ou what America did. America kept him alive when they could have easily killed him at tha fox-hole Saddam hid in. America did not hand him over as soon as the judgement was given to preven Saddam from being ill-treated. America kept close distance after the death sentence was carried out to prevent Saddam's body from been mutilated. Looks like we must be talking about 2 different Americas.

Omot208,

I'm sorry you took my reference to being versed in the scriptures badly. I didn't mean to offend you and neither am I trying to claim I have more understanding than you.

In any case, I wish you will learn to discern when Jesus is speaking as man or as God. I have explained this to you earlier but you don't seem to want to follow that truth which clearly brings understanding. In any case, I have refernced to you where the Father called Jesus God but you neglect that scripture.

In any case here is another statement of Jesus that you need to consider: John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. If you are unable to understand the fact that the Father and the Son could appear dinstitively at the same place at the same time, then how will you explain the fact that Jesus, who was speaking to Nicodemus in that passage claims that He is also in heaven even at the same time!!! Notice He was refering to Himself throughout that verse. He said He is the one that came down from heaven and yet He is still in heaven.

Your reading of John 1:1 is very strange to me. First of all, God does not have a beginning and same is said of Jesus. The Bible says "His going forth has been from of old, from everlasting" - Micah 5:2 John 1:1 outdates even Genesis chapter 1, but still Jesus, the Word, outdates John 1:1. The Bible says of Jesus in John 1:1 that He 'was' before the beginning. He was not created.

With regards to marriage, please do not imply what I have not said. I have only quoted the Bible that a maried man is one body with his wife. Pick up your Bible to reference this. The one joined to the Lord is one Spirit - 1 Corinthians 6:17. All you need do is receive these things by faith, then understanding will come.

Jesus wasn't refering to the time of Melchizedek when He mentioned Abraham rejoicing to see His Day. He never said Abraham rejoiced to see 'Him', but rather 'His Day'. These are two differenet things. The question you need to ask your self is: What is the Day of the Lord? A quick reference in the Bible will show you. Try to let the Bible interprete itself and not bring your own meaning to bear on it.

Why do you have a problem with the word 'mystery'. Do you know the Bible mentions it several times? With regards to godliness, it says in 1 Timothy 3:16 that God was manifest in the flesh: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Believe it, receive it and you will understand it.

Cheers.

Omot208,

I don't even know where to begin with you. You are obviously not a versed student of the Bible. I will try my best to educate you more as I see you seem to have a right attitude. I think your major problem is using a carnal mind to interprete the things of the Spirit. By the say, did you study the verses I asked you to earlier? I hope you are not just trying to tell us what you think without going back to research further from the scriptures.

Number 1, that we call godliness a mystery is not of our own making. That is what the Bible testifies of itself. So don't go in that direction at all. That the Father has a different title than the Son only goes to show the diferenet offices they occupy. What you have failed to see is the fact that even God called Jesus God, and not a god as you are claiming. How can you claim Jesus was created and reference John 1:1? Can't you read there that it says in the Beginnig the Word was? It says the Word was "face to face" with God and that the Word was God. You really need to go into the original tongue to understand some of thes Bible passages.

You have given your own meaning about marriage that is different from what God has in mind. The union between a man and woman that is consumated goes beyond a mind agreement. In fact, the Bible says they are ONE BODY, so I do not understand where you get your doctrine from.

I have answered the issue of Jesus praying to the Father before now, so you will do well to go find what I say if you are really here to learn.

Please understand that Jesus was not an Angel, neither was he Melchizedek. Where do you get your information from? Please don't let people who are confused confuse you any further. Jesus was never and never will be an angel. The Bible says Angels worship Him. Infact, the Bible also says God never said to an Angel: "Sit at my right hand, " which is a reference to Jesus. Melchizedek was a gentile king and priest (so much for those who say christians shouldn't be in politics). Infact, the Bible said he was made like the Son of God which means he is not the Son of God and that he was just a man (See Hebrews 7:3-4). If you want to learn more about this priest, I will be sure to provide you with answers.

Isaiah 46:5 should be quoted to those who believe in more than one God. We believe the Father and the Son are One and self-same indivisible God. Infact, our confession is that God is One. Let me give you a practical example. If you believe in the Bible, then you will realise that you are a triune beign even though you are one person. You are spirit, soul and body. Your spirit is dinsticnt from your body even though both are the self-same you. You can not separate one from the other even though both can be clearly demarcated. You are made in the image and likeness of God, so that should give you an idea of what the trinity is really all about.

Hey guys,

Let's try and keep this civil. Pointing fingers won't help.

@Easyy,

You will realise if you look back at earlier posts that the definition was not given by me but by someone else. I only used it as one definition and I came up with others that I found in a dictionary. You made a mistake there.
The goal post never shifted because I did not redefine terrorism. I used the same definition to try and justify my position on all the parties which I mentioned as terrorists.
I am not a student and I do not keep record of these things that you have requested of me to provide as proof. However, you seem to be widening the goalpost when you say Israel and America came out later to apologise for their acts which border on nothing but terrorism. The question there was not whether a party apologises or not. It was about who commits those acts which can  be defined as terrorism. Israel and America certainly fall into that category as do Al Quaeda, Taleban, Hamas etc

My bad, this is the second time I think I have mistaken you for 4_Play. Sorry about that. The definition of terrorism as the indiscriminate and deliberate use of violence against innocent civilians is surely not yours. For this I apologise.

How can you make a categorical statement about a party without having any proof. Isn't that irresponsible? Even if you cannot provide references, you can at least mention a well-known incident that potrays the notion that you have put forward. For instance, Al Quaeda is a terrorist organisation in my books for the deliberate and indiscrimate killing of civilians as we witnessed on 911. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization in my books for the rockets fired into Isreal during the war even though Isreali soldiers are within their arms way.

That Isreal and the United States apologised only proves that terrorism is not their State policy, neither is it a deliberate action. For them to punish the solidiers caught out of line only proves the point further. For the other parties however, you are considered a hero for killing as many civilians as possible.  So how can you place the two in the same boat?

The unfortunate deaths of civilians is a bye-product of war. However, the difference is whether those civilians are deliberately targeted or not. Isreal even send out flyers to warn civilians of their raid.

@Easyy,

How has the goalpost been changed? proof of what?
I am not going to engage in the kind of arguments which you have been engaging in with a few other people here. Just tell me exactly what I have said that is wrong and where the goalpost seems to have changed.

How the goal post was changed? Well, you began by defining terrorism as: the indiscriminate and deliberate use of violence against innocent civilians. And when I asked you to provide examples of the parties who through policy and action indiscriminately and deliberately use violence against innocent civilians, you realise that you can't stick that on either Isreal and the U.S., so you changed the goal post to a dictionary definition that is more likely to favour your predisposition. In any case, I do not think that fits, and I'll tell you why as we go.

I ask you to provide proof of your assertion that Isreal and the United States, by official policy and action are involved in the indiscriminate and deliberate use of violence against innocent civilians. Is that too much to ask? I can provide that proof for Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Quaida and the rest of the parties on your list.

Now to help you out a little bit, all you need do is show us what each party does to people under its command who have deliberately targeted civilians. In the case of the U.S., we know what happened to those involved in the shameful acts at the  Abu Graib Prison. We know of Isreal apologising for the innocent civilians that were killed during their legitimate targeting of Hezbollah positions. These are the kind of proofs or otherwise that you can also use to sustain or relinquish your position.

@Easyy,

Now you have changed the goal post, and still unable to sustain your point with proofs.

@Easyy,

K. Based on the definition, the terrorists are Israel, Hamas, Hezbola, United States of America, Taliban.

Can you please share with us how Isreal and the United States, by official policy and action are involved in the indiscriminate and deliberate use of violence against innocent civilians

@Afam,

Still on foreign policy, why is the West not asking for Saddam not to be executed as it normally does when people they like are sentenced to death?
Iraq re-introduced the death penalty in 2004 to pave way for a certain death for Saddam andit seems ok for the US that has held Saddam for 3 years even throughout the trial process that sentenced him to death.
But the world seems to speak out when Libya sentenced to death some Bulgarians that were responsible for transmitting HIV to children in Libya even though the medical workers claimed the children contracted the virus from unhealthy surroundings (strange explanation).

How can you compare these two situations?  They have nothing in common at all.  The former is a case of proven ethnic cleansing and genocide, while the later is a case of possible victimisation. If you follow the stories, you will realise that the Doctors and Nurses, who usually swear to protect and save lives, confessed to injecting the ill-fated patients with HIV under torture. They still maintain their innocence up until today.
Libya's motives really needs to be examined closer in this situation. They have said they will only let the professionals go if their countries will pay up some millions in damages to the affected families. Now does that sound like people seeking justice or blackmail? The Bulgaria Government refuses to pay any money, rightly claiming such action will only be an admission of guilt.

@Easyy,

Please limit your list to the parties involved in our dear Professor's write-up.

@omotob208,

No one says Jesus isnt a God, one of his names is Mighty God.
what we're saying is he's not the Almighty God.
there is a bible verse that says: The LORD said to my Lord; sit thou at my right hand until i make thy enemies thy footstool.[/b]This was when Jesus got back to heaven after his earthly mission.
some Bibles use LORD for Jehovah and Lord for Jesus. don't u think there's a reason for this? all the times Jesus said My Father is greater than I indicate that there is a hierarchical order in heaven with Jehovah at the top, Jesus following and so on.
For goodness sake, they have different names, how can they both be one physically be open minded and not brainwashed. look at all the indications and be educated.

You are obviously coming to a conclusion that is not based on ALL the facts made available in the Bible. The two Words: 'LORD' and 'Lord' as used in Psalm 110:1 are two different hebrew words altogether. That explains the difference. Also, God in His eternal nature and existence cannot be known or approached by any being, that is why He relates with His creatures through His other nature which He calls the Son. That is why He told Moses that you cannot see my face and live, yet we are told that "Jesus is the brightness of God's glory and the express image of his person."  Great indeed is the mystery of godliness.
That Jesus said His Father is greater than Him only shows He submits to the authority of His Father. the indications you need to look at are the testimony of the Father who cals the Son God as we find in Hebrews 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Hannydarling,

Hope you don't mind me calling you that.  As long as you are on the internet, why don't you search out http://bible.crosswalk.com/. I'm sure the online Bible and other resources can help you.

If you read what I said clearly, then you will understand why Jesus sometimes appear to be no more than a man, and why sometimes He appears to be God. This is so becuase He is both. Until the virgin birth, He was without the human body and that is why we are told in Hebrews 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me
Going by the revelation of John that I shared with you earlier, we see that it is actually the same God who became flesh John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

Now going further into the depths of the Word, we realise that there is a difference in the way that Jesus shared humanity with the rest of us. We will find that information in Hebrews 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
The words 'partakers' and 'took part' are two different Greek words that convey a totally differnet meaning to each other. I will explain this as we go on. In the mean time, you can try and study this also as we go.

@Easyy,

define terrorism as the indiscriminate and deliberate use of violence against innocent civilians

While i will not like to pre-empt your destination, can you kindly tell us the parties that are involved in the indiscriminate and deliberate use of violence against innocent civilians.

@olabowale,

Your submissions only shows that you have limited civil engineering to superstructures which may or may not have architectural inputs.

Let's go back to your first statement:

If you know, Architecture in a way is a fine art interpretation of Civil Engineering.

If we are to relate Civil Engineering and Architecture, then we will begin from Architecture before going to Civil Engineering and not the other way round as you have done. How can Architecture interprete Civil Engineering when in almost all cases, Architectural work precedes any Civil Engineering work. Infact, the right term is Sructural Engineering as against Civil Engineering. Civil Engineering is a huge field!

I've worked in many companies as a Structural Enginner, and I have only had to work closely with Architects in one of them. I have theoretical and practical knowledge of Architecture and other fields of Engineering which I'm sure you know nothing about. I would have gisted you more on the various things that a Civil Engineer does which does not invlove Architecture but I am not responsible for your education.  Opening up a thread to discuss this issue would have been the right thing to do if only you appear learned enough, but you aren't.  I will not waste my time with you.

I would have taken you more seriously if you will at least acknowledge your earlier submissions are out of line, but your pride and family status, which means jack to me has obviously got in the way. I leave you to continually dazzle the ignorants around you whom you may have succeeded in feeding with bullshits while appearing learned and important in your own eyes.

These off-topic discussions just tells me your ignorance of this topic is matched by same of the forum discussion. You know half-truths which you run away with without considering the full picture. No wonder you are stuck with Jesus' humanity while ignoring His deity.

@shango,

Not to mention any laws passed against Israel by the UN are vetoed by the US. But ofcourse 4play left that out in his discussion of UN resolutions.

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? How can the UN pass a law that is vetoed by the U.S. A vetoed law is one that does not see the light of day. So how can Isreal be breaking laws that was not promulgated in the first place?

@4play,

I define terrorism as the indiscriminate and deliberate use of violence against innocent civilians

So are you in disagreement with the fact that terrorism cannot be used to settle land disputes?

Hannydarl-ing,

That is a very strange doctrine that you are propagating. Perhaps you will need to balance those scriptures with John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

What about Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Lest I forget, John 20:28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

And hear the testimony of the Father in Hebrews 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Your problem is that you have completely held on to the humanity of Jesus while neglecting His divinity. Indeed, the mystical figure we call Jesus Christ is 100% God and 100% man. This is what is known in the spiritual circles as the hypostatic union. You will hear Him refer to Himself in the Gospels either as the Son of Man or the Son of God (humanity and deity).

As the Son of Man he declares: "I thirst", as the Son of God He says: "I am that bread of life". As the Son of Man He died for the sins of the world, and as the Son of God He declares: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."  In other words, though He dies in His humanity, He remains alive in His deity and will raise up his humanity Himself.  I can only declare: O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! - Romans 11:33

@olabowale,

@TayoD: Are you saying that Architecture and Civil Engineering are not related? Do you want a debate on this? Do you know that architecture has a greater convergence with civil than Electrical or Mechanical or Chemical has with Civil?

The Eiffel Tower in Paris for example is studied in Architecture, even though is a Civil Engineering marvel. So are the other structures like the pyramids and many bridges. Just to limit our conversation to the obvious. Structural analysis of Dam is common to both Civil and Architecture. The clearest commonalities are buildings and liveable spaces.

You are obviosuly suffering from half-knowledge backed up with arrogance. Did you read everything you said before about science, engineering and now architecture? Can you sustain such wrong statements academically? I think not! To save face, you are now trying to relate other disciplines with the issue at hand, and you have ended up messing it up as usual.

You need to go back to school to understand that your statement above is a totally fallacy. Civil Engineering and Architecture will not survive without Mechanical Engineering. Civil Engineering and Architecture are expressed through materials whose limitations and properties are determined in mechanics. So therefore, no mechanics, no civil engineering and no architecture. Get it?

When you say:

If you know, Architecture in a way is a fine art interpretation of Civil Engineering.

Please tell us how Architecture "fine-artfully" interpretes the job of a Geotechnical Engineer involved in pile driving.

As I said, your problem is half-knowledge and I can only refer you back to the T.v. to acquire some more information.

@Ndipe,

I was surprised you mentioned Shade Adu without saying anything about the Grammy Award Winner, SEAL. You have also left out Tunde of the Lighthouse Family.

Femi Kuti and Lagbaja are unique Nigerian Brands that are doing very well internationally.

@Easyy,

What is terrorism?

What do you understand by terrorism?