Truthislight's Posts

Nairaland Forum › Truthislight's Profile › Truthislight's Posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 (of 222 pages)

Christianity Etc › Re: Ijawkid by truthislight: 7:47pm On Jun 17, 2016

plappville:
Thats the man that reveals the Satanic verse that Muslim deleted from the quran. They think they can deceive all. Muhammad had a vision from his master the Devil. When he recognised he had messed up by giving such vision. He now change it. That is where the satanic verse history came from. I go send u concrete article soon. I am a bit busy this period.

Hmmm! Sounds curious. Ok, lets see then.

Christianity Etc › Re: From catholic To "Catholic" And Back To catholic! by truthislight: 2:53pm On Jun 16, 2016

PastorAIO:
Matthew18

19Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

I had never said prayer/request is not inclusive in among the reason that will warrant him to be with his true followers. i only pointed out that other gathering are involve in the reasons.

Lets add vers 20:

20"For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst.”

The above shows that Jesus talked about being in the midst of those that gathered accordingly in truth, i never said that he will not be there in prayer, i had rather said that he said he will be in their midst as long as they are there in accordance with 'his' instructions, truth.

Be it worship, prayer, the worshipers need him to take such to the father, for no one gets to the father except
through Jesus. if he is never there when his followers do other things but prayers, it then means he will be oblivious of all other things they do.

PastorAIO:
The passage is about the power of communal action. If you get together with your brother to 'ask' for something from God what do you call that?

The above has never been my argument, i only said it goes beyond prayers. I only called you out because of the painting that @Enigma's statement was getting, that it was wrong.

PastorAIO:
Not prayer? Then what is it?

Yes, prayers is just one of them, but not alone.

Go check your initial argument.

PastorAIO:
Jesus states clearly that when more than one person agrees to pray on a subject that it will be answered. He then explains why.

The why is because he will be there during their gathering in his name, to take all their request to the father. "no one can go to the father except through the son. Unless you are telling us that the praise and worship does not go to the father. How did he got to know the deeds of that church in Revelation if he was not privy to their other activities?

PastorAIO:
The why is BECAUSE when 2 or 3 are gathered in his name he too is there in the midst of them. That is the evidence. It is plain in your bible but I am keen to see how you shall twist it into something else.

Lol. You have turned the argument from north to south.

If that was your simple stand, without limiting it to prayers, then i have nothing against that.

PastorAIO:
Wrong! Are you telling me that you've never lied? Who hasn't lied?

Lol. I have pointed to you what the bible said. The Pharisees saw the truth about Jesus and decided to lie against him and his works, deliberately. When people are not interested in the truth of God's word but take side with falsehood, then they take after Satan.

"Know the truth and the truth will set you free the Bible says".

Isaiah5:20

20 Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,
Those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,
Those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

The discussion is not about me but rather, what the Bible says.

"Though all men be found a liar, let God be found true", Hence, the way and what i see in the Bible, that is what i stand for.

PastorAIO:
So is Yahweh a child of Satan?

Is Yahweh a LIAR! ? huh

Christianity Etc › Re: From catholic To "Catholic" And Back To catholic! by truthislight: 10:27am On Jun 16, 2016*

Christians worship the father via many forms, Preaching, praising, prayer, actions. Jesus is the mediator according to the Bible. If Jesus would not be in the Midst of the true worshipers during these worship session, how can he mediate?

See what he told early worshipers:

Revelation3:1

3 “To the angel of the Church in Sar′dis write: These are the things that he says who has the seven spirits of God and the seven stars: ‘I know your deeds, that you have the name that you are alive, but you are dead".

How did he Jesus got to know the deeds of that church if he was not in their midst?

Was he only in their midst just only during prayers and got to know all their deeds? huh

Christianity Etc › Re: From catholic To "Catholic" And Back To catholic! by truthislight: 10:17am On Jun 16, 2016

PastorAIO:
You want to deprive him of his only recourse.

You don't seem to understand the level of his conundrum.

Of course it is evident to anyone reading the passage with a clean mind that Jesus is addressing the efficacy of prayer and he is saying that when christians come together to pray communally in his name then the prayers will be answered. Jesus didn't say that if any Tom Dick and Harry whether a christian or not come together ('in my name', i.e. by my authority) then they are automatically a church. This is the kind of twisting that is required when you give yourself over to delusions.

Interesting!

If only you would allow the Bible to be the basis of clarification on this issue, then and only then can the truth stand out.

As much as it cannot be 'ALL' that claim to gather in Jesus name that in actual it is true that Jesus is in their midst, so all so, you cannot show evidence that what Jesus meant was that being in "your midst" is only in terms of prayers alone.

For one, Jesus cannot be in a midst of so call Christians if falsehood is their basis of operation, if it is falsehood, they would not be representing Jesus at the first place but rather, doing the work of the father of the liar.

John 4:44

44 You are from your father the Devil, and you wish to do the desires of your father. That one was a murderer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of the lie.
......................................................................................................................................

So, based on the above, if Satan is the father of the lie, it then mean that liars are children of satan.

With that, it is true that those that Jesus can be in their midst has to be those handling the truth, and truth the Bible helps us to know is the word of God. John17:17.

Those on the side of the truth, are the ones that Jesus will "set free" and they will be his people.
...................................................................................................................................

However, If you insist that it is in prayer alone that Jesus can be in the midst of Christians, then, you have to show evidence and rationale for your stance.

Peace.

Christianity Etc › Re: From catholic To "Catholic" And Back To catholic! by truthislight: 9:45am On Jun 16, 2016

Patheos:
@Engima stop lying

Would it not have been more salient if you were to show the lies he has posted and go ahead to show why his stance is false as you claim rather than expecting us to swallow your words hook line and sinker?

Christianity Etc › Re: German Catholics Face Excommunication Over Tithe Tax by truthislight: 10:50pm On Jun 10, 2016

Patheos:
@Ubenedictus , @truthislight is not adressing all of chukwudi's points cuz it doesn't favour him

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 4:40pm On May 29, 2016

Lilbrown007:
I MADE THEM I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS EXCEPT IF I DIDN'T MAKE THEM

Is there any message you wish to pass to us? Try again, right now it is not obvious.

Freewill comes with responsibilities.

Christianity Etc › Re: Ijawkid by truthislight: 12:02pm On May 29, 2016

@Plappville

That Picture on your profile of a man holding a book, teach me more nah, what is it all about?

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 11:45am On May 29, 2016

Do we humans really discern our place in relation to the giver of freewill, that the giver of this seemingly ordinary gift (to the undiscerning mind that does not know freewill is a superlative gift) is devoid of self?

At no cost to us, We have been endowed with one of the greatest gift possible to make us who we are.

Have we ever taken time out to imagine the sort of entity that can resolve to bestow such a gift to humans?

It is unimaginable on my part to contemplate that "Chance" did endow me with such a gift, NO! Not when I am still human with a mind that I can arrive at such a conclusion, unless I don't exist.

Such a giver first and foremost, have to be absolutely devoid of selfishness, is selfless, transcend mundanity. Unlike we humans that are 101% mundane.

It is then not surprising that such ineptitude is our lot, that we act in the most irrational ways towards the application of such a gift since we are selfish entities. At best, we are rebellious with such a gift, and toward the giver of such inestimable gift.
Does such action of ours shows that we know better? how can we even know better if we never knew that such is a wonderful gift at the first place? that such gift is not a common denominator as is obvious from observing nature. That such a gift ordinarily could not come by chance?

Hence, we indulge in stupidity as though it is a competition. Yes, stupidity! How then should the rebellion be explain?

Why would the description not fit? because if we were not stupid, we would have been able to recognised the gift ab initio. why not? are you not smart enough?

Since we have agreed that our action most often is a display of naiveness, what would have been the legit thing we would had done had it been we were not this lot?

Now, if we or someone were to give a gift in our day to day living, what would have been the rational thing to do or respond? What is the usual thing polite people do?
Simple! they say thank you! thank you in appreciation for a gift. But, animals don't say thank you, that shows that our inability to have recognised the right thing to do shows how limited we are in comparison with the superlative giver of freewill.

Hence, is our continual deviant nature really a WISE course of action in relation to the giver?

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 10:52am On May 29, 2016

slimytrikt:
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.

OK, Fair enough.

But, Then, Business sense may not always take the buyer into consideration, but what the business man stands to gain.

And that is my question, what does the giver of freewill stand to gain by endowing his design with the capacity to attack him. Imagine human designing a system and endowing it with the capacity and choice to destroy mankind 'should it so wish'. What would humans stand to gain in designing such a system?
o
Now, that gain is what my question is gearing toward.

What should be the gain for the creator to give humans freewill that should endow us with the capacity to turn against him should we wish to?

What is that thing that the designer can gain that can incite us to deprive him of such benefit because we have the freewill to?

If none, why do humans rebel, why do humans imagine that rebelling or going contrary to the designers instruction is a reasonable thing to do? Or, that it is a wise course of action?

Is it possible that there is no inherent gain for the designer for giving us such but he went ahead to endow us with it all the same?

peace

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 11:05am On May 28, 2016

slimytrikt:
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.

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.

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 10:31am On May 28, 2016

slimytrikt:
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.

Fantastic!

Am in agreement with that ^
The above makes a lot of sense.

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 10:08am On May 28, 2016

jayriginal:
Bros why evils na?

Reconcile your topic with what you're asking me. There's creation in your topic which places the discussion firmly within a religious framework.

I stated earlier that I have neither the inclination nor the strength for tenuous arguments (today at least).

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 8:47pm On May 27, 2016

jayriginal:
The Christian concept of free will is an illusion.

Actually, you seem to be the one that brought here the mention of "Christian FREEWILL".

I was talking about the human person.

Please, answer, are you by any means insinuating that the human person of any kind normal, exist without freewill to personal choices/a mind of his own?

Please, devoid of religious coloring, am talking of the human person as in HUMAN.

Peace.

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 8:31pm On May 27, 2016

slimytrikt:
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.

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. grin

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?

slimytrikt:
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.

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 embarassed

SMH seriously. Well, what say you?

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

Waiting.

Peace.

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 8:02pm On May 27, 2016

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

LOL. Are you saying Humans don't have FREEWILL?

Please, come out clean lets understand you.

Peace.

Christianity Etc › Re: If You Had Been The One Creating Things, Humans, Will You Had Given 'freewill' ? by truthislight(op): 2:38pm On May 27, 2016*

"FREEWILL"

What is the relevance of it? without it, would you be who you are today?

Is it important?

Lets talk. Why would you give or would not give freewill?

Why would you give freewill to your creatures? Have you thought about that?

If you will not give freewill to your creatures to obey or disobey you if they so chose to. And if they so wish, kill or destroy you if they so want. Would that not be smart of you?

Does that then mean that God is not smart for giving us freewill?

*Editted*

Christianity Etc › Re: Ijawkid by truthislight: 2:27pm On May 27, 2016

ATMC:
truth is light is ijawkid

You of all person in this Forum saying this ? Am surprised though. Well, for your information, am not. Take note, unless you wish to insist that am lying.

Christianity Etc › Re: Ijawkid by truthislight: 2:17pm On May 27, 2016

plappville:
Am plappville. That was my monika when i was banned for exposing Muhammad the most radical, and false prophet ever..

Oh! Ok, now i understand. I was wandering Who the person was that was telling me such.

I Notice that you have been very much pissed off by this "Religion of peace" people, they can be so annoying. All the same, take care.

Peace.

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 12:01pm On May 27, 2016

Actually, the Argument that It is the earth rather than the Sun that goes round the Sun and as such the Sun cannot stand still is not a recent argument, it does not need one to be a genius to relate with what the question, aim and intents are.

Must every body see and agree with only one side of the Issue? I don't think so.

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 11:52am On May 27, 2016*

PastorAIO:
All this one has absolutely no bearing on what is being discussed and further more I wasn't even talking to you. If you want to contribute don't you think that you ought to first understand what is being discussed?

Well, am sorry if you don't see what i was saying and you feel so. but what you are writing is in a public forum and is open and will be open for people to read for only God knows how long, some of us just feel that while you express your opinion, others should be allowed to have a say. Silent is consent they say.

Hence, it will be fair i think, that those not consenting, and wishing to air should be allowed to do so.

Peace.

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 11:17am On May 27, 2016*

PastorAIO:
If the bible is a public revelation as you put it would you say that one must believe that the Sun stood still as told in Joshua 10:13 or lose happily thereafter in heaven?

Why are you this slow? Considering the Level of scientific consciousness then, how did you expect that such knowledge would have been translated to those ancient people? Or that man would have explained his thought?

Should a science test book had been opened to teach them/Japhther first How the earth goes round the source of light before explaining how the source of light will continue giving light? Talking from Hindsight is a beautiful thing, but, it calls for deep thinking to developed empathy and the like. lack of such deep thinking and meditation has always been the bend of your sort, so quick to jump to conclusion.

Again, next, they Ask how spirit caused diseases then and not Bacterial/Micro-Organism. One wonder if people of those days knew anything about Bacteria and would had Made any sense of it if such were to be told to them. SMH. Maybe, they had Microscope somewhere.

We humans do communicate with kids in a language they would understand, does that make us Slow? SMH.

Different strokes for different folks.

The Bible is a book written so that people of all times, Generations, tribes and works of life can relate to without necessarily having to be a professor like you.

Peace.

*Editted*

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 12:13pm On May 25, 2016

musKeeto:
oga, ive been around. im sonoflucifer. hw body?

Lol. what with Sonoflucifer embarassed

ok, Lucifer means Shining one. I hope you are not having other ideas with that name?

Any how, good to know you are well?

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 11:56am On May 25, 2016*

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 11:47am On May 25, 2016

musKeeto:
Abi o.

Hmmmm! long time.

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 11:43am On May 25, 2016

PastorAIO:
I presume that your following post was the shortened version which I have now responded to.

NOPE, It is not. That had a completely more message.

And, on an issue like this, it is close to the heart of most, hence, it is a wrong expectation to be expecting short post. Some should be .......................................................

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 11:34am On May 25, 2016

PastorAIO:
Okay, so that is what you meant to say. You see, it is possible to get to the point without all that verbal diarrhoea.

To address your point: 1. No bible writer denied that their was their own with the exception of a handful and even they didn't claim god, they claimed other human beings. The idea that the books of the bible were written by god came later after the writers had died and gone.

Matthew, Mark, John were written by unknown people and it was later claimed to be written by Matthew Mark and Luke. This is the same case as with Daniel. And possibly many other books too, or parts of other books which have been copied, added to and redacted numerous times over the centuries.

2. The bible is far from a Grade A piece of work. Grade A in what sense. It's a total fail in terms of scientific knowledge. Morally it is extremely questionable.

Hmmm!

I was not aware that the degradation has eaten this deep.

And, actually, that was not all i said. You can try a little bit harder and read all.

by the way, you have to developed the capacity of being patient with deep concentration skills, the write up there you could not attend to shows a lack of concentration capacity on your part, you rather pounds on a brief bit of it. LOL.

The Jews must have been very daft, even though they were adapt to keeping records and were instructed to do so.
Thousands of years later, after your kind exacted varied effort to destroy this books that was collated (Bible), you now think you know better.
Jesus and the Apostles that quoted from those writers must have been blowing hot air.

You started by criticising the statement of the Prophet Moses, now you have jumped to Matthew mark luke John, where and when will it stop? LOL.

PastorAIO:
1. No bible writer denied that their was their own with the exception of a handful and even they didn't claim god,

On the above, is it a contradiction? "No bible writer denied that their was their own with the exception of a handful" embarassed

At least, You said, Only a handful, and no one. grin

Guy, you need to cool down o. The effort you are putting into this is already taking a tole on you.

Matthew, Mark, LUke and John, What with those history? are you contending that they are not a correct History about the life of Jesus? or, Your anger is that, the writers did not care to glorify themselves as you would have done had it been you were the one that wrote those books?

Well, those books were handed over to other Humans, and those people knew who wrote the Books, Hence, they passed it on. Or, did you think they were abandoned on the road?

I wonder why that would stumble you! Is your bother not supposed to be the content? You just turned your self to an irrational critic struggling to lay your hands on whatever you can to justify your ways even though unreasonable. Am not worried, as long it is authentic, and verified factual.

What do you mean by "Grade A Moral"? I had said the bible is a best seller. NO? Do you disagree that it is a best seller? Yes it is!

Well, The Jews had all their Books by their prophets intact in their temple in Jerusalem before the Temple was destroyed in 70ce. The writers of those books was not under contention by the Jews but for your type. Those that received them knew their God and knows that he Communicated to them. Why is your concern not the content of those books?

Well, all Bible writers were Jews, take note. Some of Your sort are fond of saying they were written around 400ce.

On the Bible being a Good Moral book, i will say the test of the pudding, is in the eating, how would you know since you don't live by it? look around you and see the result of human waywardness and those not following the Bible Morals. I for one, i do, and I am telling you it is very very EXCELLENT!

Peace

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 12:25pm On May 24, 2016

Again, all the Bible writers must be daft for haven't written a book called Bible, a best seller of all times and end up denying that such beautiful work was theirs. who is there in a class that will score an 'A' in a subject, but on being called out will say the slip is not his? what should such a person be called? certainly, such a person will have to be a nut case. we have to accept that all the Bible writers are a NUT case for rejecting their best seller BOOK (Bible) and saying it is God's word.

Pastor AIO must know what they did not know. SHM.

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 12:15pm On May 24, 2016

PastorAIO:
This was very long and incoherent. Come again please, and order your thoughts so I can follow. Thanks.

Same old AIO. as usually, Escapes.

I have said what i wanted to say.

You can keep dancing to your Rhythm, even though the drummer is unknown.

Christianity Etc › Re: Does Satan & His Demons Possess The Power To Read Minds Like God? by truthislight: 12:00pm On May 24, 2016

joe4christ:
But i've heard countless numbers of NDE's (Near Death Experiences) and testified that virtually most communications done in the realm of the spirit are done through thoughts, and my spirit bares witness of this testimonies that it's true cos i've communicated with my guardian angel some couple of times through thoughts, even though i dont see him, but atimes feel his presence and then communciate with him and he responses and tells me certain things even about my childhood that i forgot, so does it also extend to angels hearing our thoughts?

This is a bible statement: "whoever you present yourself to to obey, such is your master".

When you give the password to a system to another person, that person will be able to take control, when he is in control, he does the processing of the information.

Still, your thought is your thought, if the Devil knows what people are thinking, people will never ever be able to break away from them, ever!

Human has FREEWILL. Believing to the contrary then means we don't really have freewill.

That a force tells you about your child hood does not mean he knows your thought, it only means it is older then you. It also shows that they always pay attention to what humans do with great interest. again, they are far more intelligent than humans and far more powerful, how do you verify that 'all' what they are telling you about your youths are true? what if they have fed your minds with data that reminds you what that never really happened?

Take note, they are older and far more intelligent and manipulative. Again, don't let them be your master by you presenting yourself to them to be posses by them.

But the Administrator to the human mind that has access is the designer.

Christianity Etc › Re: Contra Bibliolatreia I Mark 10:5 by truthislight: 3:34pm On May 23, 2016*

PastorAIO:
Without a doubt I have a beef against 'bible based' christianity.

In fact I have a beef against any religion that is based on any text.

Then when that text is blatantly obviously written by men and even within the text there is an admission from the highest authority in the religion (Jesus in christianity) that a part of the text was written by a human precisely as a compromise for human recalcitrance I am left flabbergasted that people still walk around claiming that the text is the basis of their religion and that it was given directly by God. What Nonsense!

There is always a window for people to deduce from certain aspect of the scriptures to justify their lackadaisical attitude owing to other unrelated stimulus, but they will always be unsatisfied till they rope the Bible in as the basis for all they have become. How convenient!

This same people will never see anything wrong with themselves for lack of compliant on other aspect of same Bible that they have not measured up to, be it that those aspect of the Bible is all plausible. "A bad workman always blame the tools" an African proverb says.

Then next, what such People will say will practically denied Jesus to justify their almighty self gratifying ways.

The above post was an attempt in rubbishing what the prophet of old wrote, no two ways about that. with such postulation, we can as well conclude that since the prophets prophesied about Jesus, if they were wrong or not inspired, then Jesus himself is a hoax. No? why not? We cannot eat our cake and have it.
If what they wrote was of God, then we should not be selective, God's spirit CANNOT dwell/propel a filthy person.

Jesus said that Moses, in other to accommodate the Hard heartedness of the Jews or to accommodate them, Moses gave them some allowance to Mary more than one wife then or divorce them, how then did Jesus come to know that this was the reason for the allowance if Yahweh did not know what Moses was doing and Moses did not speak from God ?

Yes, Yahweh must have been in the know of what Moses was doing that is why Jesus had the explanation as to what really happened. So, taking Jesus statement out of context to Justify ones lawlessness is no excuse. The Bible says that men spoke from God as they were borne by the Holy spirit.

This Jews were to produce the seed Jesus for the benefit of Mankind, God gave them a lot of tolerance. They even sin over and over but Yahweh kept forgiving them, and that was exactly what Jesus was saying be for the crucked at heart proceeded to twist and take Jesus words out of context.

On same prophets, Jesus said that "all the things the Prophets wrote concerning him will come to pass", was he Jesus lying? would God use self willed prophets? (LUKE 18:31)

Jesus also said that those things written by the prophets were written down so that we might have faith, how can that be if we cannot trust that the prophets spoke by God? How can that be if we are to be selective and picky? it is either Jesus is lying or someone else is deceitful. (JOHN 20"31)

Again, it is either Jesus was suffering from amnesia/forget fullness. Same with Paul, for him to have said that " 'ALL' the things that was written beforehand was written for our benefit so that we might have faith". If Jesus was not suffering from amnesia, it there mean that the person twisting Jesus words here have lost his mind or is simply ignorant.

Am asking, Between the prophets, Jesus existence and you, who should one belief?
When someone is confused, the Bible ask that he should beg God for wisdom, but when the Person does not belief in the Bible and God, such sound advise is lost to such a person.

The Beroeans were recommended for Going back to those same scriptures to verify if what the apostle Paul taught them was so. Meanwhile, here, someone is saying we should not follow such fine example of depending on the scripture as a guide that we were recommended to follow, as the Beroeans did, extolling them, that they were Noble minded.

Again, all the Bible writers must be daft for haven't written a book called Bible, a best seller of all times and end up denying that such beautiful work was theirs. who is there in a class that will score an 'A' in a subject, but on being called out will say the slip is not his? what should such a person be called? certainly, such a person will have to be a nut case. we have to accept that all the Bible writers are a NUT case for rejecting their best seller BOOK (Bible) and saying it is God's word.

Pastor AIO must know what they did not know. SHM.

Science/Technology › Re: Learning Basic Engineering Skills by truthislight: 3:27pm On Apr 19, 2016

vclassics:
Transistors contn.....

MOSFETs

A Metal Oxide semiconductor Field Effect Transistor (MOSFET) is a special transistor dat can perform various functions including switching on of signals and limiting a device's power levels.

They are categorized into 2 forms- d n-channel and p-channel MOSFETs.

They are 'bi-directional in nature and have 3 terminals-d Drain, Gate and Source.

MOSFETS AND INVERTERS

The MOSFET is of great use in manufacturing inverters as it's d best switching transistor.
Basically, what ur inverter does is to invert d DC voltage of ur battery to AC output voltage. It does dat with d help of MOSFETs. That explains why d output capacity of ur inverter is majorly dependent on d power rating of its transformer and MOSFETS used.
*more on this will come as we progress*
IGBT
Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors are a set of transistors dat integrate some of the functionalities of BJT and MOSFET (hence d name). This attribute makes them ideal switching and amplifying components.

They also have 3 terminals- Collector, Emitter and Gate.

Unlike d MOSFET, an IGBT can't switch on current in d forward direction.
Its advantages include fast switching speed, high voltage capability and zero gate drive current.

I will need more information from you.

Do reply.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 (of 222 pages)