₦airaland Forum

hisblud: @trogun while you are thinking of if man has a spirit APART from the breath of life, look at this


@Trogun are you mixing words or confused here, on one hand you say the breath of life is impersonal and on another hand, you say breath of life is an independent living being



contradicts the "impersonal" breath of life as an "independent being"



hmm...

you are the one creating the contradictions where there is no contradiction.

He said that the breath of life is not an independent being QED.

hisblud: yes before death, the life force animate the man abi so definately his good and bad must definately be from the life force before he dies. Do you agree?

which good and bad again?

The doing of Good and bad is an action of the persons mind which is part of the brain.

hisblud: are you saying YES, man has a spirit apart from the breath of life OR NO, man does not have a spirit apart from the breath of life. Note breath of life is spirit.

my friend in that single action called the "breath of life" :

we have the life force that kickstart the life and the breathing process.

D sage: @ TroGunn and Truthislight, I laff at you both. Let me quickly remind you some of the points you've made in your previous posts.

Body or soul is merely a dust and man is notting but dust of the earth. Man became a living soul as a result of breath of life from God.

Are you talking about resurrection of dust or what?

Waiting for your response.

this from you and not me:

D sage: Body or soul is merely a dust and man is notting but dust of the earth.

^^^
error! error!! error!!!

I never said that dust = soul

i said that dust + life force (spirit) = living soul.

Or you can qualify it as "dead soul" meaning no life in it.

D sage: Are you talking about resurrection of dust or what?

^^
where was Adam to enable God to create him?

Why will there be a need for an entity or part of the man to be some where for God to be able to resurrect man?

If Adam was brought to life without him existing somewhere, then God does not need us to be some where to enable resurrection.

Meanwhile, why do you think there is need for one to store up treasure in heaven?
Simple, to give a reason for God to have you in his memory as to remember you.

Those that die and God dont have reason to remember them are gone forever:



>>> "name in the book of life"

hisblud: hisblud: just say either YES, man has spirit apart from the breath of life OR NO, man has no spirit apart from the breath of life.

the "breath of life" = the breath and the life force (spirit)

see:

Genesis 7:22
"All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died." (Genesis 7:22).

Some translation puts it this way:

"All in whose nostrils was the breath of (the force of life) life, of all that was in the dry land, died." (Genesis 7:22).


So, the "breath of life" is made up of the breath + the life force.

hisblud: just say either YES, man has spirit apart from the breath of life OR NO, man has no spirit apart from the breath of life.

the "breath of God" is a reference to the spirit of God and not to oxygen.
the oxygen only sustain the life that was kickstarted by the spirit of God or "breath of God"

Why not pump oxygen into a dummy and see if it will come to life?

D sage: base on some of your previous posts, I will like to ask you the follow;

Do you believe in resurrection? If yes, why? And why not?

"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection oj judgment " (John 5:28-29).
QED.

D sage: Do you believe in resurrection? If yes, why and why not?

"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection oj judgment " (John 5:28-29).
.
QED.

Seun: @truthislight:
You have claimed that a "slave" in the new testament is more-or-less a hired labourer or employee rather than a piece of property to be bought and sold and forced to do whatever his/her owner wants him to do. Can you explain the following bible verses, then?

i had said that what is written in the NT and the use of the word "slave" should not be taken out of context because of the secular understanding of the use of the word slavery since the sense in which the word slave is use in the NT is different from the secular context.

Seun: "Because the patriarchs were jealous of Joseph, they sold him as a slave into Egypt. But God was with him" - Acts 7:9

that statement in the NT is relating a fact of history that happened in the OT.

Dont say you are not familiar with that story of how Joseph was sold.

Am afraid, that cannot be said to be a teaching in the NT sanctioning force labour for the 1st century christians.

Seun: auctioning slavery.
They sold him into ... Hired labor? Employment? How does a person get sold into a voluntary job?

how does this in any way support slavery in the NT?

If you are saying that the Jews in the OT fought wars and took slaves as it were i will not really have contested it.

Seun: "You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings." - 1 Corinthians 7:23

this is actually talking about the price that christ paid to buy back mankind from the sin of Adam and not slavery. No?

Besides, lets see the whole line of argument that was made to serve the purpose of christianity:

"For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant.

"Ye are bought with a price";

be not ye the servants of men. Brethren, let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide with God." (1 Corinthians 7:22-24).
.................

That ^^^ serves the purpose of christianity, to ensure that all kinds of people can freely cone to christ.

The ills of this system should not be used as a hindrance to prevent people from benefiting from the greater picture.

Seun: If a slave is simply a hired labourer or servant, why is it bad to become a slave?

the use of the word "slave" in the NT is not use in the sense that it is used in the secular society today.

I have already explained this in my previous post.

Seun: Is it wrong for a Christian to be employed?

who said it is? Definitely not me.
I said if we conclude that the word "slave" as used in the NT refers to force labour it then means that secular employment today as estate managers are also slaves.

I did not say that employment is wrong.

I also said that the instruction was directed at christians and should not be misconstrued since we know the laws to christians.

Seun: "We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you
say that we shall be set free?” - John 8:33

again, this is not endosing slavery of force labour but slavery to sin that christ was talking about.

see the full text in context:

"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. " (John 8:32-34).
..............:...............

Compare it to this:
"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?" (Romans 6:16).

Definitly not "slavery" in a secular sense as use today.

Seun: What does "we have never been slaves" mean. Does it mean they had never been employed? And why are they implying that a person who needs to be freed must be a slave?

slave of christ.

i believe by now as stated above you will have gotten the sense of what was being said by Jesus.

Seun: If slaves in the new testament are voluntary labourers, why do they need to be "set free"?

being a slave of christ is voluntary.

1. set free from sin.

2. Or, were the apostle were canvassing as not to create disharmony as not to becloud the essence of christianity that will lead all sort of people to christ.

3. All sort of men were welcome into christianity.

Context is very important.
Also note the priority of the apostles.

To create an enabling environment as to serve the purpose of converting all sort of men, the christian quality was preach, this as to attract more convert.
^^^
this ^^ neither justified slavery or but an approach to achieving the aim of converting all sort of men to God.
Peace

D sage: Trogunn, Truthislight and Frosbel should please give a clear difference between the soul and the spirit?

The "spirit" is from God and is the power of God, the spirit of God like the electric current is use by the almighty God to do whatever he wants to do and he is the custodian of it.
(the spirit of God is not the same thing as electric current)

eg:

1. The almighty use his spirit/power for creation.

2. To give life to living things.

3. To energies his prophet.

4. He used it to empower Jesus christ(as a dove)

5. To empower Jesus disciples as tongues of fire.

6. God use his spirit to do all things even to make animal to talk.

That the spirit of God empower/energised something does not mean that the spirit turns to that thing.
Just as:
That electric current energises something does not mean that the thing turns to the electric current.
..................

This spirit is what powers the dust/mould that we then refer to as soul.


soul is that state when the dust/mould is "alife" when it is powered by the spirit.

Soul is a word use to indicate that the entity is being energies by the spirit of God for it to come to life, that state of having life.

Just that state.

Seun: Moral thinking has evolved over time. In bible times, slavery was deemed to be acceptable, which is why it was not condemned even in the new testament.

this is out of context rationalisation.

1. What the new testament refers to as "slave" is not what your conventional "slavery" entails but rather a man with a body of workers or worker.

2. A manager incharge of the masters property, or having oversight over his masters belonging.

3. Hired labourers.

4. The christians that embraces christianity out of their free will were also refered to as "slaves of the lord"

5. Even the overseers or elders in the christian church was refered to as a "slave"

6. Slaves in the NT were not individuals under servitude of compulsion and thrait and chains for labour.

Your application and use of the word "slave" in the secular context that connotes torture and force labour and applying it to the bible is wrong and a strawman or an argument from ignorance at best.

Unless you wish to tell me that :

1. being a hired workman is wrong.

2. An NGO/voluntary service workers are "slave"

3. An estate manager is a "slave"

4. Salaried workers are "slaves"

5. That working under some other persons vineyard (company) for payment/salary is slavery.

If those are not slavery, then you are abusing the bible context of the use of the word "slave".

1. The person that the command was given to was a christian and we know the laws given to christians which does not allow for a force acquisition of properties that are not his lawfully neither are they allowed to engage in wars in the first century christianity.

2. The christian slave was told that he was a free man, but was advised to be exemplary in conduct as to bring honor to his christian calling, this in turn can make it possible for the conversion of his master into christianity.

3. Christianity was geared toward conversion of people to christ irrespective of status and class, as such it was package in such a way it will be attractive to people of all divides.

4. Christianity was not to give room to a certain group of people to reject the message preventing them from being "saved" for christ.
Being saved for christ was paramount and to that end, it focuses on achieving its set objective of ensuring that both master and "slave" can serve christ together without tension.

5. The aim of christianity is getting people ready for the kingdom of God, it is wrong and short sighted to set a contrary yard stick for christianity and use it to judge christian/NT
statement.

Your aims and bible aims are at divergent, if christianity was to loose its focus and start chasing shadows then it will have been a purposeless setup that will have created a destructive/distraction that will have prevented certain kind of people from embracing it(slave/master)

but rather, it positive for peaceful coexisnce as opposed to rebellion.(your projection)

That you dont know the aim of christianity hence your statement above shows your short sightedness in this matter and shows you are not even qualified to criticise it since you lack the full picture.

Seun: (Looking at a woman's boobies? Sin! Enslaving your fellow man? That's ok).

see above.

Seun: The problem with bible-based morality is that the bible's morality is 2,000 years old. People who insist on basing their morality on ancient books can't evolve their morality very much, despite the fact that we know a lot of things that the writers of those ancient books didn't know, which should enable us to make better decisions about what should be considered morally wrong.

if i should say you dont know the essence of christianity and you dont have the full gist of the bible, i will be justified.

For you to be able to pass a judgement that is valid it should be from an informed opinion which you dont have.

At best what you are doing is giving credence to your rationality that has nothing to do with the bible and its message and set objectives which is to accomodate all men in preparation for the kingdom of God

Dont argue from.............
The bible christian NT does not do what you are accusing it.

You guys are grasping at straws to seek relevance for atheism.
Peace

.

Zikkyy: BTW brother truthislight, i need help with a question here:

How come peeps are denied their 'right' to chop & drink whenever JWs hold their memorial of Christ death? the last and only time i attended your memorial i had expectations that food and wine will flow very well your people disappointed me there was no 'chop', there was no wine they were just passing the thing round, peeps were scared of taking a sip. That is not what i read in the bible o! Jesus said we should eat in remembrance of him, he did not say we should pass the plate round there was a bit of sermon and some singing (Jesus did not say you should sing in remembrance of him, did he?).

i am talking on a personal level since i also observed the event.

there is no banning of eating food.

The consideration is avoidance of distraction from the significance of the day to the individual and mankind.

Those usually involved in the preparation of food in an event usually get distracted from the most important part or thing in an event.

Remember what the reply of Jesus was to martha that was busy in the preparation of food instead of listening to Jesus:

"Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, which also sat at Jesus’ feet, and heard his word "But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me. And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: "But very little thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her." (Luke 10:38-42)
................................

With this principle in mind it is important not to get any one distracted and miss the significance of the event.

However, if someone is able to get the "need full" or take time out without getting anybody distracted it is not bad. The priority is to apply the principles and give priority to spiritual things.

For me, personally, depending, i can take friends out later, but all this are not a hard and fast rule.

You should set priority first on spiritual things.

Zikkyy: abegi! this is item #9 on the JW Xmas criticism checklist We have seen this one before jor it's been debunked na! Try again

keep "debunking" the truth of God's word, i hope you will be able to reward your self with everlasting life in the absent of Yahweh.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]I was going to touch on the above when we get to question 9 but I'll just quip in something here and we'll still touch on it when we get to question 9. You don't need to reply me so we don't go off on a tangent you can continue exploring it with davidlyan.



Anyway, that's by the way. For now please answer my question 4: How do you explain human subjective consciousness?[/quote]random memory scan individual specific based on experiences has a lot to do with subjective reality.

mazaje: What else apart from the brain?. . .We do NOT have a complete understanding about brain chemistry. . .Our understanding of it is deep but far from what we will want to know. . .

experiences over time can directly have a corolation to ones perception of his evironment.

For starters, ones formative evironment have a direct relation to the individuals interpretation of incidences in ones life later years.

So, subjective reality has a lot to do with the data based from experience of ones mind.

This because the mind as a cpu will always do a random scan of the memory befor sending out an output.

mazaje: You can ONLY control your own thoughts when you brain is in stable a condition. . .You can not completely control your thoughts if you are under some drugs (your brain is disturbed), or when you suffer brain injury. . .You can even lose your ability to think completely with a brain injury. . .Because of that I am of the opinion that the brain is responsible for it all. . .

yes, the brain is the central processor, but it can be influence externally just as the cpu of a computer can be influence externally via a remote process.

davidylan: Now we are getting somewhere... i think everyone here agrees with you that chemical reactions in the brain are responsible for the thought process. Just the same way your leg is responsible for forward or backward movement... but is your leg solely responsible for getting you from point A to B? Is your leg not merely a vehicle to accomplish a conscious choice made by your brain that your leg had absolutely no part in determining? Did your leg unilaterally decide to travel to Lagos on its own without your own input?

I am squarely of the opinion that there is a non-physical portion of the human that is responsible for triggering thought. Your brain chemistry only serves as the messenger to shaping those thoughts.

1. it is stating the truth to say that super natural beings (spirit creatures) can infuse ideas into our brain as can be attested to by the bible, but to credit this to an external "soul" outside the man and that can leave the man is unbiblical.

2. The brain is also capable of imaginary abstract reasoning and permutations that can be rehearse later on by the person.,
this with or without external influen.

If i am ask to show from the bible that spirit creatures can influence man from the bible then i will.

Come to look at it, can we access a had drive(cpu) directly and remotely? Yes we can.

That the thought process is not just an internal process is no justification for a notion of an external soul.

This is very clearly stated in the bible as can be seen by visions and "spirit owing to the influence of spirit creature and not an "external soul".

(the bible is written via inspiration of God and not an "external soul" action.

And we know that the soul is not = the spirit or spirit creatures.

Peace

davidylan: very simple... you said (paraphrasing here) that thoughts are purely a result of chemical reactions in the brain. Since it is possible to actually create dopamine in the lab or serotonin... is it possible to create a specific thought pattern by injecting a specific concoction of neurotransmitters into the brain?

human dont fully know how the brain function or its mechanism, how then can that question be valid?

greatgenius: ok you failed to answer the question! i didnst ask you about trinity! we havent gotten to that..i ask you if you believe that God the father is equal to God the son or word.. oh and I disagree you sort things out easily.. first everything in its core is in the essence of God.. The true nature and essence of God is not its form. form is an illusiion. God can take on any form and all forms..in your purest form as a light being you can take on any form.. God is not a personification.. she/he/it is simply THE CREATOR. he created you in her image and likeness to create your world as God in flesh..image and likewise here means you are a microcosm of it..not necessarily the form. you were created with the creative power of the universe on your lips. you are a microcosm of her. like God you are a creator and you create your world from the power of your mind. like God your real essence is energy, a light being.. you have all the power of the universe in you... you just ignorant to it..

you have not answered my question.

Are gorillas made in the image of God?

If yes how, if no why?

Am waiting.

greatgenius: again you are dancing
1. the filament glows red vai the action of the current..same way the lifeless body animates via the power of the spirit of God
2. yes we know and have established that the current is not the filamet just like the spirit is not the body or you are not your body.
3. yes light from the bulb is neither the filament nor current.. same way life or what you have chosen to call living soul here is not either the body or spirit but a combination of both body and power of the spirit is what brings the life as you know it..
4.(But the objective of bringing the filament and the current together is to get the light)..again we have established that..the objective of the spirit animating the body is to experience life in physicality..or be a living soul as you have termed it..

at this point either you refusing to acknowledge that you are God made man because of fear that your "god" will strike you for heresy or you really lack understanding...

lol.

Dude, you are funny.

All i know the bible says is that we are "made in the image of God"

if i am God and i cannot "change the colour of my hair from black to white"

i only know it was satan that said "Adam will be like God"

@Zikky and all Chrismas celebrant

Take a lift from something similar like christmas that happened with the nation of Israel.

Exodus 32:3-10:
3 So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. 4 He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the
shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they
said, “These are your gods,[b] Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.” 5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of the calf and announced, “Tomorrow there will be a
festival to the LORD.” 6 So the next day the people rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and
presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat
down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in
revelry. 7 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt,
have become corrupt. 8 They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have
made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf.
They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it
and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who
brought you up out of Egypt.’ 9 “I have seen these people,” the LORD said to Moses, “and they are a stiff-necked people. 10 Now leave me alone so that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them. Then I
will make you into a great nation.”


Chrismas is also similar to something that the Jews did in the past and the almighty kill them.

"What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils." (1 Corinthians 10:19-20).

Keep sacrificing with the pegan to idols.

You are on your own still.

when the Jews moulded the calf as it was done in egypt they also changed the name and said that it is for the worship of Yahweh.

Chrismas is also a name changed ceremony.

greatgenius: you just admitted that people [/b]are made up of souls a combination of [b]dust and spirit of God.. are you now changing your stance and equating people to only dust/body? Are people their body or body and spirit?..or you dont read what you write..

just as the current enters the radio and it start to talk so also the spirit enters the dust/mould and it starts to talk/have life/becomes a soul.

When the current leaves the radio it ceases to talk so also the spirit leaves the body/dust/mould and it ceases to live. It dies. The living that it had when the spirit was in it is call "soul"

the current force that drove the radio is just a force that has no shape and can power whatever device it goes into, so also is the spirit(power) of God it has no shape or form but can drive/empower a lot of things.

When it goes out of the man it goes out as it came = the force of live, it has no shape.

"The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence." (Psalm 115:17).

Nothing of the man exist any more.

The spirit is God's power.

The hope of further life is at the mercy of Almighty God.

It is him that can restore back the person to live through the Resurection. (Restoring back the life of the person that he has in his memory.

greatgenius: yes from the point of view that you all are looking at it yes it is illogical... becuase ultimately there is really nothing like something ceasing to exist. it only only changes form.. A soul "dying" doesnt cease to exist it only changes form..Also if you want to get technical i can make a case that, the dust where the body of a man came from is as immortal as the spirit of God... Technically a soul does not "die" it only changes form.. when the living soul "dies" the part of it that is spirit goes to where it came from and the other part which is dust goes to where it came from..

this ^^^ are your words and not what the bible teaches.

Your words and the bible which should we accept?

The bible made a mistake to you abi?

Then, can you explain where the illumination from the light bulb that was produce by the combination of filament and current went to when the current goes off or the bulb is broken?

D sage: Gen 2:7 And the Lord God made man from the dust of the earth,breathing into him the breath of life: and man became a living soul.

The above bible verse is enough to ascertain the fact that the soul is breath from God and it's external/ immortal. It goes back to God at death and the dead body on the other hand,returns back to the dust of the earth from which it was made.

why did you not read it well?

That scripture said that :

1. God made man/mould from the dust(lifeless)

(2) blew breath(spirit) into his nostril.

(3) dust + breath(spirit) = soul

simple!

Why then will the "soul" be what that will go back and not the spirit?

We know that the spirit is God's or God's power.

Was it the soul that came down to the man or it was the spirit?

Why is it now the soul that will go back to God?

Did the bible made a mistake when it said that the soul dies?

The soul is comparable to the light illumination that a light bulb produces, the illumination goes no where when the source of power current goes "off" so also the soul goes no where when the spirit that is from God goes "off", but rather it perishes just as the illumination of the bulb vernishes.

Simple, "the soul dies".

deebrain: Who, i pray thee, is the chief hell fire preacher...?

dont mind him and his inability to decipher the words of Jesus.

Jesus himself said that he speaks in riddle and perable so that the high and mighty of this world that are not humble will not understand.