₦airaland Forum

MacDaddy01: This is what I hate about you Muskeeto. You are never man enough to discuss and debate your convictions. You are 100% right here but like an atheist with no ballz, you run away from Anony and co.

https://gifsforum.com/images/image/son%20i%20am%20disapoint/grand/son_i_am_disappoint.jpg

His he your "son" (atheist) ?

musKeeto: Sometimes, I wonder if Christianity was supposed to be this complicated. What happens to those who believe but have no access to internet or other books?
What happens when they are "strongly rooted" in "wrong" doctrines?
@Mr. Anony, this was why I had the discussion with you once about the Bible being the word of God.. I still believe that if there's indeed a God, he would imprint his constitution on the heart not pages..

I leave you guys to your arguments..

friend, dont worry.
The judge that searches the heart man as though it is a computer (C) drive knows those that are ignorant, and those that are wilful defaulters.

No need to worry.

thehomer: How is anything I said circular reasoning?

Well what makes you think that humans are intelligently designed?

what makes you think that your brain came by chance?

Kay 17: ^^

If an intelligent designer is required for complexity, one can easily point to the process of rain formation and change in state of water according to varying temperatures.

you forgot the laws that govern all this.
How did they come about?

thehomer: By what criteria do you decide that a certain object is so complex that it must have been made by someone?



Who says there was ever nothing? Do you think there was ever nothing?



People answer questions not statements. Are you saying that time always existed?



Is consciousness reasonable without some sort of physical component?



Because there are several first cause arguments, you have to present one for me to show you how it is fallacious. I shouldn't be both formulating the argument for you and destroying them. If you expect me to, then you're just being lazy.



See my responses to MyJoe and Mr_Anony.

i think therhomer should also answer question in this forum.

Not by directing us to links.

thehomer: The phone and the human are supposed to be complete systems in themselves aren't they? No one is asking you to take the phone apart, they're asking you to compare a phone to a person not a haemoglobin molecule to the phone. Do you actually understand what the analogy is supposed to demonstrate?



No, the specifics of those complex objects are the point. The analogy fails if the complexities don't match significantly. It looks as if you don't know what an argument from analogy is supposed to look like. Please take a look at this article. It should show you why you actually have to consider those objects in the way I'm talking about.

I also notice that you've run away from actually saying what it is that you see that makes you conclude that there was a designer and that is why you've side-stepped the list I presented to you for classification.

are you confused?
Or
Can you answer the question now?

The article you posted was written by a human like you, so, pls, show that you deserved all this time/attention by answering this questions or it becomes necessary to concede that you therhomer is incompetent and as such you are Westing our time.

Should we conclude that it is the writer/editor of the link that have the capacity to answer the question while you cannot?

thehomer: Actually, you are comparing living things to non-living things. Phones and computers are non-living things while humans are living things.
How can reproduction be irrelevant when it is a significant reason why the analogy fails?

Recall that you actually need to show that phones are analogous to people. We've seen phone makers and we know what phones are have you seen people makers and do you know what people are for?



Placing the word "structure" in brackets doesn't actually qualify mechanism.



I simply want you to examine them in a consistent manner that one can use to decide on whether what they're looking at is complex and that it requires someone making it.

Based on what you're saying, there are no objects that exist that aren't designed. i.e everything humans encounter are designed. Would that be your conclusion?

this is circular reasoninging.

The argument is that intelligent designs have a maker QED

Stop chasing cat and mouse!

They both are intelligent design phone/human, human that design them are more inteligent QED.

If therhomer is not an intelligent entity, fine. An exception then.

In both we have variety/degree of intelligence but the fact is they remain intelligent designs.

Simply answer the question and spare us the childs play.
Imagine!

To you, if intelligent design does not deserved a maker fine, if it does, say so and stop the hide and seek game.

Childs Play.

Kay 17: Which is it, a phone suggests a maker because of its complexity or by our experience phones are made by men?

i feel you are dragging the discuss back/always serving as a distraction.

I have seen you do this very often with your interjection.

thehomer: The remora get some benefit from the shark by feeding on left overs that the shark cannot eat. For all we know, sharks may not like how they taste.

the sharks dont like how they test but they like the laundry and opened their mouth for them!
Why?

PLease educate us why they both love it?

Did you teach the both of them?

Dp

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Some days I enjoy reading Delafruita....[/quote]Dalafruita is hungry.

And is feeding on.......

inurmind: To show u how inaccurate and basless the bible is, here is an example:
in revelation, John said he saw STARS fall from the sky to the earth.lol.

Mind u some stars are even bigger than the sun which is so many times bigger than earth.
So tell me how that is possible.

My friends pls start thinking and do not be limited to the circumstances of ur birth.
The bible is just a bunch of fairy tales by people limited to the undertanding of their time.

plane ignorance!

manmustwac: So how old is this planet according to the bible then 6 to 10'000 years? While science give a more accurate description like 4 billion years

science dating system has been modified how many times? Can you say?

tobechi20: Do u think that science is more accurate than bible?

the bible is not a science text book.

But when the bible touches on scintific matters it is always spot on.

When science gets it right then it will rhyme with what the bible said on those points.

frosbel: It depends on what speaking in tongues means to you, if it is 'gibberish' which no one can understand then we have a problem, but if it can be interpreted and is a genuine language spoken but foreign to the speaker then we are in order.

If we look at this verse below, it clearly shows that the disciples spoke in different languages which were correctly understood by others in amazement.

"When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language." - Acts 2:6

It was not all this crazy stuff going on where we hear people saying, mamamama, papapaa, giigigigigigi , gagagagaga , bababababa, nananana and all that nonsense.

lol.

Guy, you have come along way.

Goshen360: @ Frosbel,

Is tongues also a PAGAN doctrine or teaching......because as you see me, your brother laughing in tongues, you didn't rebuke me o. ....in tongues....

funny guy.

Are you sure you are still laughing?

frosbel: actually it is not irrelevant, it is presumptuous and almost daring to ignore the harmony of scripture to the support of plain truths.

To ask that we should discard 100 scriptures for the sake of it , even though they all point to ONE TRUTH is dangerous.

I am not saying that we need 100 verses to support a particular truth, but where we have 100 verses in symphony to the understanding of a doctrine , you cannot then use 2 or 3 others , twist them out of context without proper research and condemn the facts at hand.

Bottom line is that the Trinity is a PAGAN doctrine, because it has been church tradition for eons is meaningless, if it does not add up to scripture it MUST be discarded.

People have been killed and tortured , bullied and called heretics for rejecting this falsehood, this in itself goes a long way to tell us what spirit is behind this strange teaching.

just like the moslem kills when any one try to expose their muhamad.

Same spirit.

Goshen360: ......in tongues. Abi tongues sef na pagan ni

i hope you are not deceiving us with this smiling faces?

I some how imagine that you are not smiling right now!!!

Goshen360: ......in tongues. Abi tongues sef na pagan ni

i hope you are not deceiving us with this smiling faces?

I some how imagine that you are not smiling right now!!!

[quote author=Mr_Anony]If it is true that you believe that the entirety of the bible is true, then it is irrelevant if 100 verse say one thing and 7 verses say another. 100 verses do not nullify 7 verses just because they are 100 in number.
All scripture must be true. Where they seem to contradict, an effort should be made to reconcile our understanding and not seeking one verse to use to refute another verse. Don't you think so?[/quote]i thought we have been trying to find just one scripture to backed up the trinity, how come seven now?

Or is Frosbel saying that trinitarians cite 7 scripture to backed their trinity?

Can i see the seven(7) passages that support the trinity?

plaetton: Irrational skepticism is when when a person remains obstinate and refuses to open one's eyes and mind [/b]to the wonderous beauties and the eternal realms [b] of blind faith.

at least you did address the op.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]@thehomer, Here's something I'm willing to defend: An irrational skeptic is one who asks questions but doesn't seek an answer. The aim of his skepticism is not to understand but to undermine. Usually, the irrational skeptic does not have a basis from which he makes his counter arguments[/quote]i dont know if this can be said to be true of Thehomer.

He seems to be different from martian and Logicboy on this forum.

A closer look at their approach on this thread will explain this.

MacDaddy01: The beginning of the article is a fail.


Rational skeptics are progressive not conservatives. Conservative does not change tradition. A rational skeptic is progressive in thinking, changing and improving as new facts come out.

A conservative will not change what works for him or her unless the thing is broken.

^^^
this is more sane or a rational approached.

It attempt to show the merit or demerit of the op under consideration and can make his case hence.

Fine bro, at least one can understand where you are heading to and not being all together directionless.

thehomer: Do you agree with what that article says? Are you willing to defend it?

that op seems to described what you just said.

First, you blanked out all possibility of rationality in the op and and proceeded to asked the above.

Not even selectively.

That was very narrow of you.

frosbel: Well so simple to us , but don't forget those who hate simplicity , they will turn one simple verse in the bible on it's head , and form a theology so complex that even 12 volumes will not be enough to contain the content

^^^
very true a statement.

haibe: I will just ask a simple question to you anti-trinitarians

^^^

guy, pls, pls pls.

Dont, i repeat, NEVER call me with a name that attached me to the word "TRINITY" again.

If it is a joke just STOP it hence forth.

Never you gum me to that pegan gods again, NEVER.

Just go ahead to ask your question without you calling us anti"trinitarians" again, do you get that?

And this goes to all you trinitarians!!!

Just Imagine that

Is it a joke? STOP IT.

haibe: Without question, this is the great mystery of our faith:".
"Christ was revealed in a human body" and vindicated by the
Spirit. He was seen by angels and announced to the nations.
He was believed in throughout the world and taken to heaven
in glory.

"Christ was revealed in a human body"

My brother the trinity is not difficult to comprehend as you think.
For christ to be revealed in a human body, dont you think he must have been in another nature?

The word(who is God)(john 1:1) was made flesh and dwelt among us.(John 1:14)...simple as A B C'

you dont even know what the trinity is saying.

Who said that christ has not existed in heaven befor coming to earth?

Micah 5:2

this is not the issue/problem with the trinity.

ijawkid: Or let us reason this way according to goshens analogy....

1......If goshen as son(from a parent) dies in a car aCcident(God forbid..goshen is my beloved brother) While going to see his parents would we say goshen as Father(to his own children) and goshen as husband(to a wife) will still keep living or that it just a manifestation of goshen that died and not Goshen ??......


Ok let's look @ it this way......

2.....Is it possible for Goshen as Father(to his children) pick up a phone and call Goshen as son(to his parents) in an in.stance??....won't we call goshen a mad man suffering from schizophrenia??....

My point::::

From 1.....trinitarians and goshen is saying that a part of God can die and that infact God did die.....that would be the most stupid thing that ever happened.....

From 2......trinitarians are also saying that when Jesus said the Father is greater than He is ,he(Jesus) was on some shekpe and infact forgot who he was........and that Jesus was suffering from multiple personality disorder........
Also when Yahweh spoke to Jesus from heaven,just as Goshen as Father(to his children) would pick up a phone and call Goshen as son ( to his parents),trinitarians are implying that Yahweh was speaking to himself.....what then do we call God??....


Trinitarians leave trinity alone and stick to what d bible teaches......

^^^
I love that.

Goshen360: Okay my brother.....we will always disagree to agree and leave room for our imperfection to the interpretation of scriptures. What am saying is, showing you guys that SOME translations (Amplified, GWT and Message) EXPLICITLY says JESUS is the TRUE GOD according to 1 John 5:20. It shouldn't border us if some translation didn't clarify "WHO" the TRUE GOD is according to our text for this thread BUT why should it also border us when SOME translations EXPLICITLY make it clear, calling JESUS the TRUE. Should be now discard those translations that explicitly calls Jesus the TRUE God just because it doesn't go with us? I had to consult ALL of the available translation to be clear and here we have it. It's okay if you don't believe in Trinity, but I believe it's NOT a pagan teaching.

Enjoy your weekend bro. It is well.

i did not even see any of those translation saying that Jesus is the "true God", that statement was a reference to the father that was the subject of the text.

There is even no translation problem here but you.
You are the one forcing your opinion on that text.

Goshen360: My brother, GOD is ONE! ......not three. The same You as father (if you have kids), as husband (if married) and as son (from a parent). Picture this and you will understand. It is the nature of God as DIVINE being, not MAN. It is the same ONE GOD who manifest Himself as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.......scripture says the LORD is THE Spirit. How do we explain Jesus (Lord) being Spirit? if it is NOT same person?

Besisde, Kindly address the TRANSLATIONS that TRANSLATED 1 John 5:20 as Jesus being TRUE GOD. This is what I want you to address......afterall, you and I didn't write the Bible.

^^^

how can the son of a king be the king?

We can only have the son stand in for the king but that does not mean he is the king.

this is you expressing your limitation and inability to comprehend a very simple scripture.

Since you must accept the trinity befor you are accepted as a pastor, i can understand your worries, and why you must "make sense of the trinity" to your self.

my sympathy though.

frosbel: Let us stick with the KJV , at least you and I can understand words such as betwixt and tithes



Sorry what does this mean :

phrase, "the true God," is sandwiched between "his Son Jesus Christ" and "eternal life.



Foul.

The verse explicitly made a demarcation between the Son and GOD as follows :

true God because we live in fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ







I think to the contrary it is the Trinitarians who are holding onto the fallacy that the apostles ever thought that Jesus was GOD.

If this was such an important subject in the early church , how come we never hear or see any record of disputes to this regard , until 300 years or so later when that Pagan emperor institutionalised the apostate brand of Christian and endorsed heresies such as the Trinity.

Dissenters were even killed to defend this Pagan doctrine.


Jesus's brothers Jude and James , all believed in ONE GOD , you would have thought that if this was not clear or if someone tried to infiltrate the church with a unitarian doctrine as the majority of Jews at that time held on to , there would have been a rancour.

"You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder." - James 2:19


We see warnings against circumcision and the Judaisers , but never any argument about the ONE indivisible GOD.

The entire new testament is also silent on this matter , because they knew that God is , was and always had been ONE. If you notice in most of the epistles , the apostles always referred to GOD as the Father and the Lord Jesus as his SON, servant or even prophet.





Coming back to your main argument, let us use the KJV bible as you requested.


20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

Notice the FULL STOP and then a new sentence to summarily confirm the previous sentence that GOD or Yahweh is the only true GOD.

John 17:3

"This is life eternal that they know the only true God, and Jesus christ whom thou has sent".

Getting to know the father Yahweh is through the son jesus christ, that the father Yahweh had sent to lead us to the father Yahweh.

So simple.

BARRISTERS: @Truthslight


We are ok and fine! i 've been so busy these days but still trying to find the time to make response, thanks anyway.

o, i see, you are welcome though.
Peace

Jenwitemi: LOL! This is crazy hilarious funny.

@ Frosbel

wow! Lol

1. Lets try Obediah77(aka, Buzu)
2. Oladegbu
3. Mmmmm!

If they fail the interview Does that mean majority of persons will not make it to salvation?

Thought God's words should be made easy for all to understand?

Pls add this word, "CONCUPISCENCE"
1thessolonians 4:5

my mum could not get the meaning of the above word also.