₦airaland Forum

manmustwac: All the praying and fasting bedore and durring the olympics didn't help nigeria to win a single medal whereas atheist Britain who spend more time & money on preparation instead of superstitious prayers won 29 gold medals.

who told u that d athlete never prayed? You are making conclusion without a grasp of d variables, im very sure u are a very bad scientist. Actually ur example simply proves d christian stand point, self confidence, prayer etc would hardly lead u far unless hardwork is add. Faith without work is dead (holy bible).
Peace

2good: You don't need prayer to be successful. Praying is a waste of time. All you need is hard work with some luck.

i thought an atheist doesnt believe in luck, becos luck presupposes and implies the presences of an outside and powerful force.
Well ur post is a variance of what atheist think is objective truth.
Suprise suprise.
Peace

Pastor AIO: I fear it would derail the thread. I have tried opening threads to discuss it but no one seemed interested in the discussion.

i havent seen d thread i would love to post my comments.

anyway, no biggie.

But it might help to consider what Jesus says here:



Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved."
Matt 9:17

Was Jesus talking about a one time event in history or was he suggesting that the wine was always new and so the wineskins need to always be renewed continually?

d key to dat passage is reading in d context it start at vers 14 fasting and d presence of Jesus and Jesus was saying that those ritual (fasting) dont apply when he is around it would be like patching to different pieces or d wineskin case. After Jesus left d disciples did fast and no one considered it patching an old cloth with a new one.

If symbols (and rituals) carry and convey truths . . . then must they constantly be revised and renewed in order to effectively convey these Truths? Or will yesterday's symbols suffice for all time?

well i think those symbols and ritual change when the truth they convey or d covenant they signify change. Till Jesus circumcision remained a symbol of d old covenant, the ritual of d last supper didnt have a time stamp on it. It simply say do this in remembrance of me.

(I am assuming that baptism is merely symbolic).

i dont think 'merely symbolic' cuts it for me, it is a sign alright but it symbolises grace and God uses it to give grace. That is why d bible says 'baptism now saves us'. Well i sign God uses is not 'merely a symbol' for me, but in a sense u are right it is still a symbol.
Peace

buzugee: i guess 'Major General' will suffice

no!!! Dear, mister would do just fine, ubenedictus better or ben. I really dislike titles. I prefer to be just me.
Peace, commander-in-chief.

BARRISTERS: @OLAADEGBU

im happy that you quoted this bible verse below to affirm your point;
John 10:30-33



There is no reason to take this verse to mean that Christ was saying that he and the Father make up “one God.” The phrase was a common one,the same greek translstion used for paul and apollos,a neuter form,but can you deny the fact that jesus did not say ''i and my father are one person?''and that wisdom demands that since the word 'one' was an open word and two persons that are reffered to 'we' are not in the 'neuter' sense since it did not specifically say 'i and my father are one person' ,then we have to verify other options,

the trinitarians never said the father and Jesus are one person, they said father and son are one in nature. U are arguing a case that wasnt made, a worthless arguement.

for example,in the same book of john;

john 17:21

''That [size=18pt]they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us[/size]: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me''.

why not consider the verse above to add to the trinity? and refusal to do so is called 'cherrypicking'.
Even today if someone say 'i and my father are one', people would know exactly what he meant—he and his father are very much alike.

well i believe christians have dsame spirit d fada and son has d same nature. I cant find any arguement.

When Paul wrote to the Corinthians about his ministry there, he said that he had planted the seed and Apollos had watered it. Then he said, [size=14pt]“he who plants and he who waters are one” [/size](1 Cor. 3:8 – KJV). In the Greek texts, the wording of Paul is the same as that in John 10:30, yet no one claims that Paul and Apollos make up “one being.” Furthermore, the NIV translates 1 Corinthians 3:8 as “he who plants and he who waters have one purpose.” Why translate the phrase as “are one” in one place, but as “have one purpose” in another place? In this case, translating the same phrase in two different ways obscures the clear meaning of Christ’s statement in

u didnt see d context in case u didnt notice most theologian after reading in context says 'd one who plantd and one wu watad are equal'. I dont really see ur arguement, in the context equal goes

John 10:30: Christ always did the Father’s will; he and God have “one purpose.”

he and d father has more than one purpose, they have one nature, the father is God and so is d son.

Christ uses the concept of “being one” in other places, and from them one can see that “one purpose” is what is meant. John 11:52 says Jesus was to die to make all God’s children “one.” In John 17:11, 21 and 22, Jesus prayed to God that his followers would be “one” as he and God were “one.” We think it is obvious that Jesus was not praying that all his followers would become one being or “substance” just as he and his Father were one being or “substance.”

at least all christians are one in faith, one body in christ and one spirit not just one purpose. So dont give me d purpose crap.

We believe the meaning is clear: Jesus was praying that all his followers be one in purpose just as he and God were one in purpose.

no friend not just purpose, but spirit and faith and since God got no body to be one in, im sure he is one in nature.

The context of John 10:30 shows conclusively that Jesus was referring to the fact that he had the same purpose as God did. Jesus was speaking about his ability to keep the “sheep,” the believers, who came to him. He said that no one could take them out of his hand and that no one could take them out of his Father’s hand. Then he said that he and the Father were “one,” i.e., had one purpose, which was to keep and protect the sheep.

and lastly,see some strong verses that destroyed any of your affirmation to seperate persons in God.

if jesus is God himself,why would jesus not share same knowledge with God here;


[size=14pt]Mathew 24:36;
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.[/size]
or why is jesus saying this to himself;

Matthew 27:46

46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli,[a] lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”)

that only proves that Jesus was a man

you knew that you trinitarians have lost this argument,but lets go now!!!

actually i didnt see the any good point.
Peace

Ihedinobi: About the symbol of water baptism, I'm sorry if I sounded disrespectful or anything like that. My word is not law. One can search the Scriptures for oneself. However, I am interested in that part of your statement about the symbols of a covenant remaining effective until the covenant expires. I'm very interested to study this matter with other believers. It's more than a little scary to make a declaration like I have, but I think that there is Scriptural strength backing it. The prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Hosea seem to revolve about it and much of the prophecies and teachings concerning the times of the end appear to touch upon it. If it suits you and any other interested party, I could start a thread on it, unless room is found for it on this thread.

i understand ur idea and thanks for d charity in d thread. I would love to see d prophesy where baptism lost it meaning and significance.
Peace

Ptolomeus: Right.
Catholics defend Hitler.
I think the question is answered by the thread themselves.
OUT.

aha! Are u happy now? You cant find any proof against the catholic church in d nazi case, u cant find any word where a church council or pope support hitlers injustices, infact u see an encyclical against hitler's injustices and yet u just want to run and hide, u just cant face it. It is a pity u just cant face d truth and i hate a discussion where d other party is afraid of d truth or too scared to admit it wen he sees d truth. As much as i respect people, i would be sincere ur attitude irritates me.
I hope that satisfys u.

Ihedinobi: Quite right. I just thought it'd be clearer using the word "quality". "Godness" is indeed a Nature much like Love is.

i totally get ur point.

truthislight: am fine. Thank you.

Please, lets not go into meal thing here.

i belive i have already finished and concluded that discussion. The once a year thing isnt true and it is concluded.
Peace

ijawkid: Those christians that paul asked to make intercessions in behalf of there fellow brothers were they already dead??

in christ non is dead.

Was paul asking brothers and sisters to make dead people there intercessors??

incase u dont know those who have passed on are also my brodas and sis, it is called the communion of saints. And my dear in christ there is no dead, but how would u understand wen u dont even blive dat a human has a spirit.

Or was paul asking christian folks who were already dead to pray for kings and all those needing prayers??



Imams and pastors are persons who are alive who d bible. Or quaran as d case mayb had given mandate to take d lead.....james 5:14 $ 15

i didnt check d passage but im sure it is about d prayer of d righteous, i didnt see anything there specifying that d pson must b alive

Those verses apply to persons who are alive....

Mary is dead oooooo....

How can d dead intercede for others??

Where in d bible did u hear that Gods people prayed thru d dead to intercede for them??

Please mention just 1 verse and I'll quit this discuss....

U might wanna tell me that when mary was alive people begged her to beg her son to change water into wine @ a wedding ceremony...u might wanna use that as an example....but d truth is mary was alive and so also was Jesus on earth with her.....

But mary is dead...she is dead my bro.....

No isrealite or early christian with there right senses would have even pleaded with mary to intercede for them even when she was alive and when Jesus had gone back to heaven.....

hahaha u make me laugh,

That would totally go against Yahwehs arrangement.....

That wuld be ancestral worship my bro...

Only pagans expected d dead to intercede for them.......




That shuld be tantamount to ancestral worship....

The only person who died, was ressurected and has d right to intercede for us is JESUS and only Jesus......

Mary is far away from such responsibility......

hahaha no body in christ is dead just learn that even though u may nt undastand since u dont tink humans have spirit.
Peace

tintingz: And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, 'Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah'?" He willsay: "Glory to Thee! Never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, though I know not what in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden. [Qur'an 5:116]

sorry dear friend i dont even feel d need to defend myself to the quran, no hard feelings but i dont blive it.

......................................................................
Firstly muslims don't depend on imams prayer both imam and the prayer seeker fear God they know it is God who only answer prayers having faith in God only not imams...

and any good catholic know that it is God who answers prayers not some saints.

we don't ask prophets, angels to pray for us they are God creations...

but u ask imams who are also just God creations

but catholics call on apostles and Mary forgeting that they are dead Quran says
Those you call on besides Allah do not create anything. They are themselves created. They are dead, not alive, and they are not aware of when they will be raised. (Quran 20-21)

my dear that is d quran not the bible, in the bible Paul wish for death so he can be with christ for me what u call death is simply a transition to another life. And those guys u called dead are alive in christ.

This two verses are enof I don't need to start quoting the whole verse of Quran...Peace

i dont really need d quran quote.
Peace

frosbel: A Muslim lawyer in Egypt is arguing that, because Christians believe Jesus is the Son of God, they are clearly polytheistic infidels, and not the “Christians,” the “Nassara,” that the Koran speaks tolerably of, on occasion. Accordingly, Egypt's Copts, because they profess the Trinity, must be barred from having any say regarding the new constitution. “Lawyer Requests Exclusion of Copts from Constitutional Committee for being ‘Polytheists,’" from Coptic Solidarity, July 30:

Sherif Gadallah, a lawyer from Alexandria has submitted a report to the public prosecutor, against the president of the court of appeal, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Mosque, the interim Pope of Alexandria as well as President Mohamed Morsy requesting the exclusion of Copts from the committee in charge of forming Egypt's constitution, claiming that Orthodox Copts are not representative of Egypt's Christian population, because they are simply not "nassara"; a substitute term employed by Salafists to refer to people of Christian faith, this term has developed pejorative connotations, being used by those who loathe Christians the most; the use of which often justified by the fact that the term "Christian" was never mentioned in the Quran.

According to Mr. Gadallah Orthodox Copts are not "Nassara, or even Christian"; they can be counted among the "polytheists" which makes them non-representative of Egypt's Christians.

Mr. Gadallah bases his request on purely Islamic grounds. He states that the essence of all heavenly religions is that "Allah is one and there is no god but Him", and that the prophets of Allah, Moses, Eissa [Arabic for Jesus] and Mohamed, are but humans sent by Allah to pass along His message to His Creatures, so if a certain denomination of a certain religion claims that their prophet is the "son of God" or "is God", it is then considered infidel and a dissident of that religion. Gadallah goes on to ask the Grand Mufti to have Al-Azhar issue a clear statement about the verdict of Sharia regarding Copts who claim that Jesus is the son of God.

http://www.copticsolidarity.org/cs-releases/738-lawyer-requests-exclusion-of-copts-from-constitutional-committee-for-being-polytheists

this is too bad, that region is already unstable now dis guy is bringing religious buhaha an is sure to unsettle thing. Both copts and muslims came together and pursued mubarak, why cant they come together to lead? I hope this very intolerant idea is not adopted, because if it is the vatican just has a new situation to make a speech on since copts are catholics and the unstable situation will worsen when the copts feel sidelined.
I wish them peace.

bright007: Hello forumites,I have been doing å lot of philosophy and have decided to share some disturbing topics on philosophy that have defied permanent solutions.I believe we all have the ability to think critically and come out with our opinion on specific issues.
The question being asked here is "Does Man have freewill?.Is he predetermined?.
Now let's discuss:It is generally assumed that man is free and consequently has freewill,that is,the freedom to do
things and not to,act in one way or another.Despite this claim.it seems man's freewill is not nearly as free as its is generally assumed.Å gainst this background,there has been å plethora of arguments for and against freewill.For instance,John Searle in his arguments in favour of freewill states that Evolution has given us å form of experience of voluntary action where the experience of freedom,that is to say,the experience of of the sense of alternative possibilities,is built into every conscious,voluntary,intentional human behaviour".
John Hospers on the other hand evaluated human freedom and freewill from å different perspective.According to Hospers,freewill is å mere illusion,we talk about freewill,and say for example,the person is free to do so-and-so if he wants to and forget that his wanting is caught up in the stream of determinism,that unconscious forces drive him into wanting to do the thing in question.The analogy of the puppet whose intentions are manipulated from behind in wires....is å telling one at almost every point"
Though Searle accepted freewill ,he is not unconscious of the difficulty associated with the problem of determinism. Despite the irreconcilable positions between freewill and determinism,Searle though it was more commonsensical to opt for Freewill since man is å rational,free,conscious and mindfull agent.What is meant by freedom of d will?
Freewill is the capacity to take decisions to act in one way or another.It is the decision to act or not act at all.
According to Echekwube,freewill is:"the choice of å person to act in å manner suitable to å particular situation.The concept of freedom views it as the delberate act of somebody who acts from personal initiative at all times without being guided"
According to Clement of Alexandria"the only reason ŵĥŷ moral discourse makes sense is because of the Freewill human possesses.And if there is nothing as freedom then sanctions and praises become meaningless".
Thomas Aquinas also reasoned along this line on subject of freewill.He argued that man endowed with reason so that he could use it,and that morality hinges on this endowment.Hence man can reason,make decisions and act on his decisions.The philosophers above are those in favour of Freewill.

man truly has a will to choose esp btw good and evil. Man is not predetermined he is predestined.
Peace

diluminati: please do people called witches and wizards fly out at night from their body at sleep, and go ontop of trees or mountains to plot to kill people? anyone with proof? i'm tired of these nollywood movies spreading superstitions. unless someone can show proof then ill know these people aint mad

hahaha those are d stuff elders tell children to scare them.
Peace

[quote author=Ki-Katanga]Why has God bestowed the wealth, health and power on people who do not follow his religion or any religion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Importance_of_religion_by_country
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_per_capita

Why has god made Norway, Sweden, Denmark Japan and the UK so rich when they do not value His word?
Why are Nigeria, Niger and Bangladesh forsaken when they know His word to be true?[/quote]wisd 11:25-7

Ihedinobi: I know I pissed you off too. Sorry. But I'm going through the thread again to see things I overlooked.

Per the bolded statement, it may be necessary to define what it means to be God. I think that we all agree that that which is God is that from which everything that exists comes. That there is no power but power that it gives, that there is no knowledge but is derived from it, that there is no place hidden from its presence. In other words, God is that which is greater than the universe and all creation, spiritual and material and from which it all proceeds.

Anything that fits that description is God, I daresay. In that sense, Islam's Allah can claim Godhood among other religions. But how we can separate one claim from another to know which indeed is the true God is to compare the qualities assigned to them individually and see if there is coherence in those qualities.

However, "Godness", if I dare use that word, is a quality or an ability. The Concept of the Trinity says that there are three Beings that possess this quality of Godness, all three are all-powerful, all-merciful, all-knowing, all-seeing, all-wise etc etc and are one in essence.

a little addition 'Godness' 'divinity' is not just a quality it is a nature.
Peace

buzugee: sup Field Marshall Ubenedictus. Wetin una chop remain . oh yeah the favor is the grace. favor = grace . they will be purified before death. only way you getting purified is when you can feel pain, which is in a body, which is on earth. when your body feels pain, your soul feel pain and gets humbled. without a body ? your soul is at rest. so you get purified by trial before physical death. however part of the trial is, or can be spiritual death. the lord can kill you spiritually and keep you in spiritual darkness while you are alive.

beautiful way to put it, but oga i never reach 'field marshall'.

Ihedinobi: Thank you,
John was the connection between the Old Covenant and the New. His task, as the Scriptures say, was to call for repentance, that is, to fulfil the era of the Law. The Old Testament was all about showing man his incapacity to do right. Because man would not accept its verdict, man took it as a manual that he could interpret anyway he pleased to agree with his own view of righteousness. This was the condition that Jesus would have met and if He had met it, He would have "(struck) the land with a curse and a ban of utter destruction" (Mal 4:6). John's message was "the Law has condemned you, o man, you are without excuse. In all points, even with your great councils to assign meanings to it, your condemnation is certain. Repent or be consumed by the Kingdom of God." This quite agrees with Matt 15:6. The Law had become subject to what interpretation powerful interest groups assigned it and each one defined righteousness by some point of the law that they excelled in while turning a blind eye to the spirit of it. John's work was to show that however pious anyone claimed to be they still stood condemned by the Law. If anyone accepted his message, his baptism of that person said to the Judge of all the earth, "I beg you hold your peace and have mercy. This one yearns for your salvation." That baptism was in preparation for the Savior, the Only One Who could answer fully the Law's Demands and pay the full price that the Perfect Justice of the Most High demanded. It asked Justice to stay its hand and wait just a little bit more for the One Who could pay the debts of the baptized. Please see Isaiah 40:3, Luke 1:17, Mal 4:5-6, and Matt 17:12.

Jesus's baptism might have been done in water as well, but it wasn't, in principle, a baptism of water. It was a spiritual baptism. Fire is a symbol of the Spirit too. To be baptized into Jesus (not necessarily physically with water) is to accept the terms of the New Covenant. It's something like the blood sprinkling that Moses did to bind the people of Israel with God under the Old Covenant (Ex 24:18). Only it's a spiritual baptism. It is the same as the infilling of the Spirit or what we refer to as being born again of the Spirit. This baptism presupposes an acceptance of the verdict of the Law on the part of the baptized that they have completely failed the Righteous and Just requirements of God and stand in need of His Mercy or else they must face His Justice. In fact, that baptism is impossible without that consciousness, but since any one can masquerade as anything, it's impossible to tell sometimes that such and such are not truly born of the Spirit.

I must say that God uses symbols a great deal to communicate things to us so at the beginning, this baptism of Jesus's was physical. It was done with water to represent what had happened spiritually but symbols pass. God does not fail to change symbols because of our aptitude for making idols out of them, remember the bronze snake in the wilderness that King Josiah had to destroy centuries later because the children of Judah had been worshipping it or the very temple of God in Jerusalem that turned into a site for all kinds of worship and in Jesus's day had become something in itself apart from the One for Whom it was built etc etc. God's Way has always been to start out with symbols so as to educate us as to His Meanings with respect to things but eventually He removes the symbol so that we don't lose the Meanings and turn the symbol into an idol. The same thing happened to the baptism of water. Today, being baptized in water with the words, "I baptize you, so and so, in the Name of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost" means nothing.
. . .

wow! Way to go, so becos simbols are removed you think that the simbol of baptism 'water' is no more effective. Now i doubt that that symbols of initiation into a covenant cannot expire and die wen d covenant is still functioning, and baptism only loses its meaning when d spiritual perspective is shaded.
Everybody thus far explained d passage in d present but i want to ask, what does d bible mean when it say 'the Day'? It appears many time in d bible.
Peace

Enigma: ^^^ I think you need to add "not" somewhere there, no?

thanks enigma most time my head moves faster than my hands and forces my hand to do same. It is suprising what one word can do to a whole statement.
Thanks again
peace

truthislight: there are more things that are wrong with religion than this.

Food and NO food. Unless there is a specific purpose.

please let me inform u about the purpose, your friend max accused d catholic church of celebrating the last supper often instead of yearly like d jw, my post simply shows that d often stand is supported by scriptures and no d yearly stand. The 'anamesis' of d lords supper may not be important in ur church, but in my church it is very important, and i dont like it when accused wrongly.
How are u doing truthislight? Glad to hear from u.
Peace

truthislight: Guy if you have a family and some dumb guy comes in to mess with them do defend them, get it?

right i get that

But base on nationalistic ideas?
You are on your own.
Peace

well one of d nationalistic ideas if peace, freedom and freedom to pursue ur happiness, well hypothetically speaking, if niger invade nigeria as germany did poland in ww2 and all our borders are closed, what happens to d jw who cant afford a plane ticket? He is suppose to sit in his palour when some soldiers are raping his wife and daughters and shooting his sons and they certainly will come for him next? He shouldnt use a gun if he has one becos that would mean fighting a war right? Something most jw forget is that those nationalist ideas affect us in one way or another.
Peace

Maximus85: My brother, there's a lot you need to know. These people in act 2:46 were eating normal food. Read Luke 22:14-20. It explain how Jesus did it and how he commanded us.

no no no no, it says ''day by day, attending d temple 2gether and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food...' if d 'breaking bread' was normal food why did d next phase talk about 'partaking of food'? That would be a silly thing to do? Repeating d same thing in one sentence like saying 'so therefore' hey can u remind me what d english man calls such a silly mistake?
I just to back my point 1cor11:23-26, verse 26 says and i quote "for as often as u eat this bead and drink this cup u proclaim d lord's death until he comes" i hope u noticed just as i did that d bible didnt say one a year eat d bread and drink d cup, no the bible says as often as d church does it d church is proclaiming d lord's death. Even if it is done every minute of d day, it proclaims d lord death. That is what my bible say, my bible says 'as often' not yearly.
Peace

Maximus85: You think God approve of war? I don't want to quote bible. You are a christian, country B is waging war agains your country, we have your christians brothers and sisters in country B, yet you pray to God to help you destroy country B. You want a father to help one of his sons to kill his other son. GOD IS LOVE, HE IS HOLY, HE IS JUSTICE. HE WILL NEVER ANSWER SUCH PRAYERS.

wow good post, God is about peace and love and all those Good qualities, and country up against country shouldnt be, that was d reason pope pius xii gave so the catholic church was neutral during world war 2, but God is also about justice, and d innocent has a to defend himself against an oppressor, and God is also about prudence, and our life is important to him, this was d reason johnpaul 2 gave for advocating a non-violence-only demonstation in curbing d communist in poland instead of d military alternative, and it was sucessful. I know d issue is black and white to u, but as much as in any conflict i would say diplomacy first as d catholic church teaches, i would have no problem using a weapon on any unreasonable gunman about to shot any one of my family even if d weapon is fatal and even when i do that i would not have done anything wrong just as d catholic church teaches.
Donot pray that u ever be in that situation becos if u ever were u would have 2 options when d gunman is unreasonable 1 use d weapon on d gunman and go about feeling guilty that u just committed murder as d watch tower says, 2 donot use d weapon and live with the guilt all ur life that someone or people died becos u did ntin to help them.
Peace

comnsense: Well, if you can't see a purpose for my post, then you are either finding it difficult to understand what I've broken down in simple terms or you have shut your mind to learning anything other than what you believe in.
As to there being no purpose to my life, you may have meant that as an insult, but in some way, you are right. My life in itself is purposeless. I wasn't born or created with a purpose in the mind of any 'creator' as you believers would believe. I am an absolutely contingent being - that is I am just as much as I may not have been. I didn't have to be. I am simply the sperm that got to an egg first (And so are you my friend).
However, now I am here, it is up to me to imbue my existence with purpose, to lace my actions with intentions towards a goal. I make my own purpose; I give my life its purpose.

the very great claims of an atheist u just cant hate it....

[quote author=Ki-Katanga]What was this concordance carried out on? Where is the original text?[/quote]haha, funny uh u dont need d original text to translate something all you need is a copy of d original text. I thought u already knew that but it seems u didnt.

That's how science works! You have to prove that it is what you think it is - if you prove that it isn't then it isn't!

yeah it was proven otherwise after year of fooling many a scientist, that is why i wont be suprised if many thing science talks about is proven otherwise.

Is there a time when man was truly satisfied?

God

Looking at Earth, the places with the least religion are the most satisfied. You might want to ask yourself why the place that believe most fervently, Haiti, Afghanistan, India, Nigeria etc are blighted with sickness, crime, corruption and poverty, while places like Japan or Holland and Norway where even the Churches have denounced God are living long happy healthy fulfilled lives.

hahaha, because japan has decided to put more into possesing and dorminating the earth, that doesnt mean that those in japan are d happiest of people. Hey u forgot to add even cuba has a communist government yet they are poor.
Peace

Ptolomeus: Estimate.
1. I do not add another subject. I said that the Catholic Church supported a lot of criminals and dictators. Not only Nazi war criminals, but also Franco (Phalangists), and all the dictatorships of Latin America.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_14031937_mit-brennender-sorge_en.html d pope eyes were not closed and he didnt support hitler. Where is ur proof?

2. He is wrong. Historically the Catholic Church had aversion for the Jews. A historical fact: the expulsion of Jews from Spain. I can quote you a thousand cases like that.

is d catholic church d king of spain? D expulsion of jews is d work of isabel and ferdinand of spain no church council said anything about expelling jews

3. You are asking me about the dates of the second world war?

im not asking for d date of d war, im telling u as late as 1933 d nobody knew hitler as a dictator.

I'm trying expose seriously. Please think about what you write and ask you.
4. You say that Hitler was a LEADER OF LOVE??. Believe me I can not believe what I'm reading ... You are kidding right? A leader of love? You read "Mein Kampf"? you know anything about the "living space? you know what Hitler said about blacks BEFORE being Prime Minister?

of course d mein kampf is 'on d struggles' d memoirs of of hitler. What did d americans and d british say about black can u remind me? D whole western world had something against blacks. And hitlers memoirs doesnt show any support of d CC.

You just missed him deny (you did) that the Catholic Church supported the enslavement of Indians and Africans, that the church considered them animals.

in those days it was hard to find anyone against slavery st paul certainly didnt say something against it, it took years before d principles of d gospel was applied and slavery was stopped but the church never said 'd africans are animals'.

I think that we agreed then.
Excuse me, but very respectfully, I can not take you seriously.

who had armies and who were supposed to keep Germany under watch after WW1?
Since u cant take me serious maybe u will take this guy.
This is Albert Einstein:

[I]Being a lover of freedom, when the revolution came in Germany, I looked to the universities to defend it, knowing that they had always boasted of their devotion to the cause of truth; but, no, the universities immediately were silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers whose flaming editorials in days gone by had proclaimed their love of freedom; but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks...

Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced thus to confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly.[/I] (December 23, 1940 issue of Time magazine, page 38)
yeah who financed hitler? It was d americans.
Where were d arm countries who were suppose to make sure that something like that didnt happen? Huh, where were they? The pope had something to lose, when d pope speaks against d government in china or pakistan, those who suffer are d catholics in those countries. When d pope spoke against hitler he knew who would bear d blunt: catholic priest and bishops, the church would suffer for it, yet that didnt stop d pope from writting against hitlers injustices. Even d isreal is thankful to pope pius for instructing d convents and monastries to open their door to the jew. The only people who say d pope did nothing are people who are misinformed and dont know what happened.
As much as i dislike dis discussion, i do respect ur opinions.
Peace

Ptolomeus: [size=15pt]SORRY EVERYONE, BUT AFTER READING SOMEONE SAYS THAT HITLER WAS A "LEADER OF LOVE", I THINK THAT I WOULD BE OVER AGAIN TO INTERVENE IN THIS THREAD.
I BELIEVE THAT THIS STATEMENT HAS SHOWN DRAMATICALLY BY THE HIGH AFFINITY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH (and unfortunately, of some Catholics) WITH NAZISM.
AY CONFESSION OF A PARTY, RELAY TEST
My respects
[/size]

hahaha, now i will have to get serious with u, are u purposely playing with me? Or purposely misinterpreting me? Are u doing dis becos it sounds funny to u? I said there was a time wen hitler was well loved, that was b4 he began his injustice did i say that he was alway a leader of love? Do u have problem reading or understanding?
Peace and stop twisting my words i hate to have to correct ur misinterpretation again.

[quote author=Ki-Katanga]You can't use concordance if there is no original. Not only is there no original bible, there is also no conclusive agreement on what language it was written in.[/quote]haha.

Using concordance, you can get a sense of meaning, but without a nuanced understanding of both source and target languages, it's hard to convey specificities like drove/pushed/forced/threw out, all of which might be translated from the same words in some languages.

well i guess u havent seen a concordance with extensive explanation.

I've seen skeletal remains of most primitive humans (you should try visiting the Natural History Museum in London once in a while).

beautiful, have u seen a live homo habilis? Because a scientist once discovered a very old tooth which look like one from d 'homo' genre only be proven otherwise.

I "Jumped" to Infrastructure because that's what Nigerians need to focus on, not on religion.

is there a time when infrastruture truly satisfied man?
Peace

MacDaddy01: People like Ubenedictus have been brainwashed by their pastors/churches to be anti-intellectual. They hate evolution without even knowing what it is. They prefer to follow a foreign religion that enslaved their forefathers.

The sad irony here is that the christians believe in talking snakes, witches, angels and dream interpreting but evolution is a myth.

sorry dear u gat d wrong man, cos im not anti intellectual nor all those this u described. Evolution is a scientific theory and as a scientist i accept it as such, one thing with a theory is that in d future, it may be modified or become a law. As a catholic i believe evolution hardly contradicts scriptures, and as a scientist i know it hasnt been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Peace

comnsense: Oh if i had a naira for every time an uninformed person asks this kind of question about evolution? Go and read up on evolution for yourself.

i have done that intensively

By the way, it is a scientific fact. It's as ridiculous denying the law of gravity as denying evolution.

no dear friend it is a theory which many scientist disagree with

It's only in religion riddled poor uneducated countries like Nigeria that people know little or still fight evolution.

this is a display of ur ignorance becos people and scientist stil disagree with evolution even in d u.s.

Anyway, religion is an evil (especially the imported ones - christianity and islam) because it takes human responsibility and puts it in the hands of a god. When humans begin to take direction from elsewhere and shirk the use of their own reason, they become puppets and cannot take control of their destiny. Go read up on the Renaissance - the great revolution in knowledge that brought Europe out of the dark ages. It began in shaking the status quo in all sectors especially religion.

i have already read that up my dear d first inventions were made by xtians, do u remember? God didnt hold man down, man just need to 'take possession and dominion of d earth and all in it' as God commanded.

Scientists began challenging religious dogma and slowly set Europe on the path to greatness. Whereas in Nigeria, because of religion, we are still busy accusing and torturing children of witchcraft - something that went out of Europe at least two centuries ago. How backward!

aha, aha. Challenging dogmas helped no one either, taking dominion of d earth did.

We are Fools indeed!

hey there, friend i didnt deny evolution, i was refering to ur statement that i dont know d original languages of d bible, my response was that u havent seen a homo habilis, besides d reason evolution will always remain a theory is because no one can throw 10000 generations into d lab for observation. And among d science circles there are scientist who disagree with evolution. Remember i didnt say i personally disagree.
Peace

Please ptolomeus can we finish one topic before we jump to another? I didnt agree with ur catholic -nazi claim and suprisinly u a spring spain etc. I certainly didnt remember mentioning spain, i hope to make a study on dat and come back to u wen appropriete so please back to d mata at hand.

Ptolomeus: Estimate.
Ok. No offense.

none taken.

1. In fact you ignore the deep rivalry between the Catholic Church with the Orthodox Jewish religion?

d catholic church believe dat d jew missed d long awaited messiah but that doesnt translate into hatred for d jews. There were times when d jews were considered troublesome people not because of d difference in religion, but becos they were know to b secluded people who believe their race was better and every other inferior, they were also known for riots.

2. The photos are displayed to the bishops to support the Nazi leaders are not faked, and you know it. I advise you to read any book on World War II, and doubts will disappear.

nah nah nah, i dont know that and i still asked for dates.

3. You ask me dates. The period of Hitler is known, no need to talk about dates, but of actions. Read about the Spanish Revolution (1936), in which the Catholic Church fully supported the dictator Franco ...

d reason i asked for dates is becos hitler wasnt alway a dictator, there was a time he was a well love leader and times when he had cordial relations with d church, all this ended when he began his injustices and concentration camps, he earned d popes disfavour and disapproval and dat of d catiolic world, so i ask 4 dates.

4. I was really surprised that you say that the Catholic Church was against slavery. The Catholic Church regarded the slaves (Indians and blacks) "soulless animals." Did you know that blacks could not enter a Catholic church in the eighteenth century in America?

did a church council or pope say dat? Unless they did u cnt say d catholic church u have to talk specific.

What evidence you are asking me? Please!
Be serious.
Peace for you
My respects.

same

Please ptolomeus can we finish one topic before we jump to another? I didnt agree with ur catholic -nazi claim and suprisinly u a spring spain etc. I certainly didnt remember mentioning spain, i hope to make a study on dat and come back to u wen appropriete so please back to d mata at hand.

Ptolomeus: Estimate.
Ok. No offense.

none taken.

1. In fact you ignore the deep rivalry between the Catholic Church with the Orthodox Jewish religion?

d catholic church believe dat d jew missed d long awaited messiah but that doesnt translate into hatred for d jews. There were times when d jews were considered troublesome people not because of d difference in religion, but becos they were know to b secluded people who believe their race was better and every other inferior, they were also known for riots.

2. The photos are displayed to the bishops to support the Nazi leaders are not faked, and you know it. I advise you to read any book on World War II, and doubts will disappear.

nah nah nah, i dont know that and i still asked for dates.

3. You ask me dates. The period of Hitler is known, no need to talk about dates, but of actions. Read about the Spanish Revolution (1936), in which the Catholic Church fully supported the dictator Franco ...

d reason i asked for dates is becos hitler wasnt alway a dictator, there was a time he was a well love leader and times when he had cordial relations with d church, all this ended when he began his injustices and concentration camps, he earned d popes disfavour and disapproval and dat of d catiolic world, so i ask 4 dates.

4. I was really surprised that you say that the Catholic Church was against slavery. The Catholic Church regarded the slaves (Indians and blacks) "soulless animals." Did you know that blacks could not enter a Catholic church in the eighteenth century in America?

did a church council or pope say dat? Unless they did u cnt say d catholic church u have to talk specific.

What evidence you are asking me? Please!
Be serious.
Peace for you
My respects.

same