₦airaland Forum

HardMirror:
vaxx weldone

butterflion is different from vaxx. Pls do not mistake me to anyone.

MuttleyLaff:
Kikiki, vaxx you no go keel pesin sha

lol

Seun:
Well, it seems to be a hypothesis which a lot of lay people find attractive, but it has not been accepted by evolutionary biologists because the evidence for it is very weak.

elaine morgarn a reputable biologist gave an interesting lecture on the concept. She actually support it. .http://www.ted.com/talks/elaine_morgan_says_we_evolved_from_aquatic_apes.html

Riofidelio:
There is NO nation without their rendering of the Almighty God but God ONLY revealed HIS identify to just one single nation. HE wanted every other nations to go and learn about HIM from that single nation,of course mighty nations in ancient times disagreed with HIS decision and they suffered the consequences. This is why all those mighty nations have succumb to the fact that the one and only true God always call HIMSELF the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They're not duped nor gullible, they just submitted to the will of God. Olodumare is the most high according to the children of oduduwa though their are other deities serving as mediators between them and Olodumare because they believe HE is too Holy and pure to be approached directly! All this are the things Lamurudu (Nimrod) taught his Son Oduduwa before they were separated due to the confusion in language that occurred during the building of the tower of Babel. Genesis 11:1-9 So it's ONLY the Israelites that the Almighty God revealed HIMSELF to that's why all the mighty nations of ancient times bowed before them and start claiming till today that the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob is the one and only true God(Exodus 6:2,3) and let HIM become my God as well! Ruth 1:16,17 Thank you for this enlightenment!

evidence pls?

johnydon22:
Human intelligence is a recipe to existential crisis. We not only able to perceive the world around us, we are also capable of questions regarding the universe and existence herself.

One question that is at the pinnacle of our enquiry is Why exactly does anything exist at all?

Very many approaches we have towards answering this questions may lead us towards different method of thinking and worldview, but one thing neither of us can deny is: The universe exists

Whether as a hologram
objective matter
matrix

what ever your perception about the universe is, the end point is; it exists.

And this begs the question; Why?

Why does something exist rather than nothing?

Theologically, the natural answer to this question is, God.
From conventional religious world view the universe was created out of nothing (Ex nihilo) by God.

But then the question we are addressing is; Why is there something instead of nothing?
And if God is the answer then obviously God is also something and thus if we must pursue this question courageously we must ask the next question.

Why is there God (something) rather than nothing?

The obvious answer to this theologically is that God has always existed.

This argument can also be extended to the universe by stating it has always existed therefore eliminating the need for God as a cause (not necessarily as a designer).

Aristotle argued that the idea of an uncaused cause is nonsensical, that the universe just is.

Going further in this answer, we explore the remarkable position of the ancient Hindus. They happen to have a profound perspective on existence, cosmological causality.

Like Aristotle, the Hindus believe in an eternal universe but this eternity is looped like a circle.
From Hindu cosmogony; the universe is going through an eternal loop of death and rebirth. A circular existential model that makes out the universe to be just an incessant repetition or perfect balance between birth and death. An old universe dies and a new one springs up from it, round and round it goes.

One of the implications of the big bang model is an oscillating universe. This implication suggests that with the right amount of gravitational force present in the universe, the universe will eventually collapse on itself and form a kind or singularity which ultimately sparks off another Big bang and thus it goes like the Hindu model.

Now with this background in place i will go ahead and make my own argument:

I happen to think that ex nihilo is nonsensical at best (Though i leave a possibility due to the knowledge that my perception on the necessity of causality is not objectively or cosmologically binding, it is just the reach of my perception)

Even if the universe was designed, i do not think God created the universe out of nothing, i do believe if we apply the principle of design as we know it just like the principle of causality; you can't design nothing but can design something.

so for God to design the universe, the universe must have existed in a raw form prior to God's manipulation (ex materia).

Therefore i hold the idea that the universe has always existed whether designed or not.

And if the universe have always existed, the question why is there something instead of nothing becomes a logical absurdity..

What about you?

What do you think?

Do you subscribe to the ex nihilo or ex materia?

Why do you think there is something rather than nothing?

i have another thought. What if ex nihilo and ex material are both real. maybe the reason why there is something rather than nothing is because we both have mistakenly overlooked the fact that they both exist. i suspect the are harmonious conjoined opposites. Neither can exist without the other. That means that there is something even more basic which is both something and nothing. lets call it Possibility. Possibility is what underlies probability in quantum mechanics. therefore, i my good to say possibility is indeed possible?

OkaiCorne:
Thank you very much. The Quran was compiled in over 20 years of Muhammad's ministry...

I find it funny that musicwriter concluded it was extracted from some hidden scroll in a cave...

you can imagine such a clown? this is someone who i assume had/has never study Islam before in its source apart from what it is written by the antagonist. how can you seek truth in that. if you want to know about BMW car , do you ask from Toyota? who does not know they are rivals . it is either you ask BMW or a neutral body.

sonmvayina:
Sadly enough, there was none.. As far as history goes.
The
Towing the same line of thought with you, I could say there was a Harry Potter that lived in London, who lost his parents at an early age and was brought up by his uncle and aunt.. And not the Harry that was playing the qhiditch or slaying giant snakes..

stop using absurd logic with me. do harry potter evidence stands emphatically in writings like that of Jesus? you are even using bible to discredit the evidence of Jesus. how erroneous is that?

And unfortunate,most Nigerians female over there are into prostitution . just could not believe my eyes, the same applies to Ghana too. now that is a Nigeria man killing an Ivorian girl, i hope the reverse will not happen soon.

Seun:
This is a great way to express my position on the existence of God. Just change “my previous neighbour” to “religion”. There is no evidence for the existence of mermaids, and the people that claim to have seen them are liars or delusional.

From an evolutionary POV, without considering the lack of evidence, aquatic human beings are extremely unlikely to exist because we do not share the common ancestor that mammals in the sea (whales and dolphins) share. It is from this ancestor that they got most of the features that allow them to thrive in the sea, such as nostrils at the top of their heads, strong flippers and tails and for swimming with great speed and agility, the ability to hold their breaths for a very long time, their aerodynamic shape that reduces drag as they swim, the ability to give birth under water, the layer of fat that protects them from freezing in cold water, the ability to communicate under water, etc. Human beings cannot live in the sea just because they have tails. It takes far more than that. The biologically changes needed to make human beings seaworthy would make them unrecognizable as human beings, or extremely ugly.

Quick question: if mermaids are spirits, why do they usually have tails? They aren’t physically swimming in the water, right?

seun . have you heard of the waterside hypothesis of human evolution also known as aquatic apes hypothesis? if so what is your conclusion?.

@HappyPagan learn something here , maybe it will perhaps change your perspective. . we continue when you finish studying i may end up explaining spirit to you hence God . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

i welcome possibility

Fish from the waist down; human from the waist up. such species may likely exist, an evolutionary proponent should consider this. human and fish both have common ancestors. so having a cousin who is both human and fish at the same time should not be a big deal, just like hippopotamus who look more like pig but belong to whales family for example. biologically if such a creature exist they will fall under mammals. they will lived near the surface of the sea and came up for air like other aquatic mammals. and someone may suggest if that is the case we would have already found, killed and categorized them by now. but the person should know that not all aquatic species are known. in fact there is still more to be known.

Currently there is one place on the planet where a completely unknown civilization could exist if a very large number of fairly improbable events happened and a lot of conditions were met. That place is proposed underground ocean:

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/huge-underground-ocean-discovered-towards-earths-core/


https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jun/13/earth-may-have-underground-ocean-three-times-that-on-surface


it seems that the op is a crazy fan of mermaids , op you can consult a genetic engineering , they may probably find a way of creating a species like that.... try watching this movie ''Splash'' there is a rumor, it is a documentary and not just a movie!!

MuttleyLaff:
Behave,
the internet never forgets or forgives

You want to play the nuance card, right.
Answer this then,
OK, as a professed traditionalist faithful and ifa adherent, [b]do you make and/or pay obeisance[/b] to Ogun or not?

And this is why i am challenging you to provide evidence and not just allegation. you need to remind the cyber space that a user is lying against her

AND TO THE SECOND BOLD. I understand that the term obeisance is a technical, specialized term when contrasted with the term worship. However, for what it is worth, the term obeisance is a French term [in French,you add an "s" and write obeissance] meaning simply "obedience." The French term obeissance derives from the verb, obeir, meaning to "obey." Perhaps this etymology can shed some light on the technical term obeisance. i used the idea to send my message that traditionalist should heed to the instruction of the oishas without worshiping them. the term obeisance in my message implies that traditionalist should make their behavior conform to ifa teaching without implying that traditionalist should worship ifa; they should limit their worship to olodumare alone if willingly as it is not compulsory or mandated .As I have said, I am not sure how the term obeisance is contrasted in technical terms with the word worship; and I have no dictionary of religious terms at my disposal to have been able to separate them properly.'' this is English bro, i am not a grammarian'' However, I am sure of its etymology; English took it from the French.

musicwriter:
The books were hidden in earthenware pots, anywhere from 325 AD after Rome converted to Christianity and started killing people who read other books they didn't recommend. Early Christian and Gnostic books were still being discovered in caves in Egypt, in the town of Nag Hammadi, as recent as 1945.

Between 1946, 1947, 1956, even more ''dead sea scrolls'' were discovered in caves in Qumram, Palestine. If Muhammad wasn't carried away by excitement and he looked carefully, he could have actually discovered those books.

There're still undiscovered books hidden away in caves right now.

Another hogwash from someone who have not taken his time to study Islam himself but depends on antagonist write up. no man who indeed want to seek the truth pass thru this way. quran was not a book that was compiled in a day, it spans the length of 23 years of Muhammad ministry. so it was in sequence and not in a day, And besides quran compilation was within the time when the Arabs excelled in oral poetry. Poetry competitions like today rap competitions, In fact the science of Arabic grammar was developed after the compilation of the Quran, using the Quran as a basis for devising its rules.

Mohammed did not endorse any official complete written versions of Quran when he was alive (since many have memorized it at that time). After he died (and some of the people who memorized Quran were killed in wars) and especially as the Islamic territory was getting much bigger, people felt the need to have full written versions of Quran. Then the first Islamic governor, caliph Abubakr, ordered to gather a full version of Quran. Several methods were used to verify that verses actually belong to Quran, such as: people could bring their written versions or two (well-known) Muslims could swear that. However, after a few years, the third caliph found some (pronunciation) differences and ordered to create a unique version of Quran (mostly similar to the one prepared by the first caliph), prepare lots copies, and destroy all other versions of Quran all over Islamic territories.and hope you know well how Muslim influence western civilization. you may really want to lean or maybe for the sake of others . My main source was History of the Prophets and Kings which was written about 300 years after the death of Mohammad, it is one of the earliest books on history of Islam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Prophets_and_Kings And this is my own speculation on quran , it is Mohammad who authored Quran, and then caliphs collected it as a book.

musicwriter:
This thread was going smoothly before people came in and derailed it, thereby, causing me to lose interest. I may or may not make further posts, but Islam has nothing going for it once Christianity is done with. Islam is a Jonny-just-come religion that the followers can easily see the fakery in it. Any so called holy koran given to Muhammad and written by Allah[b], was actually one of many books hidden in a cave by persecuted religious sects[/b], when Emperor Constantine and others were raiding houses killing people who read alternative bible not recommended by Rome.

Be sincere have you yourself study quran apart from the hogwash you have been feeding yourself with from smear internet campaign. what you are saying is actually baseless here. you know why?The Quran itself says its repeating the same message as revealed to other Prophets which include Christianity and the Jews and as revealed to all nations of mankind at one time or the other. which to me it is the reasons why some aspects in every religion of this world which finds parallels in the Quran. But the way Quran deals with these topics is very very different.

let me give you some examples

in the Genesis Eve takes the greater share of the blame for disobeying God but in the Quran its adam. The depiction of hell in the Quran is very similar to Rigveda or Mahabharata of the hindu and that is why some writer like you also claim Islam was copy from hindu scripture without evidence. And here again the Quran is different as you don't get a second chance to redeem your sins. I personally think that you will find similarities in every scripture. I have seen a lot of similarities of ifa teaching in both bible and quran, will it be right for me to say these books copy my tradition? since ifa practice happens to be A thousand older than the Jews, i think that will be a dishonest makeup. well, i am putting down a book together which will address the similarities in religion. i have seen unity in diversity .... in fact atheist will not be left out from the book. most atheist practice yoga . an ancient Hindu pagan practice which had been scientifically verified to be beneficial.

musicwriter:
The whole world was once inhabited by black people. See Britain discovers their ancestors were black. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/02/07/first-britons-black-natural-history-museum-dna-study-reveals/amp/

The place known today as Palestine was also part of Africa in ancient time; including Arabia, all those places turned white as the Africans were interbreeding with Asians, and Asians with Europeans.

The people that lived in Palestine at that time, no doubt were blacks. The late president of Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser, while on an interview on television, said "you (Israel) will never be able to live here in peace, because you left here black but came back white. We cannot accept you! .''

The people in neighboring countries with Israel knows there were all once black and they don't deny it.

Shango conquering up to Benin republic is definitely a myth. No God fought anybody ever in the history of the world. However, there were wars of course, but our wars were child-play when compared to European wars.

Yes, gun powder was invented first between China and Africa, but it wans't called gun powder or used as ammunition. It was used ceremonially, like during certain festivities to give gun salute. Its still used in Igboland today to give salute to the dead during burial ceremony.

The problem is not that there is white man saying we cannot develop, rather, our unfortunate contact with them destroyed our social, political, cultural, educational, religious, language, and our self esteem. When someone give you language, education, religion, the person can go to sleep and watch you enslave yourself, and that's what we're doing in Africa today. To stop enslaving ourselves to extinction, we must restore our language, education, and religion back to the ''follow come'', then modernize it.

The first earth inhabitants were prokaryotes, single celled being for which skin is not a relevant context.

"Race" is not a scientifically recognised concept: it is far more a cultural than a scientific construct.

But, assuming you meant humans, chimpanzees and gorillas are white and black under their fur. It is therefore reasonable to say that all humans have ancestors who were white or black. On the other hand, humans almost certainly originated from groups in Africas in areas where, if they had lost their fur, they would have been dark skinned. Therefore that answer would appear to be yes and no, depending on where you draw the dividing line on humans. Skin colour does not fossilise, so we can not have direct evidence at all.


And beside gun powder is a chemical mistake that was initially developed in china by a ''chemist'' (i called him a chemist because he was working with chemical compound and not because he hold a degree in it)who was seeking for a medicinal element to increase his long span on earth, he stumble upon chemistry like nitrogen and salt and the result of it became what we have today as GUN POWDER. the arab/muslim were the first to used gun powder in a full blown war against the christian in Jerusalem during the crusader war, the arab/ muslim encounter it on their business trip to china. the Europe took the idea from them and better it just like they tookthe idea of sugar from them too. The first contact of gun and gun powder in sub saharan african was thru the influence of the Malian king( he was know as the richest king in the world) that was as far back as 10 centuries, he was in business of gold and salt with kushites. present day Egyptians.


The west are not holding our progress, the right to develop and advance is our birthright. we are free now not under colonization again, SOUTH KOREA WAS ONCE A JAPANESE COLONY. now he is an advance nation without looking toward japan or other western power for aids. WE SHOULD STOP COMPLAINING, WE SHOULD RATHER WORK INSTEAD.


you finally derailed your own thread.

Butterflyleo:
----------- Butterflyleo 2018 ©

Cc vaxx you are free to borrow the above quote whenever you encounter a debate on logic.

This is the nitty gritty of every atheist and theist argument and every atheist ----> theist and theist ------> atheist conversion.

this is indeed beautiful.

BossLaifay:
Exactly! I'm no scholar and I was born into a christian family but I think this right here is what vaxx has failed to understand about your argument.

There are scholarly references about a jesus here and there piecing together his existence. HOWEVER, the Jesus we have come to know did not exist! As long as he was not born by a virgin, walk on water and a host of other things, he was well cooked up and rebranded to make him more appealing and to give hope to the hopeless for selfish reasons.

THIS IS YOUR PERSONAL CLAIM WHICH I WELCOME.

i am not a christian and nether was i born into a christian home, but fortunately i attend an Anglican school where going to church as a boding house child was compulsory and mandatory every Sunday and a good morning devotion everyday. and this became part of my life for good six years. maybe this can tell you why i took it as a decision to know whom jesus was historically. i view him now as a teacher rather than a messiah.

And to correct musicwriter, biblical jesus is not limited to the one working on the water, born by virgin and all sort of mystical connection that was ascribed to him. there is practical biblical jesus, the one that teaches, evangelized to a Samaritan woman, the one that was put to death and the one that has connection with this towns .Galilee, Bethlehem and Jerusalem. this is the historical Jesus i am insinuating .

[quote author=MuttleyLaff post=67518894]

Whats yes no?
Its either, yes or its either no
yes no, is not on
You can't eat your cake, and have it too.

i said YES, i speculate he was not born by a virgin, and NO credible research had confirm he was born by a virgin. you are quoting me out of context. never said yes and no. that will be a hogwash.

You being a self-titled traditionalist, a publicly self-confessed Ogun worshipper to be precise
[/b]apart from what legend states, can you attest of any rigorous study that supports the claim,
that Ogun descended down to earth from heaven climbing on a spiderweb?

i never recall in any of my post or any of my thread where i claim i am an ogun worshiper, and beside i have always describe myself as traditionalist faithful and ifa adherent to be precise. i never used the word [b]WORSHIP to qualify myself with any orisha. . that to me is another hogwash. you are seriously doing a bad job for quoting me out of context bro. and if you do clearly follow my thread, you will realize i am not an advocate of superstition nor do i subscribe to this chain you are trying to roped me with. if you want to know more about ogun, create a thread on it. i will honor it.

Nothing can be done without being faith based

.interesting, i am also an advocate of this concept. in fact i used it a lot in my discussion here on the religious thread.

So are you ruling out that Jesus is born by a virgin?

i am speculating that it can not be true, mind you, i have also meet a christian brother who find it difficult to accept.he actually see it as a metaphor of a creative process embedded in the bible. on my side, i do not accept it not because i doubt spiritual work, but just because it fails to agree with nature. and likewise in my opinion, the virgin birth story in the bible is a literary device to present Jesus as having extraordinary beginnings. if you have read Greek methodology and well enough. you will see it is a common literary device that was used often . it was thought that notable persons would have been born under notable circumstances. The creed statements about Mary's virginity and divinely inspired pregnancy are retrojections from a devotional understanding to my subjective view .in fact some interesting record was also put down during AMINA pregnancy.(mother of muhammed) which i also fail to accept. since i see where both are coming from.

Do you have issues with reconciling the fact that in-vitro gametogenesis (IVG) research discoveries
have revealed that, in the not-so-distant future, eggs and sperms may no longer be needed to make a baby?

No, i do not have issues with how human skin cell can produce human baby without the embryo nor womb. it is called bio engineering. in fact the practice had been documented and used in japan using mouse as an example and it was successful. Are you insinuating something of such was carried out on mary to conceive Jesus? i will like you to express your line of argument here. well i love speculation since nothing can be done without it too. if you do speculate on that theorem , how can i say you are lying, we both have not experienced it. i

The penny drops.

Looks like, God, in this area of virgin birth expertise, is way ahead of science,
as science is doing catching up, with this particular skill, learning and trying to figure out how it is done

i love it when people speculate. however it is good to be practical. i await scientific discovery on this concept . that is if possible.

Student125:
@vaxx, what measure did u adopt in judging to arrive that he lost, though I have downloaded it bt yet to watch, will do wen I get home but what I read in d comment section s contrary to ur claim.

thanks, before i will answer you. try and watch it first. maybe you will understand my measure way better.

musicwriter:
You shouldn't even bother yourself watching any video he send. I told him to watch a video and he said he don't accept video as scholarly material. Yet, he want you to watch a video to prove his point. What you're dealing with here is a dangerous religious zealot that can kill you in the name of God.

i know you will misinterpret it. continue with your foul mouth. at least your point have been made and it is clear it is not true.

hopefulLandlord:
obviously anyone who took his/her time to check the comments would agree with me. its right there for them to see. Dalaman and Student125 have checked the comments and agreed with me although we may differ on the percentage
You made a claim that Richard lost by a wide margin and you just watched it today. However I've watched it a few times in the past and nothing I saw and heard showed that conclusion is sensible!

My asking YOU to give me those points is a way of telling you to defend your claim, maybe there were some things in that video I missed or didn't assimilate very well or ignored due to subconscious bias. asking you to defend your claim is akin to you telling Musicwriter to defend his claim about Jesus although I've only skimmed through your back and forth

There's a difference between posting a video and posting it with a conclusion especially a conclusion as big as yours. it requires some defending but apologies for telling you to defend your claim, how stupid of me

so what could you have concluded.

The issue here is you are patiently waiting for the rebuttal to be challenge and since you could not see. you found the video interesting since it akin to your area of interest. which is ok by me. but asking me to defend the video which is not in hiding is an extreme joke. i concluded that the video was in favor of David marshall, and the most thoughtful question of yours is for me to defend my claim in the video which i myself posted. are you Richard career to defend him here or am i David marshall to question his conclusion. i am just a spectator like everyone on that video thread and base on my finding, it amazed me he did not won the debate.

musicwriter:
That person called vax is the type of religions zealots that would blast themselves with bomb in the name of God. He is simply here to defend Christianity, but he is in the wrong thread.

lol, let see. waiting patiently for your next post. can you continue?

dalaman:
he clearly won the dabate, read the comments from the people in the YouTube video. Majority agree that he won. His opponent lost the debate.

do you watch the video. be honest

hopefulLandlord:
Its easy to say "He lost by a wide margin" but debates aren't football that the final score shows how wide the loss was so I'm taken aback by how you got to that conclusion

about "Other people can confirm" it holds no water as I'm sure there are other people that can confirm the opposite. infact about 99% of the comments that appear below the link of the video you posted all said David Marshall lost by a wide margin!

However you can tell us how exactly he lost. what major points did David bring up that Marshall failed to address AND vice versa. it should be very easy since you just watched of today and its still fresh in your memory

Do you know the implication of this you comment? i will rather pushed it to you to defend this claim. and stop asking me to brings what he did and could not say.... the video has been posted by me. that is much i can do. and if you claim you do watch as you said you should not be asking me this question.. people response are there and comment were made, you may use to read once again.

musicwriter:
Aren't you the same person that acknowledged there was no Jesus with virgin birth?

If there was no Jesus with a virgin birth; what other Messiah are you defending?

mind you i am not defending any Jesus, i am only reaffirming what available evidence said about historical Jesus. as i said religious book is not an academic book. available evidence biblical Jesus once existed while the miracle attached to him is yet to be confirm in which i speculate that is might not be true.

dalaman:
Losing a debate means he isn't a scholar or what?

Some people are just poor debaters and don't know how to master and utilize debating tricks.

Richard is a very poor debater, something he himself has acknowledged before.

i agree with you, he do not present his case well and maybe he is just a poor debater . losing a debate does not make him less scholar, but it is one way we all can learn from each other.

hopefulLandlord:
Who "Lost the debate with a wide gap"? how did he lose it exactly? mind you, I've watched the debate long ago and I doubt you've watched it from your summation

i just watch it today.and he dully lost. others people can confirm

musicwriter:
Nothing was debunked by you. You don't even have anything to offer other than what Paul told you in the Acts of apostles and new testament. You don't have what it takes. At all!.

I will be back with more posts. Stay tuned.

you were not making a case earlier, you were affirming your statement, and we all follow you. but when questions were thrown at you, you started shifting the goal post, then i have to come in ask for your references. where you are pulling your hogwash and which you generously give. and upon scrutinizing it was found to be complete hoax and has no credible academia backup. i will be excepting your next reply to come as if you are making a case instead of affirming your statement. then i will honor you with my own argument . lobatan. i am patiently also waiting for muhammed fake claim

denziz:
This is a discussion I am highly interested in,I think you will be doing the followers of this thread a big favour by coming up with scholarly research that prove the existence of Jesus Christ.This will make the argument to be balanced.

go thru the thread i forward to dalaman. and if you are yet satisfy. you can ask me further question

dalaman, i am watching Richard career debate now with David Marshall which took place in Alabama, i will like you to see how he lost the debate with a wide gap.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooXCaMwTGD8




well. i am yet to read the review of his work . he was educated at Colombia university interesting.

musicwriter:
You can tell that to the mountains!!.

lol. just note that the more you split ignorance here, the more i debunked it.