shadeyinka:

You needn't get angry on a faceless medium that someone didn't answer a question exactly as you want.

So you are a mind-reader too? Lol!
I don't know what gave you the impression, but whatever it is, i can assure you that nothing you have said can elicit such vice from me.

Some answers are already apparent from the response.
Example:

Question:
Did you eat Mama Sule's Pounded Yam?
Answer:
The food wasn't even delicious: it tasted of kerosine.

You would have expected a YES or NO as an answer. But the response has given you what you need plus other information.

But, is the response the answer to the question asked?

"The food wasn't even delicious: it tasted of kerosine" can never be the answer to => Did you eat Mama Sule's Pounded Yam?

The right way to make your answer correlate correctly would have been:
Question- Did you eat Mama Sule's Pounded Yam?
Answers: - Yes/Yeah.
- Yes/Yeah, I ate Mama Sule's pounded
yam.
- Yes/Yeah I did.
- No/Nah.
- No/Nah, I didn't.
- No/Nah, I didn't eat Mama Sule's
pounded yam.

After answering the real question, your addendum can then come in Viz:
Question- Did you eat Mama Sule's Pounded Yam?
Answers: -

Yes/Yeah. The food wasn't even delicious, it tasted of kerosine.

-

Yes/Yeah, I ate Mama Sule's 
                    pounded yam. The food wasn't even 
                    delicious, it tasted of kerosine.

- Yes/Yeah I did. The food wasn't 
                even  delicious, it tasted of kerosine.
                 

It's really that simple, but somehow you are making a simple thing seem like a complex/complicated stuff.

IamMichael:

So you are a mind-reader too? Lol!
I don't know what gave you the impression, but whatever it is, i can assure you that nothing you have said can elicit such vice from me.


But, is the response the answer to the question asked?

"The food wasn't even delicious: it tasted of kerosine" can never be the answer to => Did you eat Mama Sule's Pounded Yam?

The right way to make your answer correlate correctly would have been:
Question- Did you eat Mama Sule's Pounded Yam?
Answers: - Yes/Yeah.
- Yes/Yeah, I ate Mama Sule's pounded
yam.
- Yes/Yeah I did.
- No/Nah.
- No/Nah, I didn't.
- No/Nah, I didn't eat Mama Sule's
pounded yam.

After answering the real question, your addendum can then come in Viz:
Question- Did you eat Mama Sule's Pounded Yam?
Answers: -

Yes/Yeah. The food wasn't even delicious, it tasted of kerosine.

-

Yes/Yeah, I ate Mama Sule's 
                    pounded yam. The food wasn't even 
                    delicious, it tasted of kerosine.

- Yes/Yeah I did. The food wasn't 
                even  delicious, it tasted of kerosine.
                 

It's really that simple, but somehow you are making a simple thing seem like a complex/complicated stuff.

No!
In situations when your words could be misrepresented. Clarifications with WORDs are gold nuggets.

Only a brute will mindlessly say YES or NO to all questions irrespective of the purpose of the question.

shadeyinka:

No!
In situations when your words could be misrepresented. Clarifications with WORDs are gold nuggets.

Only a brute will mindlessly say YES or NO to all questions irrespective of the purpose of the question.

Well, I will leave you and your dogma with this wise saying:

"The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn." - Alvin Toffler.

IamMichael:

Well, I will leave you with this wise saying:

"The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn." - Alvin Toffler.

And if it's about me not stupidly answering your questions, I'll give you what the wisest man once said.

Mat 22:17-22:
"Tell us therefore, What think you? Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said,
Why tempt you me, you hypocrites? Show me the tribute money. And they brought to him a penny. And he said to them, Whose is this image and superscription? They say to him, Caesar's. Then said he to them, Render therefore to Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's.
When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left him, and went their way."

You would have in your wisdom answered YES or NO!

SMH!

shadeyinka:

And if it's about me not stupidly answering your questions, I'll give you what the wisest man once said.

Mat 22:17-22:
"Tell us therefore, What think you? Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said,
Why tempt you me, you hypocrites? Show me the tribute money. And they brought to him a penny. And he said to them, Whose is this image and superscription? They say to him, Caesar's. Then said he to them, Render therefore to Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's.
When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left him, and went their way."

You would have in your wisdom answered YES or NO!

SMH!

Well, if the alleged Jesus was wise as you say, he could have simply replied " Yes, it's lawful to give Ceasar tribute and went about his business.

Like you have been doing, the alleged wise Jesus however, instead of answering a simple question, had to create his own question from his perception of the reason behind the question asked him. Then he proceeded to answer questions noone asked him and sneaked in God into the scenario even when no-one asked him anything about God.

1) No-one asked him a question about coin in the scenario.
2) No-one asked him a question about God in the scenario.


So, Yes; in my wisdom, I would have said "Yes, it is lawful to give tribute to Ceaser." Or "No, it is unlawful to give tribute to Ceaser!" and proceed to give my reasons if demanded/required.

As tribute goes, money is not the only means of paying tribute.
Ceaser could be King/Emperor and his head may not be the image on the existing legal tender at the time. In otherwords, the image of the sun could be on the legal tender, and therefore the statement of giving to Ceasar what belongs to Ceaser because his head is on the coin becomes meaningless.

Finally, when, the alleged wise Jesus asked them:
Whose is this image and superscription?
Their reply= "Ceaser's."
Simple and straightforward!
They didn't start perceiving what's in the mind of the alleged wise Jesus nor why he asked the question. They didn't start describing the coin or start narrating how the coin was made or if it's silver or gold coin or how the image on the coin looked like when you bent it in some manner. They gave a simple and straightforward reply...

IamMichael:

Well, if the alleged Jesus was wise as you say, he could have simply replied " Yes, it's lawful to give Ceasar tribute and went about his business.

Like you have been doing, the alleged wise Jesus however, instead of answering a simple question, had to create his own question from his perception of the reason behind the question asked him. Then he proceeded to answer questions noone asked him and sneaked in God into the scenario even when no-one asked him anything about God.

1) No-one asked him a question about coin in the scenario.
2) No-one asked him a question about God in the scenario.


So, Yes; in my wisdom, I would have said "Yes, it is lawful to give tribute to Ceaser." Or "No, it is unlawful to give tribute to Ceaser!" and proceed to give my reasons if demanded/required.

As tribute goes, money is not the only means of paying tribute.
Ceaser could be King/Emperor and his head may not be the image on the existing legal tender at the time. In otherwords, the image of the sun could be on the legal tender, and therefore the statement of giving to Ceasar what belongs to Ceaser because his head is on the coin becomes meaningless.

Finally, when, the alleged wise Jesus asked them:
Whose is this image and superscription?
Their reply= "Ceaser's."
Simple and straightforward!
They didn't start perceiving what's in the mind of the alleged wise Jesus nor why he asked the question. They didn't start describing the coin or start narrating how the coin was made or if it's silver or gold coin or how the image on the coin looked like when you bent it in some manner. They gave a simple and straightforward reply...

Ok, I understand why you don't understand the storyline. Borrow a little sense from Jesus.

If Jesus had answered YES: pay tax to Ceaser, he would have been the most hated man in the whole of Israel for Israel had to pay heavy taxes to Rome.

If Jesus had answered NO: don't pay taxes to Ceaser. The Jews who sought his arrest would have got a good excuse to report him as enemy of the Roman Republic. This was an offence that warrantied a capital punishment.

So, what did Jesus do to the question? He said, GIVE UNTO CEASER WHAT BELONGS TO CEACER! With his answer, he killed two birds with one stone.

Sorry Bro!

shadeyinka:

Ok, I understand why you don't understand the storyline. Borrow a little sense from Jesus.

If Jesus had answered YES: pay tax to Ceaser, he would have been the most hated man in the whole of Israel for Israel had to pay heavy taxes to Rome.

If Jesus had answered NO: don't pay taxes to Ceaser. The Jews who sought his arrest would have got a good excuse to report him as enemy of the Roman Republic. This was an offence that warrantied a capital punishment.

So, what did Jesus do to the question? He said, GIVE UNTO CEASER WHAT BELONGS TO CEACER! With his answer, he killed two birds with one stone.

Sorry Bro!

Here we go again!
With so many instances of him exhibiting delusional acts like thinking he walks on water, flying to the sky, raising the dead, and feeding thousands with 5 loaves and two fish; borrowing any sense from this alleged Jesus you are referring to is going to make me dumb and delusional like him. So, I'll respectfully pass.

Secondly, for someone who seem to know all the history relating to the quotation you posted, you don't know the difference between "Tributes" and "Taxes".
We don't see the same alleged wise Jesus perceive wickedness in Matthew 17:24-27.
I guess like all his followers, he also suffers from Selective Bias.

Thirdly, go back and read my reply without your religious bias. Maybe, you will finally probably get the point cuz from your reply, it's obvious you didn't.

Fourthly, it still hasn't occurred to you that your reply (post above) is off-point. You assume that the person reading your quotation above know about the historical tensions or whatever between the alleged Jesus and his Questioner's.

IamMichael:

Here we go again!
With so many instances of him exhibiting delusional acts like thinking he walks on water, flying to the sky, raising the dead, and feeding thousands with 5 loaves and two fish; borrowing any sense from this alleged Jesus you are referring to is going to make me dumb and delusional like him. So, I'll respectfully pass.

Secondly, for someone who seem to know all the history relating to the quotation you posted, you don't know the difference between "Tributes" and "Taxes".
We don't see the same alleged wise Jesus perceive wickedness in Matthew 17:24-27.
I guess like all his followers, he also suffers from Selective Bias.

Thirdly, go back and read my reply without your religious bias. Maybe, you will finally probably get the point cuz from your reply, it's obvious you didn't.

Fourthly, it still hasn't occurred to you that your reply (post above) is off-point. You assume that the person reading your quotation above know about the historical tensions or whatever between the alleged Jesus and his Questioner's.

They say lawyers like to argue even when the truth stares them in the face. What was the miracle of Jesus here o: miracle of not saying yes or no!? I don't understand how you assumed I have stated another miracle of Christ?

Now you want to stress the difference between Tribute and Tax. Use your senses!
Where does money from an unwilling tribute come from?
What is tax to an expatriate government like?
You don't have to be a Christian to READ Jewish History!

I quoted the scriptures because Micheal, your name, is a name that originate from the Bible: you should know that. But your response show that you have not the tiniest compression of the scriptures, hence I gave you a brief historical background. Where is that an offence? You should have read up to confirm the history from other sources than the bible. SMH!

Your Summary:
All questions that wish for affirmative answers directed at you must be answered with a YES or NO response without the use of one's common sense!

My Summary:
All questions that wish for affirmative answers directed at you must NOT be answered with a YES or NO response without the use of one's common sense!

QED!

Take yours and move on!

shadeyinka:

They say lawyers like to argue even when the truth stares them in the face. What was the miracle of Jesus here o: miracle of not saying yes or no!? I don't understand [/b]how you assumed I have stated another miracle of Christ?

Lol... Is that what you made out from the sentence?
You told me to borrow sense from Jesus and I gave you reasons why i won't. It's a simple reply bro, don't know what else you are referring to, or maybe it has something to do with your understanding==>@bolded.

Now you want to stress the difference between Tribute and Tax. Use your senses!
Where does money from an unwilling tribute come from?
What is tax to an expatriate government like?
You don't have to be a Christian to READ Jewish History!

I didn't stress any difference bro... Just told you to know the meaning of the words you use. One time you are talking about [b]Tributes and the other time you are talking about Taxes as if they are the same.
Both are not the same bro and cannot be used interchangeably, and when you use it in a sentence, they can never mean the same thing.
I had to give you a verse in your religious book to show you this, but apparently, you still didn't get the point.

I quoted the scriptures because Micheal, your name, is a name that originate from the Bible: you should know that. But your response show that you have not the tiniest compression of the scriptures, hence I gave you a brief historical background. Where is that an offence? You should have read up to confirm the history from other sources than the bible. SMH!

Really?@bolded.
A Christian suggesting that Bible quotations be confirmed from other sources?
Thanks but no thanks bro, I'll pass!

Your Summary:
All questions that wish for affirmative answers directed at you must be answered with a YES or NO response without the use of one's common sense!

My Summary:
All questions that wish for affirmative answers directed at you must NOT be answered with a YES or NO response without the use of one's common sense!

QED!

Take yours and move on!

Okay, now i understand what the problem is for you.
By saying that you should use "Yes" or "No", I have always meant that you should answer a question directly when asked. If the person asking you a question demands a Yes/No reply, that's what you give.

Q: What is your name?
A: My name is Michael.
See, the question doesn't require a Yes/No reply.

But for you, drawing instances with how you typically answer your questions, you will probably start by assuming the intention behind the question, and then what you think the right question should have been, what the person asking intends to do with your name, and every other thing you can assume with regards to the question.

Q: Where are you from?
A: I am From Pluto.
See, the question doesn't require a Yes/No reply.

Q: Which University did you attend?
A: University of Agriculture, Pluto.
See, the question doesn't require a Yes/No reply.

This is a simple discuss in a faceless forum, if i ask you a simple question, its simple logic to give a simple reply. When you are asked what is "A" and you go on about talking about things related to Z, the discussion cannot move forward.

Anyone that implores such tactics as you do in a discuss is avoiding answering a question because the answer would undermine their own position. Therefore, they resort to dilly-dallying around just to avoid the question.

Regards!!!

IamMichael:

Lol... Is that what you made out from the sentence?
You told me to borrow sense from Jesus and I gave you reasons why i won't. It's a simple reply bro, don't know what else you are referring to, or maybe it has something to do with your understanding==>@bolded.


I didn't stress any difference bro... Just told you to know the meaning of the words you use. One time you are talking about Tributes and the other time you are talking about Taxes as if they are the same.
Both are not the same bro and cannot be used interchangeably, and when you use it in a sentence, they can never mean the same thing.
I had to give you a verse in your religious book to show you this, but apparently, you still didn't get the point.


Really?@bolded.
A Christian suggesting that Bible quotations be confirmed from other sources?
Thanks but no thanks bro, I'll pass!


Okay, now i understand what the problem is for you.
By saying that you should use "Yes" or "No", I have always meant that you should answer a question directly when asked. If the person asking you a question demands a Yes/No reply, that's what you give.

Q: What is your name?
A: My name is Michael.
See, the question doesn't require a Yes/No reply.

But for you, drawing instances with how you typically answer your questions, you will probably start by assuming the intention behind the question, and then what you think the right question should have been, what the person asking intends to do with your name, and every other thing you can assume with regards to the question.

Q: Where are you from?
A: I am From Pluto.
See, the question doesn't require a Yes/No reply.

Q: Which University did you attend?
A: University of Agriculture, Pluto.
See, the question doesn't require a Yes/No reply.

This is a simple discuss in a faceless forum, if i ask you a simple question, its simple logic to give a simple reply. When you are asked what is "A" and you go on about talking about things related to Z, the discussion cannot move forward.

Anyone that implores such tactics as you do in a discuss is avoiding answering a question because the answer would undermine their own position. Therefore, they resort to dilly-dallying around just to avoid the question.

Regards!!!

Learning Sense from someone is now a miracle!?
Context of speeches aren't important in languages!?

Check how reasonable your example questions are with respect to

All questions that wish for affirmative answers directed at you must be answered with a YES or NO response without the use of one's common sense!

"Questions that wish for Affirmative Answers!" Can only have YES or NO as answers!
Your sample questions
What is your name?
Where are you from?
Which University did you attend?
Do NOT require affirmative Answers!


It's obvious you have nothing more of any importance to say!

Regards!

shadeyinka:

Learning Sense from someone is now a miracle!?
Context of speeches aren't important in languages!?

You really do have comprehension issues obviously, and I'm not saying this to disrespect or make caricature, but you do have comprehension issues my friend.

Please show me where I said that "Learning sense from someone is a miracle!"

Cont'd:
Well, at this point, you must have read all that is going on in the thread.
So, I posted this comment and quote on my discuss with the moniker @shadeyinka:

God of the Gap's operate on area's of our life/universe where science has not yet debunked/understand.
In other words, religion leans heavily on area's we do not yet understand. God is used to explain away things man do not yet understand.
However, with every new discovery, the religious god's are relegated further back to irrelevance. In other words, as the previously unexplained gaps in our knowledge of the universe is filled with proven facts, Gap's filled with religious superstitions and Goddidit are eradicated along the way, losing relevance.
Before the law of planetary motions, people believed angels moved the planets, alongside whatever superstitious belief's that pervaded then.

"God was invented to explain mystery. God is always invented to explain those things that you do not understand.
Now, when you finally discover how something works, you get some laws which you're taking away from God; you don't need him anymore. But you need him for the other mysteries. So therefore you leave him to create the universe because we haven't figured that out yet; you need him for understanding those things which you don't believe the laws will explain, such as consciousness, or why you only live to a certain length of time — life and death — stuff like that. God is always associated with those things that you do not understand. Therefore I don't think that the laws can be considered to be like God because they have been figured out."
—Richard Feynman

And his reply was:

Your theory!
You're free to believe whatever you like: BUT is that the truth?

A typical way of dismissing any question which should ordinarily challenge someone to question their beliefs. The funny irony of the thing is, he also said it's my theory and asked me if it is true.
A question he should be asking himself!!!
It is said that if you don't question your beliefs, there is no way to know if they are true or not right?
In this instance, what should a reasonable person do? What would a reasonable person do with such detailed information about his belief system when the way those belief systems work have been accurately described?
A reasonable person is supposed to go back and weigh his belief system side by side with the description and see if it matches or not. Only fóols will outrightly dismiss something without considering the possibility of a thing being true or not.

If I came and told you that i saw your wife/child somewhere, surely it would be fōolish to not inquire where. The mind is always curious. The only way you will not regard the information is if you have been with your wife/child all day with noone going out at anytime. But, if that's not the situation, surely you will like to know.

God is always associated with things we don't understand. This is one of the key statements in the above quote.
But, the moniker @shadeyinka's reply to it is:
"Your theory!
You're free to believe whatever you like: BUT is that the truth?"

A rational person would have taken a step back and tried to think about the statement using their own life and their experiences in life. A rational person would have said, wait a minute, is this statement true? Okay, wait let me weigh this statement in my life and see how it comes out.
Then that person would have then asked himself:

When do i always make reference to God in my life?
When do i always use the word God to justify things that happened in my life?
When does the word God pop mostly in my activities and actions and experiences?
Do I always associate God with things i don't understand in my life and around me?
Do i always associate God with situations in my life which there is no explanation for it at the moment?
These are situations which can be observed directly by anyone who pays attention to themselves and who understands what being rational is all about.
But, as i said at the beginning, religious indoctrination requires that people lose every ounce of reasoning in them which makes it difficult for the adherents to think for themselves.

So, the question is, as you read this post/comment, ask yourself this key question:
What things in my life do i always associate God with?

More updates later.

IamMichael:
Cont'd:
Well, at this point, you must have read all that is going on in the thread.
So, I posted this comment and quote on my discuss with the moniker @shadeyinka:


And his reply was:


A typical way of dismissing any question which should ordinarily challenge someone to question their beliefs. The more funny thing is, he also said it's my theory.
It is said that if you don't question your beliefs, there is no way to know if they are true or not right?
In this instance, what should a reasonable person do? What would a reasonable person do with such detailed information about his belief system when the way those belief systems work have been accurately described?
A reasonable person is supposed to go back and weigh his belief system side by side with the description and see if it matches or not. Only fóols will outrightly dismiss something without considering the possibility of a thing being true or not.

If I came and told you that i saw your wife/child somewhere, surely it would be fōolish to not inquire where. The mind is always curious. The only way you will not regard the information is if you have been with your wife/child all day with noone going out at anytime. But, if that's not the situation, surely you will like to know.

God is always associated with things we don't understand. This is one of the key statements in the above quote.
But, the moniker @shadeyinka's reply to it is:
"Your theory!
You're free to believe whatever you like: BUT is that the truth?"

A rational person would have taken a step back and tried to think about the statement using their own life and their experiences in life. A rational person would have said, wait a minute, is this statement true? Okay, wait let me weigh this statement in my life and see how it comes out.
Then that person would have then asked himself:

When do i always make reference to God in my life?
When do i always use the word God to justify things that happened in my life?
When does the word God pop mostly in my activities and actions and experiences?
Do I always associate God with things i don't understand in my life and around me?
Do i always associate God with situations in my life which there is no explanation for it at the moment?
These are situations which can be observed directly by anyone who pays attention to themselves and who understands what being rational is all about.
But, as i said at the beginning, religious indoctrination requires that people lose every ounce of reasoning in them which makes it difficult for the adherents to think for themselves.

So, the question is, as you read this post/comment, ask yourself this key question:
What things in my life do i always associate God with?

More updates later.

Everything you have said here is deflated by one phrase "RELATIONSHIP and EXPERIENCE"!

Without experience, the God of gap is a good argument. Can you convince me that I have no experience (subjective or objective) of God? Too bad if you don't have your own experience: open your eyes!

This had been answered before: I wonder if this is just to keep your thread alive. I shouldn't even have responded if not for @shadeyinka that keeps resonating everywhere.

shadeyinka:

Everything you have said here is deflated by one phrase "RELATIONSHIP and EXPERIENCE"!

Without experience, the God of gap is a good argument. Can you convince me that I have no experience (subjective or objective) of God? Too bad if you don't have your own experience: open your eyes!

This had been answered before: I wonder if this is just to keep your thread alive. I shouldn't even have responded if not for @shadeyinka that keeps resonating everywhere.

I already asked you a more simpler question before the post you quoted.
You should do well to answer it first before asking your own question.

Regards!!!

IamMichael:

I already asked you a more simpler question before the post you quoted.
You should do well to answer it first before asking your own question.

Regards!!!

All these to keep your thread alive!?

My experience with religious adherents online and offline is that, by and large, their zeal to defend their religion is exceeded only by their breathtaking ignorance of their own religion.
Everything they know about the history, morality, philosophy, archaeology, and theology of their religion wouldn't cover five lines of a pocket diary.
When you ask them simple questions based on their religious beliefs, questions that needs common sense and their own personal experience to answer, they either try to avoid it or they defer to the usual cliché of "spirituality/spirit" "go and find it" etc.
They don't even realize how foôlish that statement is. I mean, you are the one who is saying that you have a relationship with the central deity of your religion, you are the one who is saying you are experiencing this and that. However, when asked to tell what it is you feel exactly, you can't. It's really disheartening and pathetic to say the least.

Every experience can be narrated and said exactly as it occurred if at all it was witnessed. That's what experiences are. Experiences are actual events that has/have happened to a person. Whatever is experienced could only have been possible with the sense's.
However, when you ask a typical brainwashed religious adherent to at least narrate the alleged personal experience, this is what they reply you:

southniyikaye:

1) Now how do I corroborate what the Bible says?
At the mention of the name of Jesus, every knee shall bow, that name saved me on countless occasions, come face to face with death several times and that name saved me. Go through my thread there is a confirmation there about a snake that was suppose to kill me. It even made front page.
GOD, Jesus, those are names we need in time of trouble and those have never disappointed me for once.

He has been conditioned to believe that saying Jesus in time of difficulty is going to save him. He actually believes it's true because the alleged difficulty never harmed him.
I doubt he knows about hundreds of people who were killed in bomb blasts while praising and shouting Jesus in churches.
I doubt also he knows about all the hundreds that died in plane crashes while also shouting Jesus or the millions of Igbo's who died during the civil war or the millions of Jews (whose God he worships) that have been murdered in million's year after year by almost every Empire that reigned on earth.
He doesn't also know about thousands that have died on our roads while shouting Jesus, but he thinks Jesus saved him because he shouted the name. A typically conditioned fellow.

When I reminded him about specific questions i asked about his personal beliefs, this is his reply:

southniyikaye:

just forget all these stupid brandishing of useless thoughts that is wasps up in your head.
I won't be answering you again.
Everyone is to believe what suits him or her.
For the fact that you've maybe read some books or some things are out there that you can't seem to understand doesn't mean others should follow suit in your stupidity.
I have given you reasons why I know there is God and why I believed in Jesus.
Whatever thing you wish to hear I don't know.
I referred you to my thread and that's one of the numerous signs of his existence.
Sincerely I won't dignify you with a mention again cos you are beginning to piss me off and I won't.
Continue wallowing in your delusion.

He develops an imaginary anger, starts the typical insult while also restating that he has given me reasons why he believes there is God by referring me to a snake thread. Then he ends by saying I should continue wallowing in my delusion.
So, I went to his snake thread in this same platform which he directed me to, and this is what he wrote in the thread :

southniyikaye:

As much as I don't want this to have a spiritual undertone, God did save me this night reason is,
Am already set to eat this night, Infact I was seated already na so to shit come dey worry me, I was like, if I chop finish I go shit naw but the urge was so crazy I just have to go.

Getting to the toilet, saw this snake trapped in between the toilet's window frames. How it got there, I don't know, how he got trapped, I don't know but two things could have happened

1) I might have sat down to do my thing and this serpent bite me from the head or
2) it fit Don enter inside the closet and bite my blockos(scrotum)

BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THIS IS GOD

He defers his lack of caution and being careful to God saving him.
He didn't say what kind of environment he stays, whether it's bushy or not. He states that he didn't know how the snake entered the place, but he still said the snake got stuck in the window frames of his toilet. He also didn't post the picture of the said frames in the pictures attached to the thread.
So, by first removing every factual evidence that is likely to make his final assertion of Goddidit false, he convinced himself that Goddidit.

His brain never worked out the fact that only the type of environment determine the type of animals in it.
He also never thought of the fact that it is probably out of his own carelessness that the snake entered his home.
He also never knew that it is common sense to be cautious in the dark especially because of crawlies or any other thing likely to take advantage.
But, to him, God saved him because he has been conditioned since childhood to believe that his common sense is useless and Goddidit is the answer to every thing in his life!
When you probe further now as to how he knew it was God that saved him, well you know the usual reply!!!

Here however, is a thread on Nairaland where people with common sense educates on how snake could possibly enter your bathroom/toilet.
https://www.nairaland.com/5813456/how-snakes-get-into-toilet

It also made front-page!!!

StrikeBack:
post the link of the thread

I have finally found the guy i was looking for and his threads.
I just saw one of his threads pop up on this thread.
This is the link:
https://www.nairaland.com/120610/christianity-basic-bible-test

shadeyinka and southniyikaye will say that Goddidit, that God provided the links for me out of nowhere.

Their mind will never ever imagine that Nairaland has an algorithm that allows for certain related threads to pop up in any thread once certain parameters are met(like page views, etc).

Let me add my own

All religions insist they have found the truth, despite the fact there are hundreds of religions and thousands of denominations preaching contradictory beliefs. This made me wonder, if religions were REALLY concerned about finding the truth, how would we expect them to behave?
I wouldn't expect to see religious or inter-denominational wars, such as we have seen between Shia and Sunni Muslims, Catholics and Protestants and between Muslims and Hindus. Obviously, you don't find who has the truth by killing those who have different opinions.
Instead, I would expect to see multi-faith working groups in centres of higher learning all over the world, working round the clock, sifting evidence, setting up archaeological expeditions and carrying out research. I would expect these centers of excellence to have ruled out most religions and denominations by now and be working hard to pare down the remaining short-list of religions.
Finally, I would not expect religions to cling to dogma that cannot be changed; rather I would expect religions readily to change their beliefs as new evidence is uncovered.
But in the real world, we do see killing, we do see rigid dogma and we do not see serious attempts to rule out false religions by mutual consent. Why not?
Because, religions are NOT about truth. Truth is not in the least relevant to religions. That is why religions rely on faith and eschew evidence; that is why they rely on indoctrination of children and not on open-minded inquiry.
Religions are not about finding truth--they are about defending lies.

shadeyinka:

Everything you have said here is deflated by one phrase "RELATIONSHIP and EXPERIENCE"!

Without experience, the God of gap is a good argument. Can you convince me that I have no experience (subjective or objective) of God? Too bad if you don't have your own experience: open your eyes!

This had been answered before: I wonder if this is just to keep your thread alive. I shouldn't even have responded if not for @shadeyinka that keeps resonating everywhere.

Sometimes god-believers tell me they don't just BELIEVE God exists--they KNOW it. They know it because they have a personal relationship with him. They ask questions and receive answers.
If this is true, it would give us a good way to demonstrate that God exists. All we have to do is arrange for 100 to 200 people who claim they have a similar relationship, to ask God a question. We would devise 5 or 6 questions and randomly assign one question to each person in the study.
We would need questions to which we currently have no answer, such as; is there life elsewhere in the universe and where? What is dark matter? Is it possible to freeze humans for long periods and restore them? Why is sleep important? Is it possible to unify general relativity with quantum field theory? What important questions have humans never asked?
Each person would ask God their question and note his reply. We could then compare answers. If people really do talk to God, we should see the same answers more often than we would expect by chance. We might even be able to test the answers to see if they are correct.
Getting a positive result from a study like this would be good evidence that people really do talk to a highly knowledgeable being. Discovering that such a being actually exists, together with the answers he would provide could literally transform the world. And there would be no excuse for atheists or people who worship invented gods.
If the results are no better than chance, we will have learnt that God does not exist, or people are mistaken when they say they talk to him or God does not want to reveal himself to his creation and would rather see billions tortured in hell...
What do you think?

shadeyinka:

The only weakness of God is His gift of freewill to man. With freewill a man can defy God his maker, man can rail against God, man can even rain curses on his Creator and the Merciful God will forbid His angels from striking such men dead and instantly put in the middle of the hottest part of hell fire.

Interestingly the scriptures say that ALL things (good or bad) work for God's good purpose.

The earth is an exam Field. It is a place of selection of men who will by their own WILL and VOLITION, submit themselves to God's rulership. For such is God's desire.

"I cannot see why we should expect an infinite God to do better in another world than he does in this."
"If there is a God who will damn his children forever, I would rather go to hell than to go to heaven and keep the society of such an infamous tyrant. I make my choice now. I despise that doctrine. It has covered the cheeks of this world with tears. It has polluted the hearts of children, and poisoned the imaginations of men....
What right have you, sir, Mr. clergyman, you, minister of the gospel to stand at the portals of the tomb, at the vestibule of eternity, and fill the future with horror and with fear? I do not believe this doctrine, neither do you. If you did, you could not sleep one moment. Any man who believes it, and has within his breast a decent, throbbing heart, will go insane. A man who believes that doctrine and does not go insane has the heart of a snake and the conscience of a hyena."
-- Robert Green Ingersoll

odinson1:
Let me add my own

All religions insist they have found the truth, despite the fact there are hundreds of religions and thousands of denominations preaching contradictory beliefs. This made me wonder, if religions were REALLY concerned about finding the truth, how would we expect them to behave?
I wouldn't expect to see religious or inter-denominational wars, such as we have seen between Shia and Sunni Muslims, Catholics and Protestants and between Muslims and Hindus. Obviously, you don't find who has the truth by killing those who have different opinions.
Instead[b], I would expect to see multi-faith working groups in centres of higher learning all over the world, working round the clock, sifting evidence, setting up archaeological expeditions and carrying out research. I would expect these centers of excellence to have ruled out most religions and denominations by now and be working hard to pare down the remaining short-list of religions.
Finally, I would not expect religions to cling to dogma that cannot be changed; rather I would expect religions readily to change their beliefs as new evidence is uncovered.[/b]
But in the real world, we do see killing, we do see rigid dogma and we do not see serious attempts to rule out false religions by mutual consent. Why not?
Because, religions are NOT about truth. Truth is not in the least relevant to religions. That is why religions rely on faith and eschew evidence; that is why they rely on indoctrination of children and not on open-minded inquiry.
Religions are not about finding truth--they are about defending lies.

Only an enlightened mind could concieve of all you said above my brother...
I mean, it is typically one of the solutions to the whole Goddidit thing.
But, we both know its impossible right now as that would actually lead to world peace. The people who are in charge of various religious beliefs actually need chaos to be in existence for their trade to prosper.
This would mean :
- No more religious tourism to Israel, Italy and Saudi Arabia, India and China.
- No more terrorists.
- No more afterlife büllshit, and people can concentrate on having good life with their limited time on earth.
- No more segregation based on the imaginary deity one worships.
- No more killing because your imaginary god told you to.
- etc.

odinson1:

Sometimes god-believers tell me they don't just BELIEVE God exists--they KNOW it. They know it because they have a personal relationship with him. They ask questions and receive answers.
If this is true, it would give us a good way to demonstrate that God exists. All we have to do is arrange for 100 to 200 people who claim they have a similar relationship, to ask God a question. We would devise 5 or 6 questions and randomly assign one question to each person in the study.
We would need questions to which we currently have no answer, such as; is there life elsewhere in the universe and where? What is dark matter? Is it possible to freeze humans for long periods and restore them? Why is sleep important? Is it possible to unify general relativity with quantum field theory? What important questions have humans never asked?
Each person would ask God their question and note his reply. We could then compare answers. If people really do talk to God, we should see the same answers more often than we would expect by chance. We might even be able to test the answers to see if they are correct.
Getting a positive result from a study like this would be good evidence that people really do talk to a highly knowledgeable being. Discovering that such a being actually exists, together with the answers he would provide could literally transform the world. And there would be no excuse for atheists or people who worship invented gods.
If the results are no better than chance, we will have learnt that God does not exist, or people are mistaken when they say they talk to him or God does not want to reveal himself to his creation and would rather see billions tortured in hell...
What do you think?

I'll answer you!

In summary, you need an OBJECTIVE criteria to prove or disprove the existence of God.

Short Answer:
You will NEVER EVER get it!

Long Answer:
It is childish.
A similar question:
How can I prove that Aisha Buhari and Zhara Buhari really know Buhari. We will ask them to Go home and ask Buhari some questions like
1. What is the colour of the carpet in the President's office?
2. Is the President's pen solid gold or gold plated?
3. Does the President put on pants or boxers? etc

Now, the President of Nigeria Mohamadu Buhari will now try to convince you that he is actually the President of Nigeria and He exists by answering those questions.

The question is, to whose advantage is the question?
Does it change anything about the reality of Buhari.

Let's say I was Buhari and my children came to ask me such questions, I will just smile and move on to more important things. Anyone who believe that I (as Buhari) doesn't exist should keep up the good work.

Why?
1. God isn't physical
2. Science is Man's understanding of God's creation
3. It is man's responsibility to crave understanding of how the universe work
4. GOD DID NOT CREATE the UNIVERSE with man's understanding of science.
5. God does no care one bit about what your understanding of science is.
6. The purpose of creation of man isn't about man's ability to understand Science.
The Purpose of creation of man is a SELECTION of human species with a specific traits.
The trait: given freewill and unlimited freedom, which of these humans will subject themselves to the Love of God and Love for man.
The purpose: these are then qualified to be sons of God and His representative in the universe.
The failures: these are packed and thrown into the refuse bin of God.

odinson1:

Sometimes god-believers tell me they don't just BELIEVE God exists--they KNOW it. They know it because they have a personal relationship with him. They ask questions and receive answers.
If this is true, it would give us a good way to demonstrate that God exists. All we have to do is arrange for 100 to 200 people who claim they have a similar relationship, to ask God a question. We would devise 5 or 6 questions and randomly assign one question to each person in the study.
We would need questions to which we currently have no answer, such as; is there life elsewhere in the universe and where? What is dark matter? Is it possible to freeze humans for long periods and restore them? Why is sleep important? Is it possible to unify general relativity with quantum field theory? What important questions have humans never asked?
Each person would ask God their question and note his reply. We could then compare answers. If people really do talk to God, we should see the same answers more often than we would expect by chance. We might even be able to test the answers to see if they are correct.
Getting a positive result from a study like this would be good evidence that people really do talk to a highly knowledgeable being. Discovering that such a being actually exists, together with the answers he would provide could literally transform the world. And there would be no excuse for atheists or people who worship invented gods.
If the results are no better than chance, we will have learnt that God does not exist, or people are mistaken when they say they talk to him or God does not want to reveal himself to his creation and would rather see billions tortured in hell...
What do you think?

Hahahahahahahahaha.
You want to kill some people. In fact, the moment you raise something like this, they will probably kill you.
This is an attack on every level of Indoctrination known to them. They can never agree to it and will quote religious pages for you as to the fact that it is against their faith.
Anything that is going to show for a fact whether or not their belief is real/fake is totally abhorred.
It's as you rightly stated, Religion doesn't care about the truth, it never did. This is why anyone that challenges religious beliefs is tagged a heretic, witch, unbeliever, etc.
All the people killed by the Catholic Church tagged as witches were people who never agreed to the ridiculous belief's they were peddling as truth.
Even the often quoted Galileo succumbed to them when threatened and modified some of his findings to suit the Catholic church.

odinson1:

"I cannot see why we should expect an infinite God to do better in another world than he does in this."
"If there is a God who will damn his children forever ,
I would rather go to hell than to go to heaven and keep the society of such an infamous tyrant.
I make my choice now.
I despise that doctrine. It has covered the cheeks of this world with tears. It has polluted the hearts of children, and poisoned the imaginations of men....
What right have you, sir, Mr. clergyman, you, minister of the gospel to stand at the portals of the tomb, at the vestibule of eternity, and fill the future with horror and with fear? I do not believe this doctrine, neither do you. If you did, you could not sleep one moment. Any man who believes it, and has within his breast a decent, throbbing heart, will go insane. A man who believes that doctrine and does not go insane has the heart of a snake and the conscience of a hyena."
-- Robert Green Ingersoll

Your misconception @bold

You are NOT a child of God!.
You are NOTHING, just star dust!
No human being is a child of God by default!

You are only SOMETHING if by your Freewill and Volition choose to honour God with your life.

See the yellow highlight and the subsequent bold.
HELL is for Satan and defiant creatures who take that path that BURNING in a timeless environment was created. Like you said: YOU MADE YOUR CHOICE!
It's your choice to make:

Deu 30:19:
"I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live:"


Why should you blame God when YOU by your Volition and Freewill CHOSE Death?

Check your italics:
In the face of haters of God, a man can only do what he can.

Let me tell you what the scriptures say about this:

Jud 1:21-23:
"Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life.
And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."


Luk 16:28-31:
"For I have five brothers; that he may testify to them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham said to him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will repent. And he said to him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

The job of a Christian is to Evangelize: which means tell them that they have HOPE and a SOLUTION of NOT partaking in God's final judgement.

Let's see what Jesus said:

Mar 6:11:
"And whoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when you depart there, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Truly I say to you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."


It's NOT by force!
Your blood is upon your head!

shadeyinka:

I'll answer you!

In summary, you need an OBJECTIVE criteria to prove or disprove the existence of God.

Short Answer:
You will NEVER EVER get it!

Long Answer:
It is childish.
A similar question:
How can I prove that Aisha Buhari and Zhara Buhari really know Buhari. We will ask them to Go home and ask Buhari some questions like
1. What is the colour of the carpet in the President's office?
2. Is the President's pen solid gold or gold plated?
3. Does the President put on pants or boxers? etc

Now, the President of Nigeria Mohamadu Buhari will now try to convince you that he is actually the President of Nigeria and He exists by answering those questions.

The question is, to whose advantage is the question?
Does it change anything about the reality of Buhari.

Let's say I was Buhari and my children came to ask me such questions, I will just smile and move on to more important things. Anyone who believe that I (as Buhari) doesn't exist should keep up the good work.

Why?
1. God isn't physical
2. Science is Man's understanding of God's creation
3. It is man's responsibility to crave understanding of how the universe work
4. GOD DID NOT CREATE the UNIVERSE with man's understanding of science.
5. God does no care one bit about what your understanding of science is.
6. The purpose of creation of man isn't about man's ability to understand Science.
The Purpose of creation of man is a SELECTION of human species with a specific traits.
The trait: given freewill and unlimited freedom, which of these humans will subject themselves to the Love of God and Love for man.
The purpose: these are then qualified to be sons of God and His representative in the universe.
The failures: these are packed and thrown into the refuse bin of God.

I will give you a very short rebuttal

According to you,it is impossible to prove the existence of God since the bible says he's a spirit

Now,since you yourself dont have proof for byis existence,how are you so sure he exists??

What other ' proof ' apart from the bible makes you BELIEVE or KNOW that yahweh is the ONLY true God??

shadeyinka:

Your misconception @bold

You are NOT a child of God!.
You are NOTHING, just star dust!
No human being is a child of God by default!

You are only SOMETHING if by your Freewill and Volition choose to honour God with your life.

See the yellow highlight and the subsequent bold.
HELL is for Satan and defiant creatures who take that path that BURNING in a timeless environment was created. Like you said: YOU MADE YOUR CHOICE!
It's your choice to make:

Deu 30:19:
"I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live:"


Why should you blame God when YOU by your Volition and Freewill CHOSE Death?

Check your italics:
In the face of haters of God, a man can only do what he can.

Let me tell you what the scriptures say about this:

Jud 1:21-23:
"Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life.
And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."


Luk 16:28-31:
"For I have five brothers; that he may testify to them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham said to him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will repent. And he said to him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

The job of a Christian is to Evangelize: which means tell them that they have HOPE and a SOLUTION of NOT partaking in God's final judgement.

Let's see what Jesus said:

Mar 6:11:
"And whoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when you depart there, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Truly I say to you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."


It's NOT by force!
Your blood is upon your head!

Almost every day a Christian will warn me that I will burn in hell if I do not repent and accept Jesus... well you know the rest.
I feel like telling these sad people that I fear Christian hell as much as they fear Jahannam (Islamic hell), Hifhel (Norse hell) or as much as they fear being reincarnated as a slug.
Why don't my Christian friends fear these horrible afterlives?
Because they are ridiculous, that's why...

IamMichael:

Hahahahahahahahaha.
You want to kill some people. In fact, the moment you raise something like this, they will probably kill you.
This is an attack on every level of Indoctrination known to them. They can never agree to it and will quote religious pages for you as to the fact that it is against their faith.
Anything that is going to show for a fact whether or not their belief is real/fake is totally abhorred.
It's as you rightly stated, Religion doesn't care about the truth, it never did. This is why anyone that challenges religious beliefs is tagged a heretic, witch, unbeliever, etc.
All the people killed by the Catholic Church tagged as witches were people who never agreed to the ridiculous belief's they were peddling as truth.
Even the often quoted Galileo succumbed to them when threatened and modified some of his findings to suit the Catholic church.

And the worse part is that these religious folks will justify anything that God did.... because,after it was God who did it or commanded,it can never be wrong

That's how they justify a Father torturing his children in a lake of fire for Eternity

odinson1:

Almost every day a Christian will warn me that I will burn in hell if I do not repent and accept Jesus... well you know the rest.
I feel like telling these sad people that I fear Christian hell as much as they fear Jahannam (Islamic hell), Hifhel (Norse hell) or as much as they fear being reincarnated as a slug.
Why don't my Christian friends fear these horrible afterlives?
Because they are ridiculous, that's why...

It's your call!

odinson1:



I will give you a very short rebuttal

According to you,it is impossible to prove the existence of God since the bible says he's a spirit

Now,since you yourself dont have proof for byis existence,how are you so sure he exists??

What other ' proof ' apart from the bible makes you BELIEVE or KNOW that yahweh is the ONLY true God??

I can speak for myself: I can't generalize for others.

There is a knowledge of God you have because you were TOLD either from the Bible, your Parent, the Society, the Church, etc.

There is a KNOWLEDGE of God you have by EXPERIENCE. This experience is usually Subjective.

Now because of its subjective nature, it is impossible to convince you or anyone for that matter about my experience. My experience is unique to me and not transferable.

A mundane example:
There is no way to convince you that I had dinner with Donald Trump in my dreams. You can only have your own dream to confirm that a Nigerian can eat dinner in his dreams with the President of United States of America.

Is my claim true?
Yes!
Is it provable?
No!

Your question could be, if an experience is subjective, does it make it unreal?

shadeyinka:

I can speak for myself: I can't generalize for others.

There is a knowledge of God you have because you were TOLD either from the Bible, your Parent, the Society, the Church, etc.

There is a KNOWLEDGE of God you have by EXPERIENCE. This experience is usually Subjective.

Now because of its subjective nature, it is impossible to convince you or anyone for that matter about my experience. My experience is unique to me and not transferable.

A mundane example:
There is no way to convince you that I had dinner with Donald Trump in my dreams. You can only have your own dream to confirm that a Nigerian can eat dinner in his dreams with the President of United States of America.

Is my claim true?
Yes!
Is it provable?
No!

Your question could be, if an experience is subjective, does it make it unreal?

So according to you,your own personal proof of Gods existence is the bible and your ' personal experience ' with him....right?

shadeyinka:

It's your call!

If your god exists and your religion is true, does this give you an obligation to help others who do not share your beliefs?
If you saw a child floundering in a shallow pond, you would surely feel obliged to make an effort to save its life but how much greater is your moral obligation if you see a multitude of people headed to an eternity of unimaginable agony? Could anything possibly be more important than saving them?
So why don't all religious people dedicate their lives to saving those who worship fake gods or no gods at all? Why do most religious people shrug their shoulders and say people are entitled to their own beliefs? Are we really so selfish and wicked?
This is hard to understand. Perhaps it is because you feel it is too hard to convince others that their beliefs are wrong and yours are right. But if your beliefs are true and you know they are true, it should be possible to pass that knowledge to others. After all, if you cannot do that, how can you be sure your beliefs ARE true?
I don't know why religious people are so selfish. Perhaps they will tell us. But I do have my suspicions. I suspect they don't do this because they are not really sure their own beliefs are true--they just find them agreeable and hope they are true. They have faith.
And how can you expect to convince others, if all you have is faith?

odinson1:


If your god exists and your religion is true, does this give you an obligation to help others who do not share your beliefs?
If you saw a child floundering in a shallow pond, you would surely feel obliged to make an effort to save its life but how much greater is your moral obligation if you see a multitude of people headed to an eternity of unimaginable agony? Could anything possibly be more important than saving them?
So why don't all religious people dedicate their lives to saving those who worship fake gods or no gods at all? Why do most religious people shrug their shoulders and say people are entitled to their own beliefs? Are we really so selfish and wicked?
This is hard to understand. Perhaps it is because you feel it is too hard to convince others that their beliefs are wrong and yours are right. But if your beliefs are true and you know they are true, it should be possible to pass that knowledge to others. After all, if you cannot do that, how can you be sure your beliefs ARE true?
I don't know why religious people are so selfish. Perhaps they will tell us. But I do have my suspicions. I suspect they don't do this because they are not really sure their own beliefs are true--they just find them agreeable and hope they are true. They have faith.
And how can you expect to convince others, if all you have is faith?

Why are you playing the devil's advocate.

Believers are at different levels of faith, grace and temperaments. Each one will do what he is able to do at his level. While battling with impossible odds of normal survival and facing people like you whose has dedicated themselves to showing that their faith is fruitless.

Luk 16:28-31:
"For I have five brothers; that he may testify to them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham said to him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will repent. And he said to him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

The job of a Christian is to Evangelize: which means tell them that they have HOPE and a SOLUTION of NOT partaking in God's final judgement.

Let's see what Jesus said:

Mar 6:11:
"And whoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when you depart there, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Truly I say to you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."


In the place of great oppositions, Christians are doing their best while people like you too are doing your best. We understand!

By the scripture prophecy, you will increase on earth while we will decrease in number. Keep up the work while you can!