shahan:

The Holy Spirit has always been there, but you didn't take the time to read the relevant Bible texts.

I submit that in the first place, you would be trying to put words in Jesus' mouth. But to guarantee you, if I may acquiesce to your pun of "the equation", may I ask if you forgot what He said in matt. 28:19 - "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"?? Could He have recommended that "equation" if the Holy Ghost was not in the divine Trinity?

If all three of them were one, couldn't Jesus have easily said. . . Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of God?. . . It's verses like that that make me wonder!

@Opia,

So, in your summation, Jesus is not God? Well, I have a few questions for you to think through (you're not obliged to answer them if you don't want to):

*** Who was speaking in Revelation 22:12-13?

*** If Jesus was merely 'divine', or 'a god' but not 'God', what does that say about you - that you acknowledge several 'gods' in your faith: one being the Father (the God), and the other being the Son (a god)?

*** (because of a lack of an article in the second 'theos' in John 1:1), If Jesus was only 'divine' but not 'God', have you compared this principle with the rest of the Bible and assured yourself that it applies exactly the same?

I would really appreciate your answers to any one of these, especially the third one, if you may. Many thanks.  

@Donzman,

Donzman:

If all three of them were one, couldn't Jesus have easily said. . . Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of God?. . . It's verses like that that make me wonder!

Appreciate your rejoinder, Donzman. As I intimated earlier, that would be putting words in Jesus' mouth: and I'm not one to do so.

Secondly, He actually did say that believers are to be baptized in the name ('name' singular; not plural 'name[b]s[/b]') of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. He did not say what we want Him to say; and it is up to us to carefully consider what He did say.

Perhaps, you need to think through this: if Jesus was merely 'a god' as Opia offers us, why would we need to be baptized in His name as well as of the Father and of the Holy Ghost? Or, put another way: what form of paganism would you be offered as a Christian if someone interpreted Matt. 28:19 to you as to be baptized "in the name of God, and of a god, and of the Holy Ghost"?? You may be strongly persuaded that Jesus was 'a god'; so, let me ask you your own question: couldn't Jesus have easily said: ". . . Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of God, and of a god?. . ." Would you still call that Christianity?

Do you connect the dots now?

Yes, Jesus is God.
Yes, i am an Anni

@ Shahan

@Bobbyaf,

I'm not here to fill in the gap for m4malik or anyone. But it come across to me that you have issues that you cannot bear yourself, and that's why you think people are 'aggressive' simply because you don't agree with them.

Really now professor Sigmund! The sole issue I have is people like you who get personal instead of dealing with the truth.

@Bobbyaf,

Oh child, I wish you grew up a bit and get to know yourself.

@opia,

Did you consider the meaning of the source you cited before drawing inferences?

opia:


Volume 2 of The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (1976) . . .states:

“Jesus Christ does not usurp the place of God. His oneness with the Father does not mean absolute identity of being.

First, considering the construct of the language, that the Word (Jesus) was called God on John 1:1 simply points to the fact that the Word was being presented in his absolute identity of being. Christ was given divine appellations in Scripture, not simply as titles of honour, but to the effect of testifying to His true essence. For instance, Isaiah 9:6 (the Mighty God), Psa. 2:12 (the Son), Dan. 7:9, 13 & 22 (the Ancient of Days) are not mere appellations of honour, but truly identifying Jesus Christ indeed in His essential being. In the case of Dan. 7, it is not merely a case of describing Jesus with the picture of the 'Ancient of Days' (God); for how do you describe Him with divinity and yet make Him out not to be exactly as you describe?

Again, as quoted:

opia:

Although the Son of God in his pre-existent being was in the form of God, he resisted the temptation to be equal with God (Phil. 2:6).

Two things, please: (a) what exactly is meant by "in the form of God" that says He is not God? (b) the Phil. 2:6 verse reads: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." It was not a resisting 'the temptation to be equal with God'; but rather, not counting the very fact of His equality with God as a robbery.

opia:

In his earthly existence he was obedient to God, even unto death on the cross (Phil. 2:. He is the mediator, but not the originator, of salvation (2 Cor. 5:19; Col. 1:20; Heb. 9:15), . . .

If Christ is not the originator of salvation, what then did Heb. 12:2 mean by calling Him "the author and finisher of our faith"?

opia:

If in Rev. 1:13 ff. the appearance of the heavenly son of man is described with features from the picture of the ‘Ancient of Days’ (God) of Dan. 7, this is not to say that Christ is equal with God. In Rev. a distinction is always made between God and the ‘Lamb’.”

Surely the overall view of the Scriptures points to the fact that Jesus was not God as the Trinity doctrine claims.

A distinction is always made throughout Scripture between the Person and office of Christ. Jesus is the Son of Man as well the Son of God (Matt. 16:13 & 16); He is the Lamb of God as well the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5 & 6); He is the Shepherd as well as the Door of our salvation (John 10:2, 7 & 9); etc. In all these, any careful reader cannot miss the point that only One Person fills all descriptions above. So, to deny that the Lamb is Himself very God on the premise of stretching distinctions is to miss the point by ignoring the collective testimony of Scripture.

Further, the heavenly 'Son of Man' described with features from the picture of the 'Ancient of Days' is exactly that - God! He is not merely described; He is actually God. He is the same who spoke in the preceding verse 11 of Rev. 1, calling Himself "the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last", and reiterates this in verse 17 when He laid His hands on the apostle John. Not only so, but also in the last chapter of Revelation, He again identifies Himself emphatically as we read: "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev. 22:12-13). He was not merely assuming that appellation for Himself, but emphatically declaring who He actually is with "I am. . ."

Surely, the overall view of Scripture points to the fact that Jesus Christ is indeed God as attested to in the Trinity doctrine.

Amen. Bless!

@ m4malik,
God bless you guy!

shashan and co, u guys need a thorough clarification of the bible, i hav answers to all ur questions but i guess this is not the right place discuss that.try and go overthe article again and this time around be flexible wt ur mind dnt be like the pharisees[blocked head and stiff necked],
read it wt an open mind and u will get the message.

shashan or wht is ur name,to be baptizedhe the in name of the father son and holy spirit,i will get back to u on the issue,bye 4 now,

open ur heart mind and soul for the truth and the truth shall set u free

thts for u shashan



Accurate Knowledge Essential

8 Christian baptism is not for everyone. Jesus ordered his followers: “Go . . . and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:19, 20) Before being baptized, people must be ‘taught to observe all the things Jesus commanded his disciples.’ Hence, forced baptisms of those lacking faith based on accurate knowledge of God’s Word are valueless and contrary to the commission Jesus gave his true followers.—Hebrews 11:6.

9 What does it mean to be baptized “in the name of the Father”? It means that the baptismal candidate recognizes our heavenly Father’s office and authority. Jehovah God is thus acknowledged as our Creator, “the Most High over all the earth,” and the Universal Sovereign.—Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 40:28; Acts 4:24.

10 To be baptized ‘in the name of the Son’ means to recognize Jesus’ office and authority as God’s only-begotten Son. (1 John 4:9) Those qualified for baptism accept Jesus as the one through whom God has provided “a ransom in exchange for many.” (Matthew 20:28; 1 Timothy 2:5, 6) Baptismal candidates must also acknowledge the “superior position” to which God has exalted his Son.—Philippians 2:8-11; Revelation 19:16.

11 What is the significance of baptism ‘in the name of the holy spirit’? This indicates that the baptismal candidates recognize that the holy spirit is Jehovah’s active force, used in various ways in harmony with his purpose. (Genesis 1:2; 2 Samuel 23:1, 2; 2 Peter 1:21) Those qualifying for baptism acknowledge that the holy spirit helps them to understand “the deep things of God,” to carry on the Kingdom-preaching work, and to display the spirit’s fruitage of “love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, mildness, self-control.”—1 Corinthians 2:10; Galatians 5:22, 23; Joel 2:28, 29.

@ Opia

If Jesus isn't God what is He then? Another god? How would you respond to these texts?

1. Isaiah 45:5
5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:

If Jesus is another God, or in the case of JW's who view Jesus as a less-than-omni-potent God , then wouldn't that create a contradiction of scriptures?

2. Micah 5:2, which speaks to the eternal attribute that only God can possess, and which seems to be talking about Jesus Christ: 2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

The "he" in the latter part of the sentence is no doubt Jesus Christ, and the "me" no doubt has to be the Father. The phrase "whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting" is definitely qualifying the "he" in the verse.

JWs believe that Jesus was created by the Father, which is the real motivation behind your posts, but how does a created being become a being that possesses eternal attributes?

3. Isaiah 9:6
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

In the very text that JWs use to defend their view that Jesus is not as powerful as the Father, it says that Jesus is the everlasting Father. What is going on here? Once again can there be two Gods? Not according to the bible.

I am proposing to you Opia despite what you've been taught, is that both Father and Son share the same title, the God-Head. Both recieve power and glory. Both recieve worship. Let us view more evidence.

Hebrews 1:6
6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

Rev. 5:11-13
11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands; 12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing. 13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

It is very clear that there is absolutely no difference between what praises the Father recieves from what the Son recieves.

This brings info sharp focus the integrity of God the Father if He should ever allow one of His creatures to recieve the same extensive worship as He alone deserves according to JWs. If Jehovah, a name attributed to the Father by the JWs, is the only true God, then why would He allow a creature in the form of an archangel to recieve glory and honour? I find that concept strange.

Isaiah 42:8
8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

Isaiah 48:11
, for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another.

But, didn't Jesus pray thus: 5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. John 17:5

This glory is unique to God in that He refuses to share it with anyone else. Idols and created things , including angels, have no right to receive this glory. In fact John attempted to worship one, and the angel forbad it. Hence, if Jesus is a created being then what right does He have to recieve worship or to share God's glory? Lucifer once tried to recieve worship in heaven, and still desperately seeks it today. If Jesus were a created angel as taught by you, then why would God favour Him over Lucifer?

And this is where Paul addresses the issue of Jesus not thinking it robbery to be equal with God His Father. He already knew that. It was no big deal, but Lucifer made it out to be a big deal. Because of his special place in heaven he thought that he should be given some special attention that included worship.

In summary, the word God is a title. It just happens that both Father and Son share it.

@Opia,

opia:

shashan . . . try and go over the article again and this time around be flexible wt your mind dnt be like the pharisees[blocked head and stiff necked],

Nevermind the teasing. . . what can we do without some laughs sometimes??

Okay, to assure you, I'm not blocked head and/or stiff necked. And I carefully went through your article bit-by-bit and found them really unbalanced. Thus, my earlier questions.

I wouldn't really have bothered with your latest entry as m4malik has offered very good and open-hearted reasoning to the point. However, let me share what you really are missing:

opia:


8 Christian baptism is not for everyone.

Jesus ordered his followers: “Go . . . and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:19, 20)

Before being baptized, people must be ‘taught to observe all the things Jesus commanded his disciples.’ Hence, forced baptisms of those lacking faith based on accurate knowledge of God’s Word are valueless and contrary to the commission Jesus gave his true followers.—Hebrews 11:6.

1. If Christian baptism is not for everyone (all), then it is not for anyone at all. You will not find your idea sustained in God's Word.

2. This verse in your quote already defeats your assumption, because if the Gospel is to the 'people of all the nations' ('all', remember. . .not 'some'), then certainly no one is to be excluded from the blessing offered in that verse. It is either all, or it is for none at all.

3. I don't know about people being 'forced' into baptism. What I do know is that the moment people truly believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, they were offered baptism without much ado. Check out the following:

(a) Stephen didn't hinder the Euthiopian eunuch when he asked for baptism ('what doth hinder me to be baptized'). The evangelists settled the situation by enquiring if the eunuch believed with all his heart as to if Jesus was the Son of God. Upon affirmation of the same, the eunuch was baptized (Acts 8:36-39). Stephen didn't wait for what you term 'accurate knowledge' before baptizing the eunuch.

(b) Pretty much the same thing with Paul. Upon being converted and beleiving on the Lord Jesus Christ, he received no formal classes of accurate knowledge before he was baptized (Acts 9:17-18 ).

I hope you get the drift? I believe that whomsoever has believed and been baptized (without making them 'baptismal candidates') is accepted by God; so it is really inconsequential to denounce such "valueless" as you did earlier.

opia:

It means that the baptismal candidate recognizes our heavenly Father’s office and authority. . . means to recognize Jesus’ office and authority as God’s only-begotten Son. (1 John 4:9) . . . that the baptismal candidates recognize that the holy spirit is Jehovah’s active force, used in various ways . . .

This classic interpretation of JW doctrine in order to deny the declarations of Scripture is hardly new. Denying that the holy Ghost is a divine Person (God Himself), such doctrine makes Him an active force. I wonder then how an active force can do the following:

He can speak (Acts 8:29 & 10:19)

He can be grieved (Eph. 4:30)

He can be insulted (Heb. 10:29)

He can be lied against (Acts 5:3-5)

He teaches (John 14:26 & I Cor. 2:13)

. . . and He has love (Rom. 15:30)

I think it is an insult to Him to speak of Him only in terms of an active force that can be 'used'. However, I'd offer you to go and prayerfully study God's Word in the wisdom which the Spirit gives, and not in man's wisdom of some claiming accurate knowledge of what they neither know nor understand.

Blessings.

@opia,

8 Christian baptism is not for everyone. Jesus ordered his followers: “Go . . . and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:19, 20) Before being baptized, people must be ‘taught to observe all the things Jesus commanded his disciples.’ Hence, forced baptisms of those lacking faith based on accurate knowledge of God’s Word are valueless and contrary to the commission Jesus gave his true followers.—Hebrews 11:6.

Your argument falls straight to the ground when you read through the account of the baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts Chapter 8. How much was he ‘taught to observe all the things Jesus commanded his disciples.’ before he was baptized? I will advice you to not go beyond that which is written as you will end up with traditions that make God's Word of no effect. What else will you say? That we have to fulfill all of Christ's teachings before we can be born again?

Bobbyaf:

@ Opia

If Jesus isn't God what is He then?

A figment of your over active imaginations

, I see.

Bless you

i dont understand all these god the father and holy spirit stuff,  i think christians are in a fix and cant but defend the bible because god in the bible is the father and at the same time the son ;d

don't have much to say now but Jesus Christ is God,the second person of the Holy trinity.God the father God the son and God the Holy spirit all are one God. The creation was done by the father,the word itself is Jesus Christ and the Holy spirit is the force behind all these.
The reason why we don't understand this simple theology is because God took flesh and decend as a mere human being through a virgin whom prophet Issaih prophesied about.
see also john chapter one verse one down and verse 9-12
in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God.
That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

All these are atrributed to Jesus who is the light.
Thank u.

you all should remember the trinity. the bible said that the trinity is made up of God the father, God the son, and God the holy ghost.
It depends on which aspect you are talking of.If you are talking about God the father, then jesus is not God the father. he is God the son so he is still god. so the end point

jesus is God _{the son.}
Jesus is not the highest God in the tririnty_{he is the second and God the father is the highest.}

@robby

The bible didn't say anything about the "trinity", the catholic church did.

to opia, i think you should come back with further explanations


to shahan, how would you explain the following scriptures

1 Corinthians 8:5-6

For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords",yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.


1 Corinthians 11:3

Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

1 Corinthians 15:27-28

For he "has put everything under his feet."[a] Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

Matthew 20:20-23

Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Jesus with her sons and, kneeling down, asked a favor of him. "What is it you want?" he asked. She said, "Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and the other at your left in your kingdom." "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said to them. "Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?" "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father."

Revelation 1:1

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John

mark 13:32

No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.


John 14:28

You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 3:16

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


Mark 10:18

Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good—except God alone.

Mark 12:28-30

One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?" "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.'

i would be waiting to get a reply from shahan!

@ donzman,
let me proove you wrong.

1) isiah 48:16 says
"Come near me and listen to this:
"From the first announcement I have not spoken in secret;
at the time it happens, I am there."
And now the Sovereign LORD has sent me,
with his Spirit."

2) genesis 1:26
"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.""

here, the sovering Lord shows you that they have differentiated them and are talking about God the father. And in the second one,(which i am sure you know quite wll) the bible says "our own image". Now who are those "our" if not the trinity?

i will get more if you want

N/B:
i am not catholic or anglican.

@robby

You are just reaching conclusions that are far from forthcoming. Due to the fact you have an idea of the trinity, you automatically attribute "our" to the trinity. Could "our"not be referring to "God, angels and the hosts of heaven"?

Again, bible never explicitly states God the father, God the son and God the Holy Ghost. That is one of the contributions of the early catholic church.

I do believe that Jesus is God by the way. Is the son of a human not human?

@damosky,

While you're waiting on those, could you please answer the following:

John 1:1
In the beginning the Word already existed; the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Rom. 9:5
"To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen."

Tit. 2:13
"Looking for the glad hope, the revelation of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ"

Heb. 1:8
"But of the Son he says, Your seat of power, O God, is for ever and ever; and the rod of your kingdom is a rod of righteousness."

1 John 5:20
"And we are certain that the Son of God has come, and has given us a clear vision, so that we may see him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life."

Rev 22:12-13
"And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to each one according to his work. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End."

@ Donzman,

Donzman:

You are just reaching conclusions that are far from forthcoming. Due to the fact you have an idea of the trinity, you automatically attribute "our" to the trinity. Could "our"not be referring to "God, angels and the hosts of heaven"?

The "Us" and "Our" in Gen. 1:26 does not include the angels and heavenly hosts for the simple reasons that:

(1) any work of creation in the divine afflatus was the prerogative of the Godhead - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit;

(2) not a single verse in the Bible remotely suggests that the angels or the heavenly hosts were once involved in the work of creation;

(3) man was made to worship God as the Creator; and no worship was ascribed to any angel created by God [for He will not share His glory with any created being - Isaiah 42:8];

(4) the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are together involved in the Salvation of men in such a way that no angel or heavenly host is able to be involved [angels are ministering spirits (Heb. 1:14), and they desire to understand our salvation - I Pet. 1:12].

Donzman:

Again, bible never explicitly states God the father, God the son and God the Holy Ghost. That is one of the contributions of the early catholic church.

Granted, neither does the Bible specifically mention the words "BIBLE" or "RAPTURE" or "SUBSTITUTION"; but all these great truths are revealed on its pages, inviting our dilligent study and promising rich blessings for those who do so - "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter" [Prov. 25:2].

Donzman:

I do believe that Jesus is God by the way. Is the son of a human not human?

Helep me ask them

Hi all.I'm new to this forum,saw this thread and couldn't avoid saying something.
Its really disheartening that even bible verses written in simple English are mis-interpreted.when Jesus himself is talking about a God in one of the quoted bible verses,how can some people now say that he (Jesus) is God.
its rather sad.

@Najm,

Hi, and welcome onboard. I just have a question for you: have you read John 1:1 in simple English - what does it say?

@damosky,

A question for you as well: before Jesus became a Man, who was He?
When you find a salient answer to that, then your enquiry would have been resolved. If you still would not have found it, then i'll come back and share with you. Cheers.

@opia,

How bodi? Do I take it that you didn't try to answer my earlier questions (as it was not obligatory); or, that you had no answers at all? Pardon me, but I had wanted to point out a very important element in your exposition of John 1:1 - it might interest you what the Bible says, even for some of us who have a very poor grasp of the Greek.

@m4malik,

Thanks for adding to my understanding.

Fools of this world starting from Adam till this our time who are heading to speedy doom,debates and take liberty with God when he speaks.
Not knowing that The Almighty God have nothing to do with democracy, but he is Theocracy and will remain so till time indefinite

We read in Mathew Chapter 3 verses 16,17: After being baptised Jesus immediately came up from the water, and look the heavens opened up, and he saw descending like a dove God's spirit coming upon him, vss 17 look! also there was a voice from the heavens that[b] said" This Is My Son" the beloved, whom i have approved[/b]WARNING GOD HAVE SPOKEN!

Compare also John 17vs 1:  Jesus spoke these things and raising his eyes to heaven, he said Father the hour has come , glorify your son that your son will may aslo glorify you, SEE verse 5

Hee-hee-hee

8oracle, please try reading the whole Bible before you publicly reveal your flaws.

nigershit:

all you black african dogs , you guys are nothing short of a bunch of complete con artists and child cocksuckers and paedophiles. go lick your big fat black mama's hoochie and tell olesegun obasanjo to give all you wankers some oil money so you will stop scamming people.

all nigerians are useless black bawbags and theyre full of shite

you are sick

@8Oracle

The cannabis abuse at that time can explain most of these spooky apparitions together with some very over active imaginations