Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 3,205,003 members, 7,990,770 topics. Date: Friday, 01 November 2024 at 12:21 AM

John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax - Religion (2) - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax (3986 Views)

JOHN 3:16. / Pastor In Video Marries 4 Ladies Who Are All Virgins At Once, Says Bible Support / The Deeper Meaning To John 3:16 (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (3) (Reply) (Go Down)

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by vaxx: 4:17pm On Mar 18, 2018
danvon:
Op your logic is strange isn't your son a part of you?
no my son is a different entity from me

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by danvon(m): 4:21pm On Mar 18, 2018
vaxx:
no my son is a different entity from me
I didn't ask if your son is you, I asked if he isn't a part of you?

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by vaxx: 4:24pm On Mar 18, 2018
danvon:
I didn't ask if your son is you, I asked if he isn't a part of you?
read my op again
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by danvon(m): 4:28pm On Mar 18, 2018
vaxx:
read my op again
How many times do I have to read it God sent his begotten son which is the same thing as sending a big part of himself, so your point is strange

2 Likes

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by vaxx: 4:33pm On Mar 18, 2018
danvon:
How many times do I have to read it God sent his begotten son which is the same thing as sending a big part of himself, so your point is strange
read it yourself, if your father sent you an errant, does it equal to sending himself or a big part of him self? i will like to see your strange logic here

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by danvon(m): 4:38pm On Mar 18, 2018
vaxx:
read it yourself, if your father sent you an errant, does it equal to sending himself or a big part of him self? i will like to see your strange logic here
So according to you sending yourself and leaving your house and servants alone is the best solution
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by vaxx: 4:41pm On Mar 18, 2018
danvon:
So according to you sending yourself and leaving your house and servants alone is the best solution
so GOD IS NOT OMNIPRESENT AGAIN

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by danvon(m): 4:46pm On Mar 18, 2018
vaxx:
so GOD IS NOT OMNIPRESENT AGAIN
You said we should remove Bible references

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by MuttleyLaff: 12:00am On Mar 19, 2018
vaxx:
lets, see how you will apply your pseudo intellectual you hold in high esteem on the below rebuttal,
me, asking commentators not to go ahead to quote biblical verse further is to safe them fro quoting another hoax verses from the bible,
we are presently dealing with one, if the need to address another verse then we can go ahead.
we can be using one hoax to rob another hoax that will cause more intelligence point made earlier useless,
so to afford the normal back and fourth argument, it is better we stay out of the dark debate.
Aside bible, the testimony of another witness(es) supporting a matter, is valued and appreciated by court of law
but hey, be my guest, if you prefer hard ball and dark debate

vaxx:
Assumption 1
which contradict the topic of discussion, there was clear separation.
THAT HE GAVE HIS BEGOTTEN SON do not sound as if it is the same person talking to himself,
in fact whoever wrote the entire that verse Whoever wrote John was not a trinitarian
Please dont pick up a straw man
and let it be the last time you pull a straw-man stunt like this.
Who has talked about about trinity here?
Or who has talked about whether whoever that wrote John was a trinitarian?
Please.

vaxx:
It is a suggestion on the writer’s part that God does not choose to know the future.
because if indeed, he will have know how the game will play, Jesus was restored to cover that gap.
If God knew how that would come out, it would make the act of allowing it to happen into a cheap parlor trick, a sham.
No, only if God did not know how things would turn out could one say God gave anything.
so in the essence god did not give anything earlier according to the writer suggestion
What?!

Are you familiar with the below statement:
He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel

It is called the Protoevangelium (i.e. derived from "proto" meaning "first" and euangelion meaning "gospel" or "good news)

Unless you're in denial, you know the implication of that statement.
That statement is not only a reference to the idea of a Messiah
but doubles up, also as, the first Messianic prophecy

That statement is the genesis of salvation history with fulfillment in Jesus Christ that the opening sentence of this thread and John 3:16 is all about.

God knew how things would turn out, and waited patiently for 4000 years, from the day that prophecy was made, before it came to pass or got fulfilled

vaxx:
Assumption 2,
all these your pseudo opinion does not correlate with the message the verse intend to pass,
we are dealing with the topic, the verse clearly indicate Jesus was sent BY GOD to the world to save souls from perishing,
whatever you are imputing now does not in any way correlate with the verse.
as i said earlier i will prefer we focus on the topic. lets address the verse .
instead of shifting around. i know you are finding it difficult to do.
It correlates,
because the One who sent and the Sent are One

vaxx:
ASSUMPTION 3,
you do not do better, still repeating the same earlier warning i gave... anyway if that will make you better.
THIS IS IS not the message john 3 vs 16 intend to pass. as it clearly stated.
If I dont do it that way, you wouldnt have dots to join, to see the picture

vaxx:
christ is the begotten son of GOD that is what john 3 vs 16 stated
Yes it does
and "begotten" has hence earlier been explained

vaxx:
must GOD descend to earth before he pass his message
I know I can rely on you to make this a labour of love explanation
No, GOD doesnt need to descend to earth before He pass His message
but He needed to descend to earth in order to actualise or make a reality of the Protoevangelium

vaxx:
this your opinion here suggest god is not omnipresent.
what do you think?
It is not an opinion, not my opinion
but is a fact, that God is Omnipresent
I dont think, instead I do know that, God is Omnipresent
Repeating myself, God simultaneously can be in more than one place at a time (i.e. God can be in Heaven and on earth, at the same time)

vaxx:
this is your opinion, an innocent blood is demanded for the ransoms of sins of human since animal blood is not enough.
john 3 vs 16 clearly indicate that the only way to escape ''perish'' is to believe in GOD SON(JESUS CHRIST)
Ah the blood
I spot you going to make this blood thing hard work here

If someone like you, that flirts with the idea of having some knowledge of blood/DNA,
doesnt know why an "innocent blood" is needed or demanded for the ransoms of sins of human beings since animal blood is not enough
then its now apparent its just a semblance you have
and you havent completely connected the dots, to see the full picture

That "innocent blood" is God, sacrificially giving Himself up, for the ransoms of sins of human.

The perpetual animal blood is not enough nor does it permanently solve the issue at hand,
which is sin committed from the beginning and original sin

vaxx:
THIS IS NOT THE MESSAGE OF JOHN 3 VS 16.
IT IS AGAIN YOUR ASSUMPTION
I like how you diversify
at least you now call it "your assumption" instead of "your opinion"

I'll tell you what the message of John 3:16 is about

It is a message declaring God's love for all "mankind" which moved him to send His Son...
(i.e. that God loves the world...)

vaxx:
Do you get your pseudo logic here, harm and pain was taken off GOD SO THAT GOD WILL NOT HAVE TO SUFFER
"Second
what type of Father sends his son into harms way?
A father doesn't put his son in harm's way
but he takes the harm and pain off his son so his son doesn't have to suffer
"
- © vaxx

What then, did you mean by:
"... He takes the harm and pain off his son so his son doesn't have to suffer"
It is your pseudo logic, I was replaying back to you

The "harm", the "pain" and "suffer" were all prophesised
It was a bitter pill, and no one else came forward to take and swallow it except for God himself

vaxx:
So we are dealing with morphology now, and not the grammatical sentence, good.
God is infinite and non spatial
so let's settle instead for, we are dealing with physical projection
God, became God, the Father, after physically projecting Himself to earth as God, the Son, whom Jesus Christ is

vaxx:
i will like you suggest the Greek word that best describe the world better,
at least it could make us understand the context clearly
It means what it says on the tin
The Greek world is "kosmos" and in the context it was used, "the inhabitants of the world" best describes its meaning

vaxx:
but as it stands, an English speaker like me find it as it is begotten
and the word begotten in English grammar means possession
and it largely attribute to animal characteristics
Well, sorry to burst your bubble
You need to understand it in the original composition language and not as an English speaker

And no, begotten, in this context, has nothing to do with animal characteristics

vaxx:
i am still awaiting the better usage of English grammar that will better position that word in the context of the verse
God gave His unique or one of a kind Son

vaxx:
good point raised there....
but if am to go by your your pseudo analysis here, you will realized you just shot yourself in the foot,
are you not the one claiming jesus was god and how come it is unique and one of its kind the time
or you mean GOD SEND HIS UNIQUE SON using the isaac and abraham analogy
John 3:16, originally was written in Greek
The uniqueness of Isaac, originally was wriiten in Hebrew, so the Greek "monogene" was not used

The birth of Isaac is unique, one of a kind and as promised.
The birth of Jesus as well, equally is unique, one of a kind and as promised too

The birth of Jesus is unique and one of a kind,
because God, became God, the Father, after physically projecting Himself to earth, as God, the Son, whom Jesus Christ is

vaxx:
do not be in an hurry,
i think you shot yourself on the foot with this abraham analogy.
you could have stick with the morphology
You're mistaking, if you think I shot myself in the foot with the Abraham analogy
Forget about morphology, that's a red herring
I only brought in Isaac because it has a slight similarity with "begotten" that you have misunderstood and misinterpreted

vaxx:
if i am to go by your logic here, i will conclude that the supposed ruler of the universe,
who could not think any better way to forgive his creations,
than send himself in human form to act as a human sacrifice is incompetent.
Just so those creations can get into heaven to worship this insecure deity for eternity
Let's just say
and accept that, there are rules, processess, laws and principles laid down by God that even He respects and abides by

vaxx:
I find this God to be lacking in anything godlike
Well it looks like you have a dim view of God then
What were you expecting God do?

Would you esteem it to be godlike enough of God
if God had plucked out a magic wand, waved it,
then saying abracadabra and everything suddenly turned hunky-dory?

vaxx:
this is gibberish.
i do not hold sense out of it
Just store the "gibberish" into memory.
Sooner or later, all the info will come together and you'll make sense of them all.

vaxx:
you do no do any better except from that of the morphology
As you want it

vaxx:
LOL the philosophical point of that verse stand out to be poor,
do you know what i deduce from it.
it is if you believe in God, then everlasting life is real
but if you don’t, even more terrible things await you.
Not much of a choice. this is clearly weak of theology.
sorry what you present so far are pseudo intellectual concept, i expect you do better than this in your next reply
People die once, and after that they are judged
There is no injustice with God

Nothing and no one takes God by surprise
however everything and everyone are part of God's great eternal plan

God is solving a problem
and humans happen to be part of the solution package
Two for the price of one.

vaxx:
and please try and add space to your write up,
i found it a bit cracky
I am only countering blow by blow, section by section, each, out of order comments, you made
I will space them, more out, then
but you too, dont post lengthy write-ups that will require long responses

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by vaxx: 2:50pm On Mar 19, 2018
MuttleyLaff:
Aside bible, the testimony of another witness(es) supporting a matter, is valued and appreciated by court of law
but hey, be my guest, if you prefer hard ball and dark debate
it seems your knowledge of theology has over crowded other discipline you should be at breast with , in court proceedings, there is what is term as best evidence rule, it is a legal principle that holds that an original copy of a document as superior evidence. The rule specifies that secondary evidence, such as a copy or facsimile, will be not admissible if an original document exists and can be obtained. in this case , the original document exist and it is obtainable from the book of john chapter 3 VS 16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_evidence_ruleis



Please dont pick up a straw man
and let it be the last time you pull a straw-man stunt like this.
Who has talked about about trinity here?
Or who has talked about whether whoever that wrote John was a trinitarian?
Please

.
Do you get it NO, but wait, you will soon see how it buttress my point, i hope you will not be inputting your assumptions in your below response.

What?!
like you are shock to behold the reality i show up as evidence

Are you familiar with the below statement:
He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel

It is called the Protoevangelium (i.e. derived from "proto" meaning "first" and euangelion meaning "gospel" or "good news)
even when i gave a rule, do not pool a hoax statement to cover one hoax statement, you still eventually ended up with another strawmen from the bible, in case you afraid to quote it, i will quote it for you GENESIS 3 VS 15. i do not see how this verse correlate with john 3 vs 16, do you want to apply proto-evangelion to john 3 vs 16 when no credible christian theology has been able to do exegeses on how it correllect with the serpent story. you try hard but it is strawmen analogy.

Unless you're in denial, you know the implication of that statement.
what statement, the argument on ground is john 3 vs 16. not genesis 3 vs 15. why are trying to stay without focused.even for the sake of argument, we agree that genesis is the first gospel or the proto of the four gospels, it still does not in away support or influence john 3 vs 16. i will expecting a reliable reference on this part and not your usual assumptions.

That statement is not only a reference to the idea of a Messiah
but doubles up, also as, the first Messianic prophecy

That statement is the genesis of salvation history with fulfillment in Jesus Christ that the opening sentence of this thread and John 3:16 is all about.
that statement does not in anyway correlate with john 3 vs 16, the proto evangeliun of john 3 vs 16 is not in the bible. prove me wrong ?
God knew how things would turn out, and waited patiently for 4000 years, from the day that prophecy was made, before it came to pass or got fulfilled
your assumptions as usual, feel free if it will make you comfortable, the verse of john 3 vs 16 is well explained, it shows the that yhwh himself do not know what the future hold and he simply cover that gap as a sign of warning for those who will be not believe in his ''unique'' son Jesus Christ

It correlates,
because the One who sent and the Sent are One
no it does not tally, you are speaking with two side of the mouth

If I dont do it that way, you wouldnt have dots to join, to see the picture
but you have not bring in any dots yet
Yes it does
No sir.
and "begotten" has hence earlier been explained
yes, maybe that is the mistake the current version of kings james bible notice when they removed the word begotten to make it spell like this. FOR GOD SO LOVE THE WORLD THAT HE SENT HIS ONLY SON instead of the begotten son WHICH CORRELATE WITH ANIMAL BEHAVIOR. they must have realized the damaged that statement has done to Christianity .
I know I can rely on you to make this a labour of love explanation
No, GOD doesnt need to descend to earth before He pass His message
but He needed to descend to earth in order to actualise or make a reality of the Protoevangelium

I
i will have love to show you fallacies that comes with proto- evangelion , but it does not in any way tally to the topic of discussion. it is the villa or house where Catholicism hide but it is founded on faulty foundation.

t is not an opinion, not my opinion
but is a fact, that God is Omnipresent
I dont think, instead I do know that,
then if you agree with this , why do you not see reasons with the hoax of john 3 vs 16

God is Omnipresent
i also hold this to be true, but john 3 vs 16 in anyway do not support it
Repeating myself, God simultaneously can be in more than one place at a time (i.e. God can be in Heaven and on earth, at the same time)
sure an omini present GOD should be able to do so, but the john 3 vs 16 depict an omni absent GOD
Ah the blood
I spot you going to make this blood thing hard work here

If someone like you, that flirts with the idea of having some knowledge of blood/DNA,
doesnt know why an "innocent blood" is needed or demanded for the ransoms of sins of human beings since animal blood is not enough
then its now apparent its just a semblance you have
and you havent completely connected the dots, to see the full picture

That "innocent blood" is God, sacrificially giving Himself up, for the ransoms of sins of human.

The perpetual animal blood is not enough nor does it permanently solve the issue at hand,
which is sin committed from the beginning and original sin
do you notice the tautology in your statement, let me rephrase it for you , an innocent GOD kills himself , sacrifice to himself and consider that as a ransom for the sins committed by his creator. how much of an error.
I like how you diversify
at least you now call it "your assumption" instead of "your opinion"
you are using both , i must apply where both fit

I'll tell you what the message of John 3:16 is about

It is a message declaring God's love for all "mankind" which moved him to send His Son...
(i.e. that God loves the world...)
[/quote]No, this is what it depict and i am going to analyse it one by one. using your proto- evangelium concept. since you hold it in a high esteem

FOR GOD SO LOVE THE WORLD- this is not true, why? he will not have destroy it earlier

THAT HE GAVE HIS BEGOTTEN SON-No yhwh already had a beloved male children

THAT WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM SHALL NOT PERISH- meaning the soul of non believer shall suffer eternal damnation. ''perish''

BUT HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE- that will mean the dead believer are presently living with GOD. any evidence on that?

in conclusion, it is just a sales pitch of hope and hope do not necessarily mean it going to be true.
"Second
what type of Father sends his son into harms way?
A father doesn't put his son in harm's way
but he takes the harm and pain off his son so his son doesn't have to suffer
"
- © vaxx

What then, did you mean by:
"... He takes the harm and pain off his son so his son doesn't have to suffer"
It is your pseudo logic, I was replaying back to you
i expect you to see your faulty but sadly you could not pinch the tent.
The "harm", the "pain" and "suffer" were all prophesised
It was a bitter pill, and no one else came forward to take and swallow it except for God himself
lol, so god turning to human is not exempted, i except the usual flimsy excuse , but you forgotten so quick god turnning to human do not mean he will loose his supernatural power, he was able to do wonder that is not common to human. what stop this human god or god human to apply his supernatural power from stopping the pains, harm, suffering?
God is infinite and non spatial
so let's settle instead for, we are dealing with physical projection
God, became God, the Father, after physically projecting Himself to earth as God, the Son, whom Jesus Christ is
this is degresing or should i call it post shifting,how does it sound to you, let me repeat what you wrote . yhwh, become yhwh, the father after turning to human in the flesh of his subordinate the son whom Jesus Christ is. and behold you were able to hold sense in it?.
It means what it says on the tin
The Greek world is "kosmos" and in the context it was used, "the inhabitants of the world" best describes its meaning
stop commanding the language you have no authority upon. it becoming a common issue on your part, or else i will be force to slide your words better than you can ever imagine.
Well, sorry to burst your bubble
You need to understand it in the original composition language and not as an English speaker
so what is the essense of translation, this is the part of the muslim too whenever the verses are query, they hide on the context of you cannot speak Arabic. is yhwh the god of Greek only? well i guess that is why bible keep on revising to meet the standard and most comfortable language even if it does not tally with the original word.

And no, begotten, in this context, has nothing to do with animal characteristics
lol i am reading it out of context... the escape word. we already settle on it . it is rotted from the greek word which literally means ” (μονογενῆ / monogenē), this “mono” (one / only) + “gene” (generation) is also used as the suffix God gave His unique or one of a kind Son which you even mistakenly buttress with abraham analogy.(it is taken from greek dictionary).

John 3:16, originally was written in Greek
i know it is not written in yoruba

The uniqueness of Isaac, originally was wriiten in Hebrew, so the Greek "monogene" was not used
then that will mean the Greek writer of the Gospel of John did not understand the Hebrew text, he surely had the LXX which clearly again states “οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ θεοῦ”. i will give you this as a take away assignment to solve.

The birth of Isaac is unique, one of a kind and as promised.
The birth of Jesus as well, equally is unique, one of a kind and as promised too
but common thing about them is that they are both from woman. what separate them is this, there is consensus agreement that isaac is full human while there is no general agreement if Jesus is the same as human god or god human or simply human
The birth of Jesus is unique and one of a kind,
because God, became God, the Father, after physically projecting Himself to earth, as God, the Son, whom Jesus Christ is
you are repeating the over flogged logic... anyway i have done justice to it above

You're mistaking, if you think I shot myself in the foot with the Abraham analogy
Forget about morphology, that's a red herring
I only brought in Isaac because it has a slight similarity with "begotten" that you have misunderstood and misinterpreted
i except to hear this from you , a silent statement to say i am wrong. well , i listen better.
Let's just say
and accept that, there are rules, processess, laws and principles laid down by God that even He respects and abides by

lol, so yhwh plays by his own rules and process that he set for himself, ( that is so discipline of yhwh)but this not a good rebuttal at all.so immunity did not cover his authorship. imagine i set myself a rules to kill myself for myself for the sake of what myself create. what sort of game is that?even in soccer the immunity of kicking ball with both hand and legs is given to the kepper while the players can only play with their legs.
Well it looks like you have a dim view of God then
What were you expecting God do?
i expect yhwh to save the world with his supernatural statement , just like he say, let there be light and it was.

Would you esteem it to be godlike enough of God
if God had plucked out a magic wand, waved it,
then saying abracadabra and everything suddenly turned hunky-dory?
but this magic wand was plug out in the beginning, let there be light and it was. are you not reading your bible

Just store the "gibberish" into memory.
Sooner or later, all the info will come together and you'll make sense of them all.
No, unless it make sense. i do no store tautology
As you want it
ok
People die once, and after that they are judged
There is no injustice with God
with eternal enjoyment and eternal damnation ''perish'' for the sinners i agree with this one according to the bible

Nothing and no one takes God by surprise
however everything and everyone are part of God's great eternal plan
this does not agree with john 3 vs 16

God is solving a problem
and humans happen to be part of the solution package
Two for the price of one
so this problem is not solved in the beginning, when i said yhwh DOES NOT KNOW THE FUTURE YOU SAID NO. HAVE YOU SEEN YOU JUST SUPPORT IT. so yhwh was not able to solve the problem earlier.

I am only countering blow by blow, section by section, each, out of order comments, you made
I will space them, more out, then
but you too, dont post lengthy write-ups that will require long responses






thanks for the long episode with Zero impact, i will expect you to do better next time. i see it is not easy making wrong look right. it take a lot of brain gymnastic. i will be expecting another epistle.
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by Ubenedictus(m): 5:04pm On Apr 05, 2018
MuttleyLaff:
The serious problem I observed, shown in this post, is, the certain quasi-knowledgeability that knows nothing
Furthermore, it is insulting to someone's intelligence, asking that contributors not quote biblical reference to support submitted posts

Though Jesus was God,
He did not think of equality with God, as something to cling to.
Instead, He gave up his divine privileges;
He took the humble position of a servant
and was born as a human being.
And so God appeared on earth, in human form, as Jesus Christ, His Son

God can send Himself, did send Himself to earth, in the form of Jesus Christ
God simultaneously can be in more than one place at a time (i.e. God can be in Heaven and on earth, at the same time)
Note Jesus didnt correct people that addressed Him, when saying: "My Lord, My God"

Christ is the visible image of the invisible God
What other logical way, effective, reasonable, legal and conventional means, did you expect God to send Himself to earth?

God was not and never was in harm's way, He couldnt handle
Its often said, if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself
Something to be done right is exactly what it's all about and so what God did.
This is a matter of the classsic DIY

God looked for someone who could build walls
or stand in the breach in His presence on behalf of the world so that it won't be destroyed, but He found no one
so God is lumbered with, doing a classic Do-It-Yourself by sending Himself

I am sure you're joking that:
"harm and pain was taken off Jesus so Jesus doesn't have to suffer"

This will explain what the bible said and/or is saying
The word translated as "begotten", is the greek word "monogene"
"monogene", means, one and only or one of a kind

"monogene", is a combination of the root words:
"mono" (one or only) and "genos" (of a class or kind)
hence "begotten", in the context, or "monogene" means "the only of its kind"

It occurred also, when similarly used over Isaac,
where and when Isaac was referred to, as only son, even when Abraham already had an older son, Ishmael
Isaac was unique, was one and only or one of a kind son
Unique in the sense that, an impotent man and menopaused woman had a child, the promised son, Isaac (i.e. child in a class of its own)

Again, "begotten" in that context isn’t about procreation or some fantasied sexual intercourse

Facepalm. SMH. Tsk tsk tsk.

Very good question
The need, is for one "silver bullet"
and not million(s) of "silver bullet"
When Jesus, before bowing His head and giving up His spirit said: "It is finished"
The "It is finished" means "now accomplished"
It signifies a sense of finality, the effect of which continues into the present
The task and/or mission is accomplished, hence, there is no need for a million of Jesus Christ

Jesus, is the last Adam, and second man
The first man Adam became a living soul
Whereas, Jesus, the last Adam, became a life-giving spirit

The first man, is of the earth, earthy;
the second man, is from heaven.

Your emasculating wish is granted

Right.
Now there you have it.
"scholarly reply" without quoting biblical reference to support as you wished

PastorAIO, its turn by turn, I read where you and Ubenedictus used emmany and mutty in codes to mention Emmanystone and I,
and I laughed at how I got misconstrued but I will respond when you both, get to the front of the queue
I didn't call u in code, your username is fairly confusing I chose to shorten it.
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by PastorAIO: 5:33pm On Apr 05, 2018
MuttleyLaff:


PastorAIO, its turn by turn, I read where you and Ubenedictus used emmany and mutty in codes to mention Emmanystone and I,
and I laughed at how I got misconstrued but I will respond when you both, get to the front of the queue

I've just been made aware of this post. I scrolled up and did not even see where I'd ever contributed to this thread talk less of quoting you, and even lesser or leaster of quoting you in code.

This is not even the kind of thread that I would engage in.
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by budaatum: 5:51pm On Apr 05, 2018
vaxx:
thanks for derailing the post . I will be ready to take you serious when you stop using your bible verses and be ready to use the most important organ God has bless you with. your thinking faculty.

pls do not quote bible references . it is written plainly .
Please vaxx, stop derailing this important thread by responding. If they can't control their trolling with their faith, let us show logic is superior (instead of prattling on about it), by treating them how they need to be treated!

Do note that I too fail often as it's not easy recognising the wheat amongst so much chaff!

1 Like 1 Share

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by MuttleyLaff: 11:28pm On Apr 05, 2018
Ubenedictus:
I didn't call u in code, your username is fairly confusing I chose to shorten it.
I'll now go ahead tell an incident, to allay your misconception about what you seem to think I advocate, when you lumbered me with PastorAIO and Emmanystone on the "Des Pensees" thread

At least over 15 years ago, we were having a relaxed and easy-going chat at the home of the pastor where we used to fellowship.
The chit chat drifted to him narrating a situation involving him and some other parties over an issue
During the course of the conversation, the pastor friend threw in, like as in a matter of fact and case of frankness, that:
"you know, I just said it because you know, I can't lie..."

We left and upon getting back home, whilst in the bedroom, reliving the day's event, I asked my other half, and said:
Hang on, what was he trying to say?. Is he trying to imply he doesnt lie?. He doesnt ever lie?

My other half, smiled and then laughed, kikiki ki.

PS:Just that you know,
Though already fascinated by his action in 2013, on the day before Good Friday
but I am beginning to warm more to Jorge Mario Bergoglio because of what Eugenio Scalfari revealed, he in private, told him about hell.
Venerable Fulton J Sheen and Cardinal Francis Arinze too both intelligent and well informed too, I warm to

PastorAIO:
I've just been made aware of this post.
I scrolled up and did not even see where I'd ever contributed to this thread talk less of quoting you,
and even lesser or leaster of quoting you in code
OK, you've been successful in forcing my hand to type against my better timing.

You wouldnt see where...
because your tete a tete with Ubenedictus, in the first place, wasnt on this thread

PastorAIO:
This is not even the kind of thread that I would engage in.
Bragger
One word - snotty
Two words - so conceited
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by PastorAIO: 12:58am On Apr 06, 2018
MuttleyLaff:

Bragger
One word - snotty
Two words - so conceited

Snotty. Definately not. I blow my nose quite thoroughly. And a take plenty of Vitamin C and Zinc.


Snooty. Perhaps. But everybody has their vibe and I will defend to the death my right to remain in my vibe/camp and not venture to issues that I have no interest in.

Conceited. A Conceit is a fantasy. Yes, I do have an imagination. What's your problem with that? And what bearing does that have on any thing I've said?
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by MuttleyLaff: 3:14am On Apr 06, 2018
PastorAIO:
Snotty. Definately not. I blow my nose quite thoroughly. And a take plenty of Vitamin C and Zinc.

Snooty. Perhaps. But everybody has their vibe and I will defend to the death my right to remain in my vibe/camp and not venture to issues that I have no interest in.

Conceited. A Conceit is a fantasy. Yes, I do have an imagination. What's your problem with that? And what bearing does that have on any thing I've said?

MuttleyLaff:
Snotty has a dual meaning
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by PastorAIO: 7:27am On Apr 06, 2018
MuttleyLaff:
Snotty has a dual meaning

Yet what bearing does it have ...?
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by MuttleyLaff: 8:10am On Apr 06, 2018
PastorAIO:
Snotty. Definately not. I blow my nose quite thoroughly. And a take plenty of Vitamin C and Zinc.

Snooty. Perhaps. But everybody has their vibe and I will defend to the death my right to remain in my vibe/camp and not venture to issues that I have no interest in.

Conceited. A Conceit is a fantasy. Yes, I do have an imagination. What's your problem with that? And what bearing does that have on any thing I've said?

MuttleyLaff:
Snotty has a dual meaning

PastorAIO:
Yet what bearing does it have ...?
The bearing of you being that stuck up, to remark that this is not even the kind of thread that you would engage in
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by PastorAIO: 8:43am On Apr 06, 2018
MuttleyLaff:




The bearing of you being that stuck up, to remark that this is not even the kind of thread that you would engage in

But it is not. You are the one that has dragged me here kicking and screaming. I'm even amazed that I'm still here.
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by Ubenedictus(m): 8:43am On Apr 06, 2018
MuttleyLaff:
I'll now go ahead tell an incident, to allay your misconception about what you seem to think I advocate, when you lumbered me with PastorAIO and Emmanystone on the "Des Pensees" thread

At least over 15 years ago, we were having a relaxed and easy-going chat at the home of the pastor where we used to fellowship.
The chit chat drifted to him narrating a situation involving him and some other parties over an issue
During the course of the conversation, the pastor friend threw in, like as in a matter of fact and case of frankness, that:
"you know, I just said it because you know, I can't lie..."

We left and upon getting back home, whilst in the bedroom, reliving the day's event, I asked my other half, and said:
Hang on, what was he trying to say?. Is he trying to imply he doesnt lie?. He doesnt ever lie?

My other half, smiled and then laughed, kikiki ki.

PS:Just that you know,
Though already fascinated by his action in 2013, on the day before Good Friday
but I am beginning to warm more to Jorge Mario Bergoglio because of what Eugenio Scalfari revealed, he in private, told him about hell.
Venerable Fulton J Sheen and Cardinal Francis Arinze too both intelligent and well informed too, I warm to

OK, you've been successful in forcing my hand to type against my better timing.

You wouldnt see where...
because your tete a tete with Ubenedictus, in the first place, wasnt on this thread

Bragger
One word - snotty
Two words - so conceited
I remember the thread, I don't forget my post.

there is no code there, your names are confusing, I shortened it, I assumed you were on the thread so you'll see the most, it was addressed to 3 people about perfectionism
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by MuttleyLaff: 1:04am On Apr 07, 2018
PastorAIO:
But it is not.
Really?
Close your eyes and wish upon a star. Good luck!

PastorAIO:
You are the one that has dragged me here kicking and screaming
No one dragged you here kicking and screaming
You, on your own volition, slithered in
and it was when or after, I spotted you loitering about the pages of the thread, that I remarked
:
PastorAIO, its turn by turn,
I read where you and Ubenedictus used emmany and mutty in codes to mention Emmanystone and I,
and I laughed at how I got misconstrued
but I will respond when you both, get to the front of the queue


PastorAIO:
I'm even amazed that I'm still here.
Long-established you think too highly of yourself

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by MuttleyLaff: 1:27am On Apr 07, 2018
Ubenedictus:
I remember the thread, I don't forget my post.
Good
and pleased to know you dont forget your posts

Ubenedictus:
there is no code there,
your names are confusing, I shortened it
,
I assumed you were on the thread so you'll see the most
[img]https://s1/images/MuttHmm.gif[/img]
There is no code there, you say
but it no doubt was furtively done so PastorAIO, Emmanystone and I wouldnt know

Ubenedictus:
it was addressed to 3 people about perfectionism
Well, you've certainly by now, read me give an account of a firsthand experience with a "perfectionist"
(i.e. the story of the pastor pretending or impying he doesnt ever lie)
so I dont see how this your perfectionism has anything to do with me
nor in the first place, why ever, my moniker was listed with the 3 people addressed

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by Ubenedictus(m): 11:22am On Apr 07, 2018
MuttleyLaff:
Good
and pleased to know you dont forget your posts

[img]https://s1/images/MuttHmm.gif[/img]
There is no code there, you say
but it no doubt was furtively done so PastorAIO, Emmanystone and I wouldnt know

Well, you've certainly by now, read me give an account of a firsthand experience with a "perfectionist"
(i.e. the story of the pastor pretending or impying he doesnt ever lie)
so I dont see how this your perfectionism has anything to do with me
nor in the first place, why ever, my moniker was listed with the 3 people addressed
you guys were all on the thread, I shorten the 3 usernames, I am surprised you think I was referring to you in code in connivance with pastoraio, that is pretty surprising... are you Almighty God that I have to talk about in fear? I just don't get it.

I made a post in a thread where you guys are active and you think I was hiding it from you, aio responded without crying wolf about his username but you guys hold yourselves in such regard that to you a shorten username a a sign of ..... I just don't get it.


this is a post you made on that thread among others that made me wonder if your theology has a room for human failure among members of the body of Christ.
you wrote:


Yes, the best thing to do will be to leave the place
because they do not represent Christ there. But, leaving
a place like that, doesn't mean you should leave Christ,
because, none of those men are you model, Christ is.
And, as long as you didn't see any of their trait in
Christ, you follow He who called you to everladting life.
That's why we have a Bible. You don't throw in the
Towel and say, 'Christianity is a Farce', because Men
have become senseless.

there you and aio seemed to advocate leaving a congregation if sin if found there as if it was supposed to b perfect.
later you wrote

Anything less than practising pure and faultless
religion that God approves of, is not true and so
thereby is false religion

again the perfection of Christian living just without it flaws in human nature.

I responded cautiously saying I may b wrong about expounding your views...aio certainly felt that wasn't his view you on the other hand thinks I was gossiping about you in code. this is my post in question



I may be wrong but I see aio and emmany and mutty
speak of religion in its purest idealistic form and
anathemize anything that fall under and below and I
am almost tempted to ask if any of you guys live out
the religion you profess...
in my personal experience and in the experience of
those around me it isn't perfect, we fall under often,
in fact Catholics make a point of describing Christian
life as the personal workspace of the HOLY spirit
who constantly re-converts us, remake us and
remold us.... in fact the awareness that I am living in
Grace isn't the most interesting thing in my Christian
life, it is instead that act of falling down on my
kneels as God exposes parts of my life and attitudes,
behavior and thoughts I have falsely built and leads
me to a new path....that is for me one of the best
effects of grace.
living below what is perfect has not made me a
lesser Christian, it has led me forward it is part of
what is genuinely Christian, the Christian is not a
perfect product, in my experience he is God's work in
progress.
I don't agree with you guys that a Christian doesn't
steal, cheat, fornicate or commit sin, cos he does,
his benefit is simply the remaking, renewing and
converting power of the HOLY spirit. I have never
seen the Christian Church as a gathering of the
perfect, that is Calvinist, for me it is a hospital for
sinners, constantly healing and been healed....
I don't agree with this idea of perfection you guys
seem to advocate.
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by PastorAIO: 11:51am On Apr 07, 2018
I smell some sort of paranoid delusion.

Ubenedictus:

you guys were all on the thread, I shorten the 3 usernames, I am surprised you think I was referring to you in code in connivance with pastoraio, that is pretty surprising... are you Almighty God that I have to talk about in fear? I just don't get it.

I made a post in a thread where you guys are active and you think I was hiding it from you, aio responded without crying wolf about his username but you guys hold yourselves in such regard that to you a shorten username a a sign of ..... I just don't get it.


this is a post you made on that thread among others that made me wonder if your theology has a room for human failure among members of the body of Christ.
you wrote:


Yes, the best thing to do will be to leave the place
because they do not represent Christ there. But, leaving
a place like that, doesn't mean you should leave Christ,
because, none of those men are you model, Christ is.
And, as long as you didn't see any of their trait in
Christ, you follow He who called you to everladting life.
That's why we have a Bible. You don't throw in the
Towel and say, 'Christianity is a Farce', because Men
have become senseless.

there you and aio seemed to advocate leaving a congregation if sin if found there as if it was supposed to b perfect.
later you wrote

Anything less than practising pure and faultless
religion that God approves of, is not true and so
thereby is false religion

again the perfection of Christian living just without it flaws in human nature.

I responded cautiously saying I may b wrong about expounding your views...aio certainly felt that wasn't his view you on the other hand thinks I was gossiping about you in code. this is my post in question



I may be wrong but I see aio and emmany and mutty
speak of religion in its purest idealistic form and
anathemize anything that fall under and below and I
am almost tempted to ask if any of you guys live out
the religion you profess...
in my personal experience and in the experience of
those around me it isn't perfect, we fall under often,
in fact Catholics make a point of describing Christian
life as the personal workspace of the HOLY spirit
who constantly re-converts us, remake us and
remold us.... in fact the awareness that I am living in
Grace isn't the most interesting thing in my Christian
life, it is instead that act of falling down on my
kneels as God exposes parts of my life and attitudes,
behavior and thoughts I have falsely built and leads
me to a new path....that is for me one of the best
effects of grace.
living below what is perfect has not made me a
lesser Christian, it has led me forward it is part of
what is genuinely Christian, the Christian is not a
perfect product, in my experience he is God's work in
progress.
I don't agree with you guys that a Christian doesn't
steal, cheat, fornicate or commit sin, cos he does,
his benefit is simply the remaking, renewing and
converting power of the HOLY spirit. I have never
seen the Christian Church as a gathering of the
perfect, that is Calvinist, for me it is a hospital for
sinners, constantly healing and been healed....
I don't agree with this idea of perfection you guys
seem to advocate.
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by Ubenedictus(m): 11:58am On Apr 07, 2018
PastorAIO:
I smell some sort of paranoid delusion.

you guys have been at each others throat for sometime now, I think he has confused me and you.
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by PastorAIO: 12:24pm On Apr 07, 2018
Ubenedictus:
you guys have been at each others throat for sometime now, I think he has confused me and you.

To be honest I've noticed since I've come to nairaland that some puffed up christian ideologue always takes it upon himself to troll me. His is just the latest manifestation of a phenomenon I've noticed for a long while now.

The main thrust of the trolling is to demonstrate that they are smarter than me. That's the funny thing. It is even less about theology and more about who sabi pass.

The list is endless. Noetic is another memorable one, but there are many more. I think that there is a strain in christianity of intellectual puffed up ness that manifests every now and again. Of course christianity has many intellectual giants like Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas etc, but at the other end of the scale is the chap who reads a tract or two, and maybe discovers a website and hey presto! he believes he knows it all.

I know that I have a way of being heavy handed when I write which isn't cool, but the worst part of it is that it smokes out these types of people and then I get trolled for months. My objective is not to let it wind me up but to even just ignore them if I feel it's going to lead to saying things that I won't be proud of.

1 Like 1 Share

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by PastorAIO: 2:57pm On Apr 07, 2018
I don't know what muttley started trolling me but the first time I recall him registering with a ping on my attention was in the Hebrew Monotheist thread.

All I did was contribute by suggesting that cyrus did not worship Marduk but rather Ahura mazda.
Here: https://www.nairaland.com/3753404/hebrew-monotheistic-belief-product-religious/1#56034992

The banter went back and forth and after I demonstrated that Marduk priests made a claim for him just as Jewish priest did in the bible yet independent non religious sources show that he worship Ahura Mazda, he just went quiet on that one but ever since has taken to jump out of the bushes every time I make a post to counter with something inane. I just don't know why I bother him so much. He even got to a point he was making actually real life threats on me, telling me he knows my IP address. Anyway, I thank God for all things.


MuttleyLaff:


Thankfully your IP address got noted down so mental assessment teams can pay you a visit.
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by budaatum: 4:33pm On Apr 07, 2018
vaxx:
no my son is a different entity from me
Why, of course. It's not like if you ate your son's supper your son would say "thank you daddy, I'm full now".
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by budaatum: 4:35pm On Apr 07, 2018
danvon:
So according to you sending yourself and leaving your house and servants alone is the best solution
It may or may not be, but that's no reason to try to explain it by claiming my son and I are one and the same person!
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by budaatum: 4:38pm On Apr 07, 2018
danvon:
You said we should remove Bible references
Ignore that, "remove bible" crap, danvon. No one can limit a discussion on a topic on such a basis.

Vaxx, you might as well have asked that people only use the right hand side of their brain!
Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by vaxx: 7:36pm On Apr 07, 2018
budaatum:

Why, of course. It's not like if you ate your son's supper your son would say "thank you daddy, I'm full now".
lol, and nether can i the dady suggest to my son if the food taken by me only is enough for both of us. that will be crazy

1 Like

Re: John 3 Vs 16 Says Bible Is A Complete Hoax by vaxx: 7:49pm On Apr 07, 2018
budaatum:

Ignore that, "remove bible" crap, danvon. No one can limit a discussion on a topic on such a basis.

Vaxx, you might as well have asked that people only use the right hand side of their brain!
lol

1 Like

(1) (2) (3) (Reply)

Are You Attracting Others To Jesus? / Can A Christian Man Marry More Than One Wife / Incantations/spells Are Permitted In Islam

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 193
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.