Image123:
there is nothing like a gay Christian. a Christian cannot be gay. it's either light or darkness, they don't go together.

i'l tak it ur a basic xtian n a church,who dots the i's n cross the t's.rit!.

goshap: i'l tak it ur a basic xtian n a church,who dots the i's n cross the t's.rit!.

I don't understand your form of English writing, sorry.

thehomer:
Are the other books I mentioned special? And you seem to be agreeing that some of the laws have changed. The question now is why those laws and not other laws?

Perhaps they are special. i don't think i disagreed on change of 'laws'. What i have continued to say is that there is no contradiction. i explained to you about grace and punishments/judgement and the variations between the old and the new. The 'çhanged' laws are affected either by grace, or by Christ fulfilling them already, or by their not been necessary again.

God didn't divide the Bible into chapters and verses, men did. It shows that you don't even know much about how your Bible came about.
Where did God do this? And you're saying that the dietary laws and the sabbath laws are moral laws? This means you shouldn't eat sea-food except maybe fish and you shouldn't eat pork and the other animals listed or you'll go to hell. It also means that you'll go to hell for working on the Sabbath. Now what makes these dietary laws and Sabbath laws moral laws?

i never said God divided the Bible into chapters and verses. It's either you have an issue with comprehension, or you are deliberately misinterpreting my statements. i said the division into chapters and verses is already inherent in the passages and naturally emerges. i already answered you on diet and sabbath, i don't understand why you are echoing your questions. What are moral laws?

And I'm telling you that your hands are always subject to gravity even when they're not raised. That is why if it was cut off at the wrist, it will drop to the ground even if you weren't raising it so your analogy simply doesn't work at all. And they are still contradictory. In the OT, who was casting the punishment? In the NT, who is casting the punishment? What you don't realize is that what happened when Jesus was there is that he stopped the act that was brought before him. If it wasn't brought before him, that woman would have been killed so I don't see this hand of grace what I see is that modern people simply don't carry out those barbaric acts.

It's the same person casting the judgement in the OT and in the NT. the person is God. He can use whatever instrument He chooses in casting His judgement. Analogies are given to help you understand or relate with what is been discussed. Continued attempts to fault analogies is your loss, not mine. You are the one trying to understand, or asking to understand why this or that. i already understand.

Your analogies are bad and they're showing that you don't understand the nature of what you're trying to use for explanation.

Your loss, not mine.

I was talking about the principle that they should use not the one that they currently use. My point is that what they and Adeboye currently use is flawed. If the lawmakers decided that since most Nigerians are Muslims, they would make the 5 daily prayers mandatory would that be fine with you? You are aware that all humans have access to this natural world. The difference is that some like you have added the supernatural.

And what esoteric principle is that, that the majority do not know or practice, only thehomer is bringing it up as the principle they should use? All humans have access to the supernatural. Whosoever wants to/wills, let him come. that's what the Spirit says. It all hinges on if you want to come into the spiritual or supernatural, or no.

No you didn't. That wasn't God or Jesus talking and it doesn't say that a law has been removed. It said a law can be removed if it is useless. Now even if we assume that Jesus said it, how do you decide which law is useful and which one is useless?

When do you know that God is talking or not talking again?

Actually, you're the one reading things into that passage talking about the vision. The point of that vision was that Peter should go and preach to gentiles but he was refusing by calling them unclean but since you always see things literally, where did God literally say he had renounced his former dietary laws? Giving me someone's dream isn't good enough since as I'm sure you know, a dream isn't the same thing as the real incident.

It's your lucky day, i'm being generous here. 1 Timothy 4v3-5

Galatians only says that with respect to the view of maybe when in church otherwise, why was the Ephesians passage talking about slaves obeying their masters with fear and trembling? Looks like you've found another contradiction in the New Testament. I mean, are slaves to obey their masters with fear and trembling or are they to act as if they're all equals?

i'm in doubt as to whetherr you read that Leviticus passage. Where did you see anything about church in the Galatians passage? And where did you see slaves in the Ephesians?

I know you said that but you've not shown what these disputes are. You asked for what I thought I told you now you're running away from giving your own explanation? Asking me to keep looking is just laziness on your part.

i agree with the interpretation you gave to verse , and we should not cross dress. Very relevant and important today. The other passage is also relevant and important. So, search for the interpretation. The Word of God is a treasure mine, sometimes you justy got to dig. Dig thehomer, i'm not your skydaddy.

Looks like you've run out of steam once you've been shown not to know what you're talking about.

whatever. i'm not interested in useless arguments over nothing simply because i'm right.

Did Jesus visit Lagos? Did Governor Fasola see him? Did any other Lagosian in the past 20 years meet Jesus? You may as well have said that the people of Nineveh should have heard about Jacob and done the right thing without having Jonah come there.

Jesus visits Lagos all the time. i live in Lagos, and ive met Him. Countless others can testify to meeting Him too. Look for Him, you will meet Him. Did the Ninevites see Jonah inside the fish, or you think he was telling them stories about fishes? Read the passages again mr. All they heard was a warning about judgement in 40days, and they repented. You have heard more lucid and convincing stuff. You either have overheard or not to have paid enough attention. Work on these weaknesses.

Come on. Is that how to read the Bible? No wonder people keep seeing whatever they want to see. The warning was referring to Sodom and Gomorrah not to Noah's flood. Noah's flood wasn't a warning. Even if you want to claim the flood as a warning, is that how you warn people? By killing everyone who opposes you leaving only those who support you? That isn't warning since you've killed all those who disobeyed, that is judgement.

It is a warning to US, and other generations that followed the flood. Read 2Peter2, the sentence starts from verse 4. A proper sentence doesn't start with 'And'. Read what is before AND, the conjuction.

That commits the no true Scotsman fallacy. Sinners are children of the devil yet all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Now those who repent become children of God but they can sin and once they sin, they become children of the devil again. I wonder what unclean thing is being spoken of here since you previously quoted to me a passage about God sanctifying all creation. Another contradiction right there.

you will soon see the all true Kaduna fallacy, nonsense. Read the scriptures and be wise. Sinners are children of the devil, and like the passage says, will be children of God when they fulfil the given conditions. Which one is sanctifying all creation BTW?

And I'm telling you that people have given their lives for less than 100 people. What then makes Jesus giving one life for more than 50 billion people more difficult? Note that I'm talking about the difficulty here. It is the difficulty that makes it a sacrifice if a sacrifice were easy, will it be called a sacrifice? Then there's the fact that the person who gave his life for less than 100 people isn't sure of being resurrected but Jesus was. So his so called "sacrifice" was done and he was rewarded so I see the person giving his life for less than 100 people as having done the larger sacrifice. Just as the widow who gives her mite does more than the one who gives more money out of his huge reserves.

The point again is not how difficult or easy. that seems to be lost on you. The point is WHO has it. You can't give what you don't have. Only Jesus had what it took to pay for sins. A sacrifice is an offering to God, whether it costs much or little is not the point.

Because God is supposed to be God. He made the laws, he obviously decides to change it from time to time and he decides to break it from time to time so why couldn't he have done that as usual? Scripture doesn't say otherwise. Scripture shows that God breaks is laws and changes his laws.

Perhaps you might need to define God. The One in the Bible has shown clearly that the soul that sins will die, as was told Adam. The One in the Bible sticks to His Word and is faithful.

No he didn't send Jesus because Jesus is yet to visit Lagos. Sure why not? What else is Jesus doing there in heaven? Let him show up and display a bit more in these modern times with modern technology for review not in the ancient times when people didn't know about bacteria that could kill them.

Eyaah, like i said, Jesus has been sent into all the world. Many people can testify to that. God has a plan and will of His own that you are to subject to. He is not to subject to your whims and whimpers. Jesus coming every 33years to die is not what will make people believe in Him. Some folks lived when He came and crucified Him. Some folks saw His miracles and didn't believe but betrayed Him. Some folks watched the resurrection live but were paid not to believe. God has spoken once, you had better pay attention for your own good.



i'd reply to the rest later.

Adeboye, we dont need to be told!

lekanolas: The General Overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, RCCG, Pastor Enoch Adejare Adeboye yesterday described same sex marriage legalised in some countries as anathema to God’s will and instruction.

Adeboye, who spoke at the New Year thanksgiving organised by the Joint Christian Mission of the Obafemi Awolowo University, OAU, Ile-Ife, described same sex marriage as anti- God and ungodly.

The cleric condemned the act, which, he said, could draw backward the biblical doctrinal principle of God in humanity.

He said: “People should walk in the light of God and forsake acts that are traceable to darkness. Darkness is bad, it is evil. It produces poverty, hatred, sorrow, barenness and loneliness, but light produces love, peace, joy, promotion and faithfulness.

“Darkness is capable of wrecking havoc in the country, and Nigerian leaders should try to shun acts of darkness in 2013 for the nation to enjoy peace.”

The GO added that the will of God for human being is to be fruitful, replenish and multiply on earth and argued that same sex marriage was capable of wiping out human race within just 20 years.

Adeboye said anything contrary to man and woman marriage was devilish. He said: “Same sex marriage is anathema to God’s will and instruction.

The will of God for human being is to be fruitful, replenish and multiply on earth and anything contrary to that is devilish.”

“How can a man who marries a fellow man produce a child and how can a woman who marries a woman produce a child? “If this evil is allowed to stay, there will not be new born babies again in the world.

As the older generation dies, would there be new generation to succeed? Even plants and animals have new generation to succeed them.”

http://nationalmirroronline.net/new/same-sex-marriage-against-gods-will-adeboye

God has given us his commandment in Leviticus chapter 18 and chapter 20.Homosexuality is repulsive

thehomer:
Well, obviously many gay people have tried and failed, many priests have tried and failed so according to you, they didn't try hard enough I guess. Do you think that if you met prostitute friends, ran abroad to make money, went to a hostel or was exposed to pornography, you could have become gay? What a joke.

i don't understand what you mean by 'tried'. Tried what? i'm in christ Jesus, and shielded but need to be careful still. Evil communications corrupt good manners.
1Co 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

Again, you're putting words into God's mouth and into the Bible. You're in danger of increasing your punishment. God said he'll have mercy on whoever he wants. You're saying it is only on those who meet certain requirements. Are you now the one telling God who he will have mercy on?

Actually, you are the one choosing to misunderstand God's words. Check the passage(initial) and check the context. Moses was asking God for a favour based on Israel's 'specialness'. And to paraphrase what God told moses, He said " Moses, I will answer you, but I will have mercy on who I will. mercy is not only for Israel. god can have mercy on thehomer, his case is not hopeless. but thehomer needs to fulfill the conditions given for mercy.

You Christians that don't know your Bible and turn to non-believers to help you. I shake my head. Anyway, take a look at 1 Peter 3:15.

1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
i don't see anything in this passage telling anyone to give an answer for the questions they'll be asked. It says to be READY always to give an answer to every man that asks you a reason of the hope that is in you. Jesus is the reason of the hope that is in me. If you ask me the reason of the hope i have, i will gladly and meekly tell you that it is Jesus. He is the One that put the sugar in my tea. You have clearly tried to twist this passage to mean that the christian must answer every question/number of questions that every thehomer and harry presents to him. NO! i already showed you the example[b]s[/b] of christ, and how He was conspicuosly silent and answered nothing sometimes when asked many questions.
Joh 19:9 And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer.
Joh 19:10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?

Let me show you other scriptures that plainly allow christians to ignore you.
Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
2Jo 1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him Godspeed:
Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
2Th 3:14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.
2Ti 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do engender strifes.

Read the fineprint.

I've checked and I'm telling you. I'm also telling you that your fellow Christians don't even believe the way you do yet you're asking me to turn to the source of their confusion (the Bible) for answers? I don't know what Nietzsche has to do with anything I've said here.

The Bible is not the source of anyone's confusion as you have displayed. Many like you, have not sat down to thoroughly consider and understand the things that are written, they have refused to believe the things that are written but have only held on to parts that SEEM To support what they want. Any honest, sincere, and diligent believer would not be confused. Nietzsche is a class all time example of aconfused man, have you readup on his sad tale? Try wikipedia. Many atheists are also confused BTW. Nietzsche lived a confused, sad and sick life. He ended up in the assylum with his level of confusion. Yet he is the mentor of many a serious atheist. Try that for a perfect example to follow.

So a seed is different from a person isn't it? Now what part of the mother was Saul in? Or was he in Jacob and his wife at the same time? This is what happens when you only see things literally.

Of course a seed becomes a person. Did you not do any Biology related subject? It is the seed that becomes the tree/crop/fruit. the seed becomes the person. Without the seed in the man, the man would never BEAR children.

Yes and people convert from Christianity every other day so the choice is still yours on whether you want to continue being a Christian. Some pastor's son is losing their faith and some pastor's brother and daughter are leaving Christianity. But you still miss my point. My point is that God knew that parental influence would be a major factor in whether or not a person is religious so why did he allow so many religions before and after Christianity? The fact that I managed to escape shows you that I'm an exception to the norm.

It boils down to the individual's personal decision. It's sometimes called free will. It's not God's choice, but your choice, man's choice. God is not to be blamed for your father's or fore-father's wrong decisions to serve other gods/no gods. He is not to be blamed for their laziness which led to their impoverishment, which birthed your poverty. He is not to blame for their sickness or genetic deficiencies or blood groups either. We all make choices, and our daily choices may have far more weight than we imagine. You still have your choice to make.

Image123:
Perhaps they are special. i don't think i disagreed on change of 'laws'. What i have continued to say is that there is no contradiction. i explained to you about grace and punishments/judgement and the variations between the old and the new. The 'çhanged' laws are affected either by grace, or by Christ fulfilling them already, or by their not been necessary again.

If they're all special, then telling me the Bible is special doesn't really add much to the discussion. If God changed those laws, then how do you know that he hasn't changed the law against homosexuality?

Image123:
i never said God divided the Bible into chapters and verses. It's either you have an issue with comprehension, or you are deliberately misinterpreting my statements. i said the division into chapters and verses is already inherent in the passages and naturally emerges. i already answered you on diet and sabbath, i don't understand why you are echoing your questions. What are moral laws?

No, you have an issue with expression. You were implying that God divided the laws into moral and ceremonial laws in the same way that the Bible is divided into chapters and verses. The problem is that you're yet to show where God divided the laws into moral and ceremonial laws on the other hand, we know that the Bible's division into chapters and verses was done by men. You didn't answer on diet and the Sabbath. You simply said they were moral laws. You're the one to say what moral laws are since you're the one saying that God divided the laws in some way.

Image123:
It's the same person casting the judgement in the OT and in the NT. the person is God. He can use whatever instrument He chooses in casting His judgement. Analogies are given to help you understand or relate with what is been discussed. Continued attempts to fault analogies is your loss, not mine. You are the one trying to understand, or asking to understand why this or that. i already understand.

If your analogies are irrelevant or simply fail in the crucial point being attempted, then it is your failure in passing across the relevant information.

Image123:
Your loss, not mine.

Your failure in self expression.

Image123:
And what esoteric principle is that, that the majority do not know or practice, only thehomer is bringing it up as the principle they should use? All humans have access to the supernatural. Whosoever wants to/wills, let him come. that's what the Spirit says. It all hinges on if you want to come into the spiritual or supernatural, or no.

I showed you the principle. It is right in what you quoted me as saying. Again, I said it is rooted in this natural world that we all have access to. Can you show that all humans have access to the supernatural? The mere fact that you can type what you've typed on a computer of some sort means that you and I have access to this natural world. Can you show me the supernatural?

Image123:
When do you know that God is talking or not talking again?

You didn't answer my question but I'll answer yours. Please don't forget to answer my question. Recall that you were the one who quoted the Bible passage in Hebrews I was referring to there. As far as I know, God didn't write the letter to the Hebrews.

Image123:
It's your lucky day, i'm being generous here. 1 Timothy 4v3-5

Come on. This isn't what I asked you for. I asked you to show me where God himself or Jesus as his spokes man said they had changed the dietary laws? Do you think Jesus ate pork? You're showing me Paul's letter to Timothy. Are Paul's letters more highly placed than God's words to Moses?

Image123:
i'm in doubt as to whetherr you read that Leviticus passage. Where did you see anything about church in the Galatians passage? And where did you see slaves in the Ephesians?

Doubt all you want. The fact that in the passage you quoted, he ended it with "for ye are all one in Christ Jesus". Check Ephesians 6:5. You really should be more familiar with your Bible.

Image123:
i agree with the interpretation you gave to verse , and we should not cross dress. Very relevant and important today. The other passage is also relevant and important. So, search for the interpretation. The Word of God is a treasure mine, sometimes you justy got to dig. Dig thehomer, i'm not your skydaddy.

Come on. Don't be lazy. Show me your interpretation. Unless you think your words are written in the Bible or that I can read your mind, I think you should hold up your own part of the bargain.

Image123:
whatever. i'm not interested in useless arguments over nothing simply because i'm right.

Then show you're right. Merely saying it doesn't make it so.

Image123:
Jesus visits Lagos all the time. i live in Lagos, and ive met Him. Countless others can testify to meeting Him too. Look for Him, you will meet Him. Did the Ninevites see Jonah inside the fish, or you think he was telling them stories about fishes? Read the passages again mr. All they heard was a warning about judgement in 40days, and they repented. You have heard more lucid and convincing stuff. You either have overheard or not to have paid enough attention. Work on these weaknesses.

You met Jesus? Wow. What did he look like? What station was he on? Did he give any interviews in English, Yoruba or Aramaic? Sure he would have talked about living in fish. Who wouldn't talk about that? Heard that from who? If I believed every fantastic story I was told, then I would probably be worshiping every God I ever heard about.

Image123:
It is a warning to US, and other generations that followed the flood. Read 2Peter2, the sentence starts from verse 4. A proper sentence doesn't start with 'And'. Read what is before AND, the conjuction.

Hey. You're the one presenting the quotes. It looks as if you've still failed to understand why I brought up Noah and the flood. God flooded the earth to wipe out evil on earth. You presented 2 Peter as a claim that it was actually a warning but right there in Genesis where supposedly God was talking, he said it was a warning. Are you now telling me that Peter is allowed to second guess God?

Image123:
you will soon see the all true Kaduna fallacy, nonsense. Read the scriptures and be wise. Sinners are children of the devil, and like the passage says, will be children of God when they fulfil the given conditions. Which one is sanctifying all creation BTW?

So if someone is baptized, is it possible for them to still tell a lie? It was you who quoted a passage talking about it to me. Have you forgotten so soon?

Image123:
The point again is not how difficult or easy. that seems to be lost on you. The point is WHO has it. You can't give what you don't have. Only Jesus had what it took to pay for sins. A sacrifice is an offering to God, whether it costs much or little is not the point.

I brought it up to make the point that it was easy.

Image123:
Perhaps you might need to define God. The One in the Bible has shown clearly that the soul that sins will die, as was told Adam. The One in the Bible sticks to His Word and is faithful.

I'm talking about the God of the Bible. The one that says he loves everyone but does nothing to help them when he can. That isn't a faithful God.

Image123:
Eyaah, like i said, Jesus has been sent into all the world. Many people can testify to that. God has a plan and will of His own that you are to subject to. He is not to subject to your whims and whimpers. Jesus coming every 33years to die is not what will make people believe in Him. Some folks lived when He came and crucified Him. Some folks saw His miracles and didn't believe but betrayed Him. Some folks watched the resurrection live but were paid not to believe. God has spoken once, you had better pay attention for your own good.



i'd reply to the rest later.

If you believe just anything "some folks" say, then you're just looking to get scammed. Some folks say that Mohammed is the last prophet, some folks say that Jesus went to the U.S after flying away in Jerusalem. Some folks say that zombies roamed the city when Jesus died. Who are we to believe?

Image123:
i don't understand what you mean by 'tried'. Tried what? i'm in christ Jesus, and shielded but need to be careful still. Evil communications corrupt good manners.
1Co 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

Tried not to feel attracted to people of the same sex. Do you think that talking to a homosexual would make you start feeling attracted to people of the same sexual orientation?

Image123:
Actually, you are the one choosing to misunderstand God's words. Check the passage(initial) and check the context. Moses was asking God for a favour based on Israel's 'specialness'. And to paraphrase what God told moses, He said " Moses, I will answer you, but I will have mercy on who I will. mercy is not only for Israel. god can have mercy on thehomer, his case is not hopeless. but thehomer needs to fulfill the conditions given for mercy.

You're just repeating yourself. Can God have mercy on thehomer the way he currently is? If he can, then you're wrong by talking about fulfilling some conditions.

Image123:
1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
i don't see anything in this passage telling anyone to give an answer for the questions they'll be asked. It says to be READY always to give an answer to every man that asks you a reason of the hope that is in you. Jesus is the reason of the hope that is in me. If you ask me the reason of the hope i have, i will gladly and meekly tell you that it is Jesus. He is the One that put the sugar in my tea. You have clearly tried to twist this passage to mean that the christian must answer every question/number of questions that every thehomer and harry presents to him. NO! i already showed you the example[b]s[/b] of christ, and how He was conspicuosly silent and answered nothing sometimes when asked many questions.
Joh 19:9 And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer.
Joh 19:10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?

Let me show you other scriptures that plainly allow christians to ignore you.
Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
2Jo 1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him Godspeed:
Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
2Th 3:14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.
2Ti 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do engender strifes.

Read the fineprint.

Jesus wasn't being asked the reason for his hope. Are you seriously saying that the only question you can answer is "What is the reason for your hope"? Come on get serious. In Acts 6:9, Stephen was debating.

Image123:
The Bible is not the source of anyone's confusion as you have displayed. Many like you, have not sat down to thoroughly consider and understand the things that are written, they have refused to believe the things that are written but have only held on to parts that SEEM To support what they want. Any honest, sincere, and diligent believer would not be confused. Nietzsche is a class all time example of aconfused man, have you readup on his sad tale? Try wikipedia. Many atheists are also confused BTW. Nietzsche lived a confused, sad and sick life. He ended up in the assylum with his level of confusion. Yet he is the mentor of many a serious atheist. Try that for a perfect example to follow.

Christians themselves disagree on the Bible so who can be said to be more confused than them? They disagree so much that they've formed thousands of splinter groups. Again, what does Nietzsche have to do with anything? A number of intelligent people have ended up in asylum and some who deserved to be there weren't put in. Why not address the confusion of Christianity that is right before you rather than introducing an irrelevant issue?

Image123:
Of course a seed becomes a person. Did you not do any Biology related subject? It is the seed that becomes the tree/crop/fruit. the seed becomes the person. Without the seed in the man, the man would never BEAR children.

Is the seed the man? That is what I've been asking you. And can this seed become the man without the woman? Where was Saul before his father and mother had intercourse? Was he in both of them or in his father alone? Stop trying to evade the question. I won't let you.

Image123:
It boils down to the individual's personal decision. It's sometimes called free will. It's not God's choice, but your choice, man's choice. God is not to be blamed for your father's or fore-father's wrong decisions to serve other gods/no gods. He is not to be blamed for their laziness which led to their impoverishment, which birthed your poverty. He is not to blame for their sickness or genetic deficiencies or blood groups either. We all make choices, and our daily choices may have far more weight than we imagine. You still have your choice to make.

God is to be blamed if he says that someone's eternity depends on what they believe here on earth yet when they're most vulnerable, he deliberately places them in places where they'll get the wrong information.

thehomer:
If they're all special, then telling me the Bible is special doesn't really add much to the discussion. If God changed those laws, then how do you know that he hasn't changed the law against homosexuality?

i said perhaps. Do you know the meaning of 'perhaps'? Like i said earlier, my point was not on the Bible being a special book, you were the one who decided to dwell on its specialness. You are free to back-read. i talked about 'changed' laws, the inverted commas represent something, they are not meaningless or decoration. Like i've stated there are different forms and levels of laws. There are simple one time instructions like stretch your rod, or circle the town. there are some instructions that are simple for our present state on earth, and there ae some with eternal consequences. You may just group them all as laws. They are all to be observed in context and to see if they still apply. The law of God against homosexuality is a moral law and still applies. Homosexuality is an abomination to God, An abomination TO God remains an abomination. It doesn't change.
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
It is also repeated in the NT for emphasis with the clause of eternal judgement.
1Co 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

No, you have an issue with expression. You were implying that God divided the laws into moral and ceremonial laws in the same way that the Bible is divided into chapters and verses. The problem is that you're yet to show where God divided the laws into moral and ceremonial laws on the other hand, we know that the Bible's division into chapters and verses was done by men. You didn't answer on diet and the Sabbath. You simply said they were moral laws. You're the one to say what moral laws are since you're the one saying that God divided the laws in some way.

The division into chapters and verses is not esoteric, it is already inherent. The paragraphs and spaces are already there and any other person would probably do the same division or similar. It's the same way that the laws are broadly divided. moral laws deal with right or wrong, ceremonial laws deal with cleansing of sin. Most of the laws are easily put under any of this two. the ceremonial is already fulfilled and no more necessary. the moral is still obtainable. Not forgetting that some laws are not of eternal/hell damning consequences even if disobeyed. Some are just for humans to live and co-exist in the best way. like instructions in a manual to help enjoy a product and make it last long. You asked if the diet and sabbath laws are moral laws, and i said yes they are. Moral laws are laws that specify what is right or wrong, what is good or bad. they tell the proper thing and just thing to do.

If your analogies are irrelevant or simply fail in the crucial point being attempted, then it is your failure in passing across the relevant information.Your failure in self expression.

At all. it's the classic case of the unserious student who failed, blaming his teacher. Others passed. You're not the first person i've used analogies with. There are others who grasp, get a lesson teacher perhaps.

I showed you the principle. It is right in what you quoted me as saying. Again, I said it is rooted in this natural world that we all have access to. Can you show that all humans have access to the supernatural? The mere fact that you can type what you've typed on a computer of some sort means that you and I have access to this natural world. Can you show me the supernatural?

You and a minority are the ones that seem to have access to this principle you speak of. The supernatural like the name suggests is SUPERnatural. The spiritual realm is visible to any one that believes. in that realm, believing is usually seeing. In the natural realm, seeing is usually believing. You and every human can choose to believe or disbelieve.

You didn't answer my question but I'll answer yours. Please don't forget to answer my question. Recall that you were the one who quoted the Bible passage in Hebrews I was referring to there. As far as I know, God didn't write the letter to the Hebrews.

And what book did God write? The average christian takes the whole Bible as the Word of God, you can choose to keep playing tombo. Where you seem to see God in a wicked form or inhuman form or unbelievable(miraculous) form, it is God, but where God's Word answers you, its not God, right.

Come on. This isn't what I asked you for. I asked you to show me where God himself or Jesus as his spokes man said they had changed the dietary laws? Do you think Jesus ate pork? You're showing me Paul's letter to Timothy. Are Paul's letters more highly placed than God's words to Moses?

And what book did God write? The average christian takes the whole Bible as the Word of God, you can choose to keep playing tombo. Where you seem to see God in a wicked form or inhuman form or unbelievable(miraculous) form, it is God, but where God's Word answers you, its not God, right.

Doubt all you want. The fact that in the passage you quoted, he ended it with "for ye are all one in Christ Jesus". Check Ephesians 6:5. You really should be more familiar with your Bible.

Here is the fact, the Leviticus passage talks about special treatment for an Israelite different from the treatment meted to a gentile in same circumstances. The Galatians passage says there is no such distinction again. Wake up, we are in the new testament era.
Eph 6:5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;
i see no slave in this passage, except you mean to say that servants are slaves. In that case there is no abolition of slavery anywhere as there are servants all over the place. i'm a servant BTW.

Come on. Don't be lazy. Show me your interpretation. Unless you think your words are written in the Bible or that I can read your mind, I think you should hold up your own part of the bargain.

i've told you already that the two passages are relevant . All you are interested in is arguing on whatever my interpretation will be.

Then show you're right. Merely saying it doesn't make it so.

.

You met Jesus? Wow. What did he look like? What station was he on? Did he give any interviews in English, Yoruba or Aramaic? Sure he would have talked about living in fish. Who wouldn't talk about that? Heard that from who? If I believed every fantastic story I was told, then I would probably be worshiping every God I ever heard about.

he looked like the Saviour of the world. He was on the pages of the scripture. He spoke plainly in English. He told me to tell you that He died for you. You are very sure that Jonah spoke about living in the fish. You have a lot of misguided faith. the Bible is very plain about his message.
Jon 3:3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey.
Jon 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
Jon 3:5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.
Jonah was a servant of God, and servants of God speak what God tells them to, not what they want to.
Joh 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
You have heard about Jesus, about Peter, about Paul, about Abraham, about david. Nineveh only heard about being destroyed in 40days. you have a complete Bible, you've heard more than 40days of preaching, you have no excuse.

Hey. You're the one presenting the quotes. It looks as if you've still failed to understand why I brought up Noah and the flood. God flooded the earth to wipe out evil on earth. You presented 2 Peter as a claim that it was actually a warning but right there in Genesis where supposedly God was talking, he said it was a warning. Are you now telling me that Peter is allowed to second guess God?

God did not flood the earth to wipe out evil on the earth. He flooded it to destroy the people. He knew the heart of men was desperately wicked. He knew all men were defected. Your claims have no scripture backing. 2 Peter shows us that the flood and every other judgement is a warning, should serve as a warning to every generation that follows or hears. Where in Genesis did God say that th flood was a warning?
Gen 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
Noah survived because he made an attempt at righteousness. he made an attempt at believing God.

So if someone is baptized, is it possible for them to still tell a lie? It was you who quoted a passage talking about it to me. Have you forgotten so soon?

As long as we are in the world, no man is too holy above temptation or tests. So there is a possibility of passing the test or failing the test. But do not deliberately fail, or stay in failure. Sorry, i sincerely do not recall qouting a passage about God sanctifying all creation, at least not in the context of being a child of God and being a child of the devil. kindly remind me.

I brought it up to make the point that it was easy.

And what is the point of it being easy when you can't do it?

I'm talking about the God of the Bible. The one that says he loves everyone but does nothing to help them when he can. That isn't a faithful God.

The God of the bible says He is a faithful God. he also says that the soul that sins will die. He also told Adam that he would die if he disobeyed God. He also said that there is no other way given among men for salvation except Jesus. The One that said whosoever will let him come. he is the One that promised rest o everyone who comes. You can't help someone by force. Like they say, you can force the horse to the stream but cannot force it to ddrink water. God so loved that He gave. He has given, it is left for you to receive. He is God, not man.

If you believe just anything "some folks" say, then you're just looking to get scammed. Some folks say that Mohammed is the last prophet, some folks say that Jesus went to the U.S after flying away in Jerusalem. Some folks say that zombies roamed the city when Jesus died. Who are we to believe?

Some folks say that there is no God. Some folks say God is wicked. Are we to believe them? you ran from the point of the quote as is customary. Jesus coming every 33years to die is not what will make people believe in Him. Some folks lived when He came and crucified Him. Some folks saw His miracles and didn't believe but betrayed Him. Some folks watched the resurrection live but were paid not to believe. God has spoken once, you had better pay attention for your own good.

thehomer:
Tried not to feel attracted to people of the same sex. Do you think that talking to a homosexual would make you start feeling attracted to people of the same sexual orientation?

Yep, they didn't try enough. there are folks who fell into homosexuality and repented of it. Their trial was with the help of God though. they asked God/Jesus to help them, and today, they are free. i know that living with, hanging out with, and watching sinners can make one attracted to doing the same sin. Sin can be enticing, and we are warned not to consent. not all sin, infact, not many sins are repulsive to all. Sin is enticing.
Pro 1:10 My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.
1Corinth 15v33(ASV) Be not deceived: Evil companionships corrupt good morals.

(BBE) Do not be tricked by false words: evil company does damage to good behaviour.

(CEV) Don't fool yourselves. Bad friends will destroy you.

You're just repeating yourself. Can God have mercy on thehomer the way he currently is? If he can, then you're wrong by talking about fulfilling some conditions.

observe the passage below.
Exo 33:15 And he said unto him, If thy presence go not with me, carry us not up hence.
Exo 33:16 For wherein shall it be known here that I and thy people have found grace in thy sight? is it not in that thou goest with us? so shall we be separated, I and thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of the earth.
Exo 33:17 And the LORD said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name.
Exo 33:18 And he said, I beseech thee, show me thy glory.
Exo 33:19 And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.
Moses was asking God for a favour based on Israel's 'specialness'. And to paraphrase what God told moses, He said " Moses, I will answer you, but I will have mercy on who I will. mercy is not only for Israel. God's mercy is clearly conditional. Read the fine print. Quoting scriptures in isolation with disregard for other scripture will only lead to your confusion. Except you are not interested in understanding of course.

Jesus wasn't being asked the reason for his hope. Are you seriously saying that the only question you can answer is "What is the reason for your hope"? Come on get serious. In Acts 6:9, Stephen was debating.

Did i at any point state that Jesus was being asked the reason of His hope, or you are springing up your fallacies again? I have answered tens of your questions(perhaps you may not like the answers, that's another issue). I cannot believe that you are asking me if the only question i can answer is "What is the reason for your hope"? Re-read what i said, perhaps you might understand it this time. Stephen was debating, and i've been singing all this pages or what? i've shown you with many scriptural examples that you cannot blackmail any christian into answering every one of your questions by quoting some misconstrued verse. i can decide to avoid you at my discretion. So says the Bible, and so shows jesus my perfect example.

Christians themselves disagree on the Bible so who can be said to be more confused than them? They disagree so much that they've formed thousands of splinter groups. Again, what does Nietzsche have to do with anything? A number of intelligent people have ended up in asylum and some who deserved to be there weren't put in. Why not address the confusion of Christianity that is right before you rather than introducing an irrelevant issue?

The point is that confusion doen't stop at the door of one sect. Every sect has their own confusions. nobody is omniscient but God. Atheists show even more confusion. Nietzsche is an epitome of confusion, have you read his story. Wiki is your friend. he is a role model to many serious atheists. Is your role model irrelevant? He is confusion personified.

Is the seed the man? That is what I've been asking you. And can this seed become the man without the woman? Where was Saul before his father and mother had intercourse? Was he in both of them or in his father alone? Stop trying to evade the question. I won't let you.

And i have been telling you that the seed is the man. the seed doesn't become the man without the woman, just like the seed cannot become the tree on its own. Have you any sense of agriculture? Saul was in his fathers loins. I already answered you, you seem to be making great efforts at evading the answer.

God is to be blamed if he says that someone's eternity depends on what they believe here on earth yet when they're most vulnerable, he deliberately places them in places where they'll get the wrong information.

The whole earth is filled with wrong information. Pastors and Bishops children can be atheists. i think Nietzsche was the child of a pastor, so also were some of todays superstar sinners. My father was no pastor. Your father doesn't have to be rich for you to be rich, and vice versa. Their state may influence, but nobody is limited to that except, USUALLY, if you choose to be limited. People are getting Bibles, messages, discussions(like ou are getting), TV messages etc, and they are doing nothing about it.
Mat 21:34 And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.
Mat 21:35 And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.
Mat 21:36 Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.
Mat 21:37 But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.
Mat 21:38 But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
Mat 21:39 And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.
Mat 21:40 When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?

Image123:
i said perhaps. Do you know the meaning of 'perhaps'? Like i said earlier, my point was not on the Bible being a special book, you were the one who decided to dwell on its specialness. You are free to back-read. i talked about 'changed' laws, the inverted commas represent something, they are not meaningless or decoration. Like i've stated there are different forms and levels of laws. There are simple one time instructions like stretch your rod, or circle the town. there are some instructions that are simple for our present state on earth, and there ae some with eternal consequences. You may just group them all as laws. They are all to be observed in context and to see if they still apply. The law of God against homosexuality is a moral law and still applies. Homosexuality is an abomination to God, An abomination TO God remains an abomination. It doesn't change.
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
It is also repeated in the NT for emphasis with the clause of eternal judgement.
1Co 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Obviously, you're still having a deep problem with communicating. Merely saying "perhaps" doesn't absolve you. Notice that it was you who who began all this talk about special right here.

You're still failing to show that God changed the laws. e.g are tattoos now permissible since they weren't mentioned in the New Testament?

Image123:
The division into chapters and verses is not esoteric, it is already inherent. The paragraphs and spaces are already there and any other person would probably do the same division or similar. It's the same way that the laws are broadly divided. moral laws deal with right or wrong, ceremonial laws deal with cleansing of sin. Most of the laws are easily put under any of this two. the ceremonial is already fulfilled and no more necessary. the moral is still obtainable. Not forgetting that some laws are not of eternal/hell damning consequences even if disobeyed. Some are just for humans to live and co-exist in the best way. like instructions in a manual to help enjoy a product and make it last long. You asked if the diet and sabbath laws are moral laws, and i said yes they are. Moral laws are laws that specify what is right or wrong, what is good or bad. they tell the proper thing and just thing to do.

This is why I said you're ignorant about how the Bible came about. If you knew anything about that process, you'll know that the paragraphs and spaces weren't already there. You keep saying that the divisions were inherent yet so far, you've been unable to show that these divisions were inherent.

Image123:
At all. it's the classic case of the unserious student who failed, blaming his teacher. Others passed. You're not the first person i've used analogies with. There are others who grasp, get a lesson teacher perhaps.

No, it is the case of ignorance begetting more ignorance. When you don't know what you're talking about, your analogies will tend to be rubbish.

Image123:
You and a minority are the ones that seem to have access to this principle you speak of. The supernatural like the name suggests is SUPERnatural. The spiritual realm is visible to any one that believes. in that realm, believing is usually seeing. In the natural realm, seeing is usually believing. You and every human can choose to believe or disbelieve.

Are you serious? Do you seriously think that there are more people who actually have access to this supernatural than there are people who can interact with a computer?

Image123:
And what book did God write? The average christian takes the whole Bible as the Word of God, you can choose to keep playing tombo. Where you seem to see God in a wicked form or inhuman form or unbelievable(miraculous) form, it is God, but where God's Word answers you, its not God, right.

And what book did God write? The average christian takes the whole Bible as the Word of God, you can choose to keep playing tombo. Where you seem to see God in a wicked form or inhuman form or unbelievable(miraculous) form, it is God, but where God's Word answers you, its not God, right.

God spoke to Moses. Jesus' disciples were said to have written Jesus' words.

Image123:
Here is the fact, the Leviticus passage talks about special treatment for an Israelite different from the treatment meted to a gentile in same circumstances. The Galatians passage says there is no such distinction again. Wake up, we are in the new testament era.
Eph 6:5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;
i see no slave in this passage, except you mean to say that servants are slaves. In that case there is no abolition of slavery anywhere as there are servants all over the place. i'm a servant BTW.

I don't know about you but my translation says slaves. So your God is satisfied with enslaving other people.

Image123:
i've told you already that the two passages are relevant . All you are interested in is arguing on whatever my interpretation will be.

So you're scared about your interpretation being discovered to not be the correct one? Don't be afraid.

Image123:
.

he looked like the Saviour of the world. He was on the pages of the scripture. He spoke plainly in English. He told me to tell you that He died for you. You are very sure that Jonah spoke about living in the fish. You have a lot of misguided faith. the Bible is very plain about his message.
Jon 3:3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey.
Jon 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
Jon 3:5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.
Jonah was a servant of God, and servants of God speak what God tells them to, not what they want to.
Joh 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
You have heard about Jesus, about Peter, about Paul, about Abraham, about david. Nineveh only heard about being destroyed in 40days. you have a complete Bible, you've heard more than 40days of preaching, you have no excuse.

Are you sure you weren't hallucinating? You saw Jesus by reading a book and heard him speak in English? I've heard about Jesus and I've heard about Santa Claus. I don't believe that any of them did anything for me.

Image123:
God did not flood the earth to wipe out evil on the earth. He flooded it to destroy the people. He knew the heart of men was desperately wicked. He knew all men were defected. Your claims have no scripture backing. 2 Peter shows us that the flood and every other judgement is a warning, should serve as a warning to every generation that follows or hears. Where in Genesis did God say that th flood was a warning?
Gen 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
Noah survived because he made an attempt at righteousness. he made an attempt at believing God.

I mistyped there because I've been saying that it wasn't meant to be a warning because God himself said he regretted the creation and decided to wipe them all out.

Image123:
As long as we are in the world, no man is too holy above temptation or tests. So there is a possibility of passing the test or failing the test. But do not deliberately fail, or stay in failure. Sorry, i sincerely do not recall qouting a passage about God sanctifying all creation, at least not in the context of being a child of God and being a child of the devil. kindly remind me.

Check you quotes here. It is the one with Acts 10. No it wasn't in that context, but in the context of certain animals being clean and others being unclean.

Image123:
And what is the point of it being easy when you can't do it?

The point is that it is easy as a sacrifice to perform.

Image123:
The God of the bible says He is a faithful God. he also says that the soul that sins will die. He also told Adam that he would die if he disobeyed God. He also said that there is no other way given among men for salvation except Jesus. The One that said whosoever will let him come. he is the One that promised rest o everyone who comes. You can't help someone by force. Like they say, you can force the horse to the stream but cannot force it to ddrink water. God so loved that He gave. He has given, it is left for you to receive. He is God, not man.

I'm sure the child dying of cancer will be happy to know that he cannot be helped by force.

Image123:
Some folks say that there is no God. Some folks say God is wicked. Are we to believe them? you ran from the point of the quote as is customary. Jesus coming every 33years to die is not what will make people believe in Him. Some folks lived when He came and crucified Him. Some folks saw His miracles and didn't believe but betrayed Him. Some folks watched the resurrection live but were paid not to believe. God has spoken once, you had better pay attention for your own good.

That's just it. What we have are stories of stories of people who say that those things happened. The problem is that what we know about people tells us that they can be fooled.
Jesus was happy to show himself to Thomas for his holes to be felt but he was shy about presenting himself to historians of those times.

Image123:
Yep, they didn't try enough. there are folks who fell into homosexuality and repented of it. Their trial was with the help of God though. they asked God/Jesus to help them, and today, they are free. i know that living with, hanging out with, and watching sinners can make one attracted to doing the same sin. Sin can be enticing, and we are warned not to consent. not all sin, infact, not many sins are repulsive to all. Sin is enticing.
Pro 1:10 My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.
1Corinth 15v33(ASV) Be not deceived: Evil companionships corrupt good morals.

(BBE) Do not be tricked by false words: evil company does damage to good behaviour.

(CEV) Don't fool yourselves. Bad friends will destroy you.

Then there are those who tried and failed. I've not heard about people "falling into" homosexuality. What we've heard is that people just find themselves attracted to the same sex in the same way that you find yourself attracted to the opposite sex.

Image123:
observe the passage below.
Exo 33:15 And he said unto him, If thy presence go not with me, carry us not up hence.
Exo 33:16 For wherein shall it be known here that I and thy people have found grace in thy sight? is it not in that thou goest with us? so shall we be separated, I and thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of the earth.
Exo 33:17 And the LORD said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name.
Exo 33:18 And he said, I beseech thee, show me thy glory.
Exo 33:19 And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.
Moses was asking God for a favour based on Israel's 'specialness'. And to paraphrase what God told moses, He said " Moses, I will answer you, but I will have mercy on who I will. mercy is not only for Israel. God's mercy is clearly conditional. Read the fine print. Quoting scriptures in isolation with disregard for other scripture will only lead to your confusion. Except you are not interested in understanding of course.

What fine print are you talking about? From what I can see here, you've not shown that this mercy is conditional.

Image123:
Did i at any point state that Jesus was being asked the reason of His hope, or you are springing up your fallacies again? I have answered tens of your questions(perhaps you may not like the answers, that's another issue). I cannot believe that you are asking me if the only question i can answer is "What is the reason for your hope"? Re-read what i said, perhaps you might understand it this time. Stephen was debating, and i've been singing all this pages or what? i've shown you with many scriptural examples that you cannot blackmail any christian into answering every one of your questions by quoting some misconstrued verse. i can decide to avoid you at my discretion. So says the Bible, and so shows jesus my perfect example.

You seemed to be implying it when you brought him up while you were talking about the sorts of question you could answer. Sure you can decide to avoid me but the fact remains that Christians have been debating in the past and usually, if they're worth their salt, they won't be scared of being challenged.

Image123:
The point is that confusion doen't stop at the door of one sect. Every sect has their own confusions. nobody is omniscient but God. Atheists show even more confusion. Nietzsche is an epitome of confusion, have you read his story. Wiki is your friend. he is a role model to many serious atheists. Is your role model irrelevant? He is confusion personified.

Exactly. If you Christians are already confused, then why are you surprised that many of us don't want to join you guys in your confusion? Nietzsche was also a philosopher was that the cause of his confusion? He was also a man could that too have been a cause? You see I still don't understand how you think showing me that one atheist had a bad outcome somehow means that atheists are bound to have bad outcomes. There are mathematicians who have been hospitalized. Does that mean that Mathematics makes people prone to mental illness?

Image123:
And i have been telling you that the seed is the man. the seed doesn't become the man without the woman, just like the seed cannot become the tree on its own. Have you any sense of agriculture? Saul was in his fathers loins. I already answered you, you seem to be making great efforts at evading the answer.

And I've shown you that you answer makes no sense. Men don't live in the loins of other men. If you say that the seed is the same thing as the man, then you have to realize that you're not making any sense. I've been asking you about the mother but you just keep running away and trying to ignore it. Is there some seed in the mother or not? Please answer this question.

Image123:
The whole earth is filled with wrong information. Pastors and Bishops children can be atheists. i think Nietzsche was the child of a pastor, so also were some of todays superstar sinners. My father was no pastor. Your father doesn't have to be rich for you to be rich, and vice versa. Their state may influence, but nobody is limited to that except, USUALLY, if you choose to be limited. People are getting Bibles, messages, discussions(like ou are getting), TV messages etc, and they are doing nothing about it.
Mat 21:34 And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.
Mat 21:35 And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.
Mat 21:36 Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.
Mat 21:37 But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.
Mat 21:38 But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
Mat 21:39 And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.
Mat 21:40 When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?

Surely you cannot ignore the fact that getting born in Saudi Arabia to Muslim parents means that the child will most likely be Muslim. And for all you know, they may never come across one Christian in their entire life. What does God do to such a person? He fries them forever in Hell.

thehomer:
Obviously, you're still having a deep problem with communicating. Merely saying "perhaps" doesn't absolve you. Notice that it was you who who began all this talk about special right here.

You're still failing to show that God changed the laws. e.g are tattoos now permissible since they weren't mentioned in the New Testament?

i don't need to be absolved or no. i never argued about who first mentioned 'special'. Your bringing that up is again one of your many fallacies so we can argue on that also. i've consistently said that my point is not abouty the Bible been special or no. Like i said, you are free to re-read. i mentioned that homosexuality is also repeated in the NT for emphasis. i didn't say that anything not mentioned in the NT is no more valid like you are trying to imply/deduce. i don't need to show that God changed any laws. You are the one insisting that God changed them. i'm only explaining to you that there is no change or contradiction. i also said that there are what can be called 'changes'(the inverted commas put to speak your language). i gave the 'changes' to be in matters like judgement, or what was no longer necessary, as in the laws put while constructing a street road and when construction is complete, and other analogies. The Word of God(Bible) is intricate. It's like a simple looking human body that has layers of systems; digestive, nervous, reproductive, circulatory etc. The different systems are inter-related, not contradictory.

This is why I said you're ignorant about how the Bible came about. If you knew anything about that process, you'll know that the paragraphs and spaces weren't already there. You keep saying that the divisions were inherent yet so far, you've been unable to show that these divisions were inherent.

It's either you are been dishonest here or ignorant. Paragraphs and spaces were already there. how can one write without spaces? Permit wiki to help you again http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapters_and_verses_of_the_Bible. The article says these ( In antiquity Hebrew texts were divided into paragraphs (parashot) that were identified by two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Pe indicated an "open" paragraph that began on a new line, while Samekh indicated a "closed" paragraph that began on the same line after a small space.[1]). This was before chapter and verse divisions.
Moral laws deal with right or wrong, ceremonial laws deal with cleansing of sin. Most of the laws are easily put under any of this two. Use your brain, or ask practical questions if you do not understand.

No, it is the case of ignorance begetting more ignorance. When you don't know what you're talking about, your analogies will tend to be rubbish.

Others passed. You're not the first person i've used analogies with. There are others who grasp, get a lesson teacher perhaps.

Are you serious? Do you seriously think that there are more people who actually have access to this supernatural than there are people who can interact with a computer?

How many people can interact with a computer? Are you on this planet at all? There are more adherents of religion than there are literates, not to mention the fewer number of folks who can interact on a computer. Religious folks believe in access to the supernatural. They talk of communicating with ghosts, gods, anscestors, dead relatives, God etc. Everybody has faith, faith is your access to the supernatural.
Rom 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

God spoke to Moses. Jesus' disciples were said to have written Jesus' words.

Did God speak to Moses? On what base do you believe that, but disbelieve that Hebrews or Paul's epistles are not the Word of God? Who are Jesus'disciples? Is Paul not a disciple of Jesus, do you even know the meaning of the word? In case you are thinking that Jesus' disciples are just 12 like i'm tempted to perceive, consider the below too.
Mat 27:57 When the even was come, there came a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple:
Act 9:10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
Act 9:36 Now there was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas: this woman was full of good works and almsdeeds which she did.
Act 21:16 There went with us also certain of the disciples of Caesarea, and brought with them one Mnason of Cyprus, an old disciple, with whom we should lodge.
Mat 8:21 And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.

Also, to indulge you yet, see Jesus in the book of Matthew giving a 'change'(s)
Mat 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Mat 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Mat 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
Mat 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Mat 5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:
Mat 5:34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:
Mat 5:35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
Mat 5:36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
Mat 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
Mat 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Mat 5:40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
Mat 5:41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

Mat 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
You can also check the passages on divorce and on judgement of an adulteress. Those are some instances where you can observe 'changes', not to forget the instances i showed you on diet and slavery, which you decided to play tombo with.

I don't know about you but my translation says slaves. So your God is satisfied with enslaving other people.

Maybe your translation uses the word 'slaves' in equal vein as 'servants'. In such a case, almost everyone is a slave. Public servants are public slaves, God's servants are God's slaves, civil servants are civil slaves. Oyedepo says he is a servant of God, meaning he is a slave of God. Abraham is a slave of God, i am a slave of God, angels are slaves of God, the disciples are slaves of Jesus, Paul was a slave, Elisha was a slave etc. i'm vey much in support of and satisfied with such forms of slavery then. i verily doubt if this is the sort of slavery that freedom fighters fought against for the abolition of. The servant-master relationship i find in the Bible is very much applicable to the modern day employer-empmloy elionhipp

So you're scared about your interpretation being discovered to not be the correct one? Don't be afraid.

discovered? The two passages are relevant . Now if you have anything important to say, its time to say it.

Are you sure you weren't hallucinating? You saw Jesus by reading a book and heard him speak in English? I've heard about Jesus and I've heard about Santa Claus. I don't believe that any of them did anything for me.

Bad for you. He that cometh to God MUST believe.
Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

When you are ready to see Jesus, have faith. If you can believe, you will see. It cannot be easier said than that.

I mistyped there because I've been saying that it wasn't meant to be a warning because God himself said he regretted the creation and decided to wipe them all out.

Go and mistype no more then. And learn to read me more slowly and carefully.

Check you quotes here. It is the one with Acts 10. No it wasn't in that context, but in the context of certain animals being clean and others being unclean.

Nothing in acts 10 talks about God sanctifying all creation. learn to read me more slowly and carefully.

the point is that it is easy as a sacrifice to perform.

i don't do blind arguments as pastime.

Your child dying of cancer will die and go to Heaven which is far better. You are only trying to whip up sentiments.

thehomer:
That's just it. What we have are stories of stories of people who say that those things happened. The problem is that what we know about people tells us that they can be fooled.
Jesus was happy to show himself to Thomas for his holes to be felt but he was shy about presenting himself to historians of those times.

And what do we have for the disbelief in God again? Do you think that non-theists cannot be fooled? Thomas was a disciple, a worthy investment. Jesus showed Himself resurrected by many infallible proofs to more than 500 people before His ascension. Luke was an historian.
1Co 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

Then there are those who tried and failed. I've not heard about people "falling into" homosexuality. What we've heard is that people just find themselves attracted to the same sex in the same way that you find yourself attracted to the opposite sex.

Homosexuality is sin, and in Bible parlance, folks use the phrase on "falling into" sin. You seem to have ears for hearing stories. have you also heard of people that just find themselves attracted to other people's money and property? it's called theft. When a person feels the urge to sin, whether sponteneous or spurred, the person should try to overcome such TEMPTATION with the help of Jesus. Sin is man's biggest problem, and homosexuality is a sin. Different individuals have their different softspots and weaknesses. Some folks naturally detest stealing and are NATURALLY disciplined enough not to steal. Other folks are so principled and honest and would not tell lies. Some other person values his honour and will never sleep with another man's wife. This doesn't negate the fact that these despised sins are what some other folks cannot do without, or must give in to frequently. It's natural, and they 'find themselves just attracted' to these despicable acts. It's a similar thing with homosexuality. Trying to force a natural angle on it doesn't absolve the sinner. Sin is sin and must be dealt with and frowned at.

What fine print are you talking about? From what I can see here, you've not shown that this mercy is conditional.

Pro 28:13 He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.
i re-quote this. Mercy is conditional.

You seemed to be implying it when you brought him up while you were talking about the sorts of question you could answer. Sure you can decide to avoid me but the fact remains that Christians have been debating in the past and usually, if they're worth their salt, they won't be scared of being challenged.

the worth of a christian is not by his debate ability or non ability. Jesus Christ is the worth of the christian, if you can understand that. humans can be swayed, the media shows that often by making you hate a character, and then love the same character in no time after. Visit the courtroom and wonder at the force of argument, and how a good lawyer can convict an innocent man of murder. Ability to argue well, or express points articulately is not a proof of veracity. And BTW, christians are sheep for the most, and may not necessarily possess the power to defend themselves against stubborn goats and wolves. They need shepherds, try to understand my brethren's state . like i told you earlier, not every fisherman needs to,knows how to, or is interested in catching a shark. Now that you've been shown, try not to blackmail christians next time with one misconstrued passage, remember the numerous other passages which give them the liberty to ignore you, thanks.

Exactly. If you Christians are already confused, then why are you surprised that many of us don't want to join you guys in your confusion? Nietzsche was also a philosopher was that the cause of his confusion? He was also a man could that too have been a cause? You see I still don't understand how you think showing me that one atheist had a bad outcome somehow means that atheists are bound to have bad outcomes. There are mathematicians who have been hospitalized. Does that mean that Mathematics makes people prone to mental illness?

i'm surprised because atheism is also filled with confusion. Confusion amongst your role models, confusion among new atheists, confusion everywhere. And they are always hoping to disprove the existence of God even though they say that has been done. Why should any sane person want to join the likes of Nietzsche an epitome of confusion, and a top atheist model. What of logicb of NL? Or should we go to Bertrand Russell? That one too lived a confused life. Think up any top atheist, and look into his life and home and end. It's always confusion all the way. i'm not gloating or happy about it, just stating the facts. Russell also had a confused home. Kept on confusing love and lust, married and divorced about four times, confused many in his home to the point of derangement/mental disorder. Come on, i'd rather have Jesus.

And I've shown you that you answer makes no sense. Men don't live in the loins of other men. If you say that the seed is the same thing as the man, then you have to realize that you're not making any sense. I've been asking you about the mother but you just keep running away and trying to ignore it. Is there some seed in the mother or not? Please answer this question.

i'd rather say you do not agree with my answer, not that the answer makes no sense. i showed you also from the Bible the same answer.
Heb 7:10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchizedek met him.
1Ki 8:19 Nevertheless thou shalt not build the house; but thy son that shall come forth out of thy loins, he shall build the house unto my name.
Gen 35:11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins;
i told you and i am saying it again, the seed is in the man. The seed IS IN THE MAN.

Surely you cannot ignore the fact that getting born in Saudi Arabia to Muslim parents means that the child will most likely be Muslim. And for all you know, they may never come across one Christian in their entire life. What does God do to such a person? He fries them forever in Hell.

If i were you, i would be most worried about myself, having been born in a christian environment and exposed to christian teachings and to the Bible. What have you done? Like i already showed you, life/reality is not an exact science. that your parents are poor/rich is not a guarantee that you will be poor/rich. It's a factor, but not the only factor. Attitude is a major factor in life. God in His mercy reveals Himself to the sincere and honest hearted, He finds a way, He makes a way. When He does, it is still your call to walk in the way or no. A man's habit, decision, and lifestyle may influence and hinder his children's future, i'm not in disagreement on that. Still, the question comes back to you, Wht have YOU done with the chances you have?

Image123:
i don't need to be absolved or no. i never argued about who first mentioned 'special'. Your bringing that up is again one of your many fallacies so we can argue on that also. i've consistently said that my point is not abouty the Bible been special or no. Like i said, you are free to re-read. i mentioned that homosexuality is also repeated in the NT for emphasis. i didn't say that anything not mentioned in the NT is no more valid like you are trying to imply/deduce. i don't need to show that God changed any laws. You are the one insisting that God changed them. i'm only explaining to you that there is no change or contradiction. i also said that there are what can be called 'changes'(the inverted commas put to speak your language). i gave the 'changes' to be in matters like judgement, or what was no longer necessary, as in the laws put while constructing a street road and when construction is complete, and other analogies. The Word of God(Bible) is intricate. It's like a simple looking human body that has layers of systems; digestive, nervous, reproductive, circulatory etc. The different systems are inter-related, not contradictory.

How on earth is it a fallacy to point out that you were the one who first brought up special? Since it isn't that special, why should I care about what it contains? Actually, you need to show that God changed any laws if we're to believe that some laws no longer applied. I'm not the one insisting that he changed them, I'm saying that we shouldn't even turn to it for reasonable instructions. The changes in the matter of judgement simply became worse.

Image123:
It's either you are been dishonest here or ignorant. Paragraphs and spaces were already there. how can one write without spaces? Permit wiki to help you again http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapters_and_verses_of_the_Bible. The article says these ( In antiquity Hebrew texts were divided into paragraphs (parashot) that were identified by two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Pe indicated an "open" paragraph that began on a new line, while Samekh indicated a "closed" paragraph that began on the same line after a small space.[1]). This was before chapter and verse divisions.
Moral laws deal with right or wrong, ceremonial laws deal with cleansing of sin. Most of the laws are easily put under any of this two. Use your brain, or ask practical questions if you do not understand.

Wow. Did you even read what you've presented up there? I think you did since you quoted from it but for some reason, you skipped the very first line in what you were quoting and that is clearly dishonest. This is the full quote. Note the parts in bold.

Wikipedia:
The original manuscripts did not contain the chapter and verse divisions in the numbered form familiar to modern readers. In antiquity Hebrew texts were divided into paragraphs (parashot) that were identified by two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Pe indicated an "open" paragraph that began on a new line, while Samekh indicated a "closed" paragraph that began on the same line after a small space.[1] The earliest known copies of the Book of Isaiah from the Dead Sea Scrolls use these two Hebrew letters for their paragraph divisions, although they differ slightly from the Masoretic divisions.

This is from the introduction of that very article that you were quoting.

Wikipedia:
The Bible is a compilation of many shorter books written at different times and later assembled into the biblical canon. All but the shortest of these books have been divided into chapters, generally a page or so in length, since the early 13th century. Since the mid-16th century, each chapter has been further divided into "verses" of a few short lines or sentences. Sometimes a sentence spans more than one verse, as in the case of Ephesians 2:8-9, and sometimes there is more than one sentence in a single verse, as in the case of Genesis 1:2. As the chapter and verse divisions were not part of the original texts, they form part of the paratext of the Bible.

How the NT got its verses from that same article.

Wikipedia:
The first person to divide New Testament chapters into verses was Italian Dominican biblical scholar Santi Pagnini (1470–1541), but his system was never widely adopted.[10] Robert Estienne created an alternate numbering in his 1551 edition of the Greek New Testament [11] which was also used in his 1553 publication of the Bible in French. Estienne's system of division was widely adopted, and it is this system which is found in almost all modern bibles.

Image123:
Others passed. You're not the first person i've used analogies with. There are others who grasp, get a lesson teacher perhaps.

What "others" are you talking about? You may have used analogies before but the ones you've been using here are terrible ones.

Image123:
How many people can interact with a computer? Are you on this planet at all? There are more adherents of religion than there are literates, not to mention the fewer number of folks who can interact on a computer. Religious folks believe in access to the supernatural. They talk of communicating with ghosts, gods, anscestors, dead relatives, God etc. Everybody has faith, faith is your access to the supernatural.
Rom 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

Are you serious? Do you wish to tell me that you have to be literate before you can touch a computer? Clearly you have no idea of what you're saying. Actually, not everyone has faith so you're factually incorrect. Then how did God deal this measure of faith to people who used to believe but stopped? Did he take it away?

Image123:
Did God speak to Moses? On what base do you believe that, but disbelieve that Hebrews or Paul's epistles are not the Word of God? Who are Jesus'disciples? Is Paul not a disciple of Jesus, do you even know the meaning of the word? In case you are thinking that Jesus' disciples are just 12 like i'm tempted to perceive, consider the below too.
Mat 27:57 When the even was come, there came a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple:
Act 9:10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
Act 9:36 Now there was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas: this woman was full of good works and almsdeeds which she did.
Act 21:16 There went with us also certain of the disciples of Caesarea, and brought with them one Mnason of Cyprus, an old disciple, with whom we should lodge.
Mat 8:21 And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.

This is all pointless. Was it Jesus or God that was talking to Paul as he wrote? Or was he just writing to people and his words to those people were then collected? Besides, some of those letters being passes as being written by Paul weren't actually written by him but by unknown people.

Image123:
Also, to indulge you yet, see Jesus in the book of Matthew giving a 'change'(s)
Mat 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Mat 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Mat 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
Mat 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Mat 5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:
Mat 5:34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:
Mat 5:35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
Mat 5:36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
Mat 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
Mat 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Mat 5:40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
Mat 5:41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

Mat 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
You can also check the passages on divorce and on judgement of an adulteress. Those are some instances where you can observe 'changes', not to forget the instances i showed you on diet and slavery, which you decided to play tombo with.

While those are changes, they're not changes making something that was once permissible impermissible or vice versa besides. And that is the sort of change I'm disputing. I don't even see those changes as worthy of being taken to come from a wise God.

You didn't show me any serious instances with respect to diet and slavery. In fact, you seem to be running from it.

Image123:
Maybe your translation uses the word 'slaves' in equal vein as 'servants'. In such a case, almost everyone is a slave. Public servants are public slaves, God's servants are God's slaves, civil servants are civil slaves. Oyedepo says he is a servant of God, meaning he is a slave of God. Abraham is a slave of God, i am a slave of God, angels are slaves of God, the disciples are slaves of Jesus, Paul was a slave, Elisha was a slave etc. i'm vey much in support of and satisfied with such forms of slavery then. i verily doubt if this is the sort of slavery that freedom fighters fought against for the abolition of. The servant-master relationship i find in the Bible is very much applicable to the modern day employer-empmloy elionhipp

Rubbish. Read that passage and consider the times they were living in. It was referring to a slave-master relationship not the ridiculous notion you're presenting here that wherever we use servant, we replace it with slave.

Image123:
discovered? The two passages are relevant . Now if you have anything important to say, its time to say it.

I've said before and I'll say it again. What is your interpretation on the cloths with mixed materials?

Image123:
Bad for you. He that cometh to God MUST believe.
Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

When you are ready to see Jesus, have faith. If you can believe, you will see. It cannot be easier said than that.

Well you claim to have seen him in Lagos recently speaking English. I hope you weren't lying about that. If you weren't, then you were probably hallucinating.

Image123:
Go and mistype no more then. And learn to read me more slowly and carefully.

I'm still telling you that he Noah thing wasn't a warning but all you've been able to say is that it was a warning using what some guy said in the NT but God himself said it was because he regretted his action of creating people in the first place.

Image123:
Nothing in acts 10 talks about God sanctifying all creation. learn to read me more slowly and carefully.

It referred to some animals being clean and others unclean. Now are there still clean and unclean animals?

Image123:
i don't do blind arguments as pastime.

Your child dying of cancer will die and go to Heaven which is far better. You are only trying to whip up sentiments.

Sure you don't. How do you know that? Can you show me where that is written in Heaven? Or do you just believe it to make you feel better?

Image123:
And what do we have for the disbelief in God again? Do you think that non-theists cannot be fooled? Thomas was a disciple, a worthy investment. Jesus showed Himself resurrected by many infallible proofs to more than 500 people before His ascension. Luke was an historian.
1Co 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

What we have is reason and evidence. Sure they can the difference is that the non-theist is willing to admit it while the theist isn't. Wait so no human living today is a worthy investment? Non-theists aren't worthy investments? And that reference to 500 people is the sort of thing that we put in stories and fairytales to convince people who weren't there. And I hope you know that the actual author of the Book of Luke is unknown.

Image123:
Homosexuality is sin, and in Bible parlance, folks use the phrase on "falling into" sin. You seem to have ears for hearing stories. have you also heard of people that just find themselves attracted to other people's money and property? it's called theft. When a person feels the urge to sin, whether sponteneous or spurred, the person should try to overcome such TEMPTATION with the help of Jesus. Sin is man's biggest problem, and homosexuality is a sin. Different individuals have their different softspots and weaknesses. Some folks naturally detest stealing and are NATURALLY disciplined enough not to steal. Other folks are so principled and honest and would not tell lies. Some other person values his honour and will never sleep with another man's wife. This doesn't negate the fact that these despised sins are what some other folks cannot do without, or must give in to frequently. It's natural, and they 'find themselves just attracted' to these despicable acts. It's a similar thing with homosexuality. Trying to force a natural angle on it doesn't absolve the sinner. Sin is sin and must be dealt with and frowned at.

Are you seriously telling me that desiring wealth is theft? Where do you get these laws from? Can something that used to be a sin stop being a sin?

Image123:
Pro 28:13 He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.
i re-quote this. Mercy is conditional.

The beauty of the Bible lies in the ease of quote-mining it. So will God have mercy on all who confess and give up sins?

Image123:
the worth of a christian is not by his debate ability or non ability. Jesus Christ is the worth of the christian, if you can understand that. humans can be swayed, the media shows that often by making you hate a character, and then love the same character in no time after. Visit the courtroom and wonder at the force of argument, and how a good lawyer can convict an innocent man of murder. Ability to argue well, or express points articulately is not a proof of veracity. And BTW, christians are sheep for the most, and may not necessarily possess the power to defend themselves against stubborn goats and wolves. They need shepherds, try to understand my brethren's state . like i told you earlier, not every fisherman needs to,knows how to, or is interested in catching a shark. Now that you've been shown, try not to blackmail christians next time with one misconstrued passage, remember the numerous other passages which give them the liberty to ignore you, thanks.

I'll agree with you that they are mostly sheep. Jesus should have known that and been more circumspect in delivering his great commission instead, he did what he did. So, don't blame me, blame Jesus.

Image123:
i'm surprised because atheism is also filled with confusion. Confusion amongst your role models, confusion among new atheists, confusion everywhere. And they are always hoping to disprove the existence of God even though they say that has been done. Why should any sane person want to join the likes of Nietzsche an epitome of confusion, and a top atheist model. What of logicb of NL? Or should we go to Bertrand Russell? That one too lived a confused life. Think up any top atheist, and look into his life and home and end. It's always confusion all the way. i'm not gloating or happy about it, just stating the facts. Russell also had a confused home. Kept on confusing love and lust, married and divorced about four times, confused many in his home to the point of derangement/mental disorder. Come on, i'd rather have Jesus.

What do you think atheism actually is? By answering that question, you'll clear up a lot of the confusion you're showing here. You seem to think that atheists are to conform to one book (like the Bible) or follow one person (like Jesus). So getting married and divorced is a sign of confusion of love and lust? Sorry but that is just ridiculous. What makes you think that love is the only reason for marriage?

Image123:
i'd rather say you do not agree with my answer, not that the answer makes no sense. i showed you also from the Bible the same answer.
Heb 7:10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchizedek met him.
1Ki 8:19 Nevertheless thou shalt not build the house; but thy son that shall come forth out of thy loins, he shall build the house unto my name.
Gen 35:11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins;
i told you and i am saying it again, the seed is in the man. The seed IS IN THE MAN.

No, your answer literally makes no sense at all. You said here that the seed was the man. Now you say the seed is in the man? If the seed is the man and the seed was in the man, then how was Saul living in his father? If the man couldn't have come about without the mother, then how did the contribution from the mother get in? Or was the mother too in the father?

You Christians are the first to shout that the Bible isn't a science text but here you are quoting it at me as if it was one.

Image123:
If i were you, i would be most worried about myself, having been born in a christian environment and exposed to christian teachings and to the Bible. What have you done? Like i already showed you, life/reality is not an exact science. that your parents are poor/rich is not a guarantee that you will be poor/rich. It's a factor, but not the only factor. Attitude is a major factor in life. God in His mercy reveals Himself to the sincere and honest hearted, He finds a way, He makes a way. When He does, it is still your call to walk in the way or no. A man's habit, decision, and lifestyle may influence and hinder his children's future, i'm not in disagreement on that. Still, the question comes back to you, Wht have YOU done with the chances you have?

Well you're not me since it seems that I care more for what happens to people than you do. I'm not so selfish or conceited that I only worry about myself. God with his power doesn't need to limit himself to those people that he's selected as being "sincere and honest" he can reveal himself to all people at once. Since you're not in disagreement on the issue of a parent's religion, then why should God have allowed multiple religions in the first place? Knowing the effect it would have on children?

thehomer:
How on earth is it a fallacy to point out that you were the one who first brought up special? Since it isn't that special, why should I care about what it contains? Actually, you need to show that God changed any laws if we're to believe that some laws no longer applied. I'm not the one insisting that he changed them, I'm saying that we shouldn't even turn to it for reasonable instructions. The changes in the matter of judgement simply became worse.

Its a red herring and you are full of red herrings. i've consistently insisted on the point i was making but you seem more interested in talking about if the Bible is special or not. Do you talk this much about other books? If yes, please let me know what books those are. The NT consistently shows a 'change' from the OT. there is a new covenant and an old. If there were no differences, one would not be new and the other old. What are we to turn to for reasonable instructions? How is the NT judgement worse than the OT judgement?

Wow. Did you even read what you've presented up there? I think you did since you quoted from it but for some reason, you skipped the very first line in what you were quoting and that is clearly dishonest. This is the full quote. Note the parts in bold

This is from the introduction of that very article that you were quoting.

How the NT got its verses from that same article.

You are boldening lines that say that original manuscripts did not contain the chapter and verse divisions in the numbered form. That is the exact thing that i am saying so i do not get your point. i said that the division is already INHERENT. Do you not know the meaning of "inherent"? i said the inherence was seen in the spacing and paragraphs in the original text before the numbering using verses and chapters. You initially said that paragraphs and spaces were not there in the original manuscripts. Now i gave you a link that states that they were there and quoted the part relevant to what i said, yet all you can come up with is talks about me not quoting some line. i expected you will quote the whole page in your 'full quote' and show us honestNESS.
Moral laws deal with right or wrong, ceremonial laws deal with cleansing of sin. Most of the laws are easily put under any of this two. Use your brain, or ask practical questions if you do not understand.
The colored is the issue being discussed, but i'll not be dumbfounded if you're more interested in discussing lines and spaces.

What "others" are you talking about? You may have used analogies before but the ones you've been using here are terrible ones.

Others as in "others" LOST. Of course, i mean there are others who grasp, other persons, get a lesson teacher perhaps.

Are you serious? Do you wish to tell me that you have to be literate before you can touch a computer? Clearly you have no idea of what you're saying. Actually, not everyone has faith so you're factually incorrect. Then how did God deal this measure of faith to people who used to believe but stopped? Did he take it away?

No, i wish to tell you that there are more people book literate than there are computer literates. faith is basically belief. Everyone can belief. i guess you believe in the big bang, or evolution. You believe in yourself, that is faith. Have faith in God. God did not take away your faith, you probably hid it or employed it in other ventures. However, it is possible for God to cause you to believe a lie. You can come out of that though the same way you enter it. i expect Your redherringness to focus on this.
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
God always reveals Himself to those who love the truth and sincerely want to know.

This is all pointless. Was it Jesus or God that was talking to Paul as he wrote? Or was he just writing to people and his words to those people were then collected? Besides, some of those letters being passes as being written by Paul weren't actually written by him but by unknown people.

It is not pointless. You said Jesus' disciples were said to have written God's words implying that only disciples' writings can be taken as God's words. So, i took the time out to show you who disciples were and how all t the scriptures are disciple's writings and therefore God's words. All the Scriptures are given by the inspiration of God.

While those are changes, they're not changes making something that was once permissible impermissible or vice versa besides. And that is the sort of change I'm disputing. I don't even see those changes as worthy of being taken to come from a wise God.

It was permissible to hate others, it was permissible to swear, it was permissible to divorce for any reason. What is your definition of a wise God?

You didn't show me any serious instances with respect to diet and slavery. In fact, you seem to be running from it.

i did. i showed you two new testament scriptures talking about eating many things. Here they are again.
1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
Act 11:8 But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.
Act 11:9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
Act 11:10 And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven.

i also spoke on how the law you quoted from leviticus on slavery is rendered mute in the new testament by the uniting of nations.
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
Eph 2:16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
Eph 2:17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
Eph 2:18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
Eph 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

Rubbish. Read that passage and consider the times they were living in. It was referring to a slave-master relationship not the ridiculous notion you're presenting here that wherever we use servant, we replace it with slave.

The passage you quoted was talking to general people, servants. Except you take servants as slaves. Paul, writing to the Ephesians was writing to people who gathered together to worship God. ithink servants can do that, i doubt about slaves(thinking in your perception of slaves). Every employee is a servant of the employer/boss. The word change is not what matters. That you call someone chief cook, personal assistant, secretary, supervisor and all that doesn't rule out the fact that that person has a master(superior) or Masters. Is it permitted in today's society, yes. Anyone working for anothe person is the person's servant basically. It is the relationship that God is more concerned about, not trivialities about names. There are so many HODs that are not as well treated as some master's dog. That is wrong. You see the name is changed. The man is an HOD, an accountant, a teacher, a driver etc, but the treatment he is receiving from his workplace is worse than many Bible servants ever received. Bible servants were so well treated that some could aford to say "I love my master, I will not go out free". I'd rather be Abraham's servant than work as an engineer in some factories in the country. It's not really the name tag servant/slave. Paul was a servant of God and a prisoner of Jesus Christ. So also was Peter, John etc. Elisha was a servant of Elijah. All christians are servants. And you are a servant of sin. How your master treats you is what is important and what God is particular about. Not about whether you are allowed by God to be called chief or slave.

I've said before and I'll say it again. What is your interpretation on the cloths with mixed materials?

Unimportant to the discuss.

Well you claim to have seen him in Lagos recently speaking English. I hope you weren't lying about that. If you weren't, then you were probably hallucinating.

When you are ready to see Jesus, have faith. If you can believe, you will see. It cannot be easier said than that.

I'm still telling you that he Noah thing wasn't a warning but all you've been able to say is that it was a warning using what some guy said in the NT but God himself said it was because he regretted his action of creating people in the first place.

Finally, something to agree on, thank you God. So you now see that the new testament said it was a warning? i still cannot believe this yet. Confirm by saying it again. You initially said that God sent the flood to remove evil from the earth remember. Thank God, you are catching on at last.

It referred to some animals being clean and others unclean. Now are there still clean and unclean animals?

Good of you, nothing about sanctifying all creation.
1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

Sure you don't. How do you know that? Can you show me where that is written in Heaven? Or do you just believe it to make you feel better?

i guess you mean to say Bible. If yes, i already showed you na. When we talked about God having mercy on children.
Luk 18:16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
Luk 18:17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

thehomer:
What we have is reason and evidence. Sure they can the difference is that the non-theist is willing to admit it while the theist isn't. Wait so no human living today is a worthy investment? Non-theists aren't worthy investments? And that reference to 500 people is the sort of thing that we put in stories and fairytales to convince people who weren't there. And I hope you know that the actual author of the Book of Luke is unknown.

Fortunately, we both know that the problem is that what we know about people tells us that they can be fooled.
Reasoning can be impaired. People once reasoned that the earth was flat for instance, some reasoned that we evolved from apes. Faith is evidence. i told you already, Christ appears to many believers today. there witness is not evidence enough to you. Well, i've given you the conditions to see Him for yourself, believe. When you fulfill the condition and do not see Him, please get back to me.
Mat 21:22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.
Thomas was a foundation in the church. Jesus had invested hree years of His ministry and life into him and to Peter. The 500 put was acknowledged by others. That is christian history.

Are you seriously telling me that desiring wealth is theft? Where do you get these laws from? Can something that used to be a sin stop being a sin?

i'm telling you that stealing is theft. A thief is attracted to other people's property and takes them. Something that used to be a sin can stop being a sin. Sin is simply disobeying God. If God says not to pass place A, it would be a sin to pass place A. If God says not to eat tree B, it will be a sin to eat tree B.

The beauty of the Bible lies in the ease of quote-mining it. So will God have mercy on all who confess and give up sins?

Did you mean 'special' or beauty? Anyway, God will have mercy on all who confess to Him and give up sins.

I'll agree with you that they are mostly sheep. Jesus should have known that and been more circumspect in delivering his great commission instead, he did what he did. So, don't blame me, blame Jesus.

i never blamed you or anyone. The great commission is to preach the good news to all people. It is not to answer all questions posed at you.
Mat 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:
Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
A christian is very free at his discretion and leading by God's Spirit to leave you to yourself.
Mat 10:13 And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.
Mat 10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

What do you think atheism actually is? By answering that question, you'll clear up a lot of the confusion you're showing here. You seem to think that atheists are to conform to one book (like the Bible) or follow one person (like Jesus). So getting married and divorced is a sign of confusion of love and lust? Sorry but that is just ridiculous. What makes you think that love is the only reason for marriage?

Atheism is disbelief in God. What is ridiculous is the life of Bertrand Russell and other atheists. i can't hope to be like them, neither should anyone who loves sanity and peace.

No, your answer literally makes no sense at all. You said here that the seed was the man. Now you say the seed is in the man? If the seed is the man and the seed was in the man, then how was Saul living in his father? If the man couldn't have come about without the mother, then how did the contribution from the mother get in? Or was the mother too in the father?

The seed is the man because it is the seed that becomes the man. Just like it is the seed planted that becomes the fruit or tree. The tree/man can be looked upon in retrospect as the seed. Saul was in his father as a seed. The tree doesn't come without the planting in earth, watering and aeration. The mother is where the seed is planted into to yield as a man/fruit.

You Christians are the first to shout that the Bible isn't a science text but here you are quoting it at me as if it was one.

i'm relating it to something i expect you to understand, basic agriculture.

Well you're not me since it seems that I care more for what happens to people than you do. I'm not so selfish or conceited that I only worry about myself. God with his power doesn't need to limit himself to those people that he's selected as being "sincere and honest" he can reveal himself to all people at once. Since you're not in disagreement on the issue of a parent's religion, then why should God have allowed multiple religions in the first place? Knowing the effect it would have on children?

i care about what happens to others, you are only being sanctimonious. My advice to you comes from the Word of God
Ecc 7:16 Be not righteous over much; neither make thyself over wise: why shouldest thou destroy thyself?
The Bible's requirement is to love your neighbours AS yourself, not more than yourself. You should be concerned for yourself instead of thinking of the unknown folks. It's the classic case of a child given food who refused to eat after thinking of many unknown others who probably have not eaten and will not eat that day. Or a son you paid his school fees who became sanctimoniously worried about millions of illiterates in the world who are yet to learn the alphabets. What have you done with the chance you have to repent and receive Jesus into your heart and life. When are you going to rest from your endless labours and questions and search for truth and meaning? Jesus is still calling you gently, saying Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
God has revealed Himself through the man Jesus Christ.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
The whole earth and the heavens and all that is in it declares there is a God. The blame is not on God but on our ancestors. It's like asking in 100years time why God allowed crude oil to finish in Nigeria. But i'll rather not pass blame, i'd rather be pro-active, and do what can be done from mine end. And at the end, i'll have done my best.

Image123:
Its a red herring and you are full of red herrings. i've consistently insisted on the point i was making but you seem more interested in talking about if the Bible is special or not. Do you talk this much about other books? If yes, please let me know what books those are. The NT consistently shows a 'change' from the OT. there is a new covenant and an old. If there were no differences, one would not be new and the other old. What are we to turn to for reasonable instructions? How is the NT judgement worse than the OT judgement?

Then actually show that it is a red herring. After all, you introduced the idea that the Bible being special lent some sort of credibility to it. There are lots of other sources for reasonable instructions but what is clear is that it isn't the Bible and that is the point I'm making. The NT is worse because it introduced hell.

Image123:
You are boldening lines that say that original manuscripts did not contain the chapter and verse divisions in the numbered form. That is the exact thing that i am saying so i do not get your point. i said that the division is already INHERENT. Do you not know the meaning of "inherent"? i said the inherence was seen in the spacing and paragraphs in the original text before the numbering using verses and chapters. You initially said that paragraphs and spaces were not there in the original manuscripts. Now i gave you a link that states that they were there and quoted the part relevant to what i said, yet all you can come up with is talks about me not quoting some line. i expected you will quote the whole page in your 'full quote' and show us honestNESS.
Moral laws deal with right or wrong, ceremonial laws deal with cleansing of sin. Most of the laws are easily put under any of this two. Use your brain, or ask practical questions if you do not understand.
The colored is the issue being discussed, but i'll not be dumbfounded if you're more interested in discussing lines and spaces.

Obviously, you're the one who doesn't understand what words mean. Telling me that the divisions are already "inherent" is meaningless because as I'm sure you know, the Bible wasn't originally written in English but in several other languages. Now in those languages, did the writings contain spacing and paragraphs indicating where chapters and verses were to go? You dishonestly presented those quotes unless you think that the paragraphs indicated where chapters and verse were to be inserted.

Once again, you brought up the idea that God presented the Bible already sorted out in a certain manner but that claim is obviously false.

Image123:
Others as in "others" LOST. Of course, i mean there are others who grasp, other persons, get a lesson teacher perhaps.

Do you have actual examples of these people who accept it when you present terrible analogies? Seriously, you need to read up on how to present relevant analogies so you stop looking like you need remedial lessons in English.

Image123:
No, i wish to tell you that there are more people book literate than there are computer literates. faith is basically belief. Everyone can belief. i guess you believe in the big bang, or evolution. You believe in yourself, that is faith. Have faith in God. God did not take away your faith, you probably hid it or employed it in other ventures. However, it is possible for God to cause you to believe a lie. You can come out of that though the same way you enter it. i expect Your redherringness to focus on this.
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
God always reveals Himself to those who love the truth and sincerely want to know.

And what you wish to tell me is pointless and irrelevant. My point is that you do not have to be literate to actually touch a computer but according to your presentation of this supernatural, you need some special powers. Seriously how difficult was that to understand?

What? Faith = belief? This is the sort of muddled thinking that you seem to like. If you didn't think it was important, then why did you bring it up? Anyway, if God can make me believe a lie, how do you know he hasn't made you believe a lie? How do you know he isn't actually evil?

I'm sure that is why he has refused to reveal himself to those who would change their minds and believe him instead, he reveals himself to those who already believe.

Image123:
It is not pointless. You said Jesus' disciples were said to have written God's words implying that only disciples' writings can be taken as God's words. So, i took the time out to show you who disciples were and how all t the scriptures are disciple's writings and therefore God's words. All the Scriptures are given by the inspiration of God.

Once more, your ignorance on the origin of the Bible reveals itself. I hope you know that the books and collections that made it into the Bible were selected by a bunch of people in a meeting. For some reason, God has stopped giving inspiration so that for the past 1000 years, no more books or written works can get into the Bible.

Image123:
It was permissible to hate others, it was permissible to swear, it was permissible to divorce for any reason. What is your definition of a wise God?

If you seriously want to claim that these are commandments, then are you willing to agree to turn your other cheek, give more when you're sued and if you're forced to do something, you do even more? You need some consistency if you're going to seriously introduce those sayings as commandments.

A wise God would be one that had the ability to make a decision based on the combination of knowledge, experience, and intuitive understanding.

Image123:
i did. i showed you two new testament scriptures talking about eating many things. Here they are again.
1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
Act 11:8 But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.
Act 11:9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
Act 11:10 And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven.

And I explained to you that random collections of personal correspondence won't cut it. Neither will that vision (whose point you seem to have missed) cut it.

Image123:
i also spoke on how the law you quoted from leviticus on slavery is rendered mute in the new testament by the uniting of nations.
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
Eph 2:16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
Eph 2:17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
Eph 2:18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
Eph 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

More personal correspondence that didn't actually free slaves or abolish slavery.

Image123:
The passage you quoted was talking to general people, servants. Except you take servants as slaves. Paul, writing to the Ephesians was writing to people who gathered together to worship God. ithink servants can do that, i doubt about slaves(thinking in your perception of slaves). Every employee is a servant of the employer/boss. The word change is not what matters. That you call someone chief cook, personal assistant, secretary, supervisor and all that doesn't rule out the fact that that person has a master(superior) or Masters. Is it permitted in today's society, yes. Anyone working for anothe person is the person's servant basically. It is the relationship that God is more concerned about, not trivialities about names. There are so many HODs that are not as well treated as some master's dog. That is wrong. You see the name is changed. The man is an HOD, an accountant, a teacher, a driver etc, but the treatment he is receiving from his workplace is worse than many Bible servants ever received. Bible servants were so well treated that some could aford to say "I love my master, I will not go out free". I'd rather be Abraham's servant than work as an engineer in some factories in the country. It's not really the name tag servant/slave. Paul was a servant of God and a prisoner of Jesus Christ. So also was Peter, John etc. Elisha was a servant of Elijah. All christians are servants. And you are a servant of sin. How your master treats you is what is important and what God is particular about. Not about whether you are allowed by God to be called chief or slave.

A slave is different from a servant. e.g slaves are bought while servants are hired so your attempt at blurring the distinction fails woefully.

Image123:
Unimportant to the discuss.

It suddenly becomes unimportant because it has you stumped?

Image123:
When you are ready to see Jesus, have faith. If you can believe, you will see. It cannot be easier said than that.

Don't you have faith enough for me? Since you believe, why don't you pray and make him show himself? I think that would be the easiest option.

Image123:
Finally, something to agree on, thank you God. So you now see that the new testament said it was a warning? i still cannot believe this yet. Confirm by saying it again. You initially said that God sent the flood to remove evil from the earth remember. Thank God, you are catching on at last.

Did I indicate otherwise? I said God himself didn't see it as a warning. This is why I keep telling you not to just take whatever was written as personal correspondence as coming straight from your God. God's aim was to remove evil from the earth.

Image123:
Good of you, nothing about sanctifying all creation.
1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

Not Jesus' or God's words but words of personal correspondence selected by some guys in a meeting to be in the Bible.

Image123:
i guess you mean to say Bible. If yes, i already showed you na. When we talked about God having mercy on children.
Luk 18:16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
Luk 18:17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

I'm sorry but presenting these quotes as meaning that Jesus says all children will go to heaven indicates to me that you're either ignorant about metaphors, unable to consider abstract thought or just ignorant about Christian thought. After all, Jesus said "Suffer little children to come unto me . . . " by your reasoning can mean that you're supposed to torture children then kill them in order for them to get to heaven.

Image123:
Fortunately, we both know that the problem is that what we know about people tells us that they can be fooled.
Reasoning can be impaired. People once reasoned that the earth was flat for instance, some reasoned that we evolved from apes. Faith is evidence. i told you already, Christ appears to many believers today. there witness is not evidence enough to you. Well, i've given you the conditions to see Him for yourself, believe. When you fulfill the condition and do not see Him, please get back to me.
Mat 21:22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.
Thomas was a foundation in the church. Jesus had invested hree years of His ministry and life into him and to Peter. The 500 put was acknowledged by others. That is christian history.

According to you now, faith = evidence. Therefore belief = evidence. Yes Image123 has solved the problem. Sure you pray that I see him. Surely God would listen to you before he listens to me. The 500 is just a literary technique that is often used in stories so that others would believe the claims made. So Jesus cannot invest 3 days of his infinite life into me?

Image123:
i'm telling you that stealing is theft. A thief is attracted to other people's property and takes them. Something that used to be a sin can stop being a sin. Sin is simply disobeying God. If God says not to pass place A, it would be a sin to pass place A. If God says not to eat tree B, it will be a sin to eat tree B.

Err this is exactly what you said.

Image123:
. . . .have you also heard of people that just find themselves attracted [/b]to other people's money and property? [b]it's called theft.

A thief takes the property that doesn't belong to them someone who admires other people's property may then decide to work hard to get what others have.

How about if God says kill persons C to Z? Will it be a sin not to kill them?

Image123:
Did you mean 'special' or beauty? Anyway, God will have mercy on all who confess to Him and give up sins.

No I meant beauty in a sarcastic way.

Image123:
i never blamed you or anyone. The great commission is to preach the good news to all people. It is not to answer all questions posed at you.
Mat 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:
Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
A christian is very free at his discretion and leading by God's Spirit to leave you to yourself.
Mat 10:13 And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.
Mat 10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

What are you to do when you're asked the reason for your hope?

Image123:
Atheism is disbelief in God. What is ridiculous is the life of Bertrand Russell and other atheists. i can't hope to be like them, neither should anyone who loves sanity and peace.

Do you think that one has to live how Bertrand Russell lived in order to be an atheist? Do you really think that you can live how he lived if you tried?

Image123:
The seed is the man because it is the seed that becomes the man. Just like it is the seed planted that becomes the fruit or tree. The tree/man can be looked upon in retrospect as the seed. Saul was in his father as a seed. The tree doesn't come without the planting in earth, watering and aeration. The mother is where the seed is planted into to yield as a man/fruit.

What is wrong with you? How can the seed be the man and become the man? You're just absolutely confused or just trying to support your ridiculous notion. How about the woman? Or does the man plant his seed in earth? Where did Saul's father plant Saul?

Image123:
i'm relating it to something i expect you to understand, basic agriculture.

Agriculture has its basis in biology and what you're saying is just absurd.

Image123:
i care about what happens to others, you are only being sanctimonious. My advice to you comes from the Word of God
Ecc 7:16 Be not righteous over much; neither make thyself over wise: why shouldest thou destroy thyself?
The Bible's requirement is to love your neighbours AS yourself, not more than yourself. You should be concerned for yourself instead of thinking of the unknown folks. It's the classic case of a child given food who refused to eat after thinking of many unknown others who probably have not eaten and will not eat that day. Or a son you paid his school fees who became sanctimoniously worried about millions of illiterates in the world who are yet to learn the alphabets. What have you done with the chance you have to repent and receive Jesus into your heart and life. When are you going to rest from your endless labours and questions and search for truth and meaning? Jesus is still calling you gently, saying Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
God has revealed Himself through the man Jesus Christ.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
The whole earth and the heavens and all that is in it declares there is a God. The blame is not on God but on our ancestors. It's like asking in 100years time why God allowed crude oil to finish in Nigeria. But i'll rather not pass blame, i'd rather be pro-active, and do what can be done from mine end. And at the end, i'll have done my best.

Nah you really don't because if you did, you'll notice just how ridiculous the notion of God you're presenting is. We're talking about a God that knew he was going to burn people in hell but deliberately set things up so that most of the people he loves will end up there. And most of those people will end up there for no reason other than the fact that they didn't know any better.

God can reveal himself today and end religious strife and division but he won't do it so that he will have the pleasure of cooking people in hell.

I'd reply to your post later, but its rather pointless and difficult to discuss Christianity if passages can be freely taken in to criticize and blackmail but similar passages become 'personal correspondence' when used in defense or explanation. pretty hypocritical.

Image123: I'd reply to your post later, but its rather pointless and difficult to discuss Christianity if passages can be freely taken in to criticize and blackmail but similar passages become 'personal correspondence' when used in defense or explanation. pretty hypocritical.

The fact that those passages are personal correspondence is "inherent" in the Bible.

thehomer:

Then actually show that it is a red herring. After all, you introduced the idea that the Bible being special lent some sort of credibility to it. There are lots of other sources for reasonable instructions but what is clear is that it isn't the Bible and that is the point I'm making. The NT is worse because it introduced hell.

All you need to do is go back and read my posts to confirm what i have said, that "Its a red herring and you are full of red herrings. i've consistently insisted on the point i was making but you seem more interested in talking about if the Bible is special or not." What are these other sources for reasonable instructions? Do you talk this much about these other books? If yes, please let me know what books those are. The NT is a completion of the whole book(the Bible). This is what i have been saying for weeks, that the books were in phases. The NT gives a clearer and more complete picture and meaning.

Obviously, you're the one who doesn't understand what words mean. Telling me that the divisions are already "inherent" is meaningless because as I'm sure you know, the Bible wasn't originally written in English but in several other languages. Now in those languages, did the writings contain spacing and paragraphs indicating where chapters and verses were to go? You dishonestly presented those quotes unless you think that the paragraphs indicated where chapters and verse were to be inserted.

You initially said that paragraphs and spaces were not there in the original manuscripts, didn't you? And you're going red yet again. You mentioned anything about english and other languages? Do you think that spaces and paragraphs are only found in english writings? Moral laws deal with right or wrong, ceremonial laws deal with cleansing of sin. Most of the laws are easily put under any of this two. Use your brain, or ask practical questions if you do not understand.
The colored is the issue being discussed, but i'll still not be dumbfounded if you're more interested in discussing lines and spaces.

Once again, you brought up the idea that God presented the Bible already sorted out in a certain manner but that claim is obviously false.

You lack understanding. It's almost COMMON sense to see the inherent differences in the laws/instructions. Some laws are once (like walking around Jericho or picking 300 men). Some instructions are continuous. Some instructions are for cleansing or ceremonial, like staying some place for seven days, killing a bird or a goat. Some laws are simply moral, like don't kill, don't steal. how you cannot/refuse to understand that is baffling.

Do you have actual examples of these people who accept it when you present terrible analogies? Seriously, you need to read up on how to present relevant analogies so you stop looking like you need remedial lessons in English.

And a link would convince you right? You need Jesus.

And what you wish to tell me is pointless and irrelevant. My point is that you do not have to be literate to actually touch a computer but according to your presentation of this supernatural, you need some special powers. Seriously how difficult was that to understand?

What? Faith = belief? This is the sort of muddled thinking that you seem to like. If you didn't think it was important, then why did you bring it up? Anyway, if God can make me believe a lie, how do you know he hasn't made you believe a lie? How do you know he isn't actually evil?

I'm sure that is why he has refused to reveal himself to those who would change their minds and believe him instead, he reveals himself to those who already believe.

Well, your point was poorly presented. All you need is to have hands and access before you actually touch a computer. You said 'interact with a computer'. Every human being can believe, we all have that capacity/ability. No special powers needed to believe. Faith is belief, i try to keep it simple and basic to help you understand and give you some perspective. i thought it pointless to speak 'lofty chinese' to someone who doesn't understand it. There was a time i did not believe in God, and every other born again christian. But we changed our minds. The reason why God will possibly make you believe a lie is already state and emboldened. It is because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Do you fit that picture yet? Again, God always reveals Himself to those who love the truth and sincerely want to know.

Once more, your ignorance on the origin of the Bible reveals itself. I hope you know that the books and collections that made it into the Bible were selected by a bunch of people in a meeting. For some reason, God has stopped giving inspiration so that for the past 1000 years, no more books or written works can get into the Bible.

All that needs to be said are already in the Bible. The Bible was written in phases, not at once, it spanned hundreds of years like you're seeming to know. Then it was collated. There is nothing to be added that has not being already said. All that we need for eternal life are in it. It is finished.

If you seriously want to claim that these are commandments, then are you willing to agree to turn your other cheek, give more when you're sued and if you're forced to do something, you do even more? You need some consistency if you're going to seriously introduce those sayings as commandments.

A wise God would be one that had the ability to make a decision based on the combination of knowledge, experience, and intuitive understanding.

Good of you, you now see the changes and the differences i was talking about. You're picking up.
i like your definition of a wise God. Fits the God of the Bible very well.

And I explained to you that random collections of personal correspondence won't cut it. Neither will that vision (whose point you seem to have missed) cut it.

The vision speaks of God telling Peter to eat formerly unclean animals. It cuts it. The book of 1Timothy and Acts are scripture, live with it.

More personal correspondence that didn't actually free slaves or abolish slavery.

Funny that Ephesians is personal correspondence, except where it can be seemingly used to show that the Bible God approved slavery. You deceive yourself a lot, after satan has done his own part.

A slave is different from a servant. e.g slaves are bought while servants are hired so your attempt at blurring the distinction fails woefully.

Woah, are they different? The Bible translators seem to used them(slave and servant) interchangeably. Are you saying that the chief characteristic or quality or determinant of a slave is being bought? i know many sportmen who are being bought, i do not think they are slaves, well perhaps maybe. Is it the buying that is paining you, or the title? i initially thought it was the title/tag, hence my boring talk that was 'blurring the distinction' Not sure if Abraham bought his slaves, even the Israelites. Anyway, lemme know what is pinching you in the shoe.

It suddenly becomes unimportant because it has you stumped?

The two passages are relevant today.

Don't you have faith enough for me? Since you believe, why don't you pray and make him show himself? I think that would be the easiest option.

Sorry dear, it's not easier than what i said. When you are ready to see Jesus, have faith. If you can believe, you will see. God wants a personal relationship with you. He's saying "Where are you thehomer?" He's knocking at the door of your heart. Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Rom 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Did I indicate otherwise? I said God himself didn't see it as a warning. This is why I keep telling you not to just take whatever was written as personal correspondence as coming straight from your God. God's aim was to remove evil from the earth.

Thank God for your life, the new testament said it was a warning. i sincerely thank God that you saw that all along. But this God's aim to remove evil from the earth, can you show me? Peter is personal correspondence but Moses is coming straight from God? Where did you get that? i've searched but i can't find this new revelation. All i found was this.
Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Gen 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
nothing about God's aim to remove evil from the earth.

Not Jesus' or God's words but words of personal correspondence selected by some guys in a meeting to be in the Bible.

i don't get this new reds about selections by some guys in a meeting. Were Jesus' and God's words also selected at this meeting that you seem to be unhappy about?

I'm sorry but presenting these quotes as meaning that Jesus says all children will go to heaven indicates to me that you're either ignorant about metaphors, unable to consider abstract thought or just ignorant about Christian thought. After all, Jesus said "Suffer little children to come unto me . . . " by your reasoning can mean that you're supposed to torture children then kill them in order for them to get to heaven.

Shameful sentences. You need sackcloth and ashes, really.

thehomer:

According to you now, faith = evidence. Therefore belief = evidence. Yes Image123 has solved the problem. Sure you pray that I see him. Surely God would listen to you before he listens to me. The 500 is just a literary technique that is often used in stories so that others would believe the claims made. So Jesus cannot invest 3 days of his infinite life into me?

Ooops, sorry, i wasn't defining faith. iguess it(the sentence) would be rendered better as Faith is an evidence. i was replying to what you said that "What we have is reason and evidence." i showed that Reason may not be reliable or may be impaired, then i mentioned that Faith is evidence, or better still, Faith is an evidence. Christ appears to many believers today. Their witness(es) is evidence enough to you. Sorry for the mix caused.
i am not on a higher pedestal or opportunity than you are.You can pray, God wants you to.
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.


Jesus has been calling you for years now. He invested His life on the cross of calvary for you. He died for you. All you need to do is accept it.
1Co 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
This is not a literary technique that is often used in stories so that others would believe the claims made.

Err this is exactly what you said.



A thief takes the property that doesn't belong to them someone who admires other people's property may then decide to work hard to get what others have.

How about if God says kill persons C to Z? Will it be a sin not to kill them?

In context, i was picturing a thief, not an admirer. Like magnetizing other people's property, pick pocket stuff. The point been made was that some people are natural thieves, its in the blood/gene as it were. Some others learn theft, they naturally would not steal. They may do other stuff/sin like fornicating, even idolatry, but they may be principled and honest or hometrained. But due to bad influence, they join cults, bad gangs, become robbers. Theft can be picked up or learned, it can also be natural. The point again been driven is that being a natural homosexual doesn't make it right, just like been a natural deceiver, or a 'born killer'.
How about if God says kill persons C to Z? How about IF there is a God?

No I meant beauty in a sarcastic way.

You should enjoy biblical sarcasm. God will have mercy on all who confess to Him and give up sins.

What are you to do when you're asked the reason for your hope?

Are you asking me for the reason of my hope?

Do you think that one has to live how Bertrand Russell lived in order to be an atheist? Do you really think that you can live how he lived if you tried?

Do you think that one has to be like Jesus to be a true christian? Do you really think that anyone can live how He lived if one tried?
Now you mention any true atheist, i've given two popular sorry ones, Nietzsche and Russell. And give me a reason why they should be role models or mentors.

What is wrong with you? How can the seed be the man and become the man? You're just absolutely confused or just trying to support your ridiculous notion. How about the woman? Or does the man plant his seed in earth? Where did Saul's father plant Saul?

Is it not the seed that becomes the tree or fruit? The tree/man can be looked upon in retrospect as the seed. The mother is where the seed is planted into to yield as a man/fruit. Saul's father planted seed Saul into Saul's mother. It's the same thing your father and my father did. You are the seed of your father, and i am the seed of my father also.

Agriculture has its basis in biology and what you're saying is just absurd.

Do you understand basic agriculture and biology?

Nah you really don't because if you did, you'll notice just how ridiculous the notion of God you're presenting is. We're talking about a God that knew he was going to burn people in hell but deliberately set things up so that most of the people he loves will end up there. And most of those people will end up there for no reason other than the fact that they didn't know any better.

God can reveal himself today and end religious strife and division but he won't do it so that he will have the pleasure of cooking people in hell.

i'd rather be pro-active, and do what can be done from mine end. And at the end, i'll have done my best. What about you? God loves us all, but He can do without us.
Mar 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
God has revealed Himself and keeps revealing Himself on His terms. If you want Him hard enough, follow His terms.
Dan 4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?
When you need a job, you look at the requirements and meet up, when you need a house to rent, you look at the agreements and conditions, when you need Heaven and God, you look at the Word of God and comply. You don't blame God, you have to be pro-active. If there is any blame(which is needless, it is man, your ancestors, Adam and you.

The fact that those passages are personal correspondence is "inherent" in the Bible.

Eph 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
Eph 6:23 Peace be to the brethren, and love with faith, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Eph 6:24 Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. Amen.
1Pe 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Add the facts that the contents of the epistles show that they contained instructions to all including men and women and youths. And the truth of history that these epistles were actually passed around different churches as scripture, not personal correspondence. Christians think and know that they are all scripture, you think it is personal correspondence, who is deceiving who? That's actually a rhetorical question, you are deceiving yourself.

Image123:
All you need to do is go back and read my posts to confirm what i have said, that "Its a red herring and you are full of red herrings. i've consistently insisted on the point i was making but you seem more interested in talking about if the Bible is special or not." What are these other sources for reasonable instructions? Do you talk this much about these other books? If yes, please let me know what books those are. The NT is a completion of the whole book(the Bible). This is what i have been saying for weeks, that the books were in phases. The NT gives a clearer and more complete picture and meaning.

Why did you say anything about the Bible being special at all? The sources aren't books. I would say the NT gives a different picture and meaning.

Image123:
You initially said that paragraphs and spaces were not there in the original manuscripts, didn't you? And you're going red yet again. You mentioned anything about english and other languages? Do you think that spaces and paragraphs are only found in english writings? Moral laws deal with right or wrong, ceremonial laws deal with cleansing of sin. Most of the laws are easily put under any of this two. Use your brain, or ask practical questions if you do not understand.
The colored is the issue being discussed, but i'll still not be dumbfounded if you're more interested in discussing lines and spaces.

No I didn't say that. Please go back and read what I actually said. The fact that it wasn't written in English means that the spaces could have been in places different from what you get in the English translations. Obviously, you're not using your brain because you seem to think that working on the Sabbath is a moral issue while tolerating slavery isn't a moral issue.

Image123:
You lack understanding. It's almost COMMON sense to see the inherent differences in the laws/instructions. Some laws are once (like walking around Jericho or picking 300 men). Some instructions are continuous. Some instructions are for cleansing or ceremonial, like staying some place for seven days, killing a bird or a goat. Some laws are simply moral, like don't kill, don't steal. how you cannot/refuse to understand that is baffling.

Actually, you're the one deeply lacking in understanding because you think that the Sabbath law is a moral one. I'm asking you to state where God stated the differences but you cannot that is why you keep trying to hide behind a blade of grass.

Image123:
And a link would convince you right? You need Jesus.

And you need good reasoning.

Image123:
Well, your point was poorly presented. All you need is to have hands and access before you actually touch a computer. You said 'interact with a computer'. Every human being can believe, we all have that capacity/ability. No special powers needed to believe. Faith is belief, i try to keep it simple and basic to help you understand and give you some perspective. i thought it pointless to speak 'lofty chinese' to someone who doesn't understand it. There was a time i did not believe in God, and every other born again christian. But we changed our minds. The reason why God will possibly make you believe a lie is already state and emboldened. It is because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Do you fit that picture yet? Again, God always reveals Himself to those who love the truth and sincerely want to know.

Do you need a hand to interact with a computer? You see, interacting with a computer covers more than just using your hand to touch it. Don't blame me for your incompetence. Wow. You just keep showing that you have no idea of what you're talking about when you say that faith = belief. In other words, he reveals himself to the gullible.

Image123:
All that needs to be said are already in the Bible. The Bible was written in phases, not at once, it spanned hundreds of years like you're seeming to know. Then it was collated. There is nothing to be added that has not being already said. All that we need for eternal life are in it. It is finished.

So God has stopped inspiring people. Instead, he asks us to be gullible and swallow just any story that walks our way.

Image123:
Good of you, you now see the changes and the differences i was talking about. You're picking up.
i like your definition of a wise God. Fits the God of the Bible very well.

Are you willing to accept those instructions as commandments with imperatives similar to; don't kill and don't steal?
Yet the Biblical God keeps on making poor decisions.

Image123:
The vision speaks of God telling Peter to eat formerly unclean animals. It cuts it. The book of 1Timothy and Acts are scripture, live with it.

Please go to a Bible school because you obviously don't understand what you've read there.

Image123:
Funny that Ephesians is personal correspondence, except where it can be seemingly used to show that the Bible God approved slavery. You deceive yourself a lot, after satan has done his own part.

I said it didn't abolish slavery. Learn to read what I actually write.

Image123:
Woah, are they different? The Bible translators seem to used them(slave and servant) interchangeably. Are you saying that the chief characteristic or quality or determinant of a slave is being bought? i know many sportmen who are being bought, i do not think they are slaves, well perhaps maybe. Is it the buying that is paining you, or the title? i initially thought it was the title/tag, hence my boring talk that was 'blurring the distinction' Not sure if Abraham bought his slaves, even the Israelites. Anyway, lemme know what is pinching you in the shoe.

Then you should get a Bible that had good translators because good translations use different words for them. Your ignorance knows no bounds. Those sportsmen aren't being bought, the money you see there is payment for their services. Slaves aren't paid a salary.

Image123:
The two passages are relevant today.

If they're relevant, then why don't you discuss them?

Image123:
Sorry dear, it's not easier than what i said. When you are ready to see Jesus, have faith. If you can believe, you will see. God wants a personal relationship with you. He's saying "Where are you thehomer?" He's knocking at the door of your heart. Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Rom 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

He can knock until his hands bleed. I don't know this God, you know him. Why don't you talk to him? You're giving me flimsy excuses to hide the fact that either he isn't there or he's going to ignore you.

Image123:
Thank God for your life, the new testament said it was a warning. i sincerely thank God that you saw that all along. But this God's aim to remove evil from the earth, can you show me? Peter is personal correspondence but Moses is coming straight from God? Where did you get that? i've searched but i can't find this new revelation. All i found was this.
Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Gen 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
nothing about God's aim to remove evil from the earth.

Well the writer in the NT was probably just as confused as you. The fact that he regretted the action while saving people he thought were God implies that. Unless of course you think God was just into pointless acts of suffering (well maybe he is). Peter was writing to someone else and some people just captured the letter and included it in the Bible while Moses was reporting what God told him (according to Christian legend of course).

Image123:
i don't get this new reds about selections by some guys in a meeting. Were Jesus' and God's words also selected at this meeting that you seem to be unhappy about?

Then don't be lazy. Look up things like the origin of the Bible and the Council of Nicea. You can start with Wikipedia.

Image123:
Shameful sentences. You need sackcloth and ashes, really.

Again, don't blame me for your poor understanding of the language.

Image123:
Ooops, sorry, i wasn't defining faith. iguess it(the sentence) would be rendered better as Faith is an evidence. i was replying to what you said that "What we have is reason and evidence." i showed that Reason may not be reliable or may be impaired, then i mentioned that Faith is evidence, or better still, Faith is an evidence. Christ appears to many believers today. Their witness(es) is evidence enough to you. Sorry for the mix caused.
i am not on a higher pedestal or opportunity than you are.You can pray, God wants you to.
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.


Jesus has been calling you for years now. He invested His life on the cross of calvary for you. He died for you. All you need to do is accept it.
1Co 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
This is not a literary technique that is often used in stories so that others would believe the claims made.

What's with these random colours you keep inserting in your texts? Anyway, you're still saying the same thing. i.e faith = evidence so you need to perform a better correction.

Image123:
In context, i was picturing a thief, not an admirer. Like magnetizing other people's property, pick pocket stuff. The point been made was that some people are natural thieves, its in the blood/gene as it were. Some others learn theft, they naturally would not steal. They may do other stuff/sin like fornicating, even idolatry, but they may be principled and honest or hometrained. But due to bad influence, they join cults, bad gangs, become robbers. Theft can be picked up or learned, it can also be natural. The point again been driven is that being a natural homosexual doesn't make it right, just like been a natural deceiver, or a 'born killer'.
How about if God says kill persons C to Z? How about IF there is a God?

Why should you be picturing a thief when I (the person who brought up the example) was talking about an admirer? Wouldn't this be your own red-herring?

Based on what you were picturing, you're saying that there are some natural born thieves and natural born killers? Now why would God create such natural born thieves and killers yet decide to punish them?

Why don't you actually answer the question rather than trying like many other Christians on this forum to be evasive but still keep on failing.
Assume that your God exists. Now if that God of yours says kill persons C to Z, will it be a sin not to kill them?

Image123:
You should enjoy biblical sarcasm. God will have mercy on all who confess to Him and give up sins.

Sure he will. That is why Heaven will be full of murderers, rapists and thieves.

Image123:
Are you asking me for the reason of my hope?

No, I'm asking what you're to do when you're asked that question.

Image123:
Do you think that one has to be like Jesus to be a true christian? Do you really think that anyone can live how He lived if one tried?
Now you mention any true atheist, i've given two popular sorry ones, Nietzsche and Russell. And give me a reason why they should be role models or mentors.

You do realize that Bertrand Russell isn't a God. Don't parrot my questions back at me, they're meant for you to answer. I never said they should be role models or mentors.

Image123:
Is it not the seed that becomes the tree or fruit? The tree/man can be looked upon in retrospect as the seed. The mother is where the seed is planted into to yield as a man/fruit. Saul's father planted seed Saul into Saul's mother. It's the same thing your father and my father did. You are the seed of your father, and i am the seed of my father also.


Do you understand basic agriculture and biology?

Yes I do you obviously don't with the sort of ignorant bronze age explanation you're presenting here. JSS 1 students know better than to say that the father's seed is planted in the mother and imply that the mother doesn't contribute any genetic material. This is just shameful.

Image123:
i'd rather be pro-active, and do what can be done from mine end. And at the end, i'll have done my best. What about you? God loves us all, but He can do without us.
Mar 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
God has revealed Himself and keeps revealing Himself on His terms. If you want Him hard enough, follow His terms.
Dan 4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?
When you need a job, you look at the requirements and meet up, when you need a house to rent, you look at the agreements and conditions, when you need Heaven and God, you look at the Word of God and comply. You don't blame God, you have to be pro-active. If there is any blame(which is needless, it is man, your ancestors, Adam and you.

What you fail to understand is that the Qur'an too is the Word of God so the Word of which God is to be believed? Then there's the issue that if the terms and conditions are very atrocious, then they will be rejected and we will advice others to avoid that place too. Now if the place being sold looks like a scam, one would do well to avoid it too.

Image123:
Eph 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
Eph 6:23 Peace be to the brethren, and love with faith, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Eph 6:24 Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. Amen.
1Pe 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Add the facts that the contents of the epistles show that they contained instructions to all including men and women and youths. And the truth of history that these epistles were actually passed around different churches as scripture, not personal correspondence. Christians think and know that they are all scripture, you think it is personal correspondence, who is deceiving who? That's actually a rhetorical question, you are deceiving yourself.

Passing around personal correspondence as scripture doesn't make it scripture all it gives you is the idea of what the writer had in mind. Or did God come down and whisper to those who included it in the Bible? I hope you know that there are numerous letters that weren't included in the Bible and that some of them were even wrongly attributed. So to answer your rhetorical question, you're the one deceiving yourself and it looks like you've also been deceived by others too.

thehomer:

Why did you say anything about the Bible being special at all? The sources aren't books. I would say the NT gives a different picture and meaning.

i said it is special because it's not just like every othe book, and i have consistently insisted that my point is not on the special quality but on the Bible not written at once. i asked you to go back and re-read since you seem to have forgotten but it seems to also lazy to do that. Here it is then,
Yes, the revelation of God's will to man was progressive. It was made complete in the new testament. In the new testament, all things are ready, and nothing is needed for addition again.
Joh 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
Rev 22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

The Bible was released in series, like releasing a book in chapters until the whole thing was complete, except that it is not just like every other book, it is special. There is no change there. i used the word 'progressive' in the sense of ongoing, or gradual or developing. Not in the sense of being a radical or a reformist. The testaments are like step by step until you reach a goal. It's reason that you focus on the goal/destination, instead of how one step is not the same step as the other step. that way, you'll not end up confusing yourself.

What are these sources you are on about? You seem shy to disclose them. You may hav to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the NT gives a different picture and meaning. The Bible and believers in the Bible attest to the fact the NT is a clearer picture and meaning of the OT, it completes it.

No I didn't say that. Please go back and read what I actually said. The fact that it wasn't written in English means that the spaces could have been in places different from what you get in the English translations. Obviously, you're not using your brain because you seem to think that working on the Sabbath is a moral issue while tolerating slavery isn't a moral issue.

You said "This is why I said you're ignorant about how the Bible came about. [size=13pt]If you knew anything about that process, you'll know that the paragraphs and spaces weren't already there[/size]. You keep saying that the divisions were inherent yet so far, you've been unable to show that these divisions were inherent." In this link, https://www.nairaland.com/1171126/adeboye-same-sex-marriage-against-god/10#14400771
It sounded so ridiculous that i immediately said Paragraphs and spaces were already there. how can one write without spaces?, then i gave you the wiki link. Now, you want to dishonestly twist things. Shows you're only interested in an argument, not in understanding the biblical viewpoints. The fact that the many translations into many languages end up with the same number of chapters and verses makes nonsense of your assumptions. And where did i seem to think that working on the Sabbath is a moral issue while tolerating slavery isn't a moral issue? Am i now in your brain?

Actually, you're the one deeply lacking in understanding because you think that the Sabbath law is a moral one. I'm asking you to state where God stated the differences but you cannot that is why you keep trying to hide behind a blade of grass.

It's common sense i suppose, that's why i said it is inherent. God doesn't have to tell you that man is different from other animals, mammals and primates even though they can be classed together in some instances. It's no contradiction, its just an issue of grouping. Anyone can understand basic taxonomy. how you find it hard to understand simple classifications is mind-disturbing.

And you need good reasoning.

You don't need, right?

Do you need a hand to interact with a computer? You see, interacting with a computer covers more than just using your hand to touch it. Don't blame me for your incompetence. Wow. You just keep showing that you have no idea of what you're talking about when you say that faith = belief. In other words, he reveals himself to the gullible.

You are either very dishonest or very forgetful. You said "My point is that you do not have to be literate to actually touch a computer". Now you are asking if a hand is needed. You said that was YOUR POINT, now you're on about who knows what. What exactly is your point, or are you pointless? You are actually showing that you do not know the meaning of faith. God reveals Himself to the gullible, yes.
Mar 10:15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
1Co 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
1Co 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
1Co 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

So God has stopped inspiring people. Instead, he asks us to be gullible and swallow just any story that walks our way.

God is not a broken record as it were. All that is needed for our salvation is already revealed in the Scriptures. People are still inspired today, but not to write scriptures as that is already complete. No one is saying you should swallow just any story that walks your way, i wonder where you got that idea. All you need to do is to believe God, and His Word(the Scriptures)

Are you willing to accept those instructions as commandments with imperatives similar to; don't kill and don't steal?
Yet the Biblical God keeps on making poor decisions.

The instructions of Jesus are commandments that i obey and that i believe everyone should obey. On God's decisions, i think otherwise and so does the Bible. That settles it for me, your opinions are irrelevant in this case.

Please go to a Bible school because you obviously don't understand what you've read there.

i guess you've been to one. It surely didn't look like it helped you much. No, thanks.

I said it didn't abolish slavery. Learn to read what I actually write.

If it 'abolished slavery', it would just be personal correspondence right?

Then you should get a Bible that had good translators because good translations use different words for them. Your ignorance knows no bounds. Those sportsmen aren't being bought, the money you see there is payment for their services. Slaves aren't paid a salary.

Please suggest one to me, thanks. Sportsmen aren't being bought? Do you leave on this planet? There is usually a lot of noise about buying players during transfer windows and there is a swag attached to being the most expensive buy. So, i guess the title is not your problem, the buying is not your problem, the salary is. i've read of slaves that were given salaries, the ones that refused to work were denied of their salaries. And there are many workers in Nigeria where i live who are being owed months of salaries which would definitely not be paid, at least not in full. These people call themselves teachers, accountants, secretaries, nurses, personal assistants and other nice names. Are they slaves? Not funny but i think they are, seems i'm with you on this one.

If they're relevant, then why don't you discuss them?

Because i don't have to discuss things simply because they are relevant.

He can knock until his hands bleed. I don't know this God, you know him. Why don't you talk to him? You're giving me flimsy excuses to hide the fact that either he isn't there or he's going to ignore you.

Try to remember those words, you might need to repeat them when you die. Here is the great commission and what is expected of me.
Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; [size=16pt]but he that believeth not shall be damned[/size].
God did not tell me to talk to Him on your behalf, He told me to talk/preach to you so that you can come talk to Him. It's very simple what happens when you choose not to believe, consider those words of Jesus extra carefully.

Well the writer in the NT was probably just as confused as you. The fact that he regretted the action while saving people he thought were God implies that. Unless of course you think God was just into pointless acts of suffering (well maybe he is). Peter was writing to someone else and some people just captured the letter and included it in the Bible while Moses was reporting what God told him (according to Christian legend of course).

Sorry i do not understand the bolded 'fact', can you explain with scriptural proof? Also, this God's aim to remove evil from the earth, can you show me? Peter's 2epistles are scriptures, live with it or tear them out of all the Bibles you can find.

Then don't be lazy. Look up things like the origin of the Bible and the Council of Nicea. You can start with Wikipedia.

Again, Were Jesus' and God's words also selected at this meeting that you seem to be unhappy about? Are you seriously imagining that i do not know about the council of nicea, constantine and other councils? You really think i know about your uncles(Nietzsche and Russel)and don't know about 'the origin of the Bible'? Indeed, a thousand councils and governments cannot remove one verse from the Word of God. You can rest assured that the complete Word of God is found in the Bible in your hand(hope you didn't tear off the Peter epistles, i didn't mean that literally as a command).
Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Mat 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth forever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.
Isa 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand forever.

i believe you have read about Voltaire, you can continue from where he stopped, perhaps you might make it ehn.

Again, don't blame me for your poor understanding of the language.

When someone says "Suffer little children to come unto me . . . " by your reasoning can mean that you're supposed to torture children then kill them in order for them to get to heaven.", he obviously needs sackcloth to cover himself in shame. Jesus loves the little children and there's nothing you can do about that. as for you, if you want mercy, confess your sins and REPENT of them.

thehomer:

What's with these random colours you keep inserting in your texts? Anyway, you're still saying the same thing. i.e faith = evidence so you need to perform a better correction.

Thought it should be obvious, you can also think as an option. Red for scriptures, Green for your words, Purple for mine. Appreciate NL forum colors, what are you always bitter about. The faith of many is an available evidence presented to you. i'm showing you how unreliable reasoning and evidence alone can get. Also, don't forget you can pray, God wants you to.
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.


Jesus has been calling you for years now. He invested His life on the cross of calvary for you. He died for you. All you need to do is accept it.

Why should you be picturing a thief when I (the person who brought up the example) was talking about an admirer? Wouldn't this be your own red-herring?

Based on what you were picturing, you're saying that there are some natural born thieves and natural born killers? Now why would God create such natural born thieves and killers yet decide to punish them?

Why don't you actually answer the question rather than trying like many other Christians on this forum to be evasive but still keep on failing.
Assume that your God exists. Now if that God of yours says kill persons C to Z, will it be a sin not to kill them?

i thought i brought up the example when i said "Different individuals have their different softspots and weaknesses. Some folks naturally detest stealing and are NATURALLY disciplined enough not to steal. Other folks are so principled and honest and would not tell lies. Some other person values his honour and will never sleep with another man's wife. This doesn't negate the fact that these despised sins are what some other folks cannot do without, or must give in to frequently. It's natural, and they 'find themselves just attracted' to these despicable acts. It's a similar thing with homosexuality. Trying to force a natural angle on it doesn't absolve the sinner. Sin is sin and must be dealt with and frowned at."Here(https://www.nairaland.com/1171126/adeboye-same-sex-marriage-against-god/10#14450992). i don't do red herrings, its all yours. Every man is a natural born sinner, but we all have to repent and believe in God, or else we will be found useless to God on judgement day and punished(put in hell). That's what you do to damaged goods or corrupt files on your hard disk, you remove them if they cannot be treated. god has given us the treatment on the cross, look and live.
Joh 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

on your C to Z assumptions, i don't do baseless assumptions. In assuming, we can assume anything, like i can assume to be a dog and my computer a human being, its just crazy and pointless. let's face reality instead.

Sure he will. That is why Heaven will be full of murderers, rapists and thieves.

That have repented and have been cleansed and forgiven. That is the gospel, the goodnews. That all men can be saved, can start anew. There is hope for you too.

No, I'm asking what you're to do when you're asked that question.

You're asking in proxy then. i'll say if i've not already said and depending on the context, that Jesus Christ is the reason for my hope. i'll respond to the remainder later, have to go.

thehomer:
You do realize that Bertrand Russell isn't a God. Don't parrot my questions back at me, they're meant for you to answer. I never said they should be role models or mentors.

Is Russel not a man? Is Nietzsche not a man? Are you not emulating them? Why then should i not emulate Jesus or any of the apostles? i'm pointing out the trend to you. The atheist life trends and gravitates towards the same destination. the christian life also trends towards the same destination. i'm doing you and yours a big favour.

Yes I do you obviously don't with the sort of ignorant bronze age explanation you're presenting here. JSS 1 students know better than to say that the father's seed is planted in the mother and imply that the mother doesn't contribute any genetic material. This is just shameful.

Is the father's seed not planted in the mother? Answer please. i do not imply that the mother doesn't contribute any genetic material. Do you think that when the seed is planted into the ground, it doesn't get anything from the ground. Pls, do not let me question your JSSCE result if you have one(that is if you studied in nigeria).

What you fail to understand is that the Qur'an too is the Word of God so the Word of which God is to be believed? Then there's the issue that if the terms and conditions are very atrocious, then they will be rejected and we will advice others to avoid that place too. Now if the place being sold looks like a scam, one would do well to avoid it too.

What is atrocious about the terms and conditions in the scriptures?

Passing around personal correspondence as scripture doesn't make it scripture all it gives you is the idea of what the writer had in mind. Or did God come down and whisper to those who included it in the Bible? I hope you know that there are numerous letters that weren't included in the Bible and that some of them were even wrongly attributed. So to answer your rhetorical question, you're the one deceiving yourself and it looks like you've also been deceived by others too.

i've already answered this.
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Peter said that the writings of Paul were scriptures, do you recognise scriptures better than Peter?