4kings:

What sort of ret*rded question is that?
Little understanding of decay would save us stress.
Besides the assertion of no father's dna was not well explained at all. Nonsense talk.

I just logged on to NL after a busy week and i don't think i'm ready to deal with this now.

You asked a "smart" question on the basis of the DNA test...when a simple google search could answer your questions on answers you still expect me to spoon feed you on...

Now be kind to go and argue with the Scientists that carried out the DNA test per the documentary.

Go ahead and prove him wrong since you're more intelligent than he is...because you think he is so incompetent not to factor in the possibility of decay before arriving at his conclusions...

Quite a disappointing comeback from you I must say...

Just a simple research on Archaeogenetics in the Near East would have given you answers to your questions...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeogenetics_of_the_Near_East

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Jews

OkaiCorne:


Bros...the question is simple...did Jesus exist? yes or no

If he did not exist...is Josephus also one of the Romans that invented Jesus?

What of Jesus' disciples? Did they invent Jesus too?

Or was it Paul that invented Jesus...or perhaps Paul is an invention too?

What Jesus fulfilled exceeded the even the narrow expectations of the Jews...

The Jews...especially the zealots amongst them kept on waiting and believing in false messiahs that would liberate them from Roman rule...and what was their reward? DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM IN 70 AD...

Now as an advice bro...go and study all the books of the major and minor prophets...starting from Isaiah and see how Jesus fits into the pattern of their prophecies...

Cheers

Jesus, did not exist...he is just a Roman invention, the Romans and Greeks stole the Tanakh, they obviously read it and saw what they thought were messianic prophesies, they incorporated these in their stories, but the suffering servant in issiah is ISRAEL....not Jesus.

The messiah has not come, if he has they would be world peace..cos issiah said, "they would hammer their sword into plough shares....and learn of war no more"...these has not happened, has it?

sonmvayina:


Jesus, did not exist...he is just a Roman invention, the Romans and Greeks stole the Tanakh, they obviously read it and saw what they thought were messianic prophesies, they incorporated these in their stories, but the suffering servant in issiah is ISRAEL....not Jesus.

The messiah has not come, if he has they would be world peace..cos issiah said, "they would hammer their sword into plough shares....and learn of war no more"...these has not happened, has it?

Does unfulfilled prophecies mean that they will never be fulfilled? Or are you just quoting a fragment of Isaiah to support your claims?

Did you bother reading any prophecies on the crucifixion of Jesus by ancient prophets...does BY HIS STRIPES WE ARE HEALED ring a bell?

I am still awaiting your proof on Jesus being a roman invention...what's your source of literature? Let us take a look at it...

Who exactly did the Greek and Romans steal the Tanakh from? let's start here...

OkaiCorne:


Does unfulfilled prophecies mean that they will never be fulfilled? Or are you just quoting a fragment of Isaiah to support your claims?

Did you bother reading any prophecies on the crucifixion of Jesus by ancient prophets...does BY HIS STRIPES WE ARE HEALED ring a bell?

I am still awaiting your proof on Jesus being a roman invention...what's your source of literature? Let us take a look at it...

Who exactly did the Greek and Romans steal the Tanakh from? let's start here...

That is what I am saying, the suffering servant in issiah is referring to Israel not jesus..
Prophesy stopped on the death of the last prophet,that would be Malachi, they where all waiting for the emergence of the messiah. They knew he was coming to rule and bring peace, not change God's law and Start a new religion...so no peace and men are men are now making WMD....so messiah has not come...the Jesus story and the old testament are two different ideology...

Christianity started as the cult of inanna,i.e the Queen of heaven mention in the book of judges....it is about her and her son...(worship of mother and child) that was done all over the Roman empire...

It has nothing to do with the worship of the creator God (marduk)...the lugal dimer ankia( divine king of heaven and earth)

sonmvayina:


That is what I am saying, the suffering servant in issiah is referring to Israel not jesus..
Prophesy stopped on the death of the last prophet,that would be Malachi, they where all waiting for the emergence of the messiah. They knew he was coming to rule and bring peace, not change God's law and Start a new religion...so no peace and men are men are now making WMD....so messiah has not come...the Jesus story and the old testament are two different ideology...

Christianity started as the cult of inanna,i.e the Queen of heaven mention in the book of judges....it is about her and her son...(worship of mother and child) that was done all over the Roman empire...

It has nothing to do with the worship of the creator God (marduk)...the lugal dimer ankia( divine king of heaven and earth)

So who where the Prophets prophesying about that led the Jews to believe a Messiah will come?

And please share with us the source of your literatures you researched with. Thanks

Per the bolded, you have gotten it wrong...you are confusing Roman Catholic Christianity which is a fusion of True Christianity and Roman Paganism....for the things Jesus lived and died for... The Roman Catholic church gave the world a corrupted version of Truth...

Anyways, if you read the Bible carefully, Jesus never gave His followers the name "Christian"... Neither did God call His worshippers a specific name...

For those of you saying Jesus was a Roman invention... can you please explain why people were fed to the lions or crucified or tortured to death by various means by the Roman Empire for the very same Jesus the Romans invented?

OkaiCorne:


You asked a "smart" question on the basis of the DNA test...when a simple google search could answer your questions on answers you still expect me to spoon feed you on...

Now be kind to go and argue with the Scientists that carried out the DNA test per the documentary.

Go ahead and prove him wrong since you're more intelligent than he is...because you think he is so incompetent not to factor in the possibility of decay before arriving at his conclusions...

Quite a disappointing comeback from you I must say...

Just a simple research on Archaeogenetics in the Near East would have given you answers to your questions...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeogenetics_of_the_Near_East

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Jews

Guy, are you okay?

Now you wanna talk science, before even explaining the basis of how this research came about.

Well let me make it easy for you, in science especially when the research or theory is Novel, there is always a documentation published to scientific journals like Elsevier, IEEE, ResearchGate and so on, for reviews amongst other experts related to the published fields.

Their reviews determine initially whether the research paper is worth publishing by the Journals, and then they will be further tests after that for further empirical study.
This is usually called Peer Review.

I'm not talking about google scholars ooo, but the likes of those Journals above, this has been done sine Newton's time.

1) Now before i talk science with you; do get me the peer reviewed article of this outstanding research and the reviewers' comments.

When you're done(which would most likely lead in futility), consider like i said before the basis of this research.

The sudarium of oviedo and shroud of turin is attested by the Catholics to have come from the same person based on their tests, this same shroud was tested by 3 different set of scientists decades ago and they confirmed the date of the shroud to be around 14th century which was actually when people discovered this shroud and not 2000 years ago.

2) So even if this testing is somewhat close to being validated, on what basis does it link to Jesus?

If you can't answer the 2 questions appropriately then don't bother mentioning me.
And how does the links you posted help your points, did you read them or just read the title only? Na wa oo.

4kings:

Guy, are you okay?

Now you wanna talk science, before even explaining the basis of how this research came about.

Well let me make it easy for you, in science especially when the research or theory is Novel, there is always a documentation published to scientific journals like Elsevier, IEEE, ResearchGate and so on, for reviews amongst other experts related to the published fields.

Their reviews determine initially whether the research paper is worth publishing by the Journals, and then they will be further tests after that for further empirical study.
This is usually called Peer Review.

I'm not talking about google scholars ooo, but the likes of those Journals above, this has been done sine Newton's time.

1) Now before i talk science with you; do get me the peer reviewed article of this outstanding research and the reviewers' comments.

When you're done(which would most likely lead in futility), consider like i said before the basis of this research.

The sudarium of oviedo and shroud of turin is attested by the Catholics to have come from the same person based on their tests, this same shroud was tested by 3 different set of scientists decades ago and they confirmed the date of the shroud to be around 14th century which was actually when people discovered this shroud and not 2000 years ago.

2) So even if this testing is somewhat close to being validated, on what basis does it link to Jesus?

If you can't answer the 2 questions appropriately then don't bother mentioning me.
And how does the links you posted help your points, did you read them or just read the title only? Na wa oo.

Look bros...this thing is as easy as ABC... National Geographic shows you a scientist who performed a test on a fabric which you wrongly identified as the shroud of turin...and I brought this to your notice...

Now you are shifting your game of denial to the basis on which the DNA test was done? Why not perform your research further to know how the Scientist went about the DNA test now that I have given you a pointer? Or are you insinuating the scientist interviewed is a quack or what?

I wonder why I am having this discussion with someone who hurriedly concluded the fabric tested was the shroud of Turin...

I have provided you with research work done by a reputable scientist...the burden of proof is on you to prove the Scientist wrong instead of asking me all sorts of JAMB questions...

Cheers...and I'm expecting your next response would be devoid of insults. Thanks

4kings:

Guy, are you okay?

Now you wanna talk science, before even explaining the basis of how this research came about.

Well let me make it easy for you, in science especially when the research or theory is Novel, there is always a documentation published to scientific journals like Elsevier, IEEE, ResearchGate and so on, for reviews amongst other experts related to the published fields.

Their reviews determine initially whether the research paper is worth publishing by the Journals, and then they will be further tests after that for further empirical study.
This is usually called Peer Review.

I'm not talking about google scholars ooo, but the likes of those Journals above, this has been done sine Newton's time.

1) Now before i talk science with you; do get me the peer reviewed article of this outstanding research and the reviewers' comments.

When you're done(which would most likely lead in futility), consider like i said before the basis of this research.

The sudarium of oviedo and shroud of turin is attested by the Catholics to have come from the same person based on their tests, this same shroud was tested by 3 different set of scientists decades ago and they confirmed the date of the shroud to be around 14th century which was actually when people discovered this shroud and not 2000 years ago.

2) So even if this testing is somewhat close to being validated, on what basis does it link to Jesus?

If you can't answer the 2 questions appropriately then don't bother mentioning me.
And how does the links you posted help your points, did you read them or just read the title only? Na wa oo.

Your second question tells me you haven't been listening to me all this while...

The results of the DNA test revealed that there was no chromosome showing the person in question had an earthly father origin...thus pointing to the divinity of Jesus.

Please and please, watch the documentary again, you won't be asking me these questions if you have watched and understood what was shown in there...

4kings:

Guy, are you okay?

Now you wanna talk science, before even explaining the basis of how this research came about.

Well let me make it easy for you, in science especially when the research or theory is Novel, there is always a documentation published to scientific journals like Elsevier, IEEE, ResearchGate and so on, for reviews amongst other experts related to the published fields.

Their reviews determine initially whether the research paper is worth publishing by the Journals, and then they will be further tests after that for further empirical study.
This is usually called Peer Review.

I'm not talking about google scholars ooo, but the likes of those Journals above, this has been done sine Newton's time.

1) Now before i talk science with you; do get me the peer reviewed article of this outstanding research and the reviewers' comments.

When you're done(which would most likely lead in futility), consider like i said before the basis of this research.

The sudarium of oviedo and shroud of turin is attested by the Catholics to have come from the same person based on their tests, this same shroud was tested by 3 different set of scientists decades ago and they confirmed the date of the shroud to be around 14th century which was actually when people discovered this shroud and not 2000 years ago.

2) So even if this testing is somewhat close to being validated, on what basis does it link to Jesus?

If you can't answer the 2 questions appropriately then don't bother mentioning me.
And how does the links you posted help your points, did you read them or just read the title only? Na wa oo.

I got here by accident through the unintended mentions... reading through, I quickly observed that fools like you who are often failed individuals in real life will always use the internet as a second attempt to rekindle your shattered dreams.

Simple debate here and you're asking someone to go get an article of peer review anx the comments therein.

And when he does, which will take a lot of time and energy, you will begin criticising it and deflecting from the main issue. I might be right If I assume you to be a fringe lunatic bothering cyberspace with his obsession of being a failed and unknown science student.

OkaiCorne:


Look bros...this thing is as easy as ABC... National Geographic shows you a scientist who performed a test on a fabric which you wrongly identified as the shroud of turin...and I brought this to your notice...

Now you are shifting your game of denial to the basis on which the DNA test was done? Why not perform your research further to know how the Scientist went about the DNA test now that I have given you a pointer? Or are you insinuating the scientist interviewed is a quack or what?

I wonder why I am having this discussion with someone who hurriedly concluded the fabric tested was the shroud of Turin...

I have provided you with research work done by a reputable scientist...the burden of proof is on you to prove the Scientist wrong instead of asking me all sorts of JAMB questions...

Cheers...and I'm expecting your next response would be devoid of insults. Thanks

The documentary does not give a proper scientific insight on the research because it's just a documentary.
Scientific details is what i need for this.
I actually searched and didn't find, this is a novel research and a journal should've been published for review not vague descriptions on blogs and documentaries.

OkaiCorne:


Your second question tells me you haven't been listening to me all this while...

The results of the DNA test revealed that there was no chromosome showing the person in question had an earthly father origin...thus pointing to the divinity of Jesus.

Please and please, watch the documentary again, you won't be asking me these questions if you have watched and understood what was shown in there...

How does the result of the DNA link to Jesus?
That's the simple question. Does the documentary answer this?

4kings:

The documentary does not give a proper scientific insight on the research because it's just a documentary.
Scientific details is what i need for this.
I actually searched and didn't find, this is a novel research and a journal should've been published for review not vague descriptions on blogs and documentaries.



How does the result of the DNA link to Jesus?
That's the simple question. Does the documentary answer this?

I will appeal to you again, please watch the documentary. The answers to your questions are in there. It is audible to the deaf and visible to the blind.

Let me put a caption of the documentary from National Geographic again for everyone to see;

The Blood of Christ

Trace the blood stained Shroud of Oviedo to Israel in a quest to determine whether it holds Christ's DNA, and in a most chilling discovery, finds that it contains no evidence of a father's DNA.

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/videos/the-blood-of-christ/

I find it very sad and appalling that atheists would rely on documentaries that talks of evolution and all other sorts of scientific stuffs BUT would debunk documentaries of this nature to feed their bias and double standards...

When the documentary talks about the non-existence of God...it becomes solid evidence for atheists BUT now it is talking about the existence of a divine figure...it is just a " mere documentary" .

Bros, we both know you are intelligent enough to understand what was shown in that documentary. As for the Scientist(s) who did the DNA test, you don't need to go too far...check out the name of the one that was interviewed, check up his background and credentials and prove to us he did a shoddy job on the DNA test. Perhaps you are more intelligent and qualified than he is...who knows?

Thank you.

OkaiCorne:


I will appeal to you again, please watch the documentary. The answers to your questions are in there. It is audible to the deaf and visible to the blind.

Let me put a caption of the documentary from National Geographic again for everyone to see;

The Blood of Christ

Trace the blood stained Shroud of Oviedo to Israel in a quest to determine whether it holds Christ's DNA, and in a most chilling discovery, finds that it contains no evidence of a father's DNA.

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/videos/the-blood-of-christ/

Okay, atleast can you tell me the timestamp were it was recorded in the documentary proving the link between "Jesus" and what they found, because i can't remember anything like that.

I find it very sad and appalling that atheists would rely on documentaries that talks of evolution and all other sorts of scientific stuffs BUT would debunk documentaries of this nature to feed their bias and double standards...

Nope, scientific research and findings are documented on research papers for the public to read.
I'm into data science and machine learning and most of the stuff i've learnt are from research papers not documentary.
A documentary or blog would give you an insight or abstract overview of what the topic is but you have to get a lecture, textbook or research paper to understand technical details.

Besides documentary is just a record of event, nothing more.
There are so many documenataries on wide varieties of beliefs and culture, that does not validate the subject but provide a fair understanding of the subject, that's all.

When the documentary talks about the non-existence of God...it becomes solid evidence for atheists BUT now it is talking about the existence of a divine figure...it is just a " mere documentary" .

Digest what i said above.

Bros, we both know you are intelligent enough to understand what was shown in that documentary. As for the Scientist(s) who did the DNA test, you don't need to go too far...check out the name of the one that was interviewed, check up his background and credentials and prove to us he did a shoddy job on the DNA test. Perhaps you are more intelligent and qualified than he is...who knows?

Thank you.

Acceptance of scientific theories and findings go a long way.
I told you of how a christian scientist claims the shroud was actually dated back to jesus existence and was rejected by most of the scientific community because of tests carried out already and scrutiny of the research.
The level of acceptance of this research goes a long way in proving your claim... Even at that the basis of the research "Jesus" is not well defined.

4kings:

Okay, atleast can you tell me the timestamp were it was recorded in the documentary proving the link between "Jesus" and what they found, because i can't remember anything like that.



Nope, scientific research and findings are documented on research papers for the public to read.
I'm into data science and machine learning and most of the stuff i've learnt are from research papers not documentary.
A documentary or blog would give you an insight or abstract overview of what the topic is but you have to get a lecture, textbook or research paper to understand technical details.

Besides documentary is just a record of event, nothing more.
There are so many documenataries on wide varieties of beliefs and culture, that does not validate the subject but provide a fair understanding of the subject, that's all.

Digest what i said above.


Acceptance of scientific theories and findings go a long way.
I told you of how a christian scientist claims the shroud was actually dated back to jesus existence and was rejected by most of the scientific community because of tests carried out already and scrutiny of the research.
The level of acceptance of this research goes a long way in proving your claim... Even at that the basis of the research "Jesus" is not well defined.

Going by your logic, documentary are only records of events right? The next question to ask is if these events are accurate and valid.

Going by your logic again...these things are only accurate and valid if they are published in a scientific journal(s)... which means you cannot accept anything as true if it is not recorded in a science journal right?

OkaiCorne:


Going by your logic, documentary are only records of events right? The next question to ask is if these events are accurate and valid.

Going by your logic again...these things are only accurate and valid if they are published in a scientific journal(s).

Empirical testing gives validation for scientific research.

Even Einstein had to prove his gravitational theory and treid testing it for years(waiting for eclipse) in order to validate his theory.

4kings:

Empirical testing gives validation for scientific research.

Even Einstein had to prove his gravitational theory and treid testing it for years(waiting for eclipse) in order to validate his theory.

I asked the following questions...

1) You mentioned documentaries are only records of events...and I asked if these events are accurate and valid?

2) Everything that is valid and accurate are recorded only in science journals?

You can attest to the fact that this is not just a record of events which sounds more like a proper definition for History rather than documentary.

This documentary demonstrates the investigative skills and inquisitive mindset of the explorer(s) in question in addition to the DNA forensic analysis perform by scientist(s).

But now you have shifted the goal post to whether this has been recorded in science journals without giving a thought to the competence of the scientists in question nor the investigative skills and painstaking details and processes undertaken by the explorer. This was published on a neutral globally accepted platform i.e. National Geographic... and not a religious blog...

By the way, you asked for the time stamp showing the details of the Scientist who performed the DNA test. It is quite upsetting engaging myself in a discussion with someone who did not go through the documentary in the first place. It feels like a complete waste of my time.

OkaiCorne:


I asked the following questions...

1) You mentioned documentaries are only records of events...and I asked if these events are accurate and valid?

2) Everything that is valid and accurate are recorded only in science journals?

You can attest to the fact that this is not just a record of events which sounds more like a proper definition for History rather than documentary.

Documentaries are records of events, that's all.
I've watched documentaries on the paranormal, witchcraft and a host of others.
Can you please open your dictionary for the meaning of documentary. Here is a better definition from google: "using pictures or interviews with people involved in real events to provide a factual report on a particular subject." c'est fini.

This documentary demonstrates the investigative skills and inquisitive mindset of the explorer(s) in question in addition to the DNA forensic analysis perform by scientist(s).

But now you have shifted the goal post to whether this has been recorded in science journals without giving a thought to the competence of the scientists in question nor the investigative skills and painstaking details and processes undertaken by the explorer. This was published on a neutral globally accepted platform i.e. National Geographic... and not a religious blog...

My guy there are also superceded scientific theories.
For example; Newtonian gravity was well detailed and widely accepted at the time but later proven false.
This your research has not gotten to the stage of wide acceptance sef.

By the way, you asked for the time stamp showing the details of the Scientist who performed the DNA test. It is quite upsetting engaging myself in a discussion with someone who did not go through the documentary in the first place. It feels like a complete waste of my time.

You know you could have just given me the timestamp or state clearly the claim and we wouldn't be on this still.

4kings:

Documentaries are records of events, that's all.
I've watched documentaries on the paranormal, witchcraft and a host of others.
Can you please open your dictionary for the meaning of documentary. Here is a better definition from google: "using pictures or interviews with people involved in real events to provide a factual report on a particular subject." c'est fini.


My guy there are also superceded scientific theories.
For example; Newtonian gravity was well detailed and widely accepted at the time but later proven false.
This your research has not gotten to the stage of wide acceptance sef.


You know you could have just given me the timestamp or state clearly the claim and we wouldn't be on this still.

Going by your definition of documentaries, then there cannot be a documentary on people who lived in the distant past since we don't have their pictures nor interview them... that's an incomplete definition mehn...

You are really a handful, watch the documentary from beginning to the end and we do not have to go back and forth on some of your questions which has been answered in there already.

For some splendid reason, I cannot play the documentary from my end to give you the exact time caption...but the day I posted it here I recall the interview with the scientist was somewhere between 20 to 30 minutes of the video...

Please confirm if you can play the video from your end...

OkaiCorne:


Going by your definition of documentaries, then there cannot be a documentary on people who lived in the distant past since we don't have their pictures nor interview them... that's an incomplete definition mehn...

Seriously?
You can interview professors of history/scholars/historians involved in that subject or take pictures of artifact involving the subject for the documentary.
Nice try...

You are really a handful, watch the documentary from beginning to the end and we do not have to go back and forth on some of your questions which has been answered in there already.

Would take time to watch it completely later this week.

For some splendid reason, I cannot play the documentary from my end to give you the exact time caption...but the day I posted it here I recall the interview with the scientist was somewhere between 20 to 30 minutes of the video...

Please confirm if you can play the video from your end...

I searched for it on youtube using the title.
Think i downloaded it also.

4kings:

Seriously?
You can interview professors of history/scholars/historians involved in that subject or take pictures of artifact involving the subject for the documentary.
Nice try...

Would take time to watch it completely later this week.



I searched for it on youtube using the title.
Think i downloaded it also.

Many thanks... I'll be awaiting your feedback when you have watched the documentary completely.

Thanks for your patience and understanding

cooljude:
Interesting read but I think he as a person existed because you cannot tell me that a fictional person made all this cult like following till this day. most archaeological excavations has showed that Nazareth was a settlement during his life on earth. As for his God like status, I honestly think it was exaggerated. one thing me and you would agree on is that he must have been an exceptional person for him to have this level of followers till now.

The demonic spiritual forces that initiate atheists, block truth from entering their minds. Satanic atheists claim they worship science, but they go mental if science prove that Jesus is real.

Joy posted this extraction;
Will Durant, a historian, writer, and philosopher, wrote: “That a few simple men [the Gospel writers] should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so lofty an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospels.”
Albert Einstein, a German-born Jewish physicist, asserted: “I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.” When asked if he viewed Jesus as a historical person, he responded: “Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.”
“No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus.”—Albert Einstein

Only on Nairaland is Hopeful landlord greater than Will Durant and Albert Einstein.

Never knew hopefullanlord created a thread for this bogus claim. Another pseudo argument that seems appealing to those who have not taking time to study the claim apart from the propagandist end. Most of the actual objects of study are inaccessible to non-experts because they are too fragile or valuable to be publicly displayed for general scrutiny. Not only that, but properly evaluating their meaning and significance almost always demands a thorough understanding of ancient languages, geography, and cultures which can only be obtained by many years of advanced education in the field.

karlboss:


I like your points

Let me say something
There is the Bible and there is history behind the Bible. Most of us know the Bible but don't know the history behind it

I was born a Christian (Catholic I don't go there again). I believe there is God
The most powerful figure of our this civilization is Jesus Christ. No one can doubt but there is an issue here how and why did Jesus Christ reach that status and is it possible for a fabricated figure to become that influential in our civilization. My answer is yes and no

N.B let us remember that there is also a debate that Williams Shakespeare never existed.

As a rational human being and a student of history there is a possibility that Jesus Christ might just be a concept to keep people humble and enslaved. My reason

Where was Christ when people were using his name to exploit Africans has he punished the British for what they did.
Has he punished king Leopold d 2nd.
Why is it that when nation remove Christianity/Islam they move forward.
There was nothing new in what Jesus taught we Africans were practising what he said before Christianity came.

Do you know that all the apostles died painful death even some Bible describe how they died at the back page till I don't understand why everything that has to do with Islam and Christianity has to do with pain and death. Upon everything they do for so called peace loving God they all die painful death, why didn't ascend into heaven like their founder.

When most people pray and it happens they feel Christ has answered their prayers. They don't know we all have the power to create our own reality. In fact everylaw in the Bible can be explained by theoretical physics and law of attraction.

I was asked this question in Igbo land where I come from for Jesus to become popular is it that our religion was inefficient or we were forced to accept Jesus. I found out that we were forced to accept Christ ( many black Americans that know history hate Christ). We were forced to accept Christ so we can be their slaves forever that is what most of us on this forum have become

Think of this white people who has never wanted your progress will show you a way to Paradise don't that on its own look fishy

The people that compile the Bible selected books to be included and not to be included that means it is the work of human hands e.g Pope has given order to rewrite our Lord's prayer what does that tell you?


Peter said in Corinthians that Paul teaching is confusing it's all scam but am free.

You are right bro. It's all scam. When I knew the truth I had to shield all religious believe. for me, God dey and nothing more.

wellmax:
Are you done?
I'll tell you what, when you die you gonna know the truth. But then it will be too late.

He already knows the truth, fictitious Jesus is not a real being. Go and study the book of Common Era, you will see the history of Paul the Apostle who created Jesus Christ there.

B.C.E 29: 48-54


48. Now Saul, Apollos and Varnavas laid down all the scripts and scrolls which they had collected here and there. Then Philo put down his own too. Then he said, here are the names of the sons of the gods of the past which I have gathered, Osiris, Horus, Esus, Mithras, Krista, Dionysus, even the great Zeus.
49. Let a name be made by each of you. I will also make mine. Then let's compare the names which we have made. So they all made up names. Then when they had revealed what name they had chosen, three of them wrote down Zeusus while Apollos alone wrote down Hesbon.
50. Now when Apollos had seen that the name which he brought out was different from the rest, he excused himself and departed. Then the three of them proceeded to modify the name Zeusus which they had, so that it would be presentable to the Romans.
51. So they made the name Iesus.
52. Again they said, let us make another name for this god, which shall be his title. For in the Jewish tradition, they speak of a messiah which they expect. Also in India, they have Krista, which could be interpreted as 'the saviour'.
53. So they agreed to make Krista the name for the title of the god which they had just made.
54. So was Iesus Krista[Jesus Christ] carefully created by Saul, Varnavas and Philo in the 280,049th year of the homo sapiens era, but the stories which they had written about it was very few.