₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
You seem to be conflating 2 different concepts. What I meant was that there could have have been an infinite number of changes not that the duration of the changes are infinite. It is only in event of the 2nd case can you arrive at your objection and I am not putting forth the second case. Which means either you are confused or you are attempting a strawman argument.

To further illustrate my point, take the production of insulin. The insulin molecule is the result of the joining of 2 different molecule chains. Each of those molecules requires 100s of successive reactions before they are made. Which means for example insulin requires 100 + 1 reactions for it to come into existence. It would be absurd to suggest that because of the number of the 1st 100 reactions insulin can never be produced. Already observation negates such a claim. If we extended this to the universe we would see that there is as yet no hindrance to the number of successive changes that occurred before our current universe was birthed.

To be clear I am not saying I know this is the case, this merely puts paid to the assumption that only one eternal unchanging something existed before the universe.

You argument conclusion is just assume something, now assume that something is god therefore god exists. Not a very reasonable conclusion.

If there is really an infinite number of changes in the past, then we are going to be in the PAST by now because infinity cannot be completed by successive addition. But we are obviously not in the past because we are in the present. Therefore, number of changes in the past is not infinite because we have reached the present. And if the number of changes in the past is not infinite, then universe must have a beginning. The beginning of the universe necessitate a beginner .This beginner is called God.

Gggg102:
It would also sound foolish if someone told you that he knows an elephant that has always existed, without a beginning and would always exist.

Yes it would sound foolish because we KNOW quite right that all living things (like elephant) began to exist and will cease to exist. But it would not sound foolish if it is something whose nature is UNKNOWN to us.

What is explained below is another way to see that it is more logical to assume that "something is eternal" than to assume that "something pop into existence from absolutely nothing"

1. For a "change" to occur, a "cause" is required.
2. Popping of something into existence from absolutely nothing is a "change" which therefore require a "cause".
3. But there is no any "cause" present in an absolutely nothing.
4. Therefore, there is no cause to trigger a change from absolutely nothing to something. Hence popping of something into existence from absolutely nothing is impossible.

5.But when something is eternal, no "change" has occur. Therefore, no cause is required. Hence there is no way we can FALSIFY the existence of something that is eternal as we have done with the case of something popping into existence from absolutely nothing.

Hence assuming that something is eternal is more logical than assuming that something pop into existence from absolutely nothing.

Gggg102:
Why is it illogical to assume that something comes from nothing, while assuming something is eternal is deemed logical?

It is illogical to assume that something comes from nothing because it looks magical. If some body tell you that as he was walking along the road, all of a sudden, a very big elephant just fell from space above his head and started chasing many people. Would you sincerely believe this story ? Certainly not ! This simply shows that it is illogical to believe that something just pop into existence from absolutely nothing.

Since it is illogical to assume that something just pop into existence from absolutely nothing, then the ONLY OPTION left to account for something we have presently is to assume that SOMETHING MUST BE ETERNAL.

LordReed:
I think you should reread your statement because it seems to me confused. How have changes that have already occurred supposed to be a hinderance to changes occurring now?

Let me reexplain my points; pls read the following carefully

1. Let Yesterday represents "all the successive changes that had taken place in the past."

2. Let Today represents "the changes taking place presently in the universe"


3. Now if the universe is eternal or eternally changing i:e if the universe is without beginning, then this will implies that Yesterday (i:e all the successive changes that had taken place in the past ) would be infinite i:e without end.

4. But there is no way we can reach Today ( i:e the changes taking place presently in the universe) if Yesterday (i:e all the successive changes that had taken place in the past) is without end.

5. Since we have definitely reached Today, then Yesterday must have an end.

6. Therefore, if Yesterday really have an end, then follows from point number "3" above, universe is not eternal nor eternally changing.

So universe is neither eternal nor eternally changing.

But SOMETHING must be eternal . This is because if there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the long past, there is no way we can have something at this present time. And since this very SOMETHING is not universe, then it has to be an entity outside universe. This very entity outside universe is what we depicted as God.

LordReed:
How you chose to view it remains your business. I have stated what it will take to sway me on the existence of a god or gods.

Check your previous post, you've not stated what it will take to sway you on the existence of God. You only let us know that no argument will ever sway you in the quest for knowledge of the existence of God.

LordReed:
You got it wrong because you are insisting that the something is only singular. The somethings cannot obviously be the universe as we know it so it already is not 1 something. Whatever was before this universe in addition to this universe is already 2 somethings.

If there was really something before the universe, then it is unreasonable to ASSUME that both the "something" and the "universe" are eternal . According to Occam's razor principle, entities should not be multiplied without necessity. In other words, when presented with competing hypotheses that make the same predictions, one should select the solution with the fewest assumptions. Therefore, it is more reasonable to assume that only one entity is eternal than to assume two or more entities.

LordReed:
You are simply asserting things. You have not shown how you know the properties of an eternal something because you have never examined an eternal something so you cannot possibly know what its properties can be.

Are you denying the power of logic ? I have taken my time to explain logically why anything eternal cannot exhibit changing characteristics.
An external cause is required to trigger a change in anything because if the cause is internal the final state will precede the initial state. But for a change to occur, the initial state must precede the final state. Therefore, only external cause that can trigger a change in anything. But nothing exist beside anything that is eternal (see Occam's razor principle explained above). Hence there is no any external cause that can trigger a change in an eternal entity.

LordReed:
1. The universe is 13.8billion years old and has shown no signs of reaching an equilibrium so I don't know where you got the idea that age is a requisite for reaching equilibrium.

Time factor is necessary for something to attain equilibrium. For example, when you put a very hot water in a room, is it not "time" it will take for the water to be at the same temperature (ie at equilibrium) with the temperature of its surrounding ? Again, when we put a dead body in a grave, is it not "time" it will take for the body to decay and be at the same composition (at equilibrium ) with the composition of its surrounding. Similarly, if universe is infinitely old and not 13.8 billion years old, then it is either there would be no stars or everywhere should have been as hot as stars ( heat death) because the entire universe would have gotten enough time to be at the same temperature (i:e equilibrium)

LordReed:
2. Again where are you getting these ideas from that are in direct contradiction with what we've observed? There is an infinite number of positive integers and an infinite number of negative integers, the 2 are not the same.

Negative numbers and negative infinity are only assumptions in mathematics. There is no way we can comprehend negative numbers and negative infinity. Therefore, in real sense, infinity is infinity and we cannot have two or more infinities because one infinity will never give room for another infinity.

LordReed:
And you are doing the same with your god. If a radioactive material requires a creation so too does your god. You do not get to place arbitrary limits without demonstrating why. Your god could have been created to by another god, the god of your god.

The reason why radioactive material require a creation is because it shows a changing characteristics which proved that it is not eternal (see below why it is not possible for something to be eternally changing). But there is no evidence for you to prove that my God exhibit changing characteristics. So my God is eternal and anything eternal does not require a creator.

LordReed:
You want to give the infinte characteristic to your god but deny it for some other thing, why?

Because unlike God, other things display a changing characteristics.

LordReed:
False. You do not always need an external cause for change to occur. Nor does change have anything to do with age. The universe has been changing for 13.8billion years and could have been changing for infinity before that for all we know, you have no way of showing otherwise.

You just keep asserting characteristics that you have no way of knowing or verifying in anyway. There is nothing that prevents the universe from being eternal.

If the universe is eternal or eternally changing, the number of "successive changes" that have occurred in the past would be infinite. And if the number of "successive changes" in the past is infinite ( i:e without an end) then the present changes we are now observing in the universe would never have taken place. This is because all the series of changes in the past would be yet to finish. Since we are now observing the present changes in the universe, then all the successive changes in the past had finished. Therefore, universe is neither eternal nor eternally changing.

LordReed:
It can only if the premises are correct which you can show to be so. These premises are not evidence so I don't know how you conflating them to be so.

If you take your time to read and understand those premises, you will see that they are enough as evidence provided you do not allow your prejudice to override your logical reasoning.

LordReed:
I have said it here several times that arguments are not what will sway me in the quest for the knowledge of the existence of a God or gods but I will participate in this just for my own curiosity and enlightenment.

This implies that you have already made up your mind not to have any interest or belief in the existence of God no matter how convincing or logical the argument may be. Such kind of preconception is very bad. We should allow ourselves to be lead by evidence; not by our prejudice.

LordReed:
Who says it is 1 something? Why can't it be somethings? Or a succession of things in differing configurations of multiplicity?

Those somethings or succession of things in differing configurations of multiplicity can still be grouped together as "entire nature" or "Universe". It is this very entire nature or universe I referred to as SOMETHING. So how did I get it wrong ?

LordReed:
Why is the something eternal?

That " Something " is eternal because we have something at this present time. Of course, something can never pop into existence from ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. You can never pick some money in your wardrobe if you didn't put it there in the first instance i:e before you locked it. Therefore, logically, premise 1 is perfectly true.

LordReed:
Again why must it be unchanging? There is no precedence by which we may declare that a thing is unchanging, not even the ever present cosmic background radiation is unchanging.

Any thing that is eternal would not show any changing characteristics for two reasons;

1. If it is really eternal, then it must be infinitely old. And if something is infinitely old, then it must have gotten enough time to reach a state of perfect equilibrium. Anything in a state of perfect equilibrium would not show any changing characteristics.

2. It is totally unreasonable to assume that TWO OR MORE completely different entities are eternal because anything that is eternal must be infinite. And there is nothing like two or more infinities because one infinity would never give room for another infinity. Therefore, only one entity must be eternal. This implies that beside this eternal entity, nothing exist. Hence, this eternal entity will continue to remain as it was because there is nothing external to this entity that can cause it to change. It is only external cause that can trigger a change in anything.

LordReed:
The cause of change can be internal based on the properties of the material, eg the rate at which a material loses heat.

There is one thing you failed to put into consideration; a present change we are observing in something now could have been caused by an external factor in the long past. For example, a radioactive material which continue to emit a radiation by itself may appear to be changing without any external cause. But how did such radioactive material was brought into existence in the first place ? They were atoms with unstable nuclei formed by the process of nucleosynthesis after the bigbang that occur at the beginning of the universe. So the changing we are observing now in radioactive materials was caused by external cause in the long past.
Another example is the time bomb whose its present changing characteristics (i:e its sudden explosion) may appear to be caused by internal factor but it is really caused by external factor (i:e the person that sets the bomb) in the past.

LordReed:
The conclusion on this premise only follows if premise 1 is valid and in the case where there are successive multiplicity of somethings then it falls flat.

Even if there are successive multiplicity of somethings, the premise 1 and premise 2 are still valid. This is because successive multiplicity of somethings must have an end in order to avoid the absurdity of infinite regression.

LordReed:
The changing nature of the universe only presents a problem for premise 1 and 2, both of which can not be demonstrated in any meaningful way.

Premise 1 has been demonstrated using an illustration of a wardrobe that contains NOTHING which you can never pick SOMETHING from it.

The theory which states that 'only an EXTERNAL cause can trigger a change in something' has also been demonstrated using alkaline solution and indicator. It is this very theory that premise 2 required to be valid.
So changing nature of the universe only proved that universe is not eternal. It never present any problem for premise 1 and premise 2.

LordReed:
Nor does the changing nature of the universe preclude it from being all there ever was, in other words eternal. It could be the case that it is eternally changing.

In fact, the changing nature of the universe has precluded it from being eternal. This is because if the universe is eternally changing, the number of "successive changes" that have occurred in the past would be infinite. And if the number of "successive changes" in the past is infinite ( i:e without an end) then the present changes we are now observing in the universe would never have taken place. This is because all the series of changes in the past would be yet to finish. Since we are now observing the present changes in the universe, then all the successive changes in the past had finished. Therefore, universe is not eternally changing.

LordReed:
It is not. You can not provide any evidence to show it so how do you get to declare it as truth? Truth is only what has been shown as true, declarations do not confer veracity.

The argument does prove that God exist. The chain of evidence from premise 1 to premise 3 follows each other sequentially without any break. It is very you that does not give room for the truth because you have already developed an hatred for God and his existence.

You can never pick SOMETHING from the wardrobe that contains NOTHING before you locked it up. This is because SOMETHING cannot just suddenly pop into the wardrobe from NOTHING.

In a similar manner, "SOMETHING" at this present time could not have suddenly popped into existence from absolutely "NOTHING" in the long past. Therefore, something must be eternal i:e always exist and infinitely old. Hence Premise 1 is perfectly true.

The following premises of argument has been carefully arranged to help the atheists and agnostics to have a perfect belief in the existence of God.

PREMISE 1; Something must be eternal (i:e always exist and infinitely old)


Why ; If there is absolutely 'NOTHING' in the long past, then there is no way we can have 'SOMETHING' at this present time because something can NEVER come out from absolutely nothing.

You can never pick SOMETHING from the wardrobe that contains NOTHING before you locked it up. This is because something cannot just suddenly pop into the wardrobe from nothing.

In a similar manner, "SOMETHING" at this present time could not have suddenly popped into existence from absolutely "NOTHING" in the long past.

See the logical proof cited below;


(a) For a "change" to occur, a "cause" is
required.

(b) Popping of something into existence from absolutely nothing is a "change" which therefore require a "cause".

(c) But there is no any "cause" present in an absolutely nothing.

(d) Therefore, there is no any cause to trigger a
change from absolutely nothing to become
something.

(e) Hence popping of something into existence
from absolutely nothing is impossible.

Therefore, something must be eternal i:e always exist and infinitely old.


So what is this very something that is eternal ?

There are only two options; Universe itself (i:e the entire nature) OR any hypothetical Being outside the Universe. Let us depict this hypothetical invisible Being outside the Universe as God.
Of course it would not make sense to assume that both Universe and God are eternal. So it is reasonable to assume that only one entity is eternal (Occam's razor principle)

Now how are we to know which one is eternal ? Is it Universe (i:e the entire nature) that is eternal or is it God that is eternal?


PREMISE 2 ; Anything that is ETERNAL (i:e something that is always exist and infinitely old) would not have a CHANGING characteristic.


Why; for anything to CHANGE, an EXTERNAL cause is required to trigger this change. But as we have established above in premise 1, only one thing (i:e either Universe or God) must be eternal. Therefore, in the long past, nothing exist except this ETERNAL entity. Consequently, there was no any external cause that can trigger a change in this ETERNAL entity. Hence, anything that is ETERNAL would not have a "changing" characteristic.


OBJECTION ; Why is it only an EXTERNAL cause that can trigger a change in an eternal entity ? What of INTERNAL cause or causes within the eternal entity ?



REPLY ; if "all the cause" necessary to trigger a change in an eternal entity is INTERNAL (i:e already present inside the entity), then no change would be observed because the final state would always precede the initial state.
For an illustration, let assume that three drops of an indicator (i:e all the necessary cause) is required to CHANGE the colour of an alkaline solution from colourless to pink. That is to say, immediately I finished putting the third drop, the color of the alkaline solution will suddenly change from colourless to pink. You will agree with me that "all the three drops of indicator" are EXTERNAL CAUSE (i:e outside the alkaline solution). Now if all the three drops of indicator is already inside the alkaline solution right from the beginning of its production (i:e INTERNAL CAUSE), then the INITIAL color of the alkaline solution would be pink instead of colorless. So "changing" from colorless (INITIAL) to pink (FINAL) would never be observed because the initial color of alkaline solution is already pink not colorless. That is to say, the final state has preceded the initial state. Yet for a CHANGE to occur, the initial state must always precede the final state.
Therefore, it is only an EXTERNAL cause that can trigger a change in an eternal entity ( or in anything )

But there was no any external cause that can trigger a change in an ETERNAL entity because in the long past nothing exist beside this eternal entity. Hence, anything that is ETERNAL would not have a "changing" characteristic.

If you are yet to be convinced, see another argument explained below;

(a) Anything that is eternal (i:e always exist and infinitely old) has no beginning

(b) And anything that has no beginning did not create itself nor created by any other thing.

(c) And anything that did not create itself nor created by any other thing can never be changed, either by itself or by any other thing, from what it has always been for an infinite time.

(d) Therefore, anything that is eternal would not have a changing characteristics.




PREMISE 3 ; Universe (or nature) has a CHANGING characteristic.


Why; In the long past, no part of Universe (or nature) can see, can hear, can speak, can think and can move voluntarily . But now some part of the Universe (i:e human beings) can see, can hear, can speak different languages, can think and can move voluntarily. Therefore, Universe has undergone a drastic CHANGE.

Hence, follows from Premise 2, Universe is not eternal because of its CHANGING characteristic.

But we have already established from Premise 1 that "SOMETHING (i:e either Universe or God )" must be eternal. And since universe is not eternal because of its CHANGING characteristic, then God must be eternal.

But how are we completely sure that this very hypothetical invisible being depicted as God actually exist ?
If God does not actually exist, then Premise 1 would be wrong because nothing would be eternal. Remember that we have already proved that Universe is not eternal. Hence, if God is also not eternal due to His non existence, then nothing would be eternal. Therefore, Premise 1 would be wrong.

But Premise 1 is perfectly true. Therefore, God must actually exist.

The following premises of argument has been carefully arranged to help the atheists and agnostics to have a perfect belief in the existence of God.

PREMISE 1; Something must be eternal (i:e always exist and infinitely old)


Why ; If there was absolutely 'NOTHING' in the long past, then there is no way we can have 'SOMETHING' at this present time because something can NEVER come out from absolutely nothing. Therefore, something must be eternal i:e always exist and infinitely old. So what is this very something that is eternal ?


There are only two options; Universe (i:e the entire nature) OR any hypothetical Being outside the Universe. Let us depict this hypothetical invisible Being outside the Universe as God.
Of course it would not make sense to assume that both Universe and God are eternal. So only one thing must be eternal.

Now how are we to know which one is eternal ? Is it Universe that is eternal or is it God that is eternal?


PREMISE 2 ; Anything that is ETERNAL (i:e something that is always exist and infinitely old) would not have a CHANGING characteristic.


Why; for anything to CHANGE, an EXTERNAL cause is required to trigger this change. But as we have established above in premise 1, only one thing (i:e either Universe or God) must be eternal. Therefore, in the long past, nothing exist except this ETERNAL entity. Consequently, there was no any external cause that can trigger a change in this ETERNAL entity. Hence, anything that is ETERNAL would not have a "changing" characteristic.


OBJECTION ; Why is it only an EXTERNAL cause that can trigger a change in an eternal entity ? What of INTERNAL cause or causes within the eternal entity ?



REPLY ; if "all the cause" necessary to trigger a change in an eternal entity is INTERNAL (i:e already present inside the entity), then no change would be observed because the final state would always precede the initial state.
For an illustration, let assume that three drops of an indicator (i:e all the necessary cause) is required to CHANGE the colour of an alkaline solution from colourless to pink. That is to say, immediately I finished putting the third drop, the color of the alkaline solution will suddenly change from colourless to pink. You will agree with me that "all the three drops of indicator" are EXTERNAL CAUSE (i:e outside the alkaline solution). Now if all the three drops of indicator is already inside the alkaline solution right from the beginning of its production (i:e INTERNAL CAUSE), then the INITIAL color of the alkaline solution would be pink instead of colorless. So "changing" from colorless (INITIAL) to pink (FINAL) would never be observed because the initial color of alkaline solution is already pink not colorless. That is to say, the final state has preceded the initial state. Yet for a CHANGE to occur, the initial state must always precede the final state.
Therefore, it is only an EXTERNAL cause that can trigger a change in an eternal entity ( or in anything )

But there was no any external cause that can trigger a change in an ETERNAL entity because in the long past nothing exist beside this eternal entity. Hence, anything that is ETERNAL would not have a "changing" characteristic.



PREMISE 3 ; Universe (or nature) has a CHANGING characteristic.


Why; In the long past, no part of Universe (or nature) can see, can hear, can speak, can think and can move voluntarily . But now some part of the Universe (i:e human beings) can see, can hear, can speak different languages, can think and can move voluntarily. Therefore, Universe has undergone a drastic CHANGE.

Hence, follows from Premise 2, Universe is not eternal because of its CHANGING characteristic.

But we have already established from Premise 1 that "SOMETHING (i:e either Universe or God )" must be eternal. And since universe is not eternal because of its CHANGING characteristic, then God must be eternal.

But how are we completely sure that this very hypothetical being depicted as God actually exist ? If God does not actually exist, then Premise 1 would be wrong because nothing would be eternal. Remember that we have already proved that Universe is not eternal. Hence, if God is also not eternal due to His non existence, then Premise 1 would be wrong.

But Premise 1 is perfectly true. Therefore, God must actually exist.

Peacefullove:
You have a point here, many in the previous centuries wrongly think Yeshua is the Almighty God himself..

So what is going to be their fate for taking who is not a God as God (idolatry) ?

Peacefullove:
I wont really see any issue here given that Yeshua once admitted he can do Nothing, I mean nothing of his own initiative, he as well taught them to ask his Father directly says John 15 vs 16

You may not see any issue with this. But those who want to believe that Jesus is God are using it (John 14:13-14) and many other similar verses( Matthew 18:20, Colossians 2:9, Isaiah 9:6, Hebrew 1:8 etc ) to support their claim. Who gave them that opportunity ? Bible of course.

This is the reason why George Bernard Shaw declared many years ago; "BIBLE IS THE MOST DANGEROUS BOOK ON EARTH, KEEP IT UNDER LOCK AND KEY"

Peacefullove:
I think it oppose logic for an Almighty to have a God, but you still can't fault the writing of John, the entire capital/ small letter decision were made by Translators of Christian bible into English, if the same Bible can call humans god it must be true then that it reffered to Yeshua as God/god in the same sense , not in the sense of Almighty

I will like to know your thought.

So it is the fault of the translators of Bible into English ? I agree with you. But do you know how many Christians that have died having the belief that Jesus is God in actual sense base on this John 1:1,14 ? Remember: KJV is the first commonest Bible known to all.

Apart from this, there are some verses in the same book of John which seems to give Jesus the quality that belongs only to God. For example, consider the following verse;

"And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it. (John 14:13-14)"

Are we suppose to ask Jesus or God for anything? God of course!
Then why John have to report Jesus being said ;
" you may ask me"?

Again who suppose to answer our prayer: Jesus or God ? God of course!

Then why John have to report Jesus being said; "I will do it" ?

Honestly, the major cause of the doctrinal problems in the Christian world is Bible itself. Take it or leave it.

sonmvayina:
Same God different nomenclature....

Yes, if their God really posses those qualities

So do you believe in this one supreme God ?

Maximus69:
@Abdulgaffar You yourself quoted Isaiah 2:1-4 and Zephaniah 3:9

Laila ila Allah
~There is no king beside Allah!

That's what we often say before the Salat {Prayer}

The purpose of a KING in a kingdom is for the orderliness and peace in the kingdom, there is no usefulness in having a king if the king is not capable of speaking to his people for them to be peaceful within his domain!

But what is the significance of our one language when our king is speaking the same language {Arabic}
with all his subjects yet he couldn't use this one language to settle the internal dispute between his subjects?

Jehovah's Witnesses claims to be Christians but the name of their King is JEHOVAH and they're saying Jesus is the Prince and can you just imagine that when it's quoted in the same Bible book of Isaiah 9:6 that Jesus is the Prince of Peace!

Jehovah's Witnesses have proved beyond all reasonable doubt that their King speaks the same language with them, i can leave Nigeria today, travel to China, India, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Norway, America, Japan and name any country yet i'll feel like i'm at home because JWs are there waiting to welcome their brother in faith {me a Nigerian} not hypocritically but from the heart!

Well that's what made me say goodbye to Islam!

Let me just remind you about all the problems you have been having with your THEORY since beginning of our argument;


1. You are unable to defend that Jesus was a master worker of creation; it was Jehovah that gave series of commands (Genesis 1:1-31) and it was the same Jehovah that performed the work of Creation (Exodus 31:17, Genesis 2:2-3, Isaiah 44:24 NWT, Isaiah 48:13)



2. You are unable to deny the existence of hell fire that Jesus made mention in Matthew 25:41, Mark 9:43 and Luke 16:24.
Consider a very great robber that killed many people in this world and did not face any justice till he died. Now if there is no any punishment in the hereafter except annihilation (i:e cessation of existence) as you believe, then how could a perfect justice be administered to this great robber ?
This proved that it is also logically wrong to believe that there is no any punishment after leaving this world




3. You are in state of dilemma regarding the Spirit of truth made mentioned by Jesus in John 16:12-13: you don't want to accept this Spirit as the 3rd person of Holy Trinity and you don't want to accept the Spirit as Angel Gabriel that spoke to Muhammad (pbuh). Yet it is certain that this Spirit of truth is not an active force that can neither hear nor speak.




4. You are unable to explain why God that says an innocent and righteous human being must not be killed (Exodus 20:13) will suddenly CONTRADICT himself by saying an innocent and righteous human being must be killed on the Cross of Calvary before the humanity can gain eternal life.




5. You outrightly got it wrong by believing that your paradise is going to be established on this surface of the earth. This is because it is a well known fact that the sun is growing old day by day and it will soon expire. When the sun cease to exist, then no life can exist again on the surface of the earth.




6. You are unable to defend your claim that Jesus was sent to the entire World because the following FIVE evidence say otherwise:


(a) Jesus said "I was sent ONLY to the Iost sheep of Israel" (Matthew15:24) .
Yet if Jesus already knew that his Gospel message will later reach the Gentiles through his disciples, then he could have simply told the Canaanite woman that "it is not yet time for the Gentiles" (Matthew 15:22-24).
Since Jesus did not tell the woman what we expected, then he really meant his statement when he said "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel"



(b) Why Jesus have to label the Gentiles as DOGS if he knew that his Gospel message will soon reach them (Matthew 15:26) ?



(c) In Matthew 10:5-6, Jesus asked his disciples not to preach among the Gentiles but they should rather go and meet the Israelites.



(d) Matthew 28:19-20 is nothing but FABRICATION due to Acts 2:38, 8:16 and 10:48 which prove beyond any reasonable doubt that Jesus never commanded his disciples to make disciples of all nations nor to baptize with Trinitarian formula.




(e) If Jesus later commanded his disciples to visit the Gentiles and preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world (Acts 1:8, Mark16:15, Luke 24:47), then why did Peter have to say many years AFTER Jesus departure : "YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT IT IS AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE" (Acts 10:28 NIV) ?


Was Peter NOT aware that they were now FREE to visit the gentiles and preach the gospel to all the nations of the world ?


Some of the Christians argued that the reason why Peter said: "YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT IT IS AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE" is because he has forgotten the Jesus'new command of preaching to all the nations of the world. But if this is true, then why did remaining Jewish believers in Christ criticize Peter on the SAME ISSUE OF VISITING AND ASSOCIATING WITH GENTILES on his return to Jerusalem as the following passage below revealed ? Have they also forgotten the Jesus'new command of preaching to all the nations of the world? Read the passage below

Acts 11 New Living Translation (NLT)
"Soon the news reached the apostles and other believers in Judea that the Gentiles had received the word of God. But when Peter arrived back in Jerusalem, THE JEWISH BELIEVERS CRITICIZED HIM. “YOU ENTERED THE HOME OF THE GENTILES AND EVEN ATE WITH THEM!” they said (Acts 11:1-3 NLT).


If the other Jewish believers in Christ did not criticize Peter on his arrival to Jerusalem ON THE SAME ISSUE OF VISITING AND ASSOCIATING WITH GENTILES as shown above, then we may think that it was Peter that was saying nonsense when he said "YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT IT IS AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE. (Acts 10:28).


The second part of the Peter's statement "BUT GOD HAS SHOWN ME THAT I SHOULD NOT CALL ANYONE IMPURE OR UNCLEAN (Acts 10:28) is only referring to the "VISION" he experienced just before the arrival of the men sent by Cornelius . The statement has NOTHING to do with the so-called Jesus' new command of preaching to all the nations of the world .



Again, some Christians want to argue that the reason why Peter said:"YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT IT IS AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE(Acts 10:28)" is because Peter and other apostles find it difficult to discard the Jewish custom of not associating and visiting the Gentiles. However, it is not possible for the apostles and disciples of Jesus to give PREFERENCE for mere Jewish custom OVER a great and important command from their Master.


What actually preventing them was the command of "NOT PREACHING TO THE GENTILES" in Matthew 10:5-6 and the fact that Jesus told them CATEGORICALLY that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of the house of Israel( Matthew15:24).



Hopefully, this will be my last reply to your post. The theoretical problems with Christian world is too much for any person in his right sense to join any Christian sect. Just look at the problem No 6 cited above; there are FIVE strong evidence to prove that Jesus was never sent to the entire world. If you are yet to be convinced, then you're free to continue with your Jehovah witnessing.

As for me, this is the high time I stopped arguing with you.

May God guide us to the right part.

Thanks.

Maximus69:
¤Jesus told his disciples @ Matthew 10:5-6 to go for Israelites, and @ Matthew 28:19-20 to the extremity of the earth. So it's clear enough that it's after his people had rejected his message {Matthew 23:37-38} that he told his Jewish disciples to go to all the nations! Act 1:8

You refused to answer why Jesus have to label the Gentiles as "DOGS" if he knew already that his Gospel message will soon reach them ? You dogged the question. You are very smart ! By calling you dogs, was Jesus not telling you indirectly that he was never sent to you?

Matthew 28:19 reported Jesus to have said;

"Therefore go and make disciples of ALL NATION, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit".

In this very verse, Jesus commanded the apostles to baptize the people in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

But did apostles really act on this command ?
Read the three verses below;

1. Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38)

2. For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF JESUS (Acts 8:16).

3. So he ordered that they be BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST. Then they asked him to stay for a few days(Acts10:48)

If Jesus really commanded the apostles to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, then WHY WOULD APOSTLES GO AGAINST THIS COMMAND AND BAPTIZE ONLY IN JESUS NAME ?

Since the apostles would never go against the command of Jesus, then the only conclusion to be reached is that Jesus NEVER give such a command. Therefore, Matthew 28:19-20 is nothing but fabrication.

Maximus69:
¤Calling on the name is specifically saying God has a unique name and throughout all the earth JWs are calling on the same name JEHOVAH, moreover your Imam in Mecca is leading religionists opposing and killing one another because they're speaking the same language, right?

Not all Muslim nations in the world are killing one another. We still have a great number of sincere Muslims (far greater than 8.5 millions) who devote themselves to worship and preaching righteousness to others. For your information I am one of them. Our headquarters in Nigeria are located at Araromi village in Ilorin and Oluti in lagos. If you want to come and see how we travelled around the world for preaching , let me know. The fact that we are yet to reach you is not an evidence that we are not existing. Allah has commanded us not to segregate our selves from other Muslims (Qur'an 3:103-104) like you completely segregate yourself from other Christian world. That is the reason why unexposed Christians like you do not know us. Ask your people, we normally meet at villages.

Maximus69:
¤Isaiah's prophesy is not about a literal tallest mountain but it must be a mountain, right?

What about the worshippers not carrying weapons against one another and not learning wars anymore? Isaiah 2:4
Abi that side you wan tear am comot for the prophesy?

Are you saying Isaiah 2:2-3 are completely a parable and spiritual and not physical ?

Are you saying the MOUNTAIN and the HOUSE
OF THE LORD mentioned in these two verses are parable ?
The remaining part of the prophecy (Isaiah 2:4) is coming to be fulfilled since the first part has been fulfilled.

But if you think the verses refers to WATCH TOWER ORGANIZATION, similar question can also be thrown back to you; why the entire prophecy is yet to be fulfilled ? And if entire prophecy is going to be fulfilled in later future, let us know the MOUNTAIN and the HOUSE that God refers to .

Maximus69:
Jesus said he came only for the Israelites and you're expecting him to say it's to select his corulers!
Even the woman's response shows that she fully grasp the purpose of Jesus coming!

You are not responding to questions like intelligent person. I didn't expect Jesus to say he came to select his corulers. But I am expecting Jesus to tell the woman that " IT IS NOT YET TO TIME FOR THE GENTILES " if truly Jesus knew that his earthly mission would later reached the Gentiles through his disciples. Am I wrong ?

Again is it a must for Jesus to label the Gentiles as "DOGS" knowing that his disciples would later preach to them to accept him as God's only begotten son?

Furthermore, If Jesus was meant for the Jews and his disciples were meant for the Gentiles, then why did he forbid his disciples from preaching to the Gentiles in Matthew 10:5-6 ?

Maximus69:
And again you also mentioned language! Are you this daft?

Come on, what's the purpose of using the same language for worship when worshippers can't unite?

Can't you grasp that it simply means Perfect line of communication amongst worshippers of God?

Are you saying God Almighty does not know the appropriate words to be used to convey what he actually intended ?

Zephaniah 3:9 says as follows;

For then I will restore to the peoples a PURE LANGUAGE , that they all may call on the name of the Lord, to serve Him with one accord.

As you can see ;it is only the Muslims that are using the same pure Arabic language to worship God throughout the world.

If the worshippers are not unite then it would be impossible for millions of Muslims from different part of the world to gather at the same place to worship the same God every year behind the same Imam

Maximus69:
And Isaiah's prophecy, Walahi Talahi my guy your brains are totally dead!

Is Ararat the tallest mountain in earth?
Can't you see that the same prophesy further indicates that worshippers will not lift up weapons against one another neither join military services anymore?

A brain that is physically dead is still better than the eyes that are spiritually blind. Of course, only a spiritually blinded person will think tallest mountain implies tallest in "PHYSICAL SENSE" and not in "SPIRITUAL SENSE". If it is tallest in physical sense, how would people from all nations will be flowing it ?

Isaiah 2:2 KJV read as follows;

Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
That the mountain of the Lord’s house
Shall be established on the top of the mountains, And shall be exalted above the hills;
And all nations shall flow to it.

Question 1; which MOUNTAIN that ALL NATIONS will be flowing to?

Question 2; which HOUSE of the Lord that ALL NATIONS will be flowing to ?

Answer these questions if you sincerely believe that the mountain is not ARAFAT and the house is not KABAH at mecca.

Maximus69:
Jesus came for the selection of his corulers who will rule with him in heaven and God has promised that these corulers must be selected from only the children of Abraham, that's why Jesus said that!

Matthew 15:22-26 say as follows

15:22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession."

15:23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us."

15:24 He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."

15:25 The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said.

15:26 He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."

You said: Jesus came to select his corulers who will rule with him in heaven. But did woman ask Jesus to put her among his corulers or you don't know what you are saying ?

He simply ask Jesus to pray for the healing of her daughter. If Jesus came for the whole world to benefit from his earthly mission, why did he have to tell the woman again " IT IS NOT RIGHT TO TAKE THE CHILDREN'S BREAD (i:e what belongs only to the Jews ) AND TOSS IT TO THEIR DOGS(i:e the Gentiles) ? See how Jesus labelled you as "dogs" because he was never sent to you.
Again, why did he ask the so- called corulers not to preach among the Gentiles as the following verses indicate ?

These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.
Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 10:5-6)

Maximus69:
Muhammad failed woefully because it was the teachings of the Catholics that he just copied, removed the Trinity which will jeopardise his self acclaimed status as the last and greatest prophet because if Jesus is taught to be a part of the Trinity then himself {Muhammad} is of no relevance again.

This is exactly how you got it wrong. If Prophet of Islam was a false prophet, he had to be motivated by Satan. But Satan is the original author of doctrine of Trinity. Yet Satan would never destroy his well- established work because Satan does not use to oppose himself (see Mark 3:26). Satan can still deceived the Arabs by maintaining his doctrine of Trinity because they still believed in many gods at that time. So there was nothing difficult for Satan to reduce these multiple gods to triune gods instead of one God. In fact, they find it very difficult to accept the doctrine of one supreme God that prophet was asking them to embrace. So my friend you argument is not reasonable and logical.

If you believe that your paradise is going to be established on this surface of the earth, you outrightly got it wrong because it is well known that the sun is growing old day by day. When the sun cease to exist, then no life can exist again on the surface of the earth.

If the soul is not immortal and there is no any punishment in hell, then what is the essence of believing in God and striving to obey him ? Honestly, your ideology can ruin the morality of the entire world. One of the greatest reason that many people avoid doing something evil and engaging in good deeds is because they believe that there is reward and punishment after living this world. Consider a very great robber that killed many people in this world and did not face any justice till he died. Now if there is no any punishment in the hereafter except annihilation (i:e cessation of existence), then how could a perfect justice be administered ?

Use of specific language for worship throughout the world has been prophesied in Zephaniah 3:9

If there is no certain dress code for woman, then they would be free to wear anything they like. In that case, dressing with modesty will never be achieved. If there is no certain dress code, how are we to determine whether certain parts of woman body should be covered or not ?


Bowing and prostrating for God publicly is neither started by Catholicism nor Islam. It is deeply rooted in Bible ; Nehemiah 8:4-6

Travelling for pilgrimage to Mecca is also prophesied in book of Isaiah ;

In the last days the MOUNTAIN( i:e mount Arafat) of the LORD'S TEMPLE (i:e kabah) will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and ALL NATIONS will stream to it. (Isaiah 2:2)

The similitude of a watch tower organization is like the case of of a very generous man that got his wealth through money ritual

THEORY; the origin of the money is evil

PRACTICAL APPLICATION: giving out the money for assistance

BENEFIT: the lives of the orphans, the poor and the widow in his town change for the better

You will agree with me that there is nothing wrong with practical application and benefit. But the THEORY will still cause the man to fall sooner or later.

Similarly, watch tower organization may not have problem with practical application and benefit but their THEORY (taking Jesus as the creator, denial of existence of hell fire, accepting the spirit of truth as the third person of Trinity etc) will still cause the organization to fall sooner or later

Maximus69:
The main reason why one group needs to emerge as the real Muslims to be observing for the virtuous deeds to learn.
All those rules, tenets and hypocritical greeting of Salam aleikum {Peace be unto you} amounts to nothing if there is no real Peace in your religion!

Jesus said; I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 15:24).

Honestly, apart from this very verse, there are other many biblical verses to prove that Jesus was NEVER sent to you.

Don't be like a student of a university who used to attend lectures and participate in the examinations for many years but later discovered that his admission into the university was a FAKE one. So don't waste your precious time in Christianity because you are not part of Israelites..

Think very well ; why would Jesus said I WAS SENT ONLY TO THE ISRAELITES if he was actually sent to the entire world? Don't you see that something has wronged some where ?

See how your theoretical problems are increasing

1. You are unable to defend Jesus as a master worker of creation.

2. You are unable to deny the existence of hell in your Bible

3. You are in a state of dilemma regarding the spirit of truth in John 16:12-13.

4. You are unable to explain why Jesus would said he was sent ONLY to the Israelites instead of simply told the Canaanite woman that it is not yet time for the Gentiles if was truly sent to the entire world.

5. You are unable to explain why God that says an innocent and righteous human being must not be killed (Exodus 20:13) will suddenly CONTRADICT himself by saying an innocent and righteous human being must be killed on the Cross of Calvary before the humanity can gain eternal life.

But you neglect all these problems and continue to rely on your subjective BENEFITS of being with the watch tower organization.

If Jehovah witnesses can stand on their own without having any link with Bible and Christianity, it would have been better for them. However, the presence of all these foundational problems will NEVER allow anybody in his right sense to join any sect of Christianity.

Maximus69:
Mr Muhammad, before you expect lovers of Peace to abandon their peaceful religion, go and settle the differences between Shiites and Sunnis killing one another because of the same Allah, Muhammad and Quran!

Answer this question;

Now one of the female children approaches you for the collection of her own sweet. Please before God and man would you say; " I WAS ONLY ASKED TO GIVE THE MALE" ?

If they truthfully believe in Allah, Qur'an and the last day, they would not have fought with each other over trivial matters. They are only fighting for their personal motives and using religion as a pretext. Other Muslims are less concerned
about them because they are hypocrites.

OnyeOGA:
Krishna is the supreme god, says hindi Religious book. Same applies to other Religious gods in their Religious books.

The one supreme God is the eternal and personal being that has no beginning which brought the universe into existence.

If Krishna have all these qualities of a supreme God, then they are right. But if Krishna does not posses those qualities, then it is not the supreme God.

Maximus69:
Islam would have made much sense if you all agreed on terms of worship and sharia laws, but it's really confusing seeing different groups claiming Muslims and waging war against one another in the name of Islam!

For instance in Asia, there is unending disputes and incessant troubles going on between the Sunnis and Shiites. These are supposed to be exemplary Muslims groups but only God knows why one group is killing members of the opposite group!

That's why i keep asking you to tell me that one and only group an interested person can closely observe to know exactly what Islam is all about. But since you're advocating that all the different Churches of Christendom must be recognized as Christians, then there is no way you can successfully preach Islam on a forum like this most especially when we're not seeing each other's faces.

The true God is not for confusion, the Bible teaches that Satan has made himself like God in the midst of mankind and billions are worshipping him. So the only way to distinguish the true worshipers of the most high God is not just by arguing on doctrines and teachings, but to watch closely the activities going on in the midst of those claiming worshipers of God.

Of course we're imperfect so there's no way we can totally avert rifts but if it's amongst God's people, there's no way such rift could lead to segregation and killings of parties while we're still claiming to be brothers and sisters belonging to the same family in faith! That's the reason why the
Theories
Practical Applications and
Benefits

Of JWs teachings is remarkably convincing!

Who told you Islam does not agreed on terms of worship and shariah law ? Islam does not have problems with the foundation because all Muslims have the same basic doctrines. They all believe that Allah is God and Muhammad is the messenger of God . They all believe in six articles of faith. They all believe in five pillars of Islam. They all believe in the existence of Paradise and Hell. They all believe in the same Qur'an. There is no different versions of Qur'an. Qur'an is Qur'an in Islam.

But this is not the case with Christianity. What actually tear Christianity apart is the issue of foundational doctrines. Yet any true faith from God should not have problems with the doctrines because it is the foundation upon which the edifice of the faith will be erected.

Jesus has already declared : I WAS SENT ONLY TO THE LOST OF ISRAEL (Matthew 15:24). So you are just waisting your time in Christianity because you are not part of Israelites.

Suppose you are being asked to distribute a packet of sweet to some children in your vicinity WITH AN INSTRUCTION TO START WITH THE MALE CHILDREN BEFORE THE FEMALE.
Now one of the female children approaches you for the collection of her own sweet. Please before God and man would you say; " I WAS ONLY ASKED TO GIVE THE MALE" ?

Of course, you would not utter such kind of statement. You would definitely say "IT IS NOT YET TIME FOR THE FEMALE"

Similarly, if it was already in the divine plan that JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES WOULD PREACH TO THE JEWS FIRST AND THEN TO ALL THE GENTILES, then Jesus' statement directed to that Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:24 should have been: IT IS NOT YET TIME FOR THE GENTILES or something similar in meaning rather than “I WAS SENT ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL”.

Why did Jesus have to say such a statement if he was truly sent to the entire world to die for our sins? But you choose to neglect this very fact thinking that subjective benefits you're feeling in your organization is enough to prove that you on a right path.


There is NO ANY VERSE in the Qur'an which says Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or his companions were sent ONLY to the Arabs.

But see how the Bible categorically declared that Jesus (pbuh) was sent ONLY to the Israelites; I WAS SENT ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL ( Matthew 15:24) and see how Qur’an declared that Muhammad (pbuh) was sent to ALL MANKIND; " AND WE HAVE NOT SENT YOU (O Muhammad-pbuh) EXCEPT AS A GIVER OF GLAD TIDINGS AND AS A WARNER TO ALL MANKIND (Qur’an 34:28)". ..

Maximus69:
@bolded
Has resolved everything you've been arguing for ever since you came on Nairaland Sir!

So you can continue arguing with whoever tells you he/she doesn't believe in Muhammad at all, because the word Muslims simply means believer. And i also believe in Muhammad {though not truthfully} since Jesus said there will come after him many false prophets and the spirit of truth. So i believe Muhammad could be any of those.

Therefore any difference you and i have henceforth is not to be seriously taken, since there are millions of weak Muslims as well who don't truthfully believe in Muhammad, just count Maximus along with those weak Muslims !

Can i now get a hi~five from you, my brother in my weak faith?

By leaving Islam COMPLETELY for Christianity, there is no way we can count you among those who believe in Muhammad. All those weak Muslims you are seeing still believe in Muhammad because during the time of Ramadan they change a little bit. They are still in the fold of Islam. But you are TOTALLY out of Islam. So you are not among the weak Muslims.

By the way what is your view about Matthew 15:22-28 ?

Maximus69:
@bolded
Has resolved everything you've been arguing for ever since you came on Nairaland Sir!

So you can continue arguing with whoever tells you he/she doesn't believe in Muhammad at all, because the word Muslims simply means believer. And i also believe in Muhammad {though not truthfully} since Jesus said there will come after him many false prophets and the spirit of truth. So i believe Muhammad could be any of those.

Therefore any difference you and i have henceforth is not to be seriously taken, since there are millions of weak Muslims as well who don't truthfully believe in Muhammad, just count Maximus along with those weak Muslims !

Can i now get a hi~five from you, my brother in my weak faith?

By leaving Islam COMPLETELY for Christianity, there is no way we can count you among those who believe in Muhammad. All those weak Muslims you are seeing still believe in Muhammad because during the time of Ramadan they change a little bit. They are still in the fold of Islam. But you are TOTALLY out of Islam. So you are not among the weak Muslims.

Maximus69:
Can you see the bolded?

That's where your problem is hiding Sir!

So for you to solve it, you really need to first find the accurate understanding of the word BELIEVE!

But let me put you through perhaps like a guide!

For instance, i claim to believe in Muhammad that he is a prophet of God, i believe God sent him into the world to show mankind the way to heaven, i believe that if i also join in the Salat it's enough to show God that i am exercising faith in the teachings of God's prophet.
But all the instructions that Muhammad gave to his faithful disciples i finds it odd and old fashioned, so i preferred associating with just any group of persons claiming to be Muslims for the fun of it, while i crookedly select whatever PLEASES me in the teachings of Muhammad {the one i myself professed with my own mouth that God sent to teach me}
Do i truthfully BELIEVE in Muhammad?

Of course, there are also many weak Muslims who do not use to observe their prayer on regular basis and very negligent in following the teachings of the prophet. But yet we cannot say they do not believe in Muhammad (pbuh). We can only say they do not truthfully believe in him.

But Jesus did not say; THOSE WHO WILL TRUTHFULLY BELIEVE IN ME through their message.

He simply said THOSE WHO WILL BELIEVE IN ME.

Furthermore, that Jesus'prayer in John 17:20-23 has been in existence BEFORE the existence of the Christian world. Therefore, if Jesus truly utter this prayer, then God must have accepted it. Hence, we will not even see any Christian that would not truthfully believe in Jesus. In fact, God Almighty would have prevented the doctrine of Trinity from being established in the first instance. But this is not so.
This simply show that Jesus never prayed for the complete unity of the Christian world. This is because he was never sent to the world. By his own admission; I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 15:24). If Jesus already knew that he would later be sent to the entire world, he would not have said this statement in Matthew 15:24. He would have simply told that Canaanite woman; "it is not yet time for the Gentiles" instead of saying he was sent only to the Israelites (Matthew 15:22-24)

OnyeOGA:
If you truly believe in god. You should also acknowledge other over 3000 gods across cultures and traditions

Are you having problem with believing in one supreme God ? Let me know so that I can assist you

Maximus69:
@bolded
You're the accuser and at the same time the judge! right?

Someone gave evidence of his legitimacy and show you why others claiming children of the same man {his father} aren't of the same blood. Yet you're insisting that those infidels who aren't performing the expected duties required are of the same man just to refute what you're seeing.
Well it's still your problem Sir, Jehovah's Witnesses have made themselves clear before everyone!

You argument would have been meaningful, if Jesus have said ; I pray also for THOSE WHO WILL BELIEVE IN ME AND WORK FOR ME through their message (John 17:20) that ALL OF THEM MAY BE ONE (John 17:21).

But Jesus did NOT include "AND WORK FOR ME".

He simply and only said "WHO WILL BELIEVE IN ME through their message"

Since all Christian world believe in Jesus through the message of the Gospel delivered by the apostles, then according to this passage, ALL CHRISTIAN WORLD MUST BE ONE without any division whatsoever.

Therefore, the FAILURE of this very Jesus' prayer to be answered is a very strong evidence that Jesus NEVER utter such words because the fervent prayer of a righteous man AVAILS MUCH (James 5:16) let alone the prayer made by Jesus, one of the most dearest to God.

This is exactly what we expect because Jesus himself has already declared ; I WAS SENT ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL(Matthew 15:24). So he could not have been the same person that would be again sent to the entire Christian world talk less of praying for their complete unity.

If you believe that Jehovah witnesses have practical application, then for how long does a young woman must be wait before remarry after losing her husband and for how long does a young man must be wait before remarry after losing her wife ? (Answer with scriptural evidence)

Again, what are the minimum parts of the female body that must be covered for her to dress with modesty ? (Answer with scriptural evidence)

Furthermore, how are we to share a Large properties of a deceased that has wife, children, parents and relatives given that he did not write any will due to unexpected death ?( Answer with scriptural evidence)

In addition, what is the maximum period of time for keeping the deceased before the burial rites?(Answer with scriptural evidence)

Maximus69:
My Imam back in Islam said "You can't read the Quran and fully grasp it's meaning on your own without the tuition of an Islamic cleric"

How are you sure that your Imam was right ?

Maximus69:
But the truth is if you're getting the sense of something, the, only proof is when you're able to achieve the result NOT just mimicking whatever you find in the pages of the Bible and deceiving yourself that you've understood it!

Nobody is saying you can't read any part of that book containing 1189 chapters and 31,200 verses Sir, but it is the RESULT of what you've able to do with the writings that will prove to everyone that you fully grasp what you're reading!

If you have fully grasped what you are reading, then tell us the actual meaning of EVERLASTING FIRE in Matthew 25:41, Mark 9:43, Luke 16:24 and EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT in Matthew 25:46

Maximus69:
Only Jehovah's Witnesses have successfully formed a happy global family of peace-loving worshippers {John 17:20-23} so there's no more reason to keep arguing Sir!

Jesus simply said with NO ADDITION ;
I pray also for THOSE WHO WILL BELIEVE IN ME through their message (John 17:20) that ALL OF THEM MAY BE ONE (John 17:21) ; not only a small portion( 8.5 million out of 2.3 billion)
Do all other Christians not believe in Jesus through the message of the Gospel ?
So your argument amounts to nothing because all other Christians also believe in Jesus through the message of the Gospel. Therefore, John 17:20-23 is NOT ONLY meant for the watch tower organisation. It is meant for the WHOLE Christian world.

Maximus69:
Jesus spoke in parables as in illustrations, so if you're not one of us you can't understand what our Master, Lord and King was teaching through the use of illustrations! Matthew 13:3-13

But we his true followers know that Jesus as the one who Created all things can't contradict what was written, Creatures aren't immortal so they can't live forever.
Everlasting life is the gift of God NOT for all creatures except those who proved to be God's children! Romans 6:23

So it's funny seeing all of you confused due to Jesus' illustrations instead of trying to correlate what you're reading with all the promises of God in the Hebrew/Aramaic scriptures {Old Testament}!

Mumuscious people concluded that since Jesus mentioned fire, then God must create another place for evildoers to exist forever!

I have taken my time to read the whole Matthew 25:1-46. See below;


25:1 "At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom.
25:2 Five of them were foolish and five were wise.
25:3 The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them.
25:4 The wise, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps.
25:5 The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
25:6 "At midnight the cry rang out: 'Here's the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!'
25:7 "Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps.
25:8 The foolish ones said to the wise, 'Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.'
25:9 "'No,' they replied, 'there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.'
25:10 "But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.
25:11 "Later the others also came. 'Sir! Sir!' they said. 'Open the door for us!'
25:12 "But he replied, 'I tell you the truth, I don't know you.'
25:13 "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.
25:14 "Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his property to them.
25:15 To one he gave five talents of money, to another two talents, and to another one talent, each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey.
25:16 The man who had received the five talents went at once and put his money to work and gained five more.
25:17 So also, the one with the two talents gained two more.
25:18 But the man who had received the one talent went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master's money.
25:19 "After a long time the master of those servants returned and settled accounts with them.
25:20 The man who had received the five talents brought the other five. 'Master,' he said, 'you entrusted me with five talents. See, I have gained five more.'
25:21 "His master replied, 'Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master's happiness!'
25:22 "The man with the two talents also came. 'Master,' he said, 'you entrusted me with two talents; see, I have gained two more.'
25:23 "His master replied, 'Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master's happiness!'
25:24 "Then the man who had received the one talent came. 'Master,' he said, 'I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed.
25:25 So I was afraid and went out and hid your talent in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.'
25:26 "His master replied, 'You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed?
25:27 Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.
25:28 "'Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the ten talents.
25:29 For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.
25:30 And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'
25:31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory.
25:32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
25:33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
25:34 "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.
25:35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,
25:36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
25:37 "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?
25:38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you?
25:39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
25:40 "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
25:41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
25:42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink,
25:43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
25:44 "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
25:45 "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
25:46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."


You can see that the first parable is Matthew 25:1-12 while the second parable is Matthew 25:14-30.

So Matthew 25:41 which mention ETERNAL FIRE is not included in the parable.

Again look at the last verse Matthew 25:46 . You will notice that there is CORRESPONDENCE between this verse and Matthew 25:41 quoted above. So that passage really mention an ETERNAL FIRE. It is not a parable. Read it again by yourself

Maximus69:
That's it Sir,
The same threat as usual "If you disagree with what i'm telling you, God will torment you {ALIVE} forever inside fire"
The same old story for the gods!

Are you saying there is no hell fire?
What do you have to say about the verse below found in your own scripture ?
"Then he will say to those on his left: ‘Go away from me,+ you who have been cursed, into the EVERLASTING FIRE+ prepared for the Devil and his angels.+ (Matthew 25:41 NWT)

Honestly I don't understand your belief because you are denying something in the book you have accepted to guide you in your affairs

Maximus69:
It's you that's having problems with your Allah, Muhammad and Islam!

Instead of you to meet your elders in the
JW organization to see how the THREE THEORETICAL problems presented up there can be solved, you now resort to abusing Allah and his prophet. Well no problem ! We shall soon leave the surface of the Earth

Maximus69:
God's Holy Spirit speaks through people {2Peter :21} but you won't agree because your Muhammad told you it's Gabriel that spoke to him so it's not easy to resolve this!

2nd Peter 1:21 says;

"For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

As you can see, the Holy Spirit did NOT speak through the people. People were moved by the
Spirit to speak what God inspired in them.

If the Holy Spirit speak through the people, then Holy Spirit also HEAR through the people ? Oh yes ?

Honestly, you are not going straight. My argument is this; if the spirit of truth in John 16 can SPEAK and can HEAR, do you still believe that the passage was referring to your God'sACTIVE FORCE ? If yes then you have to accept that your God's ACTIVE FORCE is a PERSON because it is only a person that can speak and can hear. Then who is this very PERSON ?

There are only two options for you. It is either you believe that this person is the 3rd person of Holy Trinity (God the Holy Spirit) or you believe this person to be Angel Gabriel that spoke to Muhammad(pbuh).
But if you have a third option, bring it to light. Stop digging around the bush; let us know the identity of this very person.

See how you are now having problems with your THEORY;

1. You are unable to defend that Jesus was a master worker of creation; it was Jehovah that gave series of commands (Genesis 1:1-31) and it was the same Jehovah that performed the work of Creation (Exodus 31:17, Genesis 2:2-3, Isaiah 44:24 NWT, Isaiah 48:13)

2. You are unable to deny the existence of hell fire that Jesus made mention in Matthew 25:41

3. You are in state of dilemma regarding the Spirit of truth made mentioned by Jesus in John 16:12-13: you don't want to accept the spirit as the 3rd person of Holy Trinity and you don't want to accept the spirit as Angel Gabriel. Yet it is certain that this spirit of truth is not an active force that can neither hear nor speak.

Even, if you think your PRACTICAL APPLICATION and BENEFIT are okay, your THEORY would make you to fall because according to your logic, the THREE must be complete. Beside, the theory is the foundation. If the foundation of a building is very WEAK, then the building would soon collapse no matter how beautiful the building may look in the eyes of its beholders.



Do you ever know that there is no any religious scripture that SPECIFICALLY condemned the doctrine of Trinity except Qur'an. Now, if you believed that Muhammad was motivated by Satan to come up with Qur'an, do you think Qur'an would condemn the doctrine of Trinity and affirm the oneness of God ? This is impossible because Satan cannot oppose himself ; "And if Satan opposes himself and is divided, he cannot stand; his end has come(Mark 3:26)