₦airaland Forum

italo:
I already answered the bold. Meanwhile you're yet to tell me why you contradict the Bible on Gentiles being saved by their conscience. Still dodging that.

johnydon22:
Yeah just like muslims study quran by another holy spirit

@bolded
If you cannot make honest assertions then please i have no more need arguing with you unless you have reading and comprehension problem to see when i stated.
I am not an evolutionist cus i dont know how anything began
Please desist from making fallacious straw mans i only respect honest people.

Science is not a belief system, it is study, observations and experiments. . No one needs to have faith in anything, when there are evidences supporting a theory no one needs faith to know..

I can only advice you to go and start reading cus honestly am bewildered at this type of thinking and innocent naivete..

johnydon22:
Ok then its settled

But you know the difference between science (study) and faith (belief)?

sportsmaster:
Gen15,Rom4,Rom5,Gal3

johnydon22:
But all your assertions on evolution speaks quite the reverse, it shows you haven't read about evolution or possess keen knowledge on biology if you did you wouldn't have presented the questions you asked the way you did.

That is sure, your christian faith depends on your bible did you expect any different? its all right to base your discussion of your christian faith to the bible because am sure science doesn't deal on faiths.
You cant discuss fish swallowed jonah with biology text book, or hercules killed a lion with biology it must be from homers illiad.

so the way you discuss your christian faith is very okay and am okay with the fact that you dont want to intertwine it with scientific knowledge..

johnydon22:
Lmao am sure i never assumed anything on my write up, i only stated to you what evolution said since i saw you have never read it.

And am also sure i never said am an evolutionist in fact i asserted the reverse at the beginning of my post...

My only reply to you now should be; Start from basic biology and read evolution also then take up the places you don't agree/understand with evolutionists/scientists. . . Am sure you will bag a Nobel if you are able to disprove them.

sportsmaster:
"Abraham believed once,and it was accounted unto him as righteousness"

from mark 11:23-24:-
faith consists two things,
1)there is a conviction of the heart (BELIEVING)
2)There is an action (SPEAKING).
This clears your doubts.
Do you want a teaching and notes on the subject of Faith?

Visit www.livingwordmedia.org to download our teachings for free.

This is my church's website for teachings and e-books.

sportsmaster:
another one on the loose..lemme correct you before you start blabbing.
From these scriptures you quoted,what was Abraham's works..
If you read in btwn the lines,you will that the "works" James is talking about is not "CONDUCT" but "acting on your faith"

WORKS= Putting ur faith to action.
.

2cor5:21:-He who knew no sin was made sin for us so that we might be made the righteousness of God in him

as it is written,"The just shall live by faith".
What this means is that "The just(righteous) came to exist by faith".

Read ROMANS(the whole letter)
especially chapter 4 and 5.
Because if righteousness came by works then Christ died in vain.

I think where you failed it , the "works" Paul was referring to was different to the "works" James was referring to.
These books are whole "letters",Dont read in portions,Read the whole letter.

The works Paul refferred is talking about "self-righteousness" and the one James referred to is "putting your faith to work".

david,Abraham ,scriptures reckons that righteousness was imputed to them without works.

SELAH

johnydon22:
N.B: I am not an evolutionist i am of the opinion man still has a lot of study to do on the subject of the origin of species before it can be perfected.
I am only replying this post because i clearly can see you have not even read evolution and your biology isnt stable enough... its for the purpose of learning.
Am i supposed to be teaching people on nairaland what they should have learnt in school... Ok let us go science101

You know if actually you have paid attention to biology class you would have know that humans also falls under the category of anthropoids primates

Meanwhile theory evolution never stipulated humans evolved from primates like you think, but modern primates and humans (still primates) evolved from one common ancestor. . so the modern primates that you are referring are in no way in human evolutionary trend but branched off separately from that one common ancestor. . Just like Cats, lions have common ancestory making them falidea...
#Sighs again humans (primates) did not evolve from other modern primates. . They all evolved from a common different ancestor...Seriously you guys have to read something up before bringing this type of naive questions.

According to study (not me) the oldest hominid fossil dated places at 5
million years ago... so it is speculated that the first hominin Ardipithecus emerged 5.6-4.4million years ago. . You can go read up the evolutionary trend down to homo sapiens


Another naive question that sells out that you have never read anything on evolution... It did not happen all of a sudden like you think, evolution means progress.

It is a very slow change spanning millions of years where by mutated genes carry traits of parents to offsprings. . Let me represent it simply in colours in the picture below.
On the illustration below, the changes within the colours are intertwined that you wont know where the colour red stops and the green starts because it is a slow progressive process... thats exactly how science stipulates evolutionary trends progress, slow and gradual changes.

You seriously i get tired of answering these questions born out of mere ignorance of what a subject say, at least people should read this stuffs before bringing on questions to a public forum

italo:
Are you saying Jesus doesn't touch people at baptism?

italo:
To be born again is to be born of water and Spirit which is baptism.
That is why Jesus and his apostles went and baptized immediately after the teaching.
That is why Philip baptized the Eunuch.
That is why the Bible baptized entire households based on the faith of the father.


Nowhere does the Bible say the Bold.

italo:
What is infant Baptism, if not bringing infants for Jesus to touch?

2. You still haven't said anything about Gentiles being judged with their conscience or not. Have you not found a way to change Romans 2? You need more time?

italo:
What is infant Baptism, if not bringing infants for Jesus to touch?

2. You still haven't said anything about Gentiles being judged with their conscience or not. Have you not found a way to change Romans 2? You need more time?

italo:
You should try re-evangelizing all the apostles...they went and baptized with water after John3:5 teaching...and continued to baptized with water after Pentecost.

You understand Jesus more than them.

johnydon22:
Yeah i just mentioned it takes millions of years for any further physical improvement to take place due to mutation

sylarsquins:
Human beings have stopped evolving after becoming the
only species to “put halt to natural selection of its own free
will”, Sir David Attenborough has said, as he predicts the
“cultural evolution” of the future.
Sir David, whose new show concentrates on the ascent of
man, said he believed humans had now stopped evolving in
physical terms, after developing means to keep even the
weakest of the species alive.
Saying we are now able to rear up to 99 per cent of our
babies, he added people were no longer subject to
Darwinian theories natural selection.


Instead, he proposed, humans would continue to develop in
a cultural sense; inheriting knowledge from previous
generations and building upon it.
In an interview with the Radio Times this week, Sir David
said: “I think that we’ve stopped evolving.
“Because if natural selection, as proposed by Darwin, is the
main mechanism of evolution – there may be other things,
but it does look as though that’s the case – then we’ve
stopped natural selection.
“We stopped natural selection as soon as we started being
able to rear 95–99 per cent of our babies that are born.
“We are the only species to have put a halt to natural
selection, of its own free will, as it were.”
Sir David, who will present Rise of Animals on BBC2, added:
“Stopping natural selection is not as important, or as
depressing, as it might sound – because our evolutionary
process is now cultural.
“Humans have a great cultural inheritance as well as a
physical, genetic inheritance – we can inherit a knowledge of
computers or television, electronics, aeroplanes and so on.
“Each generation has got all these books that tell them these
things, so our cultural evolution is proceeding with
extraordinary swiftness.”
He also insisted he was grateful to live in the modern day,
saying that things were likely to get worse with future
generations looking back “at a world that was less crowded,
full of natural wonders, and healthier.”

Hiploko:
All these people asking stupid questions. God cannot be made a liar. His word is true... If Adam(man) evolved as science claims, what did we evolve from? Who made the object we evolved from? What did what we evolve from evolve from? Since na evolution dey reign. And tell me, since it was Apes to man. Why haven't we changed to something else? Did evolution stop with man? Receive sense all of you!!

Syncan:
I read not only this post but all your posts here, that's how I knew you already brought in the "mother of God" thread here before made allusion to it . There is no need bringing in the use of water as allegories when talking about baptism in the first place, for the apostles showed that it was literal by their actions.

italo:
Call me when you succeed in changing the word in Luke 18:15 from infants to children.

You're still a learner. Ask Barnabaseloka how he changes scripture to suit his heresies.

Syncan:
You particularly are an interesting fellow...you know what peter should have said but didnt say, you whose mother ceases to be your mother when you stop calling her mom... you say a lot at a time, too much talking drives you off point. The bold is what is important to the subject. Since the apostles understood Jn3:5 water as physical water as shown in those passages, when did the meaning change in the context of baptism. Imagine what philip must have told the ethiopian eunuch along the way about Jn3:5, that made him exclaim on citing water in acts 8. Imagine how important water event was; that made peter insist on it after the manifestation of the Holy Spirit on the people in acts 10. They held it as a very important requirement for those who are to be saved. Nothing suggests that physical water was ever removed. Maybe you need to re-evangelize peter, paul, philip and the rest.

Syncan:
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and
of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God. Jn.3:5

I have read someone saying Jesus did not mean water, this is a strange teaching even to the understanding of the apostles. Or how else will someone explain the waters of the following baptism passages?

1. Water found on the way, in Acts 8: 36. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?

2. Water still called for by peter even after their receiving the Holy Spirit, in Acts 10:47. Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

3. Water associated with river, in Acts 16:13-15. And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted .... And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira...And when she was baptized, and her household....

4. Water used for washing, in Acts 16:46 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.

And to think "Christians" did not rebuke him, but everyone was busy attacking Italo, who alone pointed this out is alarming. Or do you all agree it wasn't water in those passages too

MuttleyLaff:
"Hydatos" is water and more

I am ahead of you.
I have earlier provided and hinted you the place where hydatos was used as an allegory or figure for the word of God
Look up https://www.nairaland.com/2383797/saved-faith-water-baptism/4#34885168

John 7:38
Anyone who believes in me may come and drink!
For the Scriptures declare, 'Rivers of living water will flow from his heart.'"

You eventually are coming round to the truth
Yes, Jesus said no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water (i.e. hydatos) and the Spirit.
Hydatos is an allegro or symbol for the word of God
Remember, faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God?
Without faith in the word of God, it's impossible to enter the kingdom of God

You post and print more genuine rubbish

hahn:
Lol. I'm with y'all.

However, what strikes me is the fact that christians are only concerned about being saved. The whole idea of "being saved" is the only foundation of the average christian's morality.

And that's why you are all having this "debate". Faith or works? Will it be safe to say that a serial killer who believes in god(faith) will make heaven while a man who tries to treat everyone he encounters with love and fairness will go to hell just because he doesn't believe in god(works)?

It would seem that being kind to your neighbour, showing love to strangers, desisting from looting of public funds(as in the case of our christian political leaders), respecting other people's views and opinions, being truthful, keeping to your word, having integrity and other good "works" would seem like a burden to people who feel more comfortable with just having "faith" just so they can "make heaven". Afterall, if all one has to have to make heaven is faith then why should one care about one's staff who is unable to add milk in his daughter's ogi? What's my business with my neighbour who hasn't eaten? Why should I care about what happens to the victims of boko haram who have lost their parents, siblings or loved ones, their homes, their investments? Doing that won't matter as long as all you need is to have "faith"

Its pretty simple. I don't need to have "spiritual understanding" or cram the bible to be able to figure it out. Its common sense

hahn:
I don't see how this is a justification of me not being able to contribute and learn.

If you say the water in the kettle you're holding is hot and I say it isn't all you have to do is pour the "hot" water on my hands. If indeed the water is hot ill confirm it is but if it is not you don't expect me to agree with you just because you said it was hot in the beginning

italo:
Stop lying. I have said several times that I believe all the verses are true.

You are the one who believes some verses were wrongly written.

That Peter said 'baptism is for remission of sin,' but he really meant 'baptism is NOT for the remission of sin.'

You said it was Jesus time in John 2, Jesus said his time hadn't come.

You said Mary's motherhood ended when he started preaching, the Bible called Mary his mother at the foot of the cross.

You said all who lived after Jesus would be judged by their faith in him, the Bible says the gentiles will be judged by their conscience.

You have told too many lies against the scriptures.

...and without remorse.

italo:
Stop lying. I have said several times that I believe all the verses are true.

You are the one who believes some verses were wrongly written.

That Peter said 'baptism is for remission of sin,' but he really meant 'baptism is NOT for the remission of sin.'

You said it was Jesus time in John 2, Jesus said his time hadn't come.

You said Mary's motherhood ended when he started preaching, the Bible called Mary his mother at the foot of the cross.

You said all who lived after Jesus would be judged by their faith in him, the Bible says the gentiles will be judged by their conscience.

You have told too many lies against the scriptures.

...and without remorse.

hahn:
Lol

I'm really enjoying this discussion

I wonder why god decided to inspire a book that contrdicts itself such much that its readers are unable to agree. The incompetence of god becomes more and more glaring with each comment made on this thread

italo:
U

Bros, leave me alone. You said the apostles wrote wrongly...

How can we have a discussion on wrongly written scriptures?

italo:
Dodging questions again.

italo:
My brother, what won't we see on nairaland?

Barnabaseloka said Peter meant one thing but said another thing.

Scholar826 said Mary was not the Mother of Jesus.

Barnabaseloka said her motherhood stopped when he started preaching.

"He who the gods want to destroy, they will first make deaf/mad"--African proverb

italo:
Don't mind all those apostles who wrote the Bible in the wrong way. Peter wrote 1Pet3:21 wrong...the he said Acts 2:38 wrong...or maybe Peter said it well then Luke wrote it wrong...Mark wrote Mark 16:16 wrong.....John wrote John 3:5 wrong.

In the other thread you said Jesus time had come to perform a miracle in John 2, but John wrote wrongly that Jesus said his time hadn't come.

You said Mary's motherly role ended when Jesus started His ministry at 30, but the Bible authors called Mary his mother when he was on the cross at 33.

You have made yourself a teacher to the Holy Spirit who inspired these apostles to write wrongly.