₦airaland Forum

Goshen360: My brother, is it too difficult for you to show who these mEn are? and who these womEn are as it contradicts the words of Christ. And if it is NOT a matter of showing or quoting a verse, then I "assume" you are not fit to handle the word of truth.

~Am sorry, this thread may be over then~

obadiah777: i guess i am not worthy and fit. Go ahead with your false doctrine.

i guess Cain married his own mother then

^^^^^

Ah! I didnt know Adam divorced Eve, making way for Cain to marry her

Eve must have hurt Adam that bad

Lawd have mercy.

"Cain made love to his wife.

She became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch.

Cain was building a city, and he named it Enoch after his son"
- Genesis 4:17 GOD'S WORD® Translation

[quote author=Mr_Anony]To answer your question, let us read the passage in context:

Jeremiah 4:15-31.

Now please tell me honestly if this is prophecy or history[/quote]The time-gap in Genesis was vaguely mentioned in Genesis 1:1-2 without much detail of it given anywhere in the rest of the book.

It is the bible's very first mystery,

which is the glory of God to conceal a thing:

but the honor of kings is to search out a matter

Prophecy or history?

Prophecy is not only about looking forward and seeing into the future,

it also, is about looking backward and seeing into the past.

Joagbaje: Let's dwell on The portion I quoted.

It refers to pre adamite world.

Ask you a question ,

Is there ever going to be a time in future that the earth will become empty and void?

Another question.

WHEN DID LUCIFER FALL?

was it before Adam creation or after Adam was created ?

@Joagbaje

By the below admission, God created the earth to always be lived on

"For thus says the LORD that created the heavens;
God himself that formed the earth and made it; he has established it,
he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited:
I am the LORD; and there is none else"
- Isaiah 45:18 KJV

The second question should be re-constructed as

WHEN DID WAS LUCIFER FALL CREATED?

was it before Adam's creation or after Adam was created?

Which of the days?

"For in one place the Scriptures say,
⁶What are mere mortals that you should think about them,
or a son of man that you should care for him?

⁷Yet you made them only a little lower than the angels
and crowned them with glory and honor"
- Hebrews 2:6-7 NLT

Goshen360: ^^^
What the heck is that ugly site you are adding to your quoting me?

Goshen360: ^^^
Do you want to be reported to the moderators

patriot2: chill

Goshen360: Respect yourself or you will be reported and probably with a suggestion to be banned.

We are not playing here.

There is time for everything and besides, this is not the place for such dirty stuffs please.

I have appealed to you in a reasonable way. Thank you.

@manmustwac

Thank you for checking and taking complete control of the situation

obadiah777: genesis 2 vs 20 but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him meaning out of all the women already formed, none was suitable for him

LOL why you splash my name in lights ?

@obadiah777

We go way back, you being my homie and all

but hey, stop taking the mick

The reason at Genesis 2 vs 20 why there was not found a help meet for Adam was

Yes God promised him a help meet at Genesis 2 vs 18

God however did not start working on making the help meet until Genesis 2 vs 21

Was Adam expecting to find a help meet among animals? If he was,

then Genesis 2 vs 20 was just a reminder that his help mate project is outstanding,

this obviously would have left Adam expectant and more wanting.



obadiah777, also about

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

or

"And he answered and said unto them, Have you not read, that he who made them at the beginning made them male and female,"

Haba, Ah-ha, why twisting scripture now?

The male and female in Geneses 1:27 and Matthew 19:4 is referring to the model or template that the creation of man

and the sanctity of marriage was/are based on.

The gender specification in Geneses 1:27 is very important for the validation and relevance of the next verse (i.e. Geneses 1:28)

Goshen360: I just quoted KJV to you from where Jesus himself said they were created mAle (not male[b]S[/b]) and female (not female[b]S[/b])

No be your man

This particular yarn which he regularly spins, always takes the biscuit.

obadiah777: the sequence

genesis 2 vs 20
but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him meaning out of all the women already formed, none was suitable for him

LOL why you splash my name in lights ?

Goshen360: Stop using just words to say God created a nation of people called Adam,

kindly use scriptures to show us how One man Adam means many people.

please show us from scriptures

And where in the scriptures did God create MANY WOMEN or MANY WOMEN ALREADY FORMED?

Do you mind showing us?

^^^^^

ROTFL

danwo: @Goshen360

Whilst we are waiting for them to come home to roost

I'll like along with your question too, counter ask in relation to Hebrews 1:10 below,

that the foundation in that verse is referring to which earth or at which stage or period

"And, you, Lord, in the beginning have laid the foundation of the earth;

and the heavens are the works of your hands:"

- Hebrews 1:10 KJV

^^^

Na oil, I dey carry! Na oil, I dey carry!

Sand sand, man, no come spoil my own!

Na oil, I dey carry!

Seem to forget, that I am just a bystander

Goshen360: Okay....seems Delafruita has run away. Let me take it up with you but I don't just want him come and take us in circle and in circle.

Now, let's start with Genesis 1:1

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"

The first question is, what "beginning" is this?

What do you understand by the "beginning" of Genesis 1:1?

Let's deal with this question first and we kick off from there.

Goshen360: ^^^
Yeah brother but your people that wants to discuss this are not showing up o, I no see Delafruita and SNCOQ3 viewing this thread.

Make them no let this tension wey dey my body cool down o.

. Abeg, take your sit in the front row and watch.

@Goshen360

Whilst we are waiting for them to come home to roost

I'll like along with your question too, counter ask in relation to Hebrews 1:10 below,

that the foundation in that verse is referring to which earth or at which stage or period

"And, you, Lord, in the beginning have laid the foundation of the earth;

and the heavens are the works of your hands:"

- Hebrews 1:10 KJV

Goshen360: ^^^
Like I said, and will admit it, I am not a scientist and cannot prove the age of the earth

but I can definitely prove there was no gap whatsoever and there is nothing like pre-adamic world.

You may sit back and watch how I deal with this our brother, Delafruita on this subject.

@Goshen360

Sieving the bible or studying it would not throw up an age

Yeah, the bible doesnt tell the age of the earth.

The age of the earth is a scientific matter and not a bible/theological one,

so you are wise to leave the dispute for the scientists or those willing to enter the realm of science.

". . . there was no gap whatsoever and there is nothing like pre-adamic world . . ."?

I am the one in the front seat row with a bowl of popcorn

Goshen360: @ danwo,

Do you want to enter this discussion?

If Yes, then clearly identify where you stand.

@Goshen360

My dearest brother, I wish I can enter the discusion, God knows, but unable to.

I however would admit based on evidences in the scripture,

that I stand on the premise that the earth is more than 6000 years old.

You think otherwise? Erh?

You think the geological earth is 6000 years old? Hmm?

Jbenue: This is not a condemnation on the Bible but it seems to me that women are the only ones who are always infertile in the bible,

with very little being mentioned about male infertility.

For example Sarah, Hannah, Elizabeth where all infertile before God performed miracles on them.

Is there any case of man being impotent??

If you know please answers thanks.

danwo: like you didn't know Abraham was impotent. uh?

"And being not weak in faith,
he considered not his own body now dead,
when he was about an hundred years old,
neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb:"
romans 4:19

Jbenue: Abraham was not impotent, he bore Ishmael with Sarah's slave Haggai after Sarah herself told him to.

Know before you write please

Jbenue: @ danwo:

You have gone beyond the point of this thread.

@Jbenue

Why are you pulling the "beyond the point" or "beyond the scope" card

Thought it was you who did not agree that Abraham was impotent now.

2000 years before Mary later did, Abraham earlier, had the Holy Spirit come upon him and the power of the Most High overshadowing him.

I would have elaborated more but am wary of your "gone beyond the point of this thread" red flag or line.

Er, hmm, well, regarding "Is there any case of man being impotent?? If you know please answer[/b]s thanks"

Without trying to be controversial or come across as a polemist, [b]Er, arguably was impotent.

Jbenue: Abraham was not impotent, he bore Ishmael with Sarah's slave Haggai after Sarah herself told him to.

Know before you write please

@Jbenue

Jbenue, don't you know the difference between Ishmael and Isaac? Hmm?

Ishmael was the son of a bondswoman; Haggai, born after the flesh.

Isaac was to be the son of a freewoman; Sarah, born through the promise (i.e. as it were, aided by the Spirit)

Don't you recall the fertility promise? The offspring promise to Abram?

You don't recall Abram trying to jeopardise that promise?

Like the stunt he pulled in Egypt, for example?

Or his escapade with King Abimelech?

You didn't notice Abram's and Abraham's subsequent battle of wills with God over the said fertility promise? Hmm?

You didn't notice God regularly stepping in to repeat the promise?

6 times He repeated the promise to Abram.

It was at the 4th promise; 10 years after the 4th promise to be precise,

that Sarai, impatiently & in defiance of God, said to Abram, "The LORD has kept me from having children"

and sent Abram to the Egyptian slave girl, Haggai.

It is at the 5th promise that God changed their names and now demanded a piece of Abraham's you-know-what-that-is.

OUCH! Total and across the board divine submission happening here. HISS!

and here is Abram admitting, symbolically that his fertility is not down to him without God having a say in the matter.

It was at the 6th promise, that God repeated the promise that Sarah NOW will have a son the following year

but Sarah cynically laughed it off.

Anyway, bottom line, God waited until Abraham was clinically impotent to fulfil the promise

And we know who wouldnt be sharing the credit with God on that.

Rejuvenated Abraham, had Isaac with Sarah,

after Sarah died, he later had 6 more sons, getting jiggy with new wife; Keturah

Then Abraham fell on his face, and laughed,
and said in his heart, Shall a child be born to him that is an hundred years old?
and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?
- Genesis 17:18 KJV

Abraham didn't focus on his own impotence
and say, "It's hopeless. This hundred-year-old body could never father a child."
Nor did he survey Sarah's decades of infertility and give up.
- Romans 4:19 The Bible in Contemporary Language

jayriginal: ^^
If you like. I cant stop you can I ?

^^^
It (i.e. jayriginal) and others can't say I didn't try.
Oops!
Sorry jayriginal, I didn't really mean to call you it.

jayriginal: ^^^
You wish to avoid the obvious; so be "it".

@jayriginal

Seems you wouldn't mind me referring to you as it

Maybe I shall start using the adjective IT for you from now on when talking about you or referring to you.

mkmyers45: Answer this: what did he vow?

jayriginal: Yup, I noticed the punctuation. It simply shows that she was roasted a virgin.

Which vow did he make that was not mentioned. If god did not like the human sacrifice and permitted him to fulfill another vow(I am assuming for the sake of argument), why then was it not mentioned. Then, we wouldnt be arguing over this.

Consider Jephthah telling god he will roast whatever comes out of his house. Did either he or god suppose it would be a table that would come out of the house ?

Or perhaps the cooking pot would open the door and come out ?

At the very thing, it had to be a living thing. If I were god and didnt want the human sacrifice, what would stop me from somehow making sure it was an animal; a sheep perhaps that came out of the already opened door (dont ask me how, I am god until the fullstop ).

No, instead, god watched (that is if he did not even make the girl rush out) as the girl came joyfully to greet her father.

Now, she told her father that he must fulfill his vow, but he should let her mourn for her virginity. After mourning, she came back Jephthah turned her to suya according to his vow, and the Israel chicks MOURNED her.

You find it abhorrent and it shows you are at the very least, better than the god she was sacrificed to, but you dont want to believe that. So instead, you bend over backwards to escape the obvious.

@mkmyers45
@jayriginal

Without trying to come across as condescending, there is enough information from preceding posts to how and what really was vowed than this overrated barbecued conjecture or roasted paranoia

Here is unfolding the information . . .

Slowly read Judges 11:31 because I am hoping you will spot and detect the dichotomy in the verse

Then it shall be, that whatsoever comes forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD'S,
and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.
- Judges 11:31

Jephthah made was a coded or as it were a pregnant or loaded vow

#1: "whatsoever comes forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD'S"

#2: "and I will offer it up for a burnt offering."


It is like this:

Referring to #1: Whatsoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me shall surely be the LORD'S (i.e. dedicated or vowed to God)

Referring to #2: Better still, if it happens to be an IT (i.e. an animal and not a human being) then I will offer IT, the animal up for a burnt offering as a bonus.

Father and daughter knew the fate of the daughter is now a lifetime of celibacy and dedication to God (i.e. as per #1)

Please do not hit under the belt with "it" is used for a human being

(i.e. please recognise and understand that the "it" in the verse is referring to an animal and not a human being or Jephthah's daughter)

mkmyers45: Answer this: what did he vow?

@mkmyers45

OK here it is ...

jayriginal: She knew no man simply means she died a virgin. She was roasted a virgin.

If you say there was another vow, prove it. After all, her lament when she heard of the vow was simply bemoaning the fact that she was about to die as a virgin.
Get real bro.

plaetton: Ha ha ha.
These Yahwehist again, defending Yahweh again, even from what is clearly written in the book of Yahweh.
N wa o.
This is soooo ridiculous.
Danwo is even tying to rewrite the dictionary meaning of the word Lament. In his scriptural reasoning(lol), lament should now mean "Talk to to".

2 judges 11:31 says clearly; then It shall be that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, Shall surely be the lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.

Then, verse 39 clearly says: And it came to pass that at the end of 2 months, she(his daughter) returned unto her father who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed.And she knew no man(died a virgin). And it was a custom in Isreal(it became a custom in Isreal).

Do you guys now disagree with the words of your holy bible , or is it just too much for you to comprehend?

@jayriginal
@plaetton

"she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man.
And it was a custom in Israel"
- Judges 11:39

I hope you both noticed the punctuation mark ( : ) in the above verse and what followed after it (i.e. the immediate five words after and ending with the custom sentence)
Go figure?

jayriginal: She was barbecued.

Evil Brain: It's funny to see Christians deceiving themselves about something that is obvious. You all believe that your religion is more civilized than others. So when confronted with a clear biblical reference to human sacrifice, you tell yourselves that "the girl didn't die". This is what the oyinmbos call cognitive dissonance.

Of course the girl died, her father offered her as a burnt offering! A human sacrifice! A virgin sacrifice! To the god of Isreal!

And the god of Israel did nothing to stop this travesty. In fact he was happy enough to have it included in the "divinely inspired" Book of Judges (with no don't roast your daughters disclaimer afterwards) as an example to parents for all time.

Clearly, your god is not that different from those of the Amalekites, and the Assyrians, and the Jebusites, and the Mayans.

@jayriginal
@Evil Brain

Without saying much,

God does not, will not, has never accepted human sacrifices,

Human sacrifice is repugnant to God and there is no commandment or law to offer or kill as a religious sacrifice to God.

and before you lash and clutch on straws with what about the Jesus sacrifice

it is worth minding that Jesus was legally sentenced to death according to the Roman law of the day and land

Jesus died and became a sacrifice in accordance with the law of the land.

Jephthat had no legality to carry out his vow to sacrifice a human being to God.

An animal? yeah, yes he can, but a human being? Oh no, no, no can do

Jephthat was aware of the faux pas and the bit of bother he found himself in

His daughter, credit to her, had enough cop on, and offerred her dad a get-out-of-jail-free cop-a-plea.

Jephthat having realised he is onto an impossible task succumbed to his daughter's alternative.

You need to realise that Judges 11:39 is about another Jephthat's vow, which retrospectively he agreed to

(i.e. she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man. And it was a custom in Israel)

Now let's read Judges 11:40

That the daughters of Israel went ^Nyearly ^Nto lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year.

40 Heb. from year to year

40 Or, to talk with

If she was sacrified or died, how is it possble that the daughters of Israel went from year to year to talk with the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year

Ayomivic: CAN EVIL ONES TORMENT CHRISTIANS ?

Let me first answer this question and if iam wrong or right please let me know.

in short, christian as nothing to fear, if they are really at God saide.

I pray God we help us to always do what pleases hin in Jesus name .Amen

@Ayomivic

Also it depends on which fear we are referring to here.

If christians guards all gates to the heart

(i.e.
eyes - what to see
ears - from what to hear
mouth - from what to speak
flesh - from what is sensual)

then of course, the christian has no cause to have an unholy fear

We all know the King David and Bathsheba scandal, compare that with how Joseph handled Potiphar's wife.


[quote author=Area_boy]What the hell are you talking about?

Fear is what preserved the human race. It is a natural feeling like love, anger, hate and every other similar sort.
If your ancestors never feared anything, you and me wont be here today [/quote]

delkuf: Let me come in. There is fear and there is spirit of fear.

If u notice, God said He has not given us the spirit of fear.

Area boy, the fear u are talking abt is the nature fear. b

But wen the devil wht to wrk he send the spirit of fear.

Omo Alata: You tell him

The fear there, consider the word in perspective

@Area_boy

On the contrary, "Fear is not what preserved the human race"

and it is because "ancestors did not fear, you and me are here today"

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom:
a good understanding have all they that do his commandments:
his praise endures forever - Psalm 111:10

Though Adam and Eve, slipped up for lack of fear,

yet paradoxically, without subsequent ancestors' to date lack of fear, man could have become extinct from not engaging in hazardous and exciting activities (i.e. the exploration of unknown territory, ideas, inventions etc)

@delkuf

Fear has positive and negative values, fear can be rightly used and can be wrongly used.

God uses fear in a normal way for our benefit, the devil abuses fear in an abnormal way for his benefit

The spirit of fear in 2 Timothy 1:7 actually was referring to timidity.

Adekdammy: did Jephthat the gileadite offered his daughter as a burnt offering unto the Lord based on his vow to God according to judges 11:31.

Well i dont think he did because, he knows the Lord wont accept that kind of offering(human beign as a burnt offering)

because he knows the law of the lord well,so instead he dedicated her unto the Lord by being single 4 the rest of her life.

Will appreciate ur comments on this, thanks

@Adekdammy

This was recorded for posterity to learn from

Carpenters are wary of hammers, though an enabling tool, it wont stop giving them a sore thumb, if they arent careful when nailing.

When the Spirit of God descended on Jephthat (i.e. power to accomplish), he unguardedly and uncarefully exuberantly spoke words

The lesson here, is, a big mouth is no excuse, do not get carried away with gra-gra and throw caution to wind when under the power

Unguarded vow. He cant be 100% sure that it will be an animal that will come to meet him and not a person.

The cheek of the man, trying to shift blame on his daughter, thank God she was a God fearing & understanding daughter

"And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said,
Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art one of them that trouble me:
for I have opened my mouth unto the LORD, and I cannot go back
” - Judges 11:35

Like you, the school of thought is the daughter did not die

ijebabe: I'm sure some of us know of the upcoming wedding between Nigerian Comedian and TV host – Teju Babyface Oyelakin and his model/beauty queen fiancee, Tobi Banjoko, set to take place in Lagos on Thursday 30th August 2012 and Saturday 1st September.

Check out Shola Animashaun‘s behind the scenes video of the couple during their pre-wedding photo shoot at his studio. In the video, Shola captures the couple laughing, dancing and not afraid of being affectionate. Lovely!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfyhMTgKu3Q

[size=16pt]Someone tell me the artist name and the name of the track at the 1:47 mark please. Thanks[/size]

[quote author=E_monkey]Much appreciation, Goshen and danwo. I think I understand the views of those that do not think the OT should be referenced for laws.
I hope those that still follow the laws in the Torah and other books in the OT see this thread and explain their stand.[/quote]@E_monkey

You are welcome. No problems

[quote author=E_monkey]@danwo,
I am not 'after' anything other than to understand better. No need to get paranoid.
@Goshen,
thanks again.
If you don't mind, could you mention the books in the NT that contain the rules christians should live by?[/quote]@E_Monkey

Curiosity and not paranoia actually.

For free, all 27 books from Matthew to Revelation - they are like a hand in glove, bed fellows etc contain guidances for "christians"

Goshen360 what else did you want me to say brother.

I did earlier mention that one law has affinity with flesh and the other with the Spirit.

We have not yet mentioned the two laws that encompasses all the law and there is fidgeting already

So if it is still vague then he can abide by what floats his boat now

[quote author=E_monkey]@danwo. If I am correct, you are saying that only the laws from the OT that were repeated in the NT should be followed?[/quote]@E_monkey

No I did not say such . . .

You are free to follow what floats your boat

Remember "The Old Testament and New Testament are like "The Law of Gravity" versus "The Law of Aerodynamics""

The Old Testament and New Testament just like "The Law of Gravity" and "The Law of Aerodynamics" have their time and place too

You cant fly to the other end of the Earth relying only on "The Law of Gravity", you need the "The Law of Aerodynamics" to lift you and keep you in air, isnt it?

What is this question to Goshen360 on explicit laws about marriage all about.

What are you on about or after

[quote author=E_monkey]I started this thread because I want to know from the Christians, what laws from the Old Testament Christians are supposed to keep.

I see some Christians on here talking about things like tithing or the dress code for women or marital relationships and referencing laws from the Old Testament like the ones in Corinthians or Ephesians that give explicit directives on how Christians are/were supposed to live their lives.

I don't understand why the Old Testament is still being referenced for laws when Christianity teaches that with Jesus' coming, old things passed away and new things have replaced them.
But that's beside the point.

I just want to know which of the Old Testament laws are still valid, which of them didn't pass away and should still be applied by Christians in their lives.

Thank you for your explanation.
Peace.[/quote]

Goshen360: There is ABSOLUTELY NONE of the OT laws is binding on Christians except for the confused Christians and confused preachers that mixed the OT and NT together to serve it on the table of the Lord. The reason NONE of the OT laws is binding on Christians is that, in the OT that lasted until the death of Christ, God was still dealing with one nation - Israel.

After the death of Jesus, which started the NT (in context, not in book arrangement), the death of Jesus destroyed the middle partition of division and the Gentiles (non-native Israel), was included or engrafted into the NT. Hence, the NT or church consist of both the natural Israel and the Gentiles. And the OT became non effect. When will God institute a new covenant if God still wants to operate in the old. But God took away the old that he may establish the new. Do you then think that God will still use the OT with which he guided a single nation to guide more than one nation? This is the reason for the NT which started in the book of Acts of Apostle where the Gentiles are included/engrafted into the covenant of God.

@E_monkey

The Old Testament conceals the New Testament

The New Testament reveals the Old Testament

Old Testament:
You shall not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD. - Leviticus 19:18

New Testament:
A new commandment I give unto you, That you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. - John 13:34

Back to your question

The Old Testament and New Testament are like "The Law of Gravity" versus "The Law of Aerodynamics"

One law keeps you grounded, the other lets you fly or rise high in the air like a bird

One Testament is ground-earth bound, the other Testament is sky-heaven bound

One has affinity with the flesh, the other has affinity with the Spirit

Though Goshen360 says ABSOLUTELY NONE of the OT laws is binding on Christians, it is worth recognising that there are times and places when/where they might become binding.

Old Testament:
And the swine, because it divides the hoof, yet chews not the cud, it is unclean unto you: you shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcass - Deuteronomy 14:8

New Testament:
But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean has at any time entered into my mouth - Acts 10:14 (Refer to Acts 10:9-17, For more/background details)

Bacons, sausages, pepperoni pizza etc are all good to eat according to Acts 10:15, however Deuteronomy 14:8 the old dietary law, becomes binding when the proper cooking or hygienic production of such food and the food safety and sanitation laws of the land is questionable.

[size=16pt]"God is in control": Obama gets really religious in new interview [/size]
(with the election a little over two months away)


Not renowned for openly discussing his religious beliefs, President Obama has taken the opportunity in an interview with the Washington National Cathedral magazine to declare that at the end of the day, 'God is in control.'

Used to a skeptical public doubting the strength of his Christian faith, the president reaffirmed his belief in God just as the election campaign enters its most critical months.

'First and foremost, my Christian faith gives me a perspective and security that I don’t think I would have otherwise: that I am loved. That, at the end of the day, God is in control,' said Mr. Obama.

'From slavery to the suffrage movement to civil rights, faith — and the moral obligations that derive from our faith — have always helped us to navigate some of our greatest moral challenges with a recognition that there’s something bigger than ourselves: we have obligations that extend beyond our own self-interest.'

President Obama also addressed the ongoing ignorance over his faith, including the belief among some in the U.S. that he is Muslim.

'You know, there's not much I can do about it,' said the president.

'I have a job to do as president, and that does not involve convincing folks that my faith in Jesus is legitimate and real.

'I do my best to live out my faith, and to stay in the Word, and to make my life look more like His.

'What I can do is just keep on following Him, and serve others—trying to make folks’ lives a little better using this humbling position that I hold.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2191840/Obama-gets-really-religious-new-interview-election-little-months-away.html#ixzz24ISOQv7t

kenny888: Pls i want to know if Yinka Aiyefele,a yoruba christain musician if he is born again,

because he plays at any event where people dont think of getting born again.

@kenny888

Jesus did not say live a sheltered life and neither did He say, get the world(s) to come to you or church.

Jesus said go into all the world . . .

Yinka Aiyefele is doing exactly what Jesus commanded.

He is playing at any event, going into people's worlds - all the world.

"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature"
- Mark 16:15

danwo: @inurmind

You made a misinformed deduction

Adam was a grown man. He and Eve were not made childish

Adam and Eve did not gradually change physically or progress to maturity as a child would do

Adam was imparted with enough information by God to make an informed decision whether or not to choose to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good or evil

Notice to start with, Adam is specifically singled out here

Adam had thinking or reasoning abilities, contrary to popular belief and your assumption that ". . . God created them without critical thinking or reasoning abilities . . ."

Adam was subjected to an accelerated learning process or program, which purposeful was to allow him to think and make reflective judgment(s) concerning what to believe or what not to believe.

God taught Adam well and well enough, no surprises here; Adam had the best teacher at his disposal to thow questions at.

inurmind, here are a few posers for you.

Ruminate them in-your-mind

Poser #1:
How did Adam come about telling Eve or why did Adam tell Eve that touching the fruit will cause death, when what God said was eating of the fruit will cause death (i.e. God did not say touching will cause death)

Poser #2:
What ability was Eve using or exercising when she was romanticizing with justifications the idea to eat the fruit?

Adam knew the implication of eating the fruit, this is why he put "a grill by the fireplace" for Eve, to prevent her getting burnt.

Adam went beyond and above his call of duty by adding to his undestanding, a deterrent for Eve, that touching the fruit will cause death.

This was to discourage her from eating the fruit or entertaining any ideas concerning the fruit.

The evidences on ground shows Adam exercising critical thinking, Eve with information obtained from Adam and she later exercising reasoning abilities

"The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden,

but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.'"
- Genesis 3:2-3

"When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it."
- Genesis 3:6

Another evidence shows Adam, was not deceived, unlike Eve (i.e. Adam did not believe the devil but opted or wilfully decided to go along with Eve)

"Then the LORD God asked the woman, "What have you done?" "The serpent deceived me," she replied. "That's why I ate it.""

"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."
- 1 Timothy 2:14

What was lacking here or took for granted was questioning

Questions are intended to increase your critical thinking capacity

Eve could have questioned the devil. Eve could have questioned Adam who was beside her with a "Is what the devil saying true? ..."

The moment Adam decided to eat the fruit, he had his comeuppance, death and all that comes with it

From that moment onwards and now, Job 2:10 below rings true

"But he said unto her,
You speak as one of the foolish women speaks.
What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?
In all this did not Job sin with his lips."
- Job 2:10

Bottom line, Adam was not gullible, was not blind etc

He chose to die, he also chose to participate, to personally and actively experience good and evil for reasons best known to him

"Or will someone come and say ''knowledge of good and evil'' means something else " - Yes, this is about experiencing a dualism

No diggity Adam had all the information in the world about good and evil but it was the opportunity or thrill of experiencing (i.e. to participate in or be involved with good and evil) good and evil that got the better of him.

ITSOLUTIONS: good analogy.
But this doesnt explain the reason for the so much suffering in the world today.

My own question would be, why was the tree there in the first place?

@ITSOLUTIONS

For the first one - This is the legacy from the thrill of wanting to be an involved participant and active in dispersing good and evil

For the second one - Why not?.

That was how the cookie crumbled. He who pays the piper calls the tune so was this decision by God to place the tree there beside an alternative Tree of Life.

inurmind: We all know the story of the disobedience and punishment of adam nd eve,

but the question is, DID THEY REALLY DESERVE ALL THAT hardship that would even resonate to their descendants?

Basically, God created them without critical thinking or reasoning abilities

i.e they didn't know the difference between what was right and wrong, good and bad (gen 2vs17).

It could be deducted that they reasoned like children and had no deep thoughts about anything.

In short they were gullible. Therefore it was no surprise that the devil could deceive them (although to me he was merely saying the bitter truth: gen 3vs5).

But then God comes along and gives them this banging punishment like they were responsible for the september 11 bombings.

Now disobedience is a sin right? And to commit sin is BAD? Now how in the world could they have deserned that it was bad when they had no ''knowledge of good and evil''?

When he had created them to be so guillible, so blind and not know right from wrong?

Or will someone come and say ''knowledge of good and evil'' means something else::/:/:/.

Nigerians, lets start using our brains and making progress away from this borrowed religion.

Omo Alata: A child doesn't know left from right. You tell the child, "don't touch this. If you do, you will be smacked" and they touch it, so you smack them. Next time, they'll learn.

“You are free to eat from any tree in the garden but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” Simple instruction which they disobeyed and God couldn't spare the rod

@inurmind

You made a misinformed deduction

Adam was a grown man. He and Eve were not made childish

Adam and Eve did not gradually change physically or progress to maturity as a child would do

Adam was imparted with enough information by God to make an informed decision whether or not to choose to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good or evil

Notice to start with, Adam is specifically singled out here

Adam had thinking or reasoning abilities, contrary to popular belief and your assumption that ". . . God created them without critical thinking or reasoning abilities . . ."

Adam was subjected to an accelerated learning process or program, which purposeful was to allow him to think and make reflective judgment(s) concerning what to believe or what not to believe.

God taught Adam well and well enough, no surprises here; Adam had the best teacher at his disposal to thow questions at.

inurmind, here are a few posers for you.

Ruminate them in-your-mind

Poser #1:
How did Adam come about telling Eve or why did Adam tell Eve that touching the fruit will cause death, when what God said was eating of the fruit will cause death (i.e. God did not say touching will cause death)

Poser #2:
What ability was Eve using or exercising when she was romanticizing with justifications the idea to eat the fruit?

Adam knew the implication of eating the fruit, this is why he put "a grill by the fireplace" for Eve, to prevent her getting burnt.

Adam went beyond and above his call of duty by adding to his undestanding, a deterrent for Eve, that touching the fruit will cause death.

This was to discourage her from eating the fruit or entertaining any ideas concerning the fruit.

The evidences on ground shows Adam exercising critical thinking, Eve with information obtained from Adam and she later exercising reasoning abilities

"The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden,

but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.'"
- Genesis 3:2-3

"When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it."
- Genesis 3:6

Another evidence shows Adam, was not deceived, unlike Eve (i.e. Adam did not believe the devil but opted or wilfully decided to go along with Eve)

"Then the LORD God asked the woman, "What have you done?" "The serpent deceived me," she replied. "That's why I ate it.""

"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."
- 1 Timothy 2:14

What was lacking here or took for granted was questioning

Questions are intended to increase your critical thinking capacity

Eve could have questioned the devil. Eve could have questioned Adam who was beside her with a "Is what the devil saying true? ..."

The moment Adam decided to eat the fruit, he had his comeuppance, death and all that comes with it

From that moment onwards and now, Job 2:10 below rings true

"But he said unto her,
You speak as one of the foolish women speaks.
What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?
In all this did not Job sin with his lips."
- Job 2:10

Bottom line, Adam was not gullible, was not blind etc

He chose to die, he also chose to participate, to personally and actively experience good and evil for reasons best known to him

"Or will someone come and say ''knowledge of good and evil'' means something else " - Yes, this is about experiencing a dualism

No diggity Adam had all the information in the world about good and evil but it was the opportunity or thrill of experiencing (i.e. to participate in or be involved with good and evil) good and evil that got the better of him.