₦airaland Forum

LucanBeeB:
The South is simply a slave to the North because we are NOT UNITED, SIMPLE. We can keep blaming the likes of Zik for eternity, but how long will we keep up with the blame game?

Your guy above blamed David Ejoor who was not among the political elite that caused the disunity of the South. How long will and should he too continue blaming Ejoor who wasn't even in the picture from the beginning?

gidgiddy:
My only problem with Ejoor is that he never stood for anything. He was just another Northern slave. This was a man who went to Aburi and was signed a document along with Gowon and Ojukwu on behalf of the Mid-West Region. But when Gowon broke that agreement, rather than join Ojukwu and insist on the Aburi agreement, he sheepishly bowed to his Northern masters

You keep calling others slaves of the North when slavery to the North actually started with your brothers Azikiwe and Aguiyi Ironsi. Azikiwe sold out the South to the North by preferring the master-slave coalition government of Balewa and himself to the rejection of the East-West coalition offer which would have made him the Prime Minister. That singular poorly thought out decision triggered off every act which further destroyed Southern unity and we all ended up as losers to the North till today. But why you always never acknowledge that Azikiwe sowed the seeds of southern disunity hence slavery to the North is what always beats me.
Do you honestly think this selective finger pointing of yours will help Igbos get their Biafra or help the entire South disentangle themselves from Northern domination?

Peacefullove:
Firstly, am just a follower on this thread. But the highlighted red part is a stupid comment, you accuse the other guy of speaking where your holy book is silent, but here you are doing the same. Is tongue not a part of the physical body ? I leave you to answer that, something is wrong either you guys are right or Bible Jesus Is wrong to say Spirit don't have a physical body . one must be true. Even if we are to go by what your Bible said, a spirit should not even have a teeth to gnash, since spirit don't have bone.

You are just spewing emotions without making any sense. I doubt if you thoroughly read the comments you are responding to.
For example, I used the geographical naming of churches in the Bible by the first century Christians (in the sense of the Apostles themselves who got Jesus's approval) but you are talking of how Catholic came about. If first century Christians of your own idea named gave unscriptural names like Catholic, Protestant, etc to churches as against the purely geographical names the Apostles gave them with Jesus approval as seen in Revelations, shouldn't that tell you that those first century Christians (your own idea of who they were) were not infallible hence your organization's insistence of following in their footsteps a wrong doctrine? You are only muddling up issues and drawing the hands of the clock back.
Go and follow the debate from the very beginning rather than just jumping in to start quoting my last five responses.

CAPTIVATOR:
Lying is in your blood. Where do you see Lazarus was buried in that story ?

" Now in the course of time, the beggar died and was carried off by the angels to Abraham's side . "
He was carried off bodily oga .

" Also, the rich man died and was buried " so different
.

This will expose the bold, the rich man ask for water , physical water or spiritual water ? how could Lazarus dip fingers into a physical drinkable water if he wasn't bodily ?

Tell me why Angels don't carry dead body from mortuary today

Lying is the very blood flowing in your veins. Where in that passage did you see it written that 'Lazarus died, but without being buried, the angels took his body straight up to Abraham'?
So "he was carried off" now means same thing as "he was carried off bodily"? You have smuggled 'bodily' into the statement so fast. Thief!
If it was Lazarus'body that was carried up while that of the rich man was left in the grave on earth, then how could the rich man have been able to see Abraham and Lazarus in heaven from his grave on earth?
If a physical fire was going to torment the devil and his angels as Jesus clearly stated in Revelations 20:10, then why wouldn't a soul being tormented by heat also assume that physical water would quench it? And did Abraham replied him that there was no physical water there to cool his tongue?

Hairyrapunzel:
To even give name of denomination early Christian churches were called you can't even mention one. Something not even mentioned in the Bible is now what you guys have made a criteria in gaining salvation. Lol

What he and his organization don't even know is that the first century Christians did not give names to churches, rather they identified them with geographical names (the names of the cities in which they were located), e.g. The Church in Ephesus, The Church in Philadelphia, The Church in Smyrna, etc which Jesus Himself approved of by using same names to identify the churches while speaking to the churches in Revelations chapter 2. But in total violation of this order and biblical tradition, these clowns reject the name "church" and give to themselves a human invented name of a proper noun not found anywhere in the Bible, yet they claim they are following exactly in the footsteps of first century Christians. Hypocrites!

CAPTIVATOR:
Mark 1:24 Have you come to destroy us?

Destruction is their end not torment. Physical fire can't harm a spirit being..

Mark 5:7 says: ...And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.
Rev. 20:10 says: Then the Devil (a spirit), who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had already been thrown; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

The lake of fire is clearly described here as a place of eternal torment for the devil (a spirit) will be thrown into. If the lake of fire means mere grave, then how come the devil and his angels will be tormented in it forever?

quote author=CAPTIVATOR post=75580481]
Exodus 3:2 There the angel of the LORD appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. NIV....[/quote]The use of 'in' there contextually means 'in the form of a flame' not 'inside the flame' as you would have us assume. In one of your organization's publications titled 'My book of Bible Stories' the story of Moses and the burning bush is depicted as a flame sorrounding a bush without any pictures of an angel inside the flame...meaning that even your organization understands the verse in question to mean that there was no angel inside a flame but that the angel was the flame itself. Or are you now suggesting and admitting indirectly that your organization uses misleading pictures in its publications?

quote author=CAPTIVATOR post=75580481]
Presence of the angel In the fire is why the bush can't burn, Just lik presence of an angel in Nebuchadnezzar fire didn't allow fire burn Shadrach , Meshach , Abednego .
Again, physical fire can't affect a spirit being [/quote]Wrong! It was not angel that joined Shadrach, Meshach and Abegnego in the flame, but the Son of God Himself. Read that passage again thoroughly.
Here it is:
He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

CAPTIVATOR:
Spirit do not need a tongue to speak. They are not fleshy beings Mr Deadlytruth . Tongue is a flesh, a means of speaking by earthly humans, Going by Bibles statement that spirit don't have flesh. Explain why the rich man has flesh ? Either jedide lied that spirit don't have flesh or he Is correct.

Revelation tells us souls spoke in heaven asking God for Justice. They spoke with tongues. Even though they were had no physical bodies, they could still feel the pain of injustice. It only means that it is not only the physical fleshy body that can feel pains. So the tongue of the soul of the rich man could feel the pain of the torment of heat.

CAPTIVATOR:
Jesus said fire because fire represent second death. Elsewhere he compared it to Darkness .
Matthew 8:12
But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Darkness to tell you fire Is a picture of death.

Rev. 20:10 says: Then the Devil (a spirit), who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had already been thrown; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

CAPTIVATOR:
But am asking again: if its spirit that go to your imaginary hell , how come disembodied spirit will have teeth ( bone ) to gnash when Jesus said spirit doesn't have bone?

Check the previous response. I already answered this there. Stop speaking where the Bible is silent. Read further to know what Jesus meant.

swilo:
We dont need your phone number.

First thing is to start reading. Follow this thread religiously, read financial statements, listen to news, understand the economy, understand the times, follow the masters, learn to separate noise from news, and respect your stop loss. You need a bit of TA (well this forum gives you TA for free), you also need a bit of FA (well this forum gives you a lot of FA for free), you need to learn to put your emotions in check...

Secondly, open a trading account. I use Meritrade (www.meritrade.com), some others use Morgancapital stock brokers (http://www.morgancapitalgroup.com/). You don't need me to tell you how to open an online trading account because with the online chat on the trading sites, you can ask all your questions.

Pay in some coins into the trading account, make a withdrawal to confirm all is set up then start small.

Never forget that knowledge is power, never forget the use of cut / stop loss and never forget that entry and exit price is key but follow your currentprice.

Na prospective newbie you dey use acronyms and technical terms for like this? If you be teacher your students go hear am hot o.

CAPTIVATOR:
The questions still stand . more head ache for you nd Deadlytruth.

@ blue, Lazarus wasn't buried but carried bodily to Abraham side ? If the story is real, how come angels don't carry people from mortuary today ?

Read the entire passage first before you argue. That verse is silent on whether he was buried or not buried. Where the Bible is silent, you don't speak for it. Rather you allow it speak for itself.
It neither said 'and the angels took him up to Abraham without being buried first'' nor did it say 'and he was buried before the angels took him up to Abraham'. Speaking for the Bible where it is silent is one of the evil attributes of the JWs and it is through such means they cook up human laws which they portray as biblical truths to the unsuspecting and the gullible.
For such cases of silence, you rather allow the Bible speak for itself by reading the entire passage or reading a little further at least.
In verse 27 the rich man asked Abraham to send Lazarus back to his father's house to warn his brothers of his situation.
In verse 30, Abraham refused and argued that if they would not listen to the prophets, even if Lazarus were to rise from death they would as well not listen.
Now, how do people rise from death? Is it not through the return of their spirits and souls to their physical bodies on earth? That clearly means Lazarus' physical body was buried on earth or else the question of him returning to the earth as a person in the flesh wouldn't have arisen if it was his physical body the angels carried up to Abraham.
Put in another way, the point the rich man was trying to make is that his brothers would believe the testimony of a dead man who returned to the earth in the same physical body with which they knew him while he was alive with them. So the mere fact that the rich man demanded Lazarus return to earth and Abraham disapproved it means they both acknowledged that Lazarus' physical body was left behind on earth.

CAPTIVATOR:
Jesus didn't hold fire with him when he asked the demon to come out ooo

Deadlytruth, how can spirit have fleshy tongue ?



So its no longer disembodied sprits that leave the body that go to hell ?


The angel was in the fire. Go read well



The story said specifically that the man has tongue and we all know the tongue is pure flesh, is Jesus lying that spirit don't have flesh ?

Tell us why the spirit screamed as it was leaving the body of the mad man in Mark if it was not due to being subjected to torment by Jesus? Jesus Himself mentioned repeatedly that an eternal fire has been prepared for the devil and his angels. So if an evil spirit could ask Jesus whether he had come to torment them before time, then it means those spirits themselves are aware that they have a date with the eternal fire which Jesus had told people of.
In Exodus, the angel was the fire itself. See it below:

There the angel of the LORD appeared to him as a flame coming from the middle of a bush. Moses saw that the bush was on fire but that it was not burning up.

Now according to you, spirits alone can't burn. So we can conclude that the bush was a spirit since it wasn't burnt up by the fire. See yourself?

And we all know that it takes having a tongue to speak or scream. Then the spirits who asked Jesus questions in Mark 5 were not really spirits since they could make speeches....an act doable only with fleshy tongues. So the book of Mark is now lying, right?

Meanwhile you have still not answered why Jesus did say the fire in the wheat and tares parade was Hades during his literal interpretation.

CAPTIVATOR:
Who talk about figurative grave ? Please who discuss figurative grave with you ? U have problem o.

Hades means grave , A GRAVE IS A BURIAL place NOT A PLACE OF TORMENT. SO JESUS WAS ILLUSTRATING.

Luke 24:39 spirit does not have flesh and bones.

Why did the rich man have a tongue of flesh if he was a disembodied spirit ? Deadlytruth be running away from this.

Why did Jesus mention gnashing of teeth ( Bone) in Matthew 13, do spirit have bone ? The day u attempt to explain all this contradiction of your thought , the argument will end immediately

You think only a tongue of flesh can feel pains? Did the spirits who were afraid of Jesus' physical torment in Matthew 8:29 have fleshy bodies or bones?

Where in Luke 24:39 did Jesus expressly say that spirits can't feel the pain of torment? I already showed you where spirits begged Jesus not to torment them.
Stop trying to rewrite the Bible.
In Matthew 13, it is the evildoers themselves (not spirits) that Jesus says he will throw into fire to gnash their teeth in a furnace (which also can't mean Hades). Recall that Jesus was speaking literally here. So show me a Bible passage or an encyclopedia quote which equates furnace with Hades or grave.

Go back and read the story of Moses and the burning bush slowly. The fire there was not burning the angel not because an angel or spirit can't be tormented with fire, but because in that particular circumstance the angel was the fire itself doing the burning. That is the omnipotence of God. In once instance He chooses to torment angels (especially the ones belonging to the devil) but in another instance he transformed an angel into a fire that was burning a bush.
Judging from the omnipotence of God highlighted above, He doesn't need spirits or deamons to have fleshy bodies or tongues for them to feel the pains of torture from Him otherwise he will have lost his omnipotence.

Hairyrapunzel:
I thought you said death they are unconscious and in the grave? Fire has become a symbol of second death right? No bible verse to prove your assumption o.


SO JESUS CHRIST TOLD YOU THE PARABLES TO TAKE AS REAL AND AS FAKE ABI?

There is literal interpretation and there is figurative interpretation. Lol. Jw will not kill us with laff.
Jws now ACCUSE JESUS CHRIST OF PEDDLING FALSEHOOD.

Let me even help you out. Jesus Christ loved peddling falsehood in fact stories about a prodigal son returned home after squandering his money; a man found a buried treasure in a field, hid it again, and sold everything he had in order to buy that field; a king put on a wedding feast for his son; a slaveowner traveled abroad and then returned home to his slaves; a man constructed a vineyard, leased it out to others, but had difficulty collecting what they owed him; and so on were all fake that is they are not real.

Since you use ecc to discredit jesus Christ story and said the story isn't real then lets see what ecc really says

Ecc 9:3

2 All share a common destiny—the righteous and the wicked, the good and the bad,[a] the clean and the unclean, those who offer sacrifices and those who do not.

As it is with the good,
so with the sinful;
as it is with those who take oaths,
so with those who are afraid to take them.

Jw and non jw all share the same destiny.


Ecc 9:5- 6

For the living know that they will die,
but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward,
and even their name is forgotten.
6 Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished;
never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun.

The dead know nothing meaning they are unconscious. The dead have no further reward. Their names are forgotten. The dead will never have a part in anything that happens under the sun

YOUR PARADISE EARTH IS A SCAM AND A SHAM. NO RESURRECTION HOPE FOR YOU GUYS. BIBLE SAID SO.
EYA YOUR LEADERS ARE FOOLING YOU GUYS. KPELE AND TAKE HEART.

You won't kill me with laughter.
Captivator shot himself in the foot again by picking Ecclesiastes 9:10 in isolation as usual without knowing that verse 2 of the same chapter already says that both the righteous (which the JWs call themselves) and the wicked (which the JWs call other Christians) all share the same fate, hence their paradise is nothing but MMM? Chai! Chai! Chaaaaaaiiiiii!

CAPTIVATOR:
Compare the bold with this.



See how you use your own hands to prove the truth. Grk Hades ( hell in some bible) = Grave.
truth will always prevail over Lies
Deadlytruth refer to hell as grave Lolzzzzzz




Lake of fire isn't hellfire . it's a symbol of second Death , Death, Death , Death. It means Death , Death., Death . opposite of life , what dies is no more. That's why when u read that death Is thrown into lake of fire ., do you mean death is literally burning ? Noo, Bible explains it means death will be no more ( Rev 21:4) that is the meaning of lake of fire.


U yourself have confirm Hades mean grave. Hell means grave.
I really wish you are bold enough to answer baristet question, in his literal interpretation he also mention gnashing of teeth , does it mean spirit have bone ? How I wish u can attempt it. You dare not

I have already answered Barrister's question by showing him where a spirit screamed due to being tormented by Jesus. I also showed him where souls spoke up in Revelation.
Recall that your organization believes that the death spoken of in the Bible verse which says "the wages of sin is death" doesn't physical death but spiritual death which entails being spiritually cut off from God. If death itself will have been killed in the lake of fire as you believe, then doesn't that even mean that the dead sinners who were called from the grave would never experience death again but be alive forever to be in eternal punishment this being spiritually cut off from God as wages for their sins?

Why have you been cleverly avoiding my question as to why Jesus, in His literal interpretation of the parable of wheat and tares, maintained that hell is fire rather than Hades?

CAPTIVATOR:
You still don't get it. Since we have proved the rich man was In grave ( Hades ) , that shows the story isn't real . People are not conscious in the grave ( Eccl 9:10)

Didn't I say it that you would soon say it was a figurative grave and not a real one? For your information, Ecclesiastes is a record of the random thoughts of a man who at that time had fallen deeply into sin hence was very far away from God's guidance and inspiration hence a lot of his submissions can't be taken as truth. If you read the whole Ecclesiastes chapter 9 you will notice that in verse 2 of it the philosopher also said that the same fate awaits both the righteous and the wicked. However we know that such is contrary to what Jesus later clearly told us with the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, and indeed all His other parables. Moreover, if the same fate actually awaits the righteous and the wicked, would that not amount to God being an unjust God? Would anyone (yourself inclusive) today be denying himself all the comfort of this life to live a righteous life? That the book of Ecclesiastes is included in the Bible only signifies the fact that the Christian faith is broad enough to welcome all shades of contrary opinion with the ultimate goal of correcting them and redirecting those who hold them to the true knowledge about God.

Hairyrapunzel:
That's how they think. Rev 20:13 is the verse that shows the rich man was not in any fire but in a grave. Whereas the rev 20:13 didn't talk of any rich man o. I think he wants to tell us that he was in Jesus mind in Luke 16 and rev 20:13. In fact he told jesus Christ the parable to tell.

His colleague said that Jesus could not have meant a literal fire because he was in Jesus mind.
They just speculate nonsense and believe the nonsense they speculate.


The other one was asking us if spirit could talk or have tongue or fingers etc that there is nothing called spirit.
Yet they believe their jehovah can talk and walk like humans do and he is a spirit.

They believe Jesus Christ in his full body didn't ascend to heaven. Jesus Christ showed people his hands with nail holes and claim jesus Christ was a spirit. Jesus Christ had hands o.

They will be cherry picking their beliefs.

They will soon answer you by saying that those hands Jesus showed to Thomas were figurative hands, and that the verse in question was not talking about real Thomas but a figurative one. Confused clowns!

Hairyrapunzel:
Luke 16:22-24
The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.


So CAPTIVATOR you have become Jesus Christ abi? So he told you that rev 20:13 should be used to refute the claim of the rich man of rich man being in hell fire Luke 16 talked about.

You teach that a person is unconscious in the grave. How come the rich man was thirsty and in agony of fire?


Haba Fear God na.
Let me kuku help you. Rev 20:13 says the parable jesus talked about in Luke 16 is wrong according to CAPTIVATOR

The bolded really cracked me up. Very true! They claim that people are unconscious in the grave but they believe the rich man was speaking from his grave and feeling pains there.
Now that you have caught him and showed him this self contradiction, he will soon tell you that the grave they are talking about is figurative and not real, or that the loss of consciousness in the grave is meant to be in the figurative sense. He will quote Encyclopedia Brittanica to show you that the rich man was not in a literal grave. Bwahahahahaha....

CAPTIVATOR:
I wasn't online all this while, I guess you are not intelligent enough to check my Nairaland Last seen.
Simple question: Do you now accept Hades Is Grave?
I quoted Revelation 20:13 to prove that Hades which the rich man was is Grave.

You are very daft. Are we talking about whether grave is Hades or we are talking about hell being fire? Revelations 20:13 says the dead were called from hell first. Then verse 14 goes on to say that after judgement, those found wanting were thrown into a lake of fire. Why doesn't it say they were thrown into Hades after judgement? Are you sure you did comprehension in school at all?
The parable of the rich man vs Lazarus similarly says that the rich man was first buried in his grave and then thrown into hell fire after Judgement.

Jesus gave the parable of wheat and tares in which he mentioned hell. His disciples asked Him for a literal interpretation. He obliged them and in his literal interpretation he mentioned physical fire in place of hell. Why didn't he mention Hades for fire in the interpretation he gave? Yet you are still saying that hell fire means mere grave.
What is paining me all of this is that the day those 8 men tell you they've seen a brighter light which revealed to them that hell fire is real, you will just do a u-turn and start sheepishly propagating it again and even be insulting whoever will by then say hell is mere Hades. You are not speaking from your own personal conviction but merely echoing the ever changing opinions of some 8 men somewhere.

gidgiddy:
You are talking from both sides of your mouth. You cannot give military rule a democratic face when you want. Military rule is not democratic and they don't represent the sovereign will of the people. Only someone democratically elected has any mandate to represent people.

In military rule, what officers are supposed to do is govern by decree while making preparations to return the country to civilian rule

What Gowon should have done is to keep to the agreement he signed in Aburi and beging the preparation for elections. Gowon cannot represent the sovereign will of the people, he was not elected. It is not for Gowon to come back to Nigeria and reject the agreement he signed on the excuse that the people don't like it, if the military cared about what people like, they would not sieze power in the first place. When civilian rule then returns, the elected representatives of the people can now decide the way foward.

But what did Gowon do? He abolished the 4 Regions that were constitutionally created by the people and created 12 states by decree. All the 36 states in Nigeria today were created by military decree, none of them were created by the sovereign will of the people.

But the Aburi accord kept the 4 constitutionally created Regions, in fact, the Aburi agreement respected the will of the people far more than Gowon who abolished the Regions

You keep talking as if it was Gowon who started the whole problem.
If Ironsi had simply obeyed the intact sovereign constiution he met on ground by way of simply swearing in the Dipcharima presented by the ruling NNA coalition as replacement for Balewa, replacing the slain premiers with their deputies, and then returning to the barracks as a professional soldier; do you in all honesty think there would later have been any need for any one to go to Aburi to draft a new constiution let alone it being reneged upon by whoever?
Would the likes of Gowon, Murtala Muhammed, Obasanjo, Buhari, IBB, Abacha and all other military opportunists have ever had the opportunity to put Nigeria into this sorry state we still hopelessly grapple with till today? Why focus on the prognosis of a problem but ignore the root cause?
If Gowon committed havoc by reneging on the Aburi Accord which neither bore the seal of the people's sovereign approval nor came through a genuine universally recognized democratic process; then what do we say of Ironsi who, before Gowon came, had unilaterally destroyed the terms of coexistence which we ourselves unanimously agreed to and clearly spelt out in the sovereign independence constitution which drafting process he didn't even participate in at all?
Hasn't it ever occured to you that by his taking over power illegally and by his pioneership of the mutilation of the independence constitution, Ironsi actually laid the foundation for reneging on agreements thus getting everyone to believe that agreements, however solemnly made, were not really sacrosanct? Ironsi had already established the culture that agreements in Nigeria are not cast in stone hence future agreements do not necessarily need to be respected provided any of the parties to the agreement can later give 'cogent' excuses to breach them. Recall that Ironsi himself justified his breaching of our federal constiution by manufacturing the obviously false and unilateral excuse that federalism was promoting tribalism over nationalism. So Blame him, not Gowon.

gidgiddy:
In military rule, there is no democracy or legislature. The issue of carrying people along does not come into it because if the military wanted that, they would conduct elections as soon as possible. The military governs by fiat. The Aburi agreement/meeting was to discuss the terms by which the 4 Regions would carry on existing as Nigeria until the return of civilian rule. The terms were discussed and agreed to and signed. Gowons job was to go back to Nigeria and start preparations to conduct elections. Gowon completely destroyed everything by going against the agreement he signed and this ultimately led to the war.

First and foremost, the independence constitution did not give room for military take over of government hence the military guys who took over together with the ones who were gathering themselves to Aburi had all committed treason in the first instance and should therefore have been under some form of punishment at that time in question. Therefore it was an insult on Nigerians that they were even the ones trying to make a new constiution for us without having explained to us why they subverted and destroyed the one we had drafted by ourselves as a sovereign people. So the rejection of Aburi Accord was partly in recognition of the fact that our sovereignty as a people rested squarely in our hands and not on the military which should not be found anywhere near political power but in the barracks or at the borders.

Secondly, how could they have gone to make agreements on the regional terms of coexistence pending the return of civil rule without reaching any agreement on exactly how and when that very civil rule would return? Was civil rule going to return by itself?

gidgiddy:
In military rule, there is no democracy or legislature. The issue of carrying people along does not come into it because if the military wanted that, they would conduct elections as soon as possible. The military governs by fiat. The Aburi agreement/meeting was to discuss the terms by which the 4 Regions would carry on existing as Nigeria until the return of civilian rule. The terms were discussed and agreed to and signed. Gowons job was to go back to Nigeria and start preparations to conduct elections. Gowon completely destroyed everything by going against the agreement he signed and this ultimately led to the war.

Wrong.

Barristter07:
Lake of fire IS NOT Hades

The focus of discussion was if Hades means grave Or not , Do u now accept Hades means Grave as Captivator pointed out, ?...

Here you said in a post "

Captivator picked a Revelations verse in isolation to prove his doctrine. But I exposed his heretic use of that verse by pointing him back to the entire passage which rather explains that after being called from their graves both on land and in the sea, the evil ones were thrown into a lake of fire.


Answer that then we can address verse 14. , @ red, From Hades they are called , Are you now accepting Hades means Grave ?

Why are you this dishonest? The whole debate started as to whether Hell fire is real or figurative and never about whether Hades means grave.
I have showed you and your captivator where Jesus mentioned fire in the parable of wheat and tares, and in his literal interpretation He still referred to it as fire.
Captivator dubiously cited a verse in isolation but when challenged to read further he ran away till now.
Why do you want to address verse 14 separately? Is it not part of the passage hence must be addressed in the context of the rest verses in the passage? Or you want to take it in isolation according to the usual practice of your manupulative organization?

teufelein:
WHO BEWITCHED US?

Every four years we gather here to insult ourselves over politicians, we create new enemies different from the ones we had in the last few years.
Immediately After election, maximum three years, the same politicians will reconcile, form another group in their quest to continue milking our common wealth and protect their interests with some rhetorical promises and mouth watering offers.
Then you see the same people going back to their vomit.

No principle, No ideology!

If Amaechị goes back to PDP after the 2019 election, those who are insulting him today will call him the best thing that has happened to Niger Delta.

In fact, a banquet will be held in his honor in the bricks house and his sins will be forgiven and nobody will remember that he once sold Rivers state assets.
Today, Akpabio is in APC to save himself from prosecution (that's according to the opposing camp in Akwa Ibom) which may be true but wait until after the 2019 election probably PDP wins at the centre and he returns back to the PDP. His title of "uncommon" in his name will return.
If APC wins, most of the people shouting on top of their voice today in PDP will either go into hiding or decamp to the ruling party.

And the circle continues!

Orji Uzor Kalu is one man in the south East that Obasanjo has accused of many things, openly and his books but wait until they need a stooge in the east to make President in the future and Orji Uzor Kalu presents himself, prostrate to Baba, his chapter in babas book will be erased and he will be anointed the messiah from the east. Second after Zik.

That's how we roll!

The messiahs promising us heaven today had the opportunity to make that heaven come true in 2015 but what did they do? They brought a known failure, navigated him into Aso Rock, then sat back to watch Nigerians cry to them for help and like the helpless chicken, we went back to them begging for help forgetting that the real power is with us.
I dusted my copy of "My Watch" yesterday night and I wept for this country.
I began to wonder how a group of people would be able to hold a country as populous as Nigeria to ransom and the citizens of same country will be singing hallelujah in worship.

Every election year, the politicians will shift camp and pitch the citizens against one another while watch the same citizens.
I read some where yesterday where the writer was making reference to Hamas, ANC etc, saying they had a political wing and participated in the electoral process but that same person will turn around and tell you that voting for anybody outside the two candidates in the APC or PDP is a waste of vote. In fact he will tell you that any vote outside PDP is a vote for Buhari. That's the new pattern of blackmail.
Nigerians had the opportunity of restructuring this enclave after the failed attempt at Aburi in Ghana in 2015 but a few people masquerading as messiahs and navigators gathered and paid same intellectuals or what some will call bellellectuals to blackmail everyone with their conspiracy theories and lies.

Today, the same people that rejected the man who took practical steps to restructure Nigeria are back, making rhetorical promises without even making reference to the National confab report and many are singing let's get Nigeria working again first and I ask, how do you get Nigeria working without a plan?

You helped in destroying a house, you didn't show remorse, you have not shown concrete plan on how to rebuild the house which you helped destroy...... Of course you know the people are helpless and would jump at anything which is the plan.
All because these group of politicians want to remain relevant.
Who bewitched Nigerians?

While your write up is generally insightful, the part touching on Aburi Accord is misleading because the Accord didn't really address the issue of restructuring for which the summit was convened in the first instance. Those who attended were selected while the true political leaders who had been elected by the people to represent them in all legislative businesses were all deliberately sidelined for the military establishment's civil servants who by the civil service annonimity principle should have no business with politics let alone legislative process. The agreements themselves were proposals for a confederal structure which was very contrary to the federal structure status quo ante being expected by Nigerians back at home and which they were operating and we're satisfied with before the military came and tampered with it. There was no agreement on any date for return to civil rule in the entire accord. It was just about how soldiers and would henceforth share powers among themselves across regional lines. So the accord didn't really carry any people oriented agreement hence it was rightly rejected by the people through their political leaders representing them genuinely.

Hairyrapunzel:
Lol. Encyclopedia people. He is even quoting a secular source. If someone else quotes this same encyclopedia to discredit their doctrine he will be the first to shout secular sources. Lol

Ironically they are the same people who are quick to accuse other Christians of following man made rules. I don't know where the author of Encyclopedia Brittanica claims he was inspired by God. Very crass hypocrites!

Hairyrapunzel:
Shame did not allow you put up the whole verse. You will isolate a phrase from a verse and start asking stupid questions. When people quote the whole verse and show you your error you will run or start asking something you have asked and they have already given you answer.

That is why I asked him why he loves moving in circles. But he didn't understand what I meant.
Before you know it now he will start quoting Encyclopedia Brittanica to defend his belief that the souls spoken of in heaven are not real souls.

Hairyrapunzel:
So you can see people actually read the bible. You twisted exodus 3 so as to fit your own narrative. It is now difficult for you to defend your statement because you have been caught.

That is their stock in trade. They are experts at picking verses in isolation and twisting them to suit their Ojoro doctrine. No wonder their doctrines change when they later read further but still don't read completely. Deception experts!

Barristter07:
Is it that you can't comprehend properly ?

Hell ( Hades ) which appear at Luke 16 has been shown as Grave through Rev 20:13 quoted by captivator

KJV

" and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them "

CSB

and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them;

NLT

and death and the grave gave up their dead.

Why is Hades translated Grave ?



Will respond to all this watery allegation soon, duty calls

And verse 14 says:

14. Then death and the world of the dead were thrown into the lake of fire.
Why did you select only the verses which favour you but leave out verse 14 which doesn't? Ojoro doctrine!

Hairyrapunzel:
As his magazine has told him that jesus could not have meant literal burning in fire what can we do?
Nothing because they have been programmed to regard only what their magazines say and also to disregard what the bible says.

The funny thing is that the writers of those their magazines have taken the place of God. If it's a Bible verse that goes against what they teach they say that Bible verse must have been taken figuratively while if it's a Bible verse that supports their doctrines they say it was taken literally.

They love Cherry picking. I dey look barrister07 they laff. He is actually afraid of me. Lol

Their matter just tire person.
And what surprises me about them is that if those 8 men in charge of their publishing company just wake up tomorrow and tell them that they've just studied the scriptures more deeply and discovered that hell is really fire, they will just make a very sharp u-turn and start defending it sheepishly again even with insults directed at whoever may not agree with them by that time.
If those eight men later again say they studied the Bible deeply once more and discovered again that hell is not fire but grave, they will still turn around and start spreading it as the true doctrine. They will never ask those eight men why they are so inconsistent and unstable.
Brainwashed lots!

Hairyrapunzel:
Don't mind him. He feels he alone has the right to jesus mind. He even went ahead to tell you that Jesus could not have meant literal burning in fire.

I have shown him the parable of the tares and wheat for which Jesus' disciples asked Him for literal interpretation, and which Jesus obliged to by telling them that the fire in the parable is fire in real life. But he has cleverly been avoiding this poser like a plague. He doesn't want to touch it at all since it runs against his publishing company's narrative. Talk of victims of broad daylight manipulation.

Barristter07:
You have a long way to go, if you are yet to recognize that Hades and Gehenna are two different things




Shift wetin ?

Don't chat meaninglessly, You quoted Rich man and Lazarus after which Captivator exposed your folly by pointing out that the man Is in Hades ( Grave ).


In your running in circles, You later quote Mark where " Gehenna " appeared NOT Hades .

So am actually explaining TWO different words to you , none of which support your satanic hell . But you can't understand because you have been FOOLED since both are rendered Hell despite they are Different .



Jesus talked about Gehenna NOT hell.

Gehenna ( Valley of Hinnom) a visible place outside Jerusalem , No torment is carried out there ( Jer 7:31) , it image total destruction of the wicked. Just as refuse thrown there don't burn forever.

Go study Gehenna, nd stop embarrassing yourself here



You are creating more problems for yourself.

Exodus 3:2 - it was an angel that appeared IN THAT FIRE unharmed . Showing clearly that Spirit beings cannot be harmed by fire .

Fact ! Another blow to your useless doctrine



Jesus carry fire for hand ? Go and read what you quote at Exodus 3:2, Spirit beings cannot be harmed by fire .



Even death ride a horse and grave following it ...nd stars as big as they are than earth still fell on earth . How real Is that to you !??



Bible says a spirit does not have flesh . .


But the rich man has tongue ( Flesh ) , is that a spirit ?

Unless you mean bible Is wrong, so you can be right

It is you who have a long way to go as you have not been able to show any Bible passage to substantiate your argument that hell is not fire. I have shown you several citations where Jesus mentioned hell and went ahead to specifically describe it as fire that never goes out. I also showed you where Jesus mentioned fire in a parable and in His literal interpretation of the parable he mentioned fire again rather than Hades or Gehenna. Neither you nor captivator has been able to address that parable and its interpretation till now. Your abusive language already gives you away as lacking in superior argument. You know the Pharisees whom you are the modern day version of always resorted to abusing Jesus each time he burst their heretic and man made opinions.

Captivator picked a Revelations verse in isolation to prove his doctrine. But I exposed his heretic use of that verse by pointing him back to the entire passage which rather explains that after being called from their graves both on land and in the sea, the evil ones were thrown into a lake of fire. Then I asked him how possible they were again thrown back into the soil and seas after judgement if the lake of fire means the very graves from which they were called? He ran away till now. So he rather exposed the folly of himself and yourself.

It is getting clearer that you don't really study the Bible with your own independent mind but with the mindset imposed on your by a publishing company. Exodus 3:2 says:
There the angel of the LORD appeared to him as a flame coming from the middle of a bush. Moses saw that the bush was on fire but that it was not burning up.

The angel itself was the flame that was burning the bush and not that the flame was burning the angel. So your argument that the angel was a spirit whom the flame couldn't burn is bunkum. Read the bolded again. It was the bush that verse spoke of as not being burnt despite a fire was around it.

But you believed that the 144,000 men were real despite they are from the same seal as those which showed the stars you believe are figurative? This is an irony of yours which you have failed to address despite it being repeatedly pointed out.

And till now you have still not been able to show me where the Bible specifically says that spirits can neither speak nor feel pains. I have shown the verses that prove otherwise.

And the biggest irony about all these your watery and unscriptural doctrines is that much as you are so passionate in their defense to the extent of using abusive language, you are sure to abandon them in future once those 8 men tell you they were wrong about all your are saying now, and then give you an altogether new interpretations to those verses you are quoting. Then you begin to defend it with insults again.
See your lives?

TATIME:
Hmmmmmmmmm you're MISTAKING Sir, Jesus DID NOT FORBID His followers from calculating and trying to ascertain the times!
He encouraged them to "keep on the watch". Matthew 24:42,26:41
If you examine the activities of the WATCHMEN of ancient times you'll realise that they always raise alarm at the sight of anything approaching!
So for JWs to keep telling themselves about times and seasons of Jesus' coming is a sign that that is what matters MOST to them.
Whoever is not comfortable with their guessing is FREE to abandon them and their form of worship, but i don't think Jesus condemned His faithful followers for being always concerned about the times and seasons of His coming!

You have veered off the issue again. We are talking of calculating and predicting dates and the hour and not the seasons. Of course Jesus gave clear hints on how to know the seasons hence that needs no special calculation or intelligence to ascertain. But for specific dates and years; he clearly said predictions for such are impossible, yet that exactly is what your organization is interested in.

And the fact that of all your organization's predictions and adjustments of the day and hour of Jesus' coming, none has ever been correct, shouldn't that have been a experience based interpretation that by that verse Jesus is actually asking his supposed followers to desist from making any specific prediction about his time of return beyond the extent to which He Himself offered some insight?

TATIME:
Jesus was talking to His FAITHFUL followers who are ever bent on ascertaining the times and season of His coming. Matthew 24:1-4 compared to Act 1:6-9
So any organization of worshippers earnestly making research on Jesus' coming must be having the same attribute as those His first century followers!

Ascertaining the times and seasons is different from predicting the specific date and hour. While Jesus Himself gave clues on the times and seasons, he forbade predictions of the specific date and hour. See it here:
Matthew 24:36..... No one knows, however, when that day and hour will come---neither the angels in heaven nor the Son; the Father alone knows.

But your organization keeps calculating and trying to guess that day and hour. And you believe it is God's organization?

Barristter07:
[size=8pt][/size]

Greek Gehenna ( a refuse dump)

Refuse thrown into Gehenna DO NOT BURN FOREVER. Jesus is talking about annihilation of the wicked

Oh, hell ... So HUMAN HANDS now Go to this imaginary hell? please how many corpse had disappeared to hell with both hands ? Tagged B1. Respond.



The bold is not the issue here, The MAN has TONGUE ( A Flesh ) , do Spirit have flesh ?

B2#

At least, with your incinerator example citation, have now shifted ground from "hell has nothing to do with fire but grave" to accept that hell means fire only that it would not burn forever. You are gradually accepting the truth.
But then an incinerator fire goes out once all the refuse is burnt. However, Jesus said the fire of hell will never go out.... meaning those to be punished in it will not be consumed but tormented by it. A foreshadowing of the possibility occurred before Moses in Mount Horeb where he saw a bush on fire without getting consumed.
Spirits in Mark screamed and felt torture from Jesus. Souls in Revelations spoke in heaven in demand for justice because they could still feel injustice done to them while they were on earth. That says it all.
The bolded is very much the issue. God is all powerful. He doesn't have to always conform to nature to prove Himself otherwise he will no longer be God.

TATIME:
Why do you always get furious each time you see comments that's pointing directly to what others has in mind?
Well it's like God's heavenly organization and their earthly followers are united in purpose so wherever the spiritual Jews{144,000} goes,their earthly subjects follows! Rev 14:1 compared to Zechariah 8:23
That's why our activities is unpredictable,even if you are a member of our organization today and fail to follow all our programs,you can't understand what we'll be doing in a months time! Matthew 10:9,10 compared to Luke 22:35-38

An organization that keeps predicting the time the world would end in open defiance to Jesus' own words that no one knows the hour of His coming can't just be an organization of God. This is very simple logic. Forget about all these cock and bull stories you are trying in vain to substantiate with these unconnected Bible references.