₦airaland Forum

jaephoenix:
So if you ask your god,"why did my dad die?" Its a prayer?

See, you an illi...

He said "communication" and if you had gone to school you would have learnt that communication can start with a question eg "are you alright?"

Image123:
Lolz. Imagine a vurgin arguing orgasm with married people. SMH

Imagine oo. 🤣🤣

TheNonexisting:
You're suspecting a nonexisting wife. No be this guy with his cooked up stories again? What's that his name sef?

Broda, I don first talk before I see say na d guy!

fattprince:
Well to a certain extent you are right, but sorry I might still have to disagree with you especially given your last illustration. True they were once governors even if they were later removed, that's certainty but not a Truth because as you believe they were governors and can say from my perspective they never were because they weren't their legitimately and you can't say I'm wrong. Can you? Even when you go through the list of past governors, some may add him to the list while some sources wouldn't add him and you can't say both are wrong they are both write from the perspective you are looking at it from. But the ones they were governors that served full terms but not removed will surely be in both lists no matter the source you get it from. Those ones now are the Truth because no matter how you want to twist it they will be there.

You are wrong because even those sources that refused to acknowledge their fact and Truth and certainty can never wipe out and delete from history that period of time when they were Governors. They can not give that period of time of Governorship to anybody and that is why you are wrong and therefore they are certain and the Truth forever and ever.

MrPresident1:
We did not see you in the Esau thread to come and defend Esau

This is where you are resting in peace

How can you see me when the thread shows that i have gotten to the logical conclusive end of the matter leaving, you repeating yourself like alu .... Tick

And now I learn you are Muslim, that explains the abnormalcy

trentslawson:
Then I'm asking you who created Christianity?
You can summon your AI to help you do your research since you confide in it so much...

Since you know that Ai could have helped you why didn't you?
With just coupla taps of your pad you could have gotten this

AI Overview

Christianity was not created by a single person in a boardroom; instead, it evolved out of 1st-century Second Temple Judaism in Judaea based on the life,
teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth

See it. It is from Jesus Christ! Even a robot knows that

trentslawson:
I'm not deceiving myself, I know the difference, Now I'm asking you who created Christianity?
I'm sure it's Not Jesus Christ, Jesus Of Nazareth, Yeshua, Jesus the Lion of Judah.

Answer me, who created Christianity?
2nd question, Did Jesus Christ gave permission to any of his beloved Disciple to create Christianity & make it a religion?

Be open minded, Jesus Christ wants you to believe his teachings & words, And to follow him on your own, not a group of people, "If you love me take your cross & follow me" Being born again doesn't make you a Christian, it makes you A follower of Jesus Christ, it's simple

If really you are bona fide and open minded then why did you say "Did Jesus Christ gave permission to any of his beloved Disciple to create Christianity & make it a religion?"

It means therefore that you already understood that Christianity is derived from Jesus Christ and originated from Him.

And no man anywhere claimed to be the creator of Christianity, not even Paul, yet you said all that you are saying even though you knew that Jesus Christ is the Originator of Christianity

jaephoenix:
Why do Christians pray?

To get the full package goodies that bellyfulls instead of palliatives.

fattprince:
..But that's BTW, Dtruthspeaker you are actually smart but I think you are not getting chieveboy. What chieveboy is trying to say is that, let's forget Dangote he used as example and go with your dad so it can be more relatable. As you have grown into an adult now have you in anyway tried to verify if the father that raised you, paid your school fees throughout your education and provided for you before you became independent, is your biological father. By verifying I mean trying to ask for DNA or even asked if his your dad. I will guess and say know, why? Because due to all he has done for you, you are certain his your biological father and you don't need any verification. That's why chieveboy agreed with the Op that certainty could be a barrier to truth because, there are probability he's not your biological father, he may have adopted you or might have planned with the child mother(i don't want to use you as an example anymore) to bring in the pregnancy from outside or may not even know (as in a case if paternity fraud). But because the father has acted as his father since he was young till he grew up he just assumed and very certain that's his father and would not have thought of verifying his assumption.

Thank you. This on point just, that as a child i remember seeing how my classmates and neighbours (some of them)
looked like a direct colour photocopy of their father and there was nothing of their mother in them (as we thought then).

That's when we learnt and knew the word "resemblance" and resemblance meant proof that your father is your father.

And, this led us to see those who directly, resemble their mother et al.

And then we also observed those who did not look like their parents.

Armed with all these information every we all went to see if we truly resembled our parents, even those we told that they are a spitting image of their father as they did not believe us, which even in adulthood, you still hear some say that people tell them that they look like their father or mother but they can't see the resemblance.

And we all checked our baby photographs and listened to the stories of our birth and prebirth to confirm that our parents are truly our parents.

So, in the end every child in a normal house and did verify that their parents, are their own even if unconsciously, because nature makes everyone verify fact so that we can know the Truth.

Secondly, your statement in bold is still a form of verification, thereby proving that certainty is Truth.

The fact that a former certain Truth was later nullified or ousted by fresh evidence coming to light does not negate the certainty of Truth eg governors who were declared by the courts as not the persons who won the election, cannot be denied the certainty of Truth that they were once governors, even if later removed,eg Emeka Ihedioha,

So, i disagree Certainty is the same as Truth, therefore it cannot barr itself

expert234:
I challenge you to define a "Christian" for me. Yeah, tell me the dictionary meaning of 'Christian'. You Muslims love making rubissh claims with confidence! ...

I suspected as much that he must be Muslim. That explains the insane logic behind his reasoning.

“You cannot cure a madman’s thinking by argument.” Voltaire

trentslawson:
So because you are Christ like you are automatically a Christian?, Who taught you that?

Do you know that it was after the death of Jesus Christ Christianity was created by Apostle Paul? Don't get me wrong we are not here to quarrel or promoting hatred. I'm just going with fact. Never in Jesus Speech did he intend to create a religion, he only came to preach & set the captives free.

I never said Christianity is Evil. so why's your blood boiling? or do you want to start acting like the so called Muslims when you talk anytime against there prophet? because there's no difference between you & them.

And let's be realistic, you are not a True Christian, you are just a sinful Christian that's serving the devil & the same time deceiving yourself. You are not Christlike in anyway if you look into yourself.

"Paul created Christianity?"

Ah! With this it is clear Fayaball, that this guy is truly not ok at all, at all.

AI Overview
Paul did not create Christianity, as the faith began with Jesus Christ and his early Jewish followers in first-century Judea.

Truthseeker10:
Can you point out the statement of my illogical line of reasoning? Kindly bring the evidence here. If you don't bring it in your next response, I would BLOCK YOU.

Oh i see now what is the problem. My objection is way back when you asked "So what is the point of the exam if it will not change the outcome that has been predestined to occur?"

What you do not get is that I have told you before, is that all these destiny and predestination is all about destination and arrival at a destination.

They do not control and determine that the person must arrive there hence my "A person flying to abuja has 2 or 3 outcomes" example.

And because of your wrong understanding you responded "So are you saying that God is unsure of the exact outcome of the person flying to Abuja even before the person was born?"

And I responded "Is it God Who is complaining about predestination?"

I wonder if you would have been this confused if I had directly said "is God Who cares about predestination or you humans?

Bobage16:
[qte author=Dtruthspeaker post=140893361]If you like write till PART 100.

Anything built on nothing will always fall.🤣🤣lol. Without doubt , mk all man choose their foundation or build a new one after going through the different adverts of building materials

Precisely brother.

Funny thing be say dem too like fake then dem dey shock when just one small rain tap, the building collapse. 🤣🤣

Truthseeker10:
You still have made no point....what exactly is your point. If you were actually well rested, you would have seen that you actually replied to a question.

The fact that you are complaining about my response and your inability to proceed with your illogical line of reasoning, proves it already. If you can't get it then go back to when I corrected your reasoning and proceed logically if you can

Roycemadeit:
4. The forbidden fruit: Adam was warned that he would die if he ate it, yet he had never witnessed death. How could he understand the full meaning of that punishment?...

Already answered this saying
Ai
An advocate cannot testify from the bar because lawyers are bound by the advocate-witness rule, which strictly separates the role of an advocate (who argues the law and comments on evidence) from a witness (who testifies to facts under oath)

Plus, the record proves that at the time male Adam was accused of the offence, he verily understood everything; his world, the offence and the consequences of the offence which is showed in his blame shifting and finger pointing confessional statement saying "it was the woman whom you gave me who gave me to eat and i did eat of it".

By the confessional statements of the Accused and the Accuseds were found guilty and properly convicted and this matter became res judicata

And it cannot be relitigated again.

Truthseeker10:
You seem to need sleep

You need to reason well.

"One of the painful signs of years of dumbed-down education is how many people are unable to make a coherent argument. They can vent their emotions, question other people's motives, make bold assertions, repeat slogans—anything except reason." – Thomas Sowell

Roycemadeit:
..
.
Their response exposes the contradiction in their moral reasoning: they would condemn people for killing others and seizing their land today, yet justify the same actions in the Bible because God allegedly commanded them. They treat an act as evil when humans commit it, but acceptable when scripture attributes it to God, even though the people who were killed never agreed to give up their land...

And every reasonable person here can see that you have not provided any reasonable and valid counter to them as everything we have said are backed by Law.

To attack migrants is a war crime and the attacker is therefore entitled to be destroyed.

To attack a person first means that the attacker is entitled to be destroyed- Law of Retribution/Just War

So your trying to make a case based on emotions just shows how baseless and unfounded your claim is.

And this man aptly describes you and what you are doing

"One of the painful signs of years of dumbed-down education is how many people are unable to make a coherent argument. They can vent their emotions, question other people's motives, make bold assertions, repeat slogans—anything except reason." – Thomas Sowell

So go and learn to reason properly

"Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end."— Leonard Nimoy

Raise your words, not your voice. It is rain that grows flowers, not thunder." — Rumi

"The more emotional an argument the less logical it is." — Robert A. Heinlein

Truthseeker10:
What kind of question is this?

The kind that corrects bad thinkings after all you dared to ask if "God was unsure".

femi4:
Using AI shows your level of knowledge

The Sabbath isnt for rest but to honour God by keeping it holy

Ex 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy

Then Jesus went further to clarify the essential works of the Sabbath in Mt 12

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them

When the Pharisees saw this, they said to him, “Look! Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.”

3 He answered, “Haven’t you read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4 He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread—which was not lawful for them to do, but only for the priests. 5 Or haven’t you read in the Law that the priests on Sabbath duty in the temple desecrate the Sabbath and yet are innocent?

I used AI since you wanted pretend like you don't know the meaning of Sabbath (i just learnt the word is called "wiillful ignorance"

And the AI even tells that the word Sabbath is derived from the Hebrew word shabbāth meaning "to cease" or "to rest". And that is on top of the fact that you chose to disbelieve and disrespect that, it was the very Commandments God gave and He Specifically Said "Rest"

Leviticus 23:3
"Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings."

Yet, you say you are a Christian

Now, i understand why people have no rest in their lives and they shall never find it. No wonder they wish their dead "rest in peace" whereas, if their dead never rested in life, they can never rest in death.

FayaBall:
Don't mind him. He is now resorted to the gas lighting by feigning ignorance or "playing dumb" to escape the fact that he cannot say anything reasonable after your answer. After all, you have answered him this severally and those times he could never answer. So, now that he cannot answer rather than shamefully go away he chose to disgrace himself by playing willful ignorance.

A case of from the frying pan to the fire! The foolness of atheists is unending

Roycemadeit:
.
..
...

Since you have dismissed my write-ups and accused me of lying, let us deal with the actual story in the Bible. Please explain these points or just keep quiet:

1. God's image: Genesis 1:26–27 says God made humans in his image. John 4:24 says God is spirit. What exactly is God's image? Is it physical or spiritual?

2. God's footsteps: Genesis 3:8 says Adam and Eve heard God walking in the garden. If God is spirit, what were they hearing? And if God is everywhere, why is his presence described in one particular place?

3. God looking for Adam: Genesis 3:9 says God called out, “Where are you?” Did an all-knowing God not know where Adam was?

4. The forbidden fruit: Adam was warned that he would die if he ate it, yet he had never witnessed death. How could he understand the full meaning of that punishment?

5. The serpent: Genesis 3:1 calls the serpent the craftiest of the animals God made. Why was this deceiver allowed into the garden to mislead the humans?

6. Knowing good and evil: Genesis 3:22 says humans had now become like God in knowing good and evil. What did being made in God's image mean before they acquired that knowledge?

7. The tree of life: Genesis 3:22–24 says God expelled the humans to prevent them from eating from the tree of life and living forever. So was eternal life available to them through that tree?

8. Childbirth: Genesis 3:16 presents pain in childbirth as part of God's punishment of the woman. Yet childbirth pain results from biological processes, including uterine contractions and the baby's passage through the mother's pelvis. Modern medicine can reduce that pain without changing the basic process. What exactly changed after the supposed curse? Did women's anatomy change?

9. Human labour: Genesis 3:17–19 describes painful labour to obtain food. Yet some people inherit enormous wealth and never need to work for their survival. How does this curse apply to them?

10. The serpent eating dust: Genesis 3:14 says the serpent will eat dust. Snakes eat other animals, not dust. Is this meant literally or symbolically?

11. Human origins: If Adam and Eve were the only original humans, how does that account for the genetic diversity found in modern humanity, given what population genetics tells us?

These are the issues in the biblical story that I discussed. You have called me a liar, but insults do not explain any of them.

Please address the points themselves. Calling me a chameleon does not make the story accurate, and calling yourself a defender of truth does not exempt your arguments from examination.

You are not the first to ask these. Many threads here have dealt with all of these questions and you and I were even in them, so need replicating and over flogging them.

Everyone is tired of these shi...s that is why you see, no one is interested.

But just for fun let me point out that i bursted your question 1 was already when i raised the issue of image and mannequins which you started wailing about and then moved post to God's Image, Spirit and physicality.

And my same answer still applies which is, *Since when did images become the same as the Product they are made from?

Then what do you mean by God's Image? Have you seen God's image?

Then do you appreciate what physical and spiritual means? Because if you did, then you know that your question is not rational or reasonable.

And answering all these means that question 2 is answered since you want to pretend like you do not understand and incapable of understanding them

jaephoenix:
If u cannot understand that,go back to kindergarten

If you as an adult cannot define your "cannot", then you need tobi 💉

jaephoenix:
What is the difference between the 2 questions?
Yet you haven't answered my question

You mean you don't know the difference?

It's like you are getting stew.... PDa every year

Let Google teach you
AI Overview
The core difference is that a question saying "what" asks for facts, identities, or descriptions of things, while "why" asks for reasons, causes, or motivations.

Obviously, your new technique of responding to questions which prove you are dom is 2 actually make it worse by actually showing that you are dorm bah. 🤣🤣🤣

Image123:
He answered you clearly already. It appears that you don't like the answer.

Precisely.

He stu.... thinks answers are subject to his pleasure. The way reasoning of atheists ehn, even rats will call them stu

jaephoenix:
Thank you for saying nothing
Now back to the question...Why do Christians pray

The thread shows that i answered saying "So that we have the full and better package God reserves and gives to His Children.

The one you see that people have is just God's goodness package for all men but as you see from the op's cries, it is never enough and the package even ceases...."

So, here you go lying again because of the pain that you can never ever have this things and you would always leave life grovelling and struggling for scarce resources

Even a father who is a "nobody" is a somebody and I believe that the Bible would have mentioned him, if they really knew him.

Therefore, what it means is that he is

1) an orphan

2) son of a hurr

3) child born out of insex

4) child born out of rap3

Roycemadeit:

My reluctance to engage is simple: we approach the Bible from fundamentally different perspectives.

I'm examining its history, contradictions, and moral implications, while you seem more concerned with defending its authority, even when its narratives raise serious ethical questions.

A meaningful discussion requires us to examine the text critically rather than assume that whatever it attributes to the Hebrew deity must be justified.

Until we are willing to question our assumptions and apply the same moral standards consistently, I don't see much value in doing that.

In your supposed examination and scrutiny of the Bible, is it not clear that you are attacking the Bible and that you want to attack the Bible?

From people's opposition, we It is clear that that is what you are doing.

So, i must be on the other side to defend it as you already stand on the side against the Bible.

And all meaningful discussions, Examinations and Morality are based on VALIDITY and TRUTH.

You can't ask or say the wrong thing and you expect that the right thing would come out of it.

Roycemadeit:
Nobody said an image must be exactly like the thing it represents. The question is simple: what does it mean that God made humans in his image? Is it our skin colour, hair, height, or physical body? John 4:24 says God is spirit, so what does God's image look like?

Genesis 3:22 adds another problem. God says humans have now become like him in knowing good and evil. But weren't they already made in his image? What exactly changed?

And that is only one part of my post. I also discussed childbirth pain, painful labour, snakes eating dust, God walking through the garden and calling out for Adam, and the claim that all humans came from just two people, which conflicts with modern genetics.

You chose one point, turned it into a joke about mannequins, and ignored the rest.

Laughing at my argument does not answer it. If you disagree, address the points I actually made instead of mocking an argument I never presented.

If you appreciated the distinction between the image and it's originator, then why did you slanderously say "Yet these creatures, supposedly reflecting their creator"...?

If you indeed you were bonafide, you would have gone straight to make your case.

And see, you have started lying and chameleoning in this thread again for the thread and post shows that you were trying to make a case and advocate for Adam, so when in the post did you ask these questions?

And unfortunately for you, the post i responded to shows and proves that you never asked any of the above stated questions you claim to have asked, only you trying to advocate for Adam and relitigate/try to reargue case, as if you are Adam.

So, again, you have been caught on record lying. 🤣

You atheists just cannot do without lying. 🤣🤣🤣

Roycemadeit:
God placed a beautiful forbidden fruit in the middle of the garden and warned Adam that eating it would bring death. Adam had never witnessed death. He was given a punishment he had no experience of understanding, in a world [/b]where the forbidden object remained within his reach...

[b]Objection My Lord!

This person advocating for is wrongly holding the brief of Adam as Adam is dead and could not have possibly briefed him.


AI Overview
An advocate cannot hold a brief for a deceased party becaue the authority of an advocate ceases immediately upon the death of the client, as the client-advocate relationship is one of principal and agent.

Second Objection, my Lord.

This fake advocate, IS NOT A WITNESS, THEREFORE, HE CANNOT BE TESTIFYING AND SAYING THINGS LIKE "Adam had never witnessed death/he had no experience of understanding"
SINCE HE IS NOT ADAM NOR WAS HE BRIEFED BY ADAM.

THEREFORE, MY LORD, HE IS FABRICATING TESTIMONY THAT IS NOT IN THE RECORD.

Thus, my Lord, this fake advocate's entire statement should be struck of from the record and this fake advocate should be jailed for perversion of just is, contempt of court, Fabricating evidence and testimony and held guilty of any other breach of Law that he maybe held guilty of and punished in the most strictest vexatious terms, my Lord 🤣🤣🤣🤣


AI Overview
An advocate cannot testify from the bar because lawyers are bound by the advocate-witness rule, which strictly separates the role of an advocate (who argues the law and comments on evidence) from a witness (who testifies to facts under oath)

Plus, the record proves that at the time male Adam was accused of the offence, he verily understood everything; his world, the offence and the consequences of the offence which is showed in his blame shifting and finger pointing confessional statement saying "it was the woman whom you gave me who gave me to eat and i did eat of it".

And My Lord, before this Honourable Court is the confessional statements of the Accused and the Accuseds were found guilty and properly convicted and this matter has been res judicata

And it cannot be relitigated again.

Only Appealed

And the time of Appeal has extremely overlasped being millienials old, where as the maximum time of appeal of a decision of Court all over the world is 90 days after the Judgement was given.

AND MY LORD, THIS IS NOT EVEN AN APPEAL Neither is this fake advocate the proper person to make an appeal

Therefore, this advocate has given false testimony to wickedly and mischievously bring about a gross miscarriage of just is and a perversion of Law.

My Lord, this op fake advocate is worthy of the death penalty and more if the weight of all his offences are accurately computed and weighted.