₦airaland Forum

tctrills:
Another rude boy. I don't discuss with mannerless kids.

Look at this stupid insane thing when you first insulted me, in your insane mind you were polite and well behaved.

tctrills:
Please make your argument with Jesus Christ, I only quoted him.

And you show that your head does not work well for Christ did not say "If death has not come into the world man would abide alone, he would have no fruit."

There was no death when female Adam came to meet male Adam and she kept him company and they bore fruits.

So, go have your head and brain and soul repaired before you come back to read the Bible so that you stop reading it crazily.

tctrills:
Good is not a liar. Listen to what he said after Adam and Eve ate the fruit.
"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil."
Now the bible did not say that Adam knew nothing or 5hat Adam was unintelligent. It only said he did not know God and Evil before eating the fruit.
Knowing Eve to be his flesh had nothing to do with good and evil.

God indeed is not a liar but it has obviously not occurred to you that His Statement "And God saw that everything that He had made was very Good" clearly proves that Adam too was more than good, he was very good. And only knew the good.

Therefore, God's statement "man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." clearly means that MAN KNEW ONLY GOOD BEFORE HE MESSED UP.

BUT WITH HIS MESS UP, HE NOW KNEW EVIL IN ADDITION TO THE GOOD HE USED TO KNOW!

Its as simple as that!

tctrills:
Knowing something is good to eat had nothing to do with knowledge of Good and Evil.

Here is why.
If I give my 2 years old boy 2 plates, one containing rice and chicken and the other full of stones, my baby would choose the first.
Does my 2 years old boy know good from evil? If you have ever had kids, you would know the answer is no. So stop saying things that are not practical.

First, I gave 2 examples and you only picked one.

Secondly, do you not see that by admitting that the child would choose the plate of rice and chicken aka "the first" over the plate of stones, you have proven what I said is True?

Try thinking about what you wanted to say before you say.

Because the church became the congregation which Psalm 1 and other scriptures said we must avoid!

Michelle70:
Why?

Maynman:
Before you know something was good you must have seen it in a bad state or have knowledge of when it was in a bad taste...

Your stupidity has no end.
When you saw fried chicken, pizza, ice-cream, ball, toy car, you did not see them in their bad states beforehand

tctrills:
If death has not come into the world man would abide alone, he would have no fruit.

Wrong!

Man was already blessed to have fruits, under The Law/Commandment, "Be Fruitful and multiply and subdue and have dominion" (Genesis 1:28) which got lost because man murdered himself.

But thanks to Noah, (Genesis 9) God Reinstated it, BUT NOW HE DID NOT RE-INSTATE OR RECOMMAND, "SUBDUE AND HAVE DOMINION" Which He amended to "the fear of you and the dread of you...."

And neither was man alone, he had God!

tctrills:
...Choose one, remaining in the garden forever or eternal salvation in the Kingdom of God. Where you would sit on his throne and become a priest and king.

Eternal salvation is the return to the garden

AntiChristian:
The question still remains unanswered!

A car that has only accelerator and no brakes is a not a good thing and I can definitely use the brakes in a very dead causing way.

That is how the fruit operates.

Evil is good in God's Hands, BUT UNATHOURIZED USE OF EVIL IS, DEATH CAUSING!

tctrills:
We all know that we need the knowledge of good but do we also need the knowledge of evil?....

We already had the knowledge of good as proven by the part where male Adam sees female Adam and happily shouted "this is my flesh". We see him knowing that female Adam was a good thing.

And the second evidence is when we see them see the fruit "that it was good to eat".

So, you see, they already had knowledge of good.

Ayo13945:
Lets Just Agree to Disagree.

The go-to statement saying "I can not counter".

kelvinsteve3:
Law in the context of religion means a body of God’s instructions ordinances, statutes and commandments, as presented through prophets or holy persons, aimed at guiding man in his relationship with God and his fellow man.
Read more: https://www.austintommy.com.ng/2021/07/19/law-and-grace/

Law in every speed means Somebody's Direction, Instruction, Commandment.

Ayo13945:
Love without Power is Sentiment,

Power without Love is Tyranny.

Love is Power!

And Power can be welded either tyrannically or properly.

But because men are evil, they must weld it evilly and tyrannically.

Ayo13945:
Being a christian now is nothing more than advertising you're a loser it's a losing religion because you've lost to Islam...

Anyone who accepts your shit is a Fool!

Every wise person knows that these are the best days to be a Christian.

No man here would find a woman who is not a prostitute, a virgin even and yet she is goodly and properly behaved, in these days where all women are prostitutes and you would not rush to marry her, praising her for being strong.

So, it is for Christians. These are definitely the days to show both God and the world that we love Him and we stand with Him, even if the whole world stands against Him.

We shall be counted among the few who shall be found standing with and in and for Him, even if you abuse and call us crazy and stupid and weak.

"We shall never follow the multitude to do evil"

And a crime does not cease to be a crime simply because they that commit it are increased!

brightest5050:
There is no conflict here at all.

In law the property goes to and belong to Morenikeji the court will apply the principle of constructive trust and the court will impose the trust that the children are holding the property for Morenikeji. ..

Brilliant! Very nice.

However, you forgot the First Law to wit- "Equity Follows The Law". And The Law still resides with and in Morenikeji

galantjoe:
Possession is the 99% of ownership. Since, she was one that built and still live in the house, she prove to the court that her husband actually misled her.

She is in possession of the property and

In addition, No child can take without being given and since the child did not come, therefore, no giving was done based on The Law "you can not give what you do not have"!

Since, she did not give, therefore it means the properties still remains hers.

princeemmma:
Dotun died in a car accident 2 weeks ago, and Morenikeji got the shock of her life when a woman came for the burial with 2 children that belongs to Dotun.

The first child is almost 9 years old, and he bears the name Dotun gave Morenikeji's unborn child. The same name on all the properties which Dotun encouraged Morenikeji to buy.
Dotun's family are now trying to claim all the properties from Morenikeji.

You are consulted by Morenikeji. What are her chances in this situation?

This is a true life Story

I'll tell her to laugh at the family.

The Law follows the person. A Name without a person is exactly the same as story books. It is fictitious and unreal.

Secondly, death without issue (child) means the connection to that sly bastard called Dotun is severed, therefore, the bastard's thieving family have no locus standi.

Thirdly, fraud and deceit and misrepresentation always destroys any and every relationship (contract/marriage), thus, she does not have a problem at Law!

See rubbish! Murderers blaming the gun for killings.

gohf:
didn't ask you for philosophy, I asked you for scriptural references concerning what you wrote.

You need scriptural references to tell you that workers of iniquity include deceit as perpetrated by the serpent in Genesis 3 or disobedience as perpetrated by Adam in Genesis 3:11/12 or murder as perpetrated by Cain in Genesis 4:7-8?

To not know this clear proves that you are less than normal!

TMTR:
The last time I checked, the people that brought Christianity to Africa were responsible for the slave trade, killed a lot of leaders who opposed them, raped our resources and women but I am supposed to be the bad one without morals for not believing in their religion

Please make it make sense

The people who brought Christianity did say that they were bad (sinners) and did that which was not good.

But you atheists almost want to claim that you do not do any bad thing.

gohf:
so it is not incorrect because it is not wrong, it is only incorrect because your idea of what I said should have been broader. How does that make you sound?

So because I did not write what you want I am wrong?

"A half-truth is even more dangerous than a lie.

A lie, you can detect at some stage, but half a truth is sure to mislead you for long." Anurag Shourie

Half a truth is often a great lie.
— Benjamin Franklin,

gohf:
it is not correct because you have another meaning or it is not correct because it is wrong?

It is not correct because you narrowed the whole of it to only one type of sin.

Whereas that statement encompasses all the faces and different ways sin can be implemented.

gohf:
Workers of iniquity are those who present "false images".
False images either of themselves or of God...

Ah! This is not correct o!

It means those who manufacture sin or who implement sin

Wilgrea7:
I've told you why I said it. Believe what you want

Which is because I had given you proof. Case closed.

Wilgrea7:
I'm tired of repeating myself. “could be" entails probability. I didn't say it because you presented "proof". You didn't. So stop tooting your own horn.

Your understanding and comprehension problem. Did you start the thread saying "it could be true"? That is what saying "it could be true" for nothing means.

Did you not say it only after I had made a presentation of natural living conditions (Proof)?

As I said, your ability to understand and comprehend is very very faulty.

Lukuluku69:
Dumboinho, go through your posts, you are the one that made the first mention with your meaningless drivel...

Now you are the lying mumu-lodo even when this thread shows you are the first to mention me. Your stupidity madness is beyond cure.

Wilgrea7:
The fact that you insist on using an unrelated mathematical concept to prove a case of probability, shows how committed you are to being intellectually dishonest in this debate.

It is you who clearly shows your staunch and unreasonable refusal to accept The Only standing Truth, that has been since the beginning of the world, as you have chosen to.

Probabilities are not Truth until they occur and become settled Solid. And when they become Solid, then they are no more probabilities but CERTAINTIES!

Truth is about solid certainty like the ground under your feet and not probability, like you becoming the president of Nigeria.

Wilgrea7:
What proof did you offer?

Did you say "it could be true" for nothing? No! You said it after you had seen the Proof! So, no case here.

Wilgrea7:
Now you're trying to define an arbitrary set of parameters that would make something anti-blue...

The parameters have been defined long before you and I were even born, so nothing here either.

richmond500:
u sabi am well.
E get how u go even align your fingers with the ball, u go play better R2

We even wear dem jersey with paper and number. Number 1 na goalkeeper and we must get number 10.

And circular Vaseline cover Na goal keeper

Wilgrea7:
I simply said it was an intellectually honest thing to say that your view COULD be true...

It is the only standing Truth as 1 x 1 = 1 and not 11 or any other contortion you may create.

Wilgrea7:
Unlike other people, I'm not closing myself off to the possibility that my opponent could be right. But I'm not accepting it either, until I see proof.

You have already seen the proof and accepted that "it could be True", yet you say "until I see proof". Do you see now that plenty is wrong with you and that you are way below normal?

Wilgrea7:
For someone to be anti-blue, in the case of the sky, they need to say that the sky CANNOT BE BLUE.

That is not the only thing you can say to become anti-blue there are many others and if you were normal you would have known them.

Wilgrea7:
Wrong analogy. We're not discussing mathematics here. We're discussing about the nature of something we cannot see, and cannot verify.

Not wrong but right. We are laying down Solid irrefutable Truth Truth which I have shown you and now you have seen. 1 x 1 = 1

But you want it to be 1 x 1 = 11 or some other answer as you can concoct. That is the analogy and I know you got it but you just do not want to accept it, as is your right..

Wilgrea7:
If I prove to you that the sky is blue, rather than red, would you say I am anti-sky?

Nope! Not "anti-sky" but anti-red. While anyone who says the sky is red is and will be "anti-blue".

That is how it works. Now I am convinced that you really have serious understanding and comprehension issues.

Lukuluku69:
Go back to that thread about the Prodigal son that came back home...

Mumuni, go and take olodomycin to reduce your mumuness. Rather than mention me on that you are instead followinge and trailing me like mad stalker to this thread!

Now, you have added mumu stalker to your name.

cutecommend:
Keep your virginity. Virgins are special people. You marry ad a virgin, it is better than marrying as non-virgin

I am blessed.

You too are supposed to be a virgin too for God to come, else, E NO GO WORK!