₦airaland Forum

Maynman:
So it is oral evidence now not admissible evidence?

Oral evidence is admissible evidence if it is direct evidence to the issue (Section 126)

Maynman:
How so?

And you see it tells you that your guy gives evidence that "he had contact with a certain cow which spoke". And none of us was there when it happened.

So Admitted in evidence.

brightalo1010:
I'm male not married not having none of the things you suggested. I'm only trying to understand how on earth another person eat food and another person is running stomach with the person that ate the food.

And pregnant HIV patients have answered you.

Maynman:
The law didn’t say you should take anything someone said as evidence, it said you should investigate the information...

Section 126 of The Evidence Act 2011 tells you, you are talking rubbish.

Maynman:
He told you personally to entreat him?

What He tells me or does not tell me is no concern of yours!

Maynman:
So you believed what you took in as evidence as a fact and tangible information?

What I took in is evidence as The Law says and since I have no Since I have no need for the information, I do not care to believe or not believe!

If you require the information, you can have it since this place is a place of public records. So have it.

Maynman:
Your god didn’t know that you will “entreat” him before you even did it?

When you see Him, you can ask Him.

Maynman:
Read what you wrote.
You took the evidence in(a cow can talk) because you believe it and it’s a fact right?

I already said that I took the evidence in because The Law said it is admissible evidence. That is all.

Maynman:
What’s the “but” doesn’t he know about your “entreat” before you even thought of it?

The "but" is to show that I am the one acting under my Lawful Rights!

Maynman:
That you need to believe what he said as fact right as required by law?
From this evidence we will use to judge other cases as truth or false.

I don't understand your question!

Maynman:
You need not, he is all knowing right? he knows what he is doing.

Yes I need not to but I like entreating Him and I have a right to entreat Him!

Maynman:
So your definition of what “evidence” mean is not correct in all cases? Because now you are not following “due process”

I have already filled the evidence in the case file as Evidence 1, as required by Law. (Due Process) Shikena!

Maynman:
You dictate for your god?

Nope! But I sure can entreat Him

brightalo1010:
Why using the punishment of sin she committed to punish others?

She is the one who has punished others. If she had killed herself before getting pregnant, then she would have saved others.

Most especially as she knew that others were going to suffer because of her wickedness.

This one you are so interested in childbirth, you must be female, or you have someone pregnant with hard labour.

Anyway, I have seen that it is prostitutes and evil women like Evil Eve, who suffer greatly during pregnancy. (Yes I said it)

haekymbahd:
Same way way your colleagues are blaspheming and persecuting God on the other side...

Therefore you commit sin because others commit sin.

O LORD, IT IS TIME TO JUDGE!

Maynman:
But did you believe that he spoke to a cow? Or you even already said it.

Since I have no need for the information, I do not care to believe or not believe!

The evidence will remain in his case file till the day it becometh important, if ever at all.

LordReed:
So a sinner cannot pray to be saved? LoLz.

He can pray, that is within His power to do, but it is a waste of time for God has already Giving Before or (Fore-Giving) or Laid Before, The Way by which a person desiring saving can be saved!

Maynman:
Darn, you are very wise.
You didn’t follow the example when you said this.
It was the guy that saw the evidence(cow) why didn’t you take it in?

And I told him I took it in because The Law says it is admissible evidence

But am I going to do anything with it? Nope, there is nothing for me to do with it. It's as simple as that.

Emilokoiyawon:
Okay. You are one of those silly unserious people. I get it now. Bye.

You are the one being silly because of the unease you are beginning to feel from my answer.

Look at it this way, of what relevance and importance and business is it to you if I say, "my dog told me my son beat him"?

None whatsoever!

You have no interest or connection with the dog or my son or me. It's as Simple as that.

Maynman:
But you acted on the information of a speaking snake?

Yes! I did. Because the information is about the Acts of Another Person (God) Whose Acts of Godship was important to me in Proof that He was Truly God.

Therefore, this is one of the several evidence which Proves that He is Truly The Owner of all the things by doing things out of the ordinary that we know eg Since He made man talk, He therefore he has the power to make an animal speak, which would definitely be a very good Proof His Ownership and Godness.

LordReed:
And what is the qualification.

You already know all this!

"If ye will obey His voice indeed and walk in His Statutes and Ordinances and Judgements, "

Emilokoiyawon:
Yes or No. Will you believe me if I told you I saw a cow speaking Igala?

Do you not get it? The information about a speaking cow has no importance or relevance to me.

So I do not need to act on the information you are giving. That is how it works.

Maynman:
Yes and he doesn’t know what he shouldn’t know.
Got it.

As is His Right and Law.

Maynman:
Your god has knowledge in a specific area, got it.
You are very wise.

God knows what He Knows and what He should know.

No Road!

Maynman:
So is this the definition you are giving to your god, when he said he is “all knowing” he is the one that called himself that..

I gave no definition only showed how it operates.

No Road!

Maynman:
But I don’t know all about men....

And neither do you need to know all men nor do you care to know all men nor is it your business to know all men.

No Road!

Maynman:
So your god is all knowing only in men affairs. ...

You are only interested in yourself being a man and because you have seen what happens to one man also happens to you, that is why you even happen to care about men!

Which is even why you are speaking to me.

Else, you would not even care.

So, No Road!

arejibadz:
this one the main reasons religion never sits right with me like why all this happening , i haven't seen any one who has answered this question WHY IS SUFFERING PART OF RELIGION

You sent "bent" not part!

Maynman:
So your god knows only us, not other things?

Who cares about other things as long as it is well with me?

None of us would be bothered if Saturn has not eaten or if the moon is sad!

We don't care.

Maynman:
So god is knowing in a specific area?

We are a specific area!

schoolboymatt:
how is suffering part of religion?

You said "bent" now you changed it to "part".

And all in all, it has become a religion for you people to suffer!

Bros no ves, na the op I be won attack

Maynman:
That’s what education means.
Please this is so simple, all knowing means you know everything, not part or some but everything.

And we also have all knowing in specific areas eg Steve Jobs is all knowing over his iPhone, Mr. Toyoda is definitely all knowing over his Corolla and God is definitely all knowing over his toys called man.