₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
LoLz. Bro you have never shown anywhere I lied. The facts are clear for all to see.

You are always lying and even now in this thread are yar lies, clear for all to see.

Gabrielshow26, i see you responded to people yesterday, are you still thinking about how to respond to my counters?

Or have you given up and seen that there is no valid argument you can make against the Truth?

LordReed:
LoLz. Thanks for proving me right by merely asserting with no evidence. Bwahahahahaha!

Thanks for proving me right by yar lying as this is not the first time we are engaging each other and the threads prove it, hahahahahahaha

Odionosagie:
... But the Bible is also very clear on forgiveness no matter how shameful the act may be...

Yet God did not forgive Esau, David etc when they repented

SpyMaster1:
The delusion and self-righteousness is actually impressive.

You claim you're "only here for Truth" and "not trying to win souls", yet every single time you open your mouth, you label people who disagree with you as "enemies of God" and "God haters".
That’s not "speaking the whole Truth". That’s just arrogant, tribal name-calling dressed up as boldness.

You turn a genuine discussion about the indignities of old age and the fear of death into another opportunity to attack "anti-Godism" and threaten people with deathbed terror. Then you pat yourself on the back saying "I’m only here for Truth, I don’t care who gets offended".

Bro, if you were truly here for Truth, you wouldn’t need to constantly divide people into "God lovers vs God enemies" and use a family member’s death to score points against non-believers.

You say you’re "all fired up" to start a thread about how everyone loses their "anti-Godism" on their deathbed. That’s not courage. That’s just you being obsessed with scaring people.

The "Truth" you claim to defend is mostly your own fear-driven interpretation. You hide behind "I’m only here for Truth" while refusing to engage honestly with the skeptical parts of the Bible (like most of Ecclesssiates) that doesn't fit your narrative.
If you really cared about "the better option for good living", you wouldn’t need to constantly insult and threaten people who simply don’t share your beliefs.

Keep telling yourself you’re the bold defender of Truth while everyone else is biased. The rest of us can see it for what it is.

You say i label people who disagree with as "enemies of God" and "God haters".
Here i am on this thread and this person disagrees with me where is the label?
https://www.nairaland.com/8660762/why-god-called-almighty#139231241

Or is it this person in this threadhttps://www.nairaland.com/8655994/what-youve-been-taught-fear/1#139198204

So, you see, you are only over reacting because you are truly a God hater which you yourself have expressed being an atheist. So I have only identified who you are which is you are a God hater and I said it.

It would definitely be a lie call you a God lover, so I am in very good order as i told you there are only 2 groups of people here in religion, God lovers and God haters. And it is, what it is.

And whereas, whilst God lovers listen, consider and measure the opinions of you anti God people, you anti God people never entertain our opinions, You only see God in your bad anti God light and where we answer and correct one of your queries, you just simply move on to raise another issue raising another bad light of anti Godism.

So, you anti God people are not here for Truth but are here to get Church goers to join you in the peril of anti Godism and God enemyship.

So, it is you who is not here for Truth and so, i won't waste my time.

And on this topic i have expressed my opinion which you do not like but I don't care as all we both have to do is simply watch and see what will happen in our lives, for i love how life and living levels and destroys every argument.

"Experience does not whisper truths; it shouts them, loud enough to shatter our illusions" Anonymous

So, i am happy you disagree with me, so now let's see what life shall do to us and let us see who laments on the death bed and who dies with smiles on their faces

DeepSight:
Bless you for this. I could not say it better.

Still doesn't change the Truth i have said

"Experience does not whisper truths; it shouts them, loud enough to shatter illusions" Anonymous

So he who would not heed to wisdom shall get the whips and clubs of life and the world and I'm gonna watch and use them for an example to other young folks. Maybe one of them may be wiser

Expanse2020:
If God die who is going to be controlling the universe.... Reason am naw
Use this brain naw

So as you build house you need to dey dia to hold am make the house no collapse? And when you create house, the house go scatter collapse because you die for one month? Use your brain naw.

Expanse2020:
As your God die he show he his not God because in the three days he died he doesn't know anything going on, on this earth again .
But my God Allah is controlling everything in orderly before you and your God was born he his controlling and after your God pkai, Allah still in control till eternity.....

Antiislam
TenQ
Grabelshow26
Come and help your brother out ...

If you can reasonably answer the point why are you changing post to "he doesn't know anything going on, on this earth again since he died for 3days?

But you are saying that your allah who is already looking like he does not exist and has not done anything to show that he exists not to talk of defeating death, is the one doing suffer head controlling everything like puppet master has to hold the puppet strings lest it collapse. Even humans have beaten your allah as they have created things and have gone to rest and die whilst the things are still working on. 😁 😁

So you see, you are only proving that your allah is fictitious and none existent😁😁🤣🤣.

That is why your allah cannot die. He does not exist at all 😁😁😁🤣🤣🤣

Expanse2020:
J
Use your brain now....
He created death and you want him dead... As how naw...
Allah didn't slumber nor sleep talk less of death...
He is everlasting ever-existing ever liveth..
Don't you know the meaning of those words and you refused to learn and upgrade your brain...
Your God dead he dead and kpai 🤣🤣🤣 for 3days that means he his not God because a God can never died
A God cannot weak or sick
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Bro use this brain naw ....

If you used your brain you would see that to prove that you are the creator of death you always have to have done something that proves that truly death is less nothing to you. Alla lying silent is exactly like "willie willie". 😁😁 Power none fictitious silent things like the drowned god and others in game of thrones 😁😁
Very fictitious empty thing which people also worshipped.😁😁

Theawakensoul:
Because saying “you will see later” is not an argument.
👉 It’s a postponement of explanation...

You forget that arguments is about explaining but if a person deliberately refuses to accept explanations, what more can i do?

The only thing left for me to do is to do like the quote has said, which is to leave the matter for life and experience to answer. For everything i say has always happened but people keep thinking like Solomon that they can beat Him. So, what more can i do but to sit back and watch how God is gonna whoop some a**

Expanse2020:
Allah cannot die ...
He is everlasting,ever-existing, ever liveth...

Your God for 3days who is controlling the earth, the heaven and universe... As how naw
Make una de reason naw

Your allah cannot die because he does not exist. If not, let us see if he can do his own defeating of death

If you are not married, Kissing is the road that leads to fornication, so don't do it.

Na for handshake na im smooshing start. And na for smooshing na im fornication start.

immortalcrown:
The downfall of his company has nothing to do with God. His company did not collapse because he challenged God. His company collapsed because he lost a productive employee and could not find a productive replacement...

Lies!
All employees are productive that is why they are employees, so one employee leaving cannot collapse a company. Certainly not in this no work cryses

Expanse2020:
A God is someone who cannot die also... everlasting, ever-existing..

True!

But dying and re living again is also proof of everlastingness and ever existingness and over greatness as it clearly shows and proves that He is Greater than death.

So, like Pharoah's magicians let us see if your allah can do his own

LordReed:
Everytime anybody tries to have a discussion with you they come away with the impression of your unreasonableness. LoLz.

That is not true, else no one would discuss with me as i would be marked and avoided like those who are known to be unreasonable.

Your problem with me is that i catch all your invalid argument violations and your atheism cannot stand on grounds of fair and valid arguments, so when I block you on the ground that your argument is invalid, you complain.

Truvelisback:
I didn't say morality isn't necessary. Born again should come before morality to balance it. Both are necessary.

So are you saying that born againess includes being moral?

SpyMaster1:
You deliberately use the term "enemies of God" over and over because you know it’s inflammatory.
You’re not having a calm discussion about death, old age, or suffering. You’re weaponizing a family member’s death to label non-believers as God’s enemies and threaten them with deathbed terror.
That’s not preaching. That’s straight-up hostility.

Most reasonable Christians on Nairaland don’t go around calling people who disagree with them “enemies of God.” They understand that death is already painful and frightening for everyone believers and non-believers alike without adding extra condemnation and fear-mongering on top.
You keep doing this because it’s the only way you know how to respond when someone raises honest questions about suffering or the realities of life and death. Instead of empathy, you jump to “I pity the enemies of God” and “fear God or you’ll die sweating in terror.”

This kind of language doesn’t draw people to faith. It pushes them away and makes Christianity look harsh and tribal.
Sorry for your loss, but using a family member’s death to attack “enemies of God” and declare that even deathbed repentance doesn’t work is not only unhelpful it’s actually cruel.

Stop using tragedy to score points against people who simply don’t share your beliefs. Death is hard enough without your added condemnation.!

To me, the point of any discussion is to determine which opinion is the better/best option to be used for good living. Exactly like in car talk the argument of 20w50 oil vs 5w30 oil. Argument is for the purpose of determining the better option.

However, in religion more than every other subject, people's biases are super high and they are arguing either to attack others which is what atheists primarily do or to defend their stand. Most people are not appreciating that it is about their life and death as you yourself have seen in ecclesiastes or rather they simply do not care. (But I do.)

So, in the end the argument reveals there are 2 clear groups, God lovers and God haters/enemies of God with their biases.

And, you already know as i told you before, you can never force anyone to accept an opinion even if it is most reasonable. And this is where I have no other choice but to remind them that all these arguments have to do with life and death and that there is are certain things we have already seen which is that on death beds, anti Godism stops.

And I was actually coming to raise a thread about how everyone loses their anti Godism on their death beds only for this thread to come be raised, so unfortunately for you guys, i am already all fired up.

And your problem is that i do not fulfill the stereotypes you know for i do not really preach and i am not here to "win souls". I am here only for Truth.

I am here to learn it, test it, discover it, stand for it and defend it and that is why I am always arguing here.

And since i am not trying to win souls, i am free to say the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth not caring who might be offended by it cos

"Our society strives to avoid any possibility of offending anyone – except God." — Billy Graham

So
"If the truth offends, then let it offend. People have been living their whole lives in offense to God; let them be offended for a while." — John MacArthur

SpyMaster1:
Sorry for your loss.
You turn every discussion about suffering, old age, or death into the same broken record: “I pity all those who are enemies of God… there is no escaping God… fear God or else.”

Even in the Ecclesiastes thread, you did the exact same thing twisting a deeply skeptical book into your personal “Solomon rebelled and got crushed, so fear God” sermon.

Many Christians on here are mature enough to discuss the realities of old age, infirmity, and death without immediately using it to attack “enemies of God” or threaten people with divine punishment. The original poster was asking a genuine, human question about whether the indignities of long life make people question God’s mercies.
Instead of engaging thoughtfully, you jumped straight to fear-mongering and pitying non-believers.

That kind of aggressive, “us vs them” approach doesn’t strengthen faith it repels people. A lot of reasonable Christians here know the difference between honest reflection on suffering and turning every tragedy into a weapon against those who don’t share your exact beliefs.

The Preacher in Ecclesiastes faced the horror and futility of death honestly for most of the book. You seem incapable of doing that without adding your favourite fear-based twist.

Now you are seeing why attack enemies of God with death bed issues because in that horrible day, all these anti Godism stops. There is no argument whatsoever. Every dying soul on that day is now in sweat filled trepidation and in crippling fear of God. I saw it all around me.

And so the question i put to the living who still have many more years on earth is why would you live your life being an enemy of God only for you to disturb the living and God when you are on your death bed?

And worse, on that day it is even over too late. (Yes, i said it and I always say it. Anyone telling you that you can repent on your death bed is lying to you and I know we have all seen many people repenting and praying on their death beds. But let's say the Truth, did it work?

I definitely say 'No! It didn't work."

So, i put it to the living does it make any sense to live a life being an enemy of God only for you to start sweating in terrifying fear when death comes?

LordReed:
LoLz. I literally asked him which portion he wanted me to focus on because I am ready to discuss reasonably. Unlike you who just makes assertions and can't be reasoned with.

Now you have started your usual lies. There is no time where i was ever unreasonable to discuss with. It is you who when you see that you have no reasonable argument to make again who starts resorting to lies and fallacies and change of posts.

Truvelisback:
Being born again isn't about being moral. Being born again is accept and believe the finished work of Christ on the cross. There are people who are moral that aren't born again. Being born again goes beyond just being moral. However, living a moral life is part of it. The Bible says by their fruit(character or moral way of living), you shall know them.

Please, address the 2 bolded statements for they are contradictory. For in the first one you discard say that morality is not necessary but in the second one you admit that morality is a part of born againess. So, which is it?

Gabrielshow26:
It’s fascinating to see you use 'mens rea' (guilty mind) to argue that disobedience doesn’t cause guilt. This is like saying a man isn't a criminal for shooting someone; he’s only a criminal because the bullet entered the body ...

That is because you are looking at the man born today after the fall from innocence who now has the knowledge of good and evil and mens rea.

Whereas, Adam male and female being the first are the only humans to have lived and enjoyed a world free of guilt. Your shooter above never enjoyed nor got that experience, so, your counter does not apply.

So the area of concentration is the spot were man transited and transformed from an innocent person who could not be held guilty to one who could now be a judged guilty, which is what I have presented above pointing out that in their case and only in their case, they experienced a world in which they could have disobeyed as children do yet they could never be held guilty because of the absence of mens rea. (No other human after them had that because they had already fallen and transformed from innocent people who could not be found guilty into people with mens rea)

Gabrielshow26:
The "Knowledge of Good and Evil" is simply the experiential realization of that rebellion...

We have heard your own definition and the thread shows that all these comes down and amounts to what is called mens rea. So, lets not go backwards

Gabrielshow26:
By the way, in any court of law, the mens rea is the intent to commit the forbidden act.

Now you are trying to change the meaning of mens rea because you want to avoid the Truth.

Is it that you forget that i am a lawyer? In every court all over the world and even Google shows that mens rea is simply

mens rea
/ˌmɛnz ˈriːə/
Mens rea, Latin for "guilty mind," is the mental state or criminal intent a defendant must possess to be convicted of a crime.

And I know you see the primary word is "guilty mind".

And this Law of guilty mind is here because every one of us in the world was born only after Adam had eaten mens rea. So, it is only Adam who saw and enjoyed the world of complete innocence and a world absent of mens rea.

Gabrielshow26:
You claimed God avoided using 'man’s sperm' to avoid sin. True. But He also didn't use '[b]Satan’s sperm[/b] .🤔'

Fallacious argument.

Straw Man Fallacy: The opponent is not directly refuting the original statement ("Joe didn't use a pen" but is instead creating a superficial, similar-sounding argument ("Joe didn't use a biro"

Red Herring / Misdirection: The goal is to redirect the conversation away from the actual issue (whether Joe used a writing instrument) to a trivial nuance, confusing the issue.

So, you have no point here!

Gabrielshow26:
Jesus was the 'Son of Adam' (Luke 3:38). If the entire human line was 'Satanic' by blood, Jesus couldn't be the 'Lamb without blemish' while sharing Mary’s 'Satanic' DNA🤕. By your logic, Mary was a 'Serpent Seed' to.

It is already settled that Jesus was/is unblemished and sinless for many other reasons. So now I am saying even marry blood did not taint Him.

For first thank God you yourself said "lamb without blemish".

Where does a lamb without blemish come from?
Answer: certainly not from the sky but they were all given birth to.

So, how is it that a lamb which came from blemished ewe now came out unblemished?

Clearly, God hath done a wonderful work of separating the blemished from the unblemished in the womb of which Mary in being a maiden Virgin undefiled is already a step and a sign towards holiness an acceptable feature God wants.

Then in addition to her being a Virgin, she was "highly favoured" (not small favour oo or normal favour but HIGHLY FAVOURED).

It still did not stop there, she still had The he Lord with her.

It still did not stop there, shr was blessed above all other women.

So, in all these where can you reasonably find sin in her when The Lord has already found her holy? (This is where the Catholics are right however, they made the mistake of overstretching it.

Gabrielshow26:
You asked 'whose pikin were we before?' as if adoption proves a Satanic bloodline

As you can see, the question is open ended for you to give proof of a different father that could reasonably be our father from whom we get our ivu nature from if it is satan.

So, prove. I am all ears and eyes.

Gabrielshow26:
You also admitted the Bible said "Adam 'knew' his wife and she conceived Cain", but you still question the paternity?

I have made an allegations of paternity fraud by virtue of Mathew 7:16, et al and proving it which led to you trying to counter that cain was born only after Adam had intercourse with his wife which led me to ask are you saying that because Adam had intercourse with his wife, then the child must be his own?

Which you have not answered.

So, i ask again are you saying that because Adam had intercourse with his wife, then the child must be his own?

Gabrielshow26:
However, in Genesis 2:17, God only mentions eating. Eve added the "touching" part herself (a classic use of legalism👀).

So, do you say that Eve is lying against God in saying that she added the word "touching" because you believe that God did not say that to her?

Gabrielshow26:
The 'guilt' didn't come from a 'biological virus🤔' inside the fruit; the guilt came from the moment they decided their own will...

So, are you saying that the guilt came from them even though you have already said that they did not have any guilt since they had not yet eaten the fruit?

And at this point where you say that guilt was in their "moment they decided", they have still not eating the fruit, so how can they be guilty when has not entered as you yourself said that guilt only enters AFTER EATING the fruit of good and evil aka mens rea?

Theawakensoul:
Let’s be very clear here.

When a conversation moves from ideas…
👉 into wishing suffering on others…

It stops being about truth.
👉 And starts revealing mindset.

You said you enjoy watching people die and expect them to suffer, just because they don't belive in your beliefs or share the same ideology with you. .

First, I recognise the limits of any argument and the almost impossibility of reasonably convincing anti God and God hating people.

Which leads to me being an opponent to them like Elijah was to the baal prophets.

So, no one can dodge direct experience and direct experience always cures all arguments and so i am happy to look to see God uphold his Laws.

"Experience does not whisper truths; it shouts them, loud enough to shatter our illusions" Anonymous

So, this is me just saying that I'll let life and real eyeity show you that what I have said is a guaranteed and certain outcome.

Kobojunkie:
Is that all you heard him say in that entire discussion? 🤔

You are looking for fairness from reed? Atiku, might be fairer than Reed

Reed will always dodge the part that is against him and must hang to anything that he can spin around to make your point look bad.

Gabrielshow26:
As for Cain being a murderer and a progeny from Satan? This is a logical leap. The same can be said of us, "beloved children of God"👀 which God never for once touched our mothers👀 yet we are his sons!

Even his begotten Son, Jesus, didn't come through God's use of his "joystick"😁. So this is out of question. The Devil seed doctrine likewise goes against what is clearly stated, "Cain was conceived after Adam knew his wife".

If you look, you would see that you are not pointing out where the gap/leap is.

All you are saying is that when you run with the view, you see now that we all are children of Sathan since we all can kil and do ivu things just like cain did, which is already proven.

https://www.nairaland.com/7723853/why-most-humans-evil#123728720

https://www.nairaland.com/6410287/humans-naturally-evil-good-video#98960517

And as we have all said being ivu and doing ivi is natural to us whereas God is not evil and being Good and doing Good is what is natural to God, so no one can rightfully say that we are children of God.

For, Mathew 7:16, you can never see a serpent behave like a sheep nor vice versa.

if indeed God is truly our Father then why are we adopted?

John 1:12 - But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:" (whose son where we be before?)

John 3:1 - Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: (who pikin we be before?)

Ephesians 1:5 - Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will.

Then, did you not see Jesus, The Son of God behaving and doing just like His Father throughout?

And thank God you even see that man's sparm and egg was not used at all for Him. That clearly tells you what God was avoiding. And that is why every reasonable person all over the world agrees that Jesus was born without sin.

So, you did not point out the gap and cain being born after Adam had intercourse with his wife only raises the question of paternity as he is supposed to have intercourse with his wife. And of course you cannot be saying that because Adam had intercourse with his wife, then the child must be his own?

Gabrielshow26:
GUILT.

Their disobedience brought about guilt, shame among other things. These things—shame being clearly highlighted—[/b]are written in the story.

We are on the same page here how is it that you disagree? What you have just declared is what is called in Law as "mens rea" which means "guilty mind".

However, i now put it to you believe that [b]It is not their disobedience that brought guilt and shame but the fruit of knowledge of G & E. For, you yourself just answered that "it is the presence of G & E that makes a person guilty" (and not the presence of disobedience.

And this is in view of fact that you also appreciated that the absence of g & e makes a person innocent. (And not the absence of disobedience)

So, before G & E they could have disobeyed in other things eg God would have told them don't go into the rain you would get cold just like children, they disobeyed; or don't touch that plant (venus fly trap) it would, gbam too late but; or don't pluck the pawpaw it is not yet ri... Too late, plucked.

But no guilt because they lacked G & E.

But for G & E, the offence, sin and crime of it even commences as soon as it is "touched" like touching a person with ebola or Staph or dead body (Numbers 19:11)

But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it.

I believe you would agree with me that you would have to touch a fruit to eat it, so touching comes first.

So by this, do you see now that disobedience was at first, on its own and it did not make a person guilty?

But that guilt and mens only began AFTER G and E had entered man?

ebubeson:
Being moral without salvation in Christ does not make one righteous in the sight of God, but being saved in Christ Jesus makes one righteous: with morality as part of the evidences of such a person's salvation.

Any unsaved person that is moral may have rewards, but such rewards will only be on earth and is useless in eternity. But any believer in Christ Jesus who is moral, has his morality tied to the grace of Jesus Christ, and will be rewarded on earth and in eternity with God.

You are partially wrong.

Being born again is about being moral. However, a person who is moral without having God has 2 major guilts standing against him

1) guilt of former wrongdoings for every person must do wrongs before they decided to live morally.

2) guilty of morality which in their opinion was not immoral.