₦airaland Forum

Mad_Max:
You're rude.

You assume my two long posts were meant just for you. They weren't.  

While talking indoctrination, the 'you' was a general public you, not just you in particular. I've lived the indoctrinated life.

It IS a peculiar form of bondage. The message was for others in a similar predicament.

It's possible you may have mistaken my earnestness for pretentiousness. You're free to.

People here have posted things that's helped me lots of times. The posters had no idea. So it wasn't all about you.

romeo4real
Can I get back to you? Tx

@Mad_Max

I am ashamed for stooping low to the extent of getting tagged rude

I misconstrued the ambiguity(ies). Am sorry and apologise

I agree with Nick you on certain issues you highlighted hence the interest, enthusiasm & scrutiny

Romeo4real:
Whilst Mad Max may sound off topic and rambling, he has articulated himself quite eloquently and in an erudite manner.

It is worthwhile to consider what he is saying. This is more that can be said of other posters here.

As for Jagunlabi & Huxley - it is best to ignore them. Huxley is well known for intentionally creating posts for the express purpose of contention, rather than for enlightened discussion. He seem to have found an excellent tag team partner in Jagunlabi!

Romeo4real:
@Mad Max - with regards to you comment above, it would be nice of you to inform us as to why.

You have made certain assertions that people want to know more about, or want you to clarify.

It is only fair that you do so, or offer a more plausible reason for your inability to do so.

@Romeo4real

Hear hear . . . and subscribing

by the way, Mad_Max is a she

PS Huxley is cool, he throws up subject matters, steps back, watches the terrain and then interjects when he fancies or deems fit

Jagunlabi on the other hand is a toughened cookie (i.e. o ti giran) famous for his general distrust and seasonal cynicism

Mad_Max:
. . . I'm still learning and know very, very little . . . Hence my sounding 'vague'.

@Mad_Max

Simply take the advice to frequent here often to shrug off the Nolly & Hollywood fantasy and delusions of grandeur

Mad_Max:
Ah, I shall have to disappoint you and not answer some of that. By evolving biologically I don't mean we arrived by ourselves, independent of God. God created us. We're spirit beings He thought about. We came into existence because of that. If you're alive on this earth you're an amalgam of spirit and flesh. Imagine how powerful a being must be, if he created creatures as complicated as we are merely by thinking about it. We aren't all He created. There are things and beings far far far more powerful and incredible than mere humans. He continues to create. Universes and beings and spirits and realms and hyper-realities impossible to imagine. It doesn't end. It's wonderful.

The Adam/Eve story in the bible isn't the original. It's a waterered down version. I think the Talmud contains the original. When you read that you're in no doubt it's allegorical, but the hairs on your neck prickle. Something is clearly happening there, hidden by imagery. Something true and terrible.  It's not for me to say. When your mind confronts something that is true but you're not ready for it, you will reject it. So you'll find out the Adam/Eve story isn't literal at your own pace. People have known they aren't real for a long, long time.  It's not new.

One exercise is to think of the spiritual facts you know and how you arrived by that knowledge. Isn't it from religious authority, from other men? And didn't you believe based on their authority as teachers and pastors? Or they offered incontroversible proof of what they taught you? So what's true for you then is dependent on which particular religious authority you trust and choose to believe. But isn't it true that these authorities differ and so there are diverse creeds and doctrines in Christianity, denominations representing its own brands of truth? Doesn't all the arguments between Christians on this forum reflect the different truths we've been taught?   

But if a thing were true, wouldn't it be true regardless of denomination or creed? How many things do you KNOW for yourself that isn't based on religious authority teaching? If you're like most of us, precious little. So what you're defending isn't necessarily what is true but what you've been taught for so long it's a part of you. To doubt it would be acute discomfort. To cut it off would be hideous trauma. It'll be like being adrift at sea with no compass.

Mad_Max:
And yet if you don't, it's unlikely you'll learn anything new. Indoctrination is a form of mental bondage. It erects a wall. How can God get behind that wall and talk to you if you don't pull it down? It can't be easy for God. We're hard creatures to teach, and we don't learn. We're gifted at self-deception, at going off our own tangents, at twisting things, at perverting the truth, at seeing what we want to see. How can we be trusted? Nevertheless, He talks to us, He teaches us, He does not stop trying.

He talks to you and I, if you'll listen. If you won't insist you know better. He'll always confirm things He tells you. In the bible, in the words and writings of strange people, in many ways. There was a book I happened across that confirmed things I knew, but from which I also learnt new things. The author is an atheist who died in a Parisienne hospital. He expected oblivion (he didn't believe we survived biological death) and got a huge shock instead. Read what he says and judge for yourself. I believed him. It's MY DESCENT INTO DEATH by Howard Storm. If you like, I can post excerpts from the book here.

God's is a Spirit of truth and He'll lead you into truth, if you desire it. Your religious teachers may be right and what they say may be true. But God also wants to talk to YOU personally. Don't block him out with indoctrinated ideas and act like religious authourity knows better than HE.

Maybe it's better to stay in the safety of what you've been taught, and to defend that viciously if it's threatened. Because those teachings are a part of you, those who attack it attack you in way, and in defending it you're defending yourself. It's natural. You're saved whether you hide behind indoctrination or not.

But if you want to know things, you'll have to endure the trauma of de-doctrination.  The things you'll learn will have been taught you by religious authority, but now you learn in perfect freedom. But you'll learn new things too. Hidden things. Secret things.Stay in your comfort zone. Or dare to venture out and ask God to lead you into truth like He promised. He is ready and willing and able. It's fantastic He even bothers
at all, but He does. I know 'His Love' has become a cliche and lost meaning. But in truth, no one will ever love you more.

@Mad_Max

Dont sweat yourself over "MY DESCENT INTO DEATH by Howard Storm".

- already familiar with the subject & author

With respect and without offence, I daresay your submission(s) were deceptively initially interesting, it fizzled out to be pretentious

and turned out to be off-the-rail with warped rhetorics, unnecessarily vague & misleading out of sheer misguidance . . .

Take a sabbatical off the Movies forum and make more or frequent pit-stops and/or appearances here

PS For the record I am not affliated to a religion.

davidylan:
Here is an example of what Christ thought of the riches owned by His wealthy followers . . .

Matt 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Luke 18:28 Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee. 29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, 30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.

@^^

On the contrary Matt 19:21 and Luke 18:28 are narrating the same incident . . .

It is not a view on the wealthy and righteous

Matt 19:21 is about Jesus seeing through the heart of an overly self-assertive wealthy man with misplaced priorities

- His earthly wealth comes first before God and the kingdom

Luke 18:28 is about Jesus reassuring Peter following his outburst after Jesus had earlier said it's terribly hard for rich people to get into God's kingdom

Mad_Max:
Yeah. I've heard how God made man from scratch and a woman from his rib and they ate a fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and mankind fell. That something as abstract as knowledge is represented by 'tree' and 'fruit' tells you this isn't a literal story. It's like Revelation, when a message is given to John in symbols. He understood. There was a place where he was completely baffled. Seeing he didn't get that particular imagery, the angel with him explained what it meant. The woman stands for this, the horns stand for that, etc. But he understood everything else and so there are no explanations offered for them. Adam and Eve aren't real flesh and blood people. No sin entered the world because they ate allegorical fruit. It's an insult to God's perfect justice that you'd accuse Him of punishing the innocent for the supposed sins of others and feel completely comfortable in this belief.

We're guilty all right. We're lost all right. We sinned all right. But it wasn't by proxy. There was no Adam and Eve. Biologically, we evolved as a species. But this world isn't the beginning and it isn't the end. We are. . . very old, all of us. God says, I have foreknown you from the foundation of the world. What do you think that means? It shouldn't be hard. Think of the story of the prodigal son. Think of Christ saying He will leave 99 secure sheep and go after a single one that is lost. Tnen go over the allegorical Adam and Eve story again. You'll figure it out. There's no such thing as inherited or original sin from Adam/Eve . It's, I'm sorry, completely absurd.

@Mad_Max

Was about saying, yeah, let's agree to disagree but among others the bolded caught my eyes

So what are we guilty of?

How are we lost . . .

When, how, where did we sin . . .

How did we evolve, what and/or where did we evolve from . . .

Mad_Max:
You're right. God didn't create hell. But flesh and blood Adam and Eve never existed either.

The Genesis story is an allegory telling you something else that is true.

It makes no sense to say two people 'sinned' and all humanity became guilty . . .

Mad_Max

Let's use the present age (i.e. the information technology age) and bring this home

Using Microsoft Office Word we can make sense of

"by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned"

Normal.dot (endearingly referred to as Normal Dot Dot) is the default or global template that Word uses to create a blank document

The moment the template becomes corrupt, all future word documents created with it will be corrupt unless the issue with the template is fixed or addressed before use

Those two people that sinned were the template that got damaged resulting in all humanity becoming guilty (i.e. word documents created from a defective template)

Sorting out the defective template gets one back to churning out defect free word documents

Deep Sight:
Great: goodbye and shut the door behind you. Next!

@Dim Sight Deep Sight

Ouch! Wallow in your Deep Shite mire!!

Deep Sight:
What is the meaning of what you have written above? ? ?

The OP posts a verse from YOUR JEWISH BOOK OF MYTHS clearly stating that Yahweh

and his angels conspired to propagate deliberate lies and falsehood to mankind, fully aware of what they were doing.

Respond intelligently to that and quit bandying further threats of other evil acts that Yahweh may think up for us.

@Deep Sight

Ah! Peeye. Did I step on a raw nerve? Sorry didnt mean to

There was threat alright but I wasnt issuing the threat or planning to harm you . . .

but rather bandying a warning of impeding danger on this trail and mischievous adventure

A word to the wise is sufficient, I dont need to respond further than that 

mazaje1:
2Ch And Micai'ah said, "Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing on his right hand and on his left;
2Ch 18:19 and the LORD said, 'Who will entice Ahab the king of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?' And one said one thing, and another said another.
2Ch 18:20 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, 'I will entice him.' And the LORD said to him, 'By what means?'
2Ch 18:21 And he said, 'I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' And he said, 'You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go forth and do so.'
2Ch 18:22 Now therefore behold, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of these your prophets; the LORD has spoken evil concerning you."

What's up with yahweh and his angels?. . . .Why are they lying and deceiving people? Or is this part of the lying justice of yahweh. . . . . . . . .

Deep Sight:
Where is the Christian brigade now to explain away this one? ? ?

No doubt they will declare this "symbolic!"

Olaadegbu, where are you? Where is Noetic? Davidylan? and the VINCLEAR GANG? (Vi[/b]aro? [b]In[/b]esqor? Nu[b]clear[/b]boy)

Why is Yahweh propagating lies as definitively conveyed in YOUR OWN PERFECT AND INFALLIBLE SCRIPTURES?

[b]@Mazaje1

What a myopic rookie blunder!

The early you get off the slippery slope, the better for you and Dim Sight Deep Sight

you aint doing yourselves half a favour with your lawlessness . . .

Yeah, that's what happens when the lawless are given up to their reprobate minds

Remember Pharaoh, how is heart was hardened by God

Take heed. To be forewarned is to be forearmed . . .

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 AMP:
⁹Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

¹⁰And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

¹¹And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

¹²That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

petphunt:
If God is all that then don't you think he/she has failed in his duty to control all events on earth?

. . .  Our fate lies in our own hands. What we do today will hurt or heal the future. God has no plan for this world. The future of the earth is in our hands.

jagunlabi:
And that is called, "growing up".

@ Petphunt

First post eh?

What a first post entry . . .

John 3:16-17 AMP:
¹⁶For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten ([a]unique) Son,

so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.

¹⁷For God did not send the Son into the world in order to judge (to reject, to condemn, to pass sentence on) the world,

but that the world might find salvation and be made safe and sound through Him.

Petphunt & Jagunlabi would or could you do better?

Supposing you get to play GOD for 24 hours I wonder how you both or individually would fare? . . .

Nothing to do with the original question by OP about whether Jesus was rich or not but rather how much was the gold given to Jesus worth?

chakula:
Xtians,

i need explanation please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OLAADEGBU:
Jamiru, your 101 contradictions in the Bible has been cleared up already in the link below.

http://debate.org.uk/topics/apolog/contrads.htm

Chakula:
Thank you for providing the link for me, but please can you make it in a few lines for my better understanding please?

@chakula

Chakula haba!

Grown man like you expecting to be spoon fed

Abeggy, c'mon dig into it and start slurping it up yourself . . .

Officerricky:
I've come to realise that it doesn't really matter wat we do, how much we try to please God and obey his words, how much we earnestly yearn for His fellowship, how much input we put into the progress of His gospel. When the time comes for the "will of God", none of these are taken into consideration. God goes all the way to cause pains, break hearts, cause sorrows, agonies and regrets just for His glory to be made manifest. I can't but remember the blind man that was made blind for 38yrs just for God's glory. Some people are created and then some wicked qualities are instilled in them just for the glory of God to be made manifest. These things are just driving me crazy. I know u might wonder why i'm saying all these. It's just my mother. She gave God everything she'd, served Him, was devoted, prayed to Him for long life and prosperity. And all God paid her back with was untimely death at 45. I know somebody is going to tell me it's God's will but can't He just consider the pains and sorrows He causes to the people He created just to effect these wills. I'm just don't understand!

@Officerricky

I feel your bewilderment, pain, hurt and misunderstanding . . .

Isaiah 57:1-2 KJV:
¹The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away,

none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come.

²He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness.

Out of curiousty and with all respect Officerricky, can you do any better than GOD if allowed to play HIM, say for a day?

[size=14pt]Atheist Nick Clegg discovers religion in time for polling day[/size]

https://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01619/clegg2_1619614c.jpg
^{Atheist Nick Clegg discovers religion in time for polling day}

Nick Clegg, who publicly declared that he was an atheist, claims that Christian values are 'central' to Liberal Democrat policies.

Praised for defying political convention when he admitted in 2007 that he was an atheist, Nick Clegg appears to have undergone a rapid conversion.

The Liberal Democrat leader, who was criticised by David Cameron for his "holier-than-thou" attitude in the first of the televised leaders' debates, has written an article for The Church of England Newspaper in which he claims that Christian values are "central" to his policies.

"My objective is to make space in society for every individual to pursue their [sic] own beliefs, and to achieve their potential," he writes. "For me that means being willing to take a stand, even on issues that may be unpopular."

Clegg, whose wife, Miriam, is a Roman Catholic, gave the sermon at an Anglican church in Surrey on Sunday. "We are proud to support specific campaigns organised by Christian groups," he says. "We are in no doubt that these are policies that will make our country fairer."

Although he voted in 2008 for abortions to continue to be allowed up to six months into a pregnancy, Clegg claims that the Lib Dems could help right-to-life campaigners.

"On 'conscience' issues like abortion and stem cell research, where no party has a united view, it will be possible for every elector to have their say about these questions by supporting candidates who share their views," he says.

Curiously, he could not find space anywhere in the article to mention that he does not believe in God.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/nick-clegg/7611480/Atheist-Nick-Clegg-discovers-religion-in-time-for-polling-day.html

davidylan:
1. Jesus Christ was rich. Really?

This particular phrase has been used to excuse the mindless pursuit of wealth by those in the WoF movement.

I do believe that God does give wealth to some of His children He specially selects but He never promised us "riches" as we define it today.

Constructive critics welcome.

@^^

This is more of commentating as opposed to criticising or finding fault . . .

Jesus is and/or was rich and wealthy . . .

It must be said we are all entitled to be rich albeit there will always be the poor in the land as referenced below

Deu 15:11 KJV:
For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying,

Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.

John 12:8 NIV:
You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me."

But then, sure and technically, Jesus has an abundance of material possessions; possess large amount of properties;

and is well supplied with land, goods, money etc

The ownership of the colt or donkey in Luke 19:31 used to bug me big time

Luke 19:31 NIV:
And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him.

but then Psalm 24:1 and 1 Corinthians 10:26 brought it home and made the penny drop

Psalm 24:1 BBEV:
The earth is the Lord's, with all its wealth; the world and all the people living in it.

1 Corinthians 10:26 NIV:
for, "The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it."

Though Jesus was/is rich as noted from the above two references He didnt at anytime advocate mindless pursuit of riches

Not all are making or taking the right decisions due to circumstances or otherwise to have riches

Not all are getting the wealth or riches in a righteous manner

Not all can handle or handling riches the righteous way

"But keep in mind the Lord your God: for it is he who gives you the power to get wealth,

so that he may give effect to the agreement which he made by his oath with your fathers, as at this day."

- Deuteronomy 8:18 Bible in Basic English

The key to riches and wealth is believing in the principles of Jesus and the key to salvation is believing in the person of Jesus

karo93:
If he didnt call media houses to cover the donation then its most commendable but if he did then he is just as hypocritical as matt.6.2 says.

@^^

If he did call the media houses its likely to serve as an example for others to emulate or follow . . .

The chap wasnt even at the handling over occasion or present to gloat but was represented by a stand-in; a certain Pastor Jeff Akinsulire

From recent memory please name us an organised church that sponsored and handed over buildings to another organised church

other than the keep-it-within-family syndrome . . .

Huxley:
So God had already planned to send humans to hell many many years before he created Adam, correct? 

So God knew that humans would sin and eventually have to end up in hell, so he created hell many many years in advance of creating man. 

So why was God surprise when Adam & Eve sinned.  God already knew they were going to sin, correct?

@ ^^

Yes, God already planned to have humans end up in hell . . .

Yes, God knew humans would sin . . . and hell was created in advance

No, God was not surprised when Adam sinned

Yes, correct God already knew they will sin . . .

---

---

Why was God surprise?

God was not surprised when Adam sinned, afterall God is omniscient

The questioning was for Adam's benefit - an experience called self-discovery

LuckyCO:
the Owner's charateristics is not given to a wannabe owner nor the recognition to idol(s)

What do you mean by wannabe owner?

Does it mean we should continue to sing the songs and that it is correct interpretation of Is 42:8?

But not the same?

So GIVE should have been used in the song instead of SHARE?

Can you briefly describe how Paul & Peter own SHARE the glory arose with me for  better understanding?

@LuckyCO

You sound genuine hence to some degree, the indulgence

LuckyCO, am so so sorry, I really am. No disrespect but I think you're green and a rookie

LORD and Lord are not styles or impulsive fanciful text formatting you know

The format  is deliberate, purposeful and convey a meaning and/or message . . .

By the way wannabe is want-to-be; you know, pretenders to the throne or the claim

Singing . . . not give my glory to another in conjunction with the LORD and Isa 42:8 is correct

Singing . . . not share my glory with any idol in conjunction with the LORD and Isa 42:8 is textually incorrect yet technically correct

Importantly note that bible verses and translations unlike scripture aren't inspired

- Verses were an after-thought; a later addition

Brush up on Glory (e.g. Kabod, Shekinah, the backdrop & build-up to Isa 42:8 etc).

I dont want to bog you down with too much details

LuckyCO:
Dear Friends

I have been thinking about this song people sing in the church but cannot understand it fully.

I shared it with people and they said what they mean not what they song is.

See the song below;

"I am the Lord That is My Name You Will Never Share Your Glory With Anybody Almighty God That is Your Name"

Below is Is 42:8

I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images (KJV).

I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols (NIV)

I am the LORD; that is my name; (A) my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols (ESV).

I sang it with then before until I came across;

Romans 8:17
2 Thessalonians 2:14
1 Peter 5:1

Then I no longer feel comfortable with the song.

Please make your comment.

luckyCO:
Honestly I didnt post this for the purpose of blasphemy or calling names.

My sole intention is to understand the song the more concerning the word SHARE and GIVE which was expressly used and why the contradiction

and thereby establishing the efficacy of the song.

Though few artist have re-sang the song this way;

1. You are the Lord that is your Name U will never Give your glory to anybody,
2. You are the Lord that is your Name U will never share your Glory with any Idol,

Bible said we can share in the glory of God, since Christ is the Glory of God, if we share in his suffering we can also share in His glory.

Philippians says; we are matured man if we have full nature of Christ in us.

Mth 5:48 We must be perfect like Father in Heaven is Perfect.

I dont want us to apply human reasoning, let us apply what we know about God based on His words.

Please I need more explanations.

luckyCO:
So what is the truth SHARE or GIVE?

It seems you are dancing around it?

I want you to generate more bible ref. to support those who are singing SHARE.

The reason am pressing this is that I have opinion that if God didn't share His glory with man

according to gospel due (Peter & Paul) one will not inherit the kingdom of God whether now or later.

If the above statement is true then the song is not needed.

Bible Says we are gods!

From the analysis God Created us from His own image and likeness, check what that means!

There is no way I can say as exhaustive as possible man's relationship with God

I have not said that bible contradicts itself here, u may check my post from the beginning.

My concern is the song extracted from Is 42:8 which contradicts with Peter & Paul's letters.

I dont think I have gone beyond this assertion.

Give and Share cannot be the same that is why it is important that we understand what we sing.

If actually it is Is 42:8 was the base of the song, then I can see reason why the song has been changed.

Please make your reasons and stop sending me to another critical thinking school.

Let me know how share and give mean the same, and let me see another bible Ref where God said He will not share His glory with man.

@LuckyCO

This is not a complex or complicated issue at all

I'll try to be as brief as possible, starting with the OT reference (i.e. Is 42:8 )

There is only one LORD (i.e. OWNER) GOD, the Owner's charateristics is not given to a wannabe owner nor the recognition to idol(s)

Concerning the NT references, believers will share in the charateristics of God through the Lord Jesus Christ

Crude parallel; President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe did not give power to the opposition leader Prime Minister Morgan Richard Tsvangirai

but rather shared power with him

Bottom line give and share; they are closely related but aren't bed fellows

PS Take heed of Enigma's hint.

For clarity, study the meaning of glory in a Hebrew and Greek context and the background surrounding how the verses arose

aloy-emeka:
MFM leader donates buildings to alma mater, advises students


The General Overseer, Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries, Dr. Daniel Olukoya, has advised students to take education seriously as it remains the only legacy for mankind.

Olukoya made the call while[b] handing over the buildings[/b] he constructed for his former school, St. John's CAC Primary School, Oke-Igan, Akure, Ondo State, on Thursday.

The general overseer, who was represented by Pastor Jeff Akinsulire, said that if students wanted to contribute to their society in the future, they must be committed to education and have a good relationship with God.

Olukoya, who was a pupil of the school between 1964 and 1969, donated buildings that included the administrative block, library, vocational studies room, laboratories, school hall and 15 classrooms.

@^^

Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries handing over buildings to St. John's CAC

Testament that there are no denominations in heaven . . .

Well done Dr. Daniel Olukoya - wasnt even present to gloat over it

How good is that. Noteworthy and commendable

PS Aloy-Emeka thanks for the FYI

Fellis:
. You a piece of work . . . anyway I'll wait 4 you to return. By the way thanks for presenting your arguments peacefully. It makes things easier.

@Fellis

I am always here, havent gone anywhere - always at your beck & call

This will come handy here "I am a lover, not a fighter . . ."

Fellis:
^^

I think you just drew that conclusion from the other verse because even you know that it is simply blasphemous to say God needs rest.

The verse you speak of from Hebrews does not directly interprete the 'rest' as meaning that God is leading by example by 'resting'. Okay.

Secondly, since humans are already under obligation to follow the commandments God gives them,

a direction to rest or take a break after their labour could have been given to them instead,

if christians are supposed to take examples from God to determine what they should do,

then they should also aspire to learn how to make the sun rise or set at their will,

or how to give life and cause death or how to create their very own heaven and earth.

@Fellis

Fellis whoa! whoa!! whoa!!! Ease up now, steady

Making the sun rise or set at their will, cause death or how to create their very own heaven and earth etc is going against the grind

C'mon, its out of jurisdiction and the sphere of authority given to man. You know that, or dont you?

"The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" - Rest was made for man, not man for rest

but hey check these verses out, provided in different translations and tell me what you think

Its self-explanatory enough

Hebrews 4:9-11:
Contemporary English Version (CEV)

⁹But God has promised us a Sabbath when we will rest, even though it has not yet come.

¹⁰On that day God's people will rest from their work, just as God rested from his work.

¹¹We should do our best to enter that place of rest, so that none of us will disobey and miss going there, as they did.

Amplified Bible (AMP)

⁹So then, there is still awaiting a full and complete Sabbath-rest reserved for the [true] people of God;

¹⁰For he who has once entered [God's] rest also has ceased from [the weariness and pain] of human labors,

just as God rested from those labors peculiarly His own.

¹¹Let us therefore be zealous and exert ourselves and strive diligently to enter that rest [of God, to know and experience it for ourselves],

that no one may fall or perish by the same kind of unbelief and disobedience [into which those in the wilderness fell].

Raymond88:
I feel depressed when I think about this, why did God put me on the cursed planet

and then make me choose between him and the devil with the ultimate punishment being hell?

I think I was happier being a spiral of nothingness, tiny speck of obscurity . . . Life depresses me!

@^^

Ah! Peele!! . . . Its one of those moments

Depression is the resultant of absence of hope and trust

Trust the LORD (i.e. OWNER) with all your heart, and do not rely on your own understanding - Proverbs 3:5

For I am conscious of my thoughts about you, says the Lord, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you hope at the end. - Jeremiah 29:11

Fellis:
^I am comin, ryt now I am busy. Same 4 d oda threads.

@Fellis

I know . . . 

Man City fumbled just like Arsenal, not seizing and grabbing opportunities

and it looks like Chelsea too are currently following suit and getting walloped by Tottenham

Fellis:
hmmmm??

I truly do not understand what you posted.

Do you mean that the fire consumes the body and then the person feels the grief and anguish which the fire was unable to consume?

Thank you 4 explaining.

*Oh . . . also, where in the Bible does it say that humans will be devoid of their organs and body in eternity/after death?

Cos you said in an earlier post that after death the organs and body rot away and there is therefore no need for reproduction.

@Fellis

Thank you for your patience and follow up.

Forget about the body, the body's gone, it's kaput; destroyed when one dies . . .

Spirit! Can you burn a spirit? Fire consumes but can fire burn anguish, regret etc

Has the penny dropped now or more explanation is necessary?

On the matter of organs, reproduction etc . . .

Fellis dont you recall  "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return" - Theology 101 or Sunday School

Have you not read and/or heard that there are no male or female in heaven?

How does one distinguish a male from a female?

Is it not by $exual organs?

So by deduction one can safely infer if there are no male or female in heaven, there are no $exual or reproductive organs

e36991:
@Fellis

Though Punishment and Judgement are closely related, in this context they are mutually exclusive

Residence in hell is based on knowledge of value . . .

I dont want to weary you or stretch your patience but check out this short example below

Your left over breakfast ended up in your trash bin not out of punishment to the cereal or akamu & akara

but rather you judging it to be of questionable value  . . .

You get the drift?

Fellis:
^Alright. So on judgement day it is actually those of questionable value and not really those that sinned that would end up in hell, not so?

@Fellis

Not entirely or quite so . . .

On the former, yes but on the latter, no

On judgement day those of questionable value and/or those that sinned would end up in hell.

Quick question Fellis

Are you right, are you always right?

Am asking because all unrighteousness is sin resulting with a questionable value

Only those with the righteousness of God will be spared the trash bin hell

e36991:
@Huxley

Your threads are welcome whether they are ludicrous or not

Keep them coming without giving in to intimidation, bullying, ridicule remarks or inhibition . . .

PS Its God's prerogative how he went about the scheme of things

I doubt God can die but rather was setting an example of what He expects of His creation (i.e. to rest . . .)

Nauvel:
It is to set an example for everyone that you should always take a break from whatever you do and make sure it is done the right way.

Fellis:
@Nauvel,

Where in the bible is that explanation you gave stated?

Jagunlabi:
Yeah, right. Where was that written in the bible, please? Or are you just making up patches to plug holes as you go along?

@Fellis & Jagunlabi

". . . Patches to plug holes as you go along" ke, far from it . . .

Read Hebrews chapter 4 for where it is written and the explanation

This is leading by example and a coded message

A leader leading by example and demostrating when and how to take a rest and/or break

and the prophetic message that man in the end will have a break from toiling and/or labour

Fellis:
But I thought hell was created to punish those who sin . . .

Why punish if we are supposed to commit 'em sins?

@Fellis

Though Punishment and Judgement are closely related, in this context they are mutually exclusive

Residence in hell is based on knowledge of value . . .

I dont want to weary you or stretch your patience but check out this short example below

Your left over breakfast ended up in your trash bin not out of punishment to the cereal or akamu & akara

but rather you judging it to be of questionable value . . .

You get the drift?

Fellis:
^^Why do you think God created satan if his work was to tempt humans to sin and humans aren't supposed to sin?

@Fellis

". . . humans aren't supposed to sin" claim.

Please give us some clues and/or evidence that humans arent suppose to sin . . .

Satan and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil . . .

To tempt or to test, hmm, that is the question dilemma

e36991:
@Huxley

I love you man!!!   

I loved your coup de grace attempt

You are right to a degree but not absolutely right

Too bad that kind of reasoning and inference is somewhat impaired

Though hurt does one physically feel the pain in ones soul?

Does one physically feel the burden on ones heart, literally?

Is regret, disappointment or bitterness exclusive only to the physical?

Fellis:
Thank you. But if the pain is only going to be psychological, then what is the point behind using fire to inflict it?

Why fire?

Why are thrown into fire to burn if they have no skin to feel?

@Fellis

Thank you but you are assuming this is about inflicting pain . . .

You are looking at the wrong sign post

Sure fire is consuming

yet this is all about the anguish and/or intense regret over getting it wrong that is not consumed by the fire

(i.e. the disappointment, annoyance, misery, sadness etc not consumed by hell)

[size=14pt]Did you sell your soul for games?[/size]

Answer this question honestly – do you read the small print when you buy games on the internet?

High Street retailing giant GameStation decided to put this to the test and inserted a new clause into their terms and conditions earlier this month that granted them legal rights to the immortal souls of thousands of their online customers.

Here, in darkest legalese, is how they got away with such a heinous act:

[center]"By placing an order via this Web site on the first day of the fourth month of the year 2010 Anno Domini,
you agree to grant Us a non transferable option to claim, for now and for ever more, your immortal soul.

Should We wish to exercise this option, you agree to surrender your immortal soul,

and any claim you may have on it, within 5 (five) working days of receiving written notification from gamestation.co.uk
or one of its duly authorised minions."[/center]

GameStation’s fiendish clause specified that they might serve such notice in “six foot-high letters of fire” too, but also offered customers an option to opt out, rewarding them with a £5 money-off voucher if they did so.

Alas, hardly anyone noticed the clause, let alone the substantial bonus for spotting the gag. More to the point, the fact that it passed more or less unnoticed raises an important issue – too few people actually read the small print when they make online purchases.

According to GameStation, around 7,500 customers carelessly signed their souls away on the day. Were you one of them . . .?

http://uk.videogames.games.yahoo.com/blog/article/11851/