₦airaland Forum

kingxsamz:
True sha. The rest of the animals teleported to the ark.

The funny thing is how you people will be thinking you know Bible.

According to the instructions given by God, Noah doesn't need to go all over the world to be looking for any animals, rather the scripture says "Pairs of every kind of bird, and every kind of animal, and every kind of small animal that scurries along the ground, will come to you to be kept alive." - NLT

Notice the @underlined.

Another possibility of this verse is that Noah might not need all the species on earth but just what God directed to him to keep alive only.

Aemmyjah:
They don't throw stones at a mango tree that its fruit is not ripe

We know just as you organization can't stop throwing stone on the mangos trees of CHRISTIANS.

oteneaaron:
Don't mind Aemmyjah, he just deceiving himself.

I know of an elder married with three children who is super promiscuous.

He can f*ck anything and anyone that wears a skirt.

But his house is the local field service center and he is a key figure in judicial committees that disfellowships other JWs who in most cases are as guilty as he is.

When you see him in the kingdom hall giving talks, you would feel as though this man is so holy and could never hurt a fly.

But the truth about him is stranger than fiction.

MaxinDhouse says he looks at his fellow JWs with suspicious eyes.

Rebellious were found among them (what of those who were not caught?)

Well as usual, they will say you're just peddling lies against the only pure organization on earth

Maynman:
Please look up the definition of "umlaunt", the symbol representing a u]umlaunt is a dot,[/u] umlaunt is not a dot.

You said it yourself

And a manuscript is not a book, CODEX is a book. They called it CODEX vaticanus.

Here you have it again.

Maynman:
A manuscript is not a book. A CODEX IS A BOOK.

Umlaunt is not a DOT, READ WHAT YOU POSTED.

It's evident you don't know what you're saying.

Maynman:
Illiterate, a CODEX is not a manuscript.

A codex is a book put together and you read it that, manuscripts comprises a book put together.

Olodo oshi

Read and stop disgracing yourself.

Ndi papyrus is a manuscript and Umluat is not a dot

Too dull yet be forming all-knowing

Funny thing is how an illiterate person will be priding in his ignorance.

Maynman:
Illiterate, we have manuscripts/papyrus, then they complied this many manuscripts into one book called a codex.

Codex Vaticanus is a manuscript, stop disgracing yourself on a public forum.

Papyrus is the materials used for the manuscripts just like our modern day paper.

Can you see your life outside?

It's only "late" according to modern standard, they went ahead to tell you only 12 was below 10 century.

And your point is?

Says the illiterate that says umlaut is a "DOT"

When I said you should stop disgracing yourself on a public forum, I have my reason.

The same link you failed to read said the below screenshot.

You see the reason why you shouldn't be taken serious.

O ma se oooo

Maynman:
They are not late, they are "late" according to modern scholars, they also told you that the late manuscript does not contain the comma.

Do you even understand yourself here?

You are the Dullard.

Says the person who says Codex Vaticanus isn't a manuscript

Trinity was birted in Rome, with the aid of constantine it became universal!

That's your cup of tea

Indoctrination is worse

Illiteracy is bad.

Maynman:
No illiterate, it's modern scholars that are calling it "late",

Then who says they are not the one?

the latest place where it was seen was in 4th century.

You're too dull.

Codex is not a manuscript, it's a collection of books, codex vaticanus is 4th century, that's the oldest you can see it, it didn't exist before 4th century
Umlaujt is not a DOT, illiterate.

Your illiteracy sha...

Indoctrination is ugly

Illiteracy is bad.

Maynman:
The "late" is just below 10th century, they said it, it's missing in Greek manuscript.

That is the argument of the modern translations that rejected 1 John 5:7

How is this hard to understand?

What does umlaunt mean, why was it put there?

Can you imagine! So you don't know yet jump in to Strat saying rubbish.

Codex vaticanus is 4th century 😂😂

And the Umluat is a DOT found in between 1 John 5:7-8 on the same Codex Vatican's.

Which that text must have been removed.

Oma se oooo

Maynman:
It was about sects, the Nicene Creed who and who were arguing?

Arguing Ke...

Send me a link of avila quoting it.

Read the link above to the end before you jump in.

Maynman:
What else did you read in the article?

So you just read the first paragraph and rush to comment rubbish.

The link is there, go back and read from beginning to the end.

Translation is different from Version, illiterate.
There were English translations before KJV.
KJV was meant for church of England lol.

And the same modern translations without Johannien Comma are called version. Illiterate.

No, it said they are "late" according to modern scholars and they said the oldest was just below 10th century.

That was the point the writer is making. Olodo.

The manuscripts 1 John 5:7 was found we're considered LATE.

English is hard for you.

It made mention of other late manuscript, without the asterisk, for you to know this are LATE, and the johanniene comma is not present there.

Do you understand the point the writer is making?

They also showed you a picture showing a umluat, it is English yet you can't understand it.

The is the reason you know, you're real olodo.

The Umluat said to occurred in one of the oldest Greek manuscripts called Codex Vaticanus.

And you are jumping on what you don't even understand.

Maynman:
There were hundreds of sects before Trinity was made official in 325AD,

It's not about number of sect.

My question was, is Trinity a talk among people before 325AD?

it was not as common as Arianism that's why the council had to be held to clip off Arianism.

Lies!

The Trinity concept originated in Rome.
Some of the sects that was later declared heresy after the 325 was Ebionites, cathars, etc.

Even Priscillian of Avila 380AD quoted 1 John 5:7 and still called a sect.

So stop saying rubbish

Maynman:
Did you read your own link, they agreed it was forged lol.

They agreed it was forged ! So that was the only thing you read from that long article?

"Most Greek manuscriptws containing 1 John 5:6-8 would be considered “late” by modern standards. Of the about 480 manuscripts of 1 John 5, only 12 of these manuscripts are from before the 10th century (Nestle-Aland: Novum"

Didn't you see they asterisk the "late" 😂

Olodo....

That was what Modern translations consider for not ADDING IT TO THEIR TRANSLATION.

The writer is making a point from there.

Haba... English isn't difficult nah

Also you need to be careful of king james VERSION. Look up how the first edition came out, who Is the king james of england, and hope you know that the first edition of kjv is present in all Masonic Lodges

KJV is just A TRANSLATION not another Bible written by another person (people).

Maynman:
The Trinity concept became official d in 325AD,

But does that mean people don't teach about Trinity before 325AD?

not only that, anyone that didn't accept the doctrine was called an heresy and ex communicated look up the Cathars, the people that accepted th doctrine were called Catholic, Constantine and the edict of milan didn't make ch[hristianity a state Religion, they made Catholic a state Religion, that is only those that followed the trinity concept.

The question is, was Trinity a talk among people before these happened?

MightySparrow:
Good job brother. How come I am just seeing this thread now.

I have had arguments with this people severally. They become dishonest whenever they are busted.
I am awed by this research.


Thanks so much.

To God be the glory sir!

Actually, it was a well detailed article by KJV proponents which you can find HERE

achorladey:
Na person wey sabi go understand well well





They will always come to nairaland to look for sincere and honesthearted ones. With this your experience they will call you dishonesthearted and insincere for leaving their what they called only better performing performance group doing God's will to become a none denominational Christian

You see his response saying you don't know the will of God and that there is nothing good in being a follower of Jesus Christ . Those are the many lies and manipulations packed into their brains by their 9 GODS of men housed in USA

This is another receipt.

'One line of thought' in the mud again

Sand2022:
Sitting with you daughter or son or even giving your blessings is seen as personal decision among JWs. But when JWs say personal decision, they don't mean that you will go unpunished. No.

If you hold any privileged position in the organization either, Auxiliary pioneer, Regular Pioneer, elder, ministerial servants etc, you will automatically loose those privileges if you ever give consent either directly or indirectly.

If you give consent and you don't hold those privileges, you might not attain that privilege in the near future. They would no longer consider you exemplary in the church. So, while they term it personal decision, it is not such intoto. You do face some discipline for such consent. Giving discipline on this is purely unscriptural. But they have their right to their beliefs.

The Organization is wrong in doing this, but that's there understanding anyway. All of us have area we don't do well.

This is like Muslim al-taqiya until you fall in then you realise there's nothing like personal decision.

And this was done for a reason, like in the case of Malawi.

achorladey:
These your analytics ehn go give their lies and manipulations no hiding place

That's why you see him shouting 'one line of thought' up and down just to console himself because of the insecurity he fills towards the organisation.

Courz:
I just love how the thread made front page. It is a JW's nightmare. They don't like their activities exposed to the public because of the Fake image they need to maintain. Mad MaxInDHouse is pissed that his Fellow JW Man came to leak their secret. I can't count how many JW Men I know that married outside the Cult. It appears to happen more amongst JW men than the women which is why I pity their ladies. Na dem many pass. They better receive sense and start to japa.

Mad MaxInDHouse is pissed that their wholesome image is ruined. JWs will continue to break their rules. It is not every JW that agrees with their Governing body. Na that one dey make Mad MaxInDHouse vex.

That's the reason you always see him bringing in "One line of thought" just to appear that Saints.

Meanwhile, it's the same deluded person who said on this forum that he looks his fellow JWs with suspicious eyes

Courz:


I talk am na. I said JW Ladies don't see their Men as desirable. That's why they refused to marry them and are still single. Many of them. That tells you the foolishness of their doctrine. Their Cult don't teach their Men on how to be desirable and work on their personalities. How to aspire. How to hustle. Na only to carry bag and umbrella to advertise the Cult na im dem sabi for there. They can't approach women. Instead, they want their ladies to approach them. If they approach the ladies, the conversation is like a Job interview. No swag. No game. They act like Incels that are bottom of the barrel. No endearing personality because they act Robotic. Their Men believe just being a JW makes them attractive. Their Cult have hyped their Men to the point that it is now irritating and some of the Ladies are branching out. That's why the quote you posted testified to it. Just ask a JW Lady that is not too indoctrinated in the Cult about her relationship experience in the Cult, she will tell you her woes she is facing with their Men. If a JW lady manage gree for one JW man to date, e go be like say na Military Man e dey date. Only quite a few of their Men are different.

But if their Men are chasing after non JW Lady to date and marry, that non existent swag that was never there before will come out of nowhere. JW Men treat a JW Lady and a Non JW lady differently.

Receipt full ground on this thread immediately it was moved to front page.

And the thread now has over 50,000 view which is around 10% of JWs population in Nigeria. So everyone well represented

See another one below and notice the reply of the deluded one to it.

He is now GB who determined who is JWs or not

MaxInDHouse:
Where are those interested in marrying from among JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES o?

Testimony from one of them who married your girl below

From experience he said JWs girls don't really have interest in JWs guys

SmartPolician:
I love this. Companies and government agencies must step up their games in monitoring what people post online.

You cannot be destroying the image of brand they invested time, efforts and resources to build in the name of cruise.

Wrongdoings must have consequences in Nigeria.

Actually you are wrong.

She didn't destroy the company image but seeking opinion of others on their product.

Remember, in 2007, a Baby teething product called MY PIKIN was released to the market by 2008 over 80 babies have died from it.

Public outcry brought government attention into it and it was discovered that it actually contain a certain substance that can cause harm to the body. Eventually, the product was banned.

So when is given negative feedback about products become a crime?

The company failed to have used this as opportunity to do good PR for their product rather than arresting her.

What if some crooks have already produced the counterfeit of their product?

What if there was actually production error somewhere?

You see negative feedback for a product isn't a crime.

MaxInDHouse:
Exactly!
So where is that BODY having the same line of thought with Jesus and his father? John 17:22

We saw the same line of thought from that thread

When will you deliver yourself from this delusion?

achorladey:
They belong to God not God's organization

Na you go tire oooooo. Difference dey between the two

If they belong to ORGANISATION Mr no sense peddler would have provided it.

But if e no dey, e no dey

Janosky:
Did Moses and all the prophets belong to Satan's organisation?


Ozuo pro max.

There's no organisation in the first place.

If you know any organisation bring the verse

So, stop your delusion JaNosense

achorladey:
I am not aware that another lie and manipulations have been peddled in that direction


These people can lie and manipulate anything to save their exposure

It happened live HERE you know they can spew any nonsense just to defend those gods in Warwick

Janosky:
22" when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD JEHOVAH has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously".
Deu 18:22.

Emusan coconut head empty.

I know that is what it says.

But your deluded brother says it was for the Israelites. When he wanted to defend your organisation failed prophecies

Do you need receipt?

JaNosense lying liar hallgoer miscreant

Janosky:
Did Jesus TAKE INHERITED SIN AWAY from babies?

No! Jesus didn't TAKE AWAY INHERITED SIN from earth.

Now after abandoned my questions on that topic, you have come up with it again.

Well I'm always here to give you Bible study.

Now what do you understand by INHERITED SIN JaNosense?

Emusan ozuo pro max

JaNosense hallgoer miscreant

Janosky:
Achorladey FAITHLESS miscreant.

JaNosense the misinformed hallgoer miscreant.

"Believe in JEHOVAH and believe in his prophets."
2 Chronicles 20:20.

" The Israelites put faith in Moses and put faith in JEHOVAH God", Exodus 14:31.

But your deluded brother says these are OLD LAW for the Israelites Deu 18:22

Are Moses and the prophets members of JEHOVAH'S organisation?
[/b]

Where did Moses and all the prophets say they are members of Jehovah's ORGANISATION?

achorladey:
We know they will manipulate and lie their way to make people Jehovah’s organization the means of salvation

That's what they are doing.

Even that statement, he will still twist it to mean ONLY JWS fullfil that criteria and you must still be a JWs before you can be righteous and God's friends

cornelboy:
Jesus Christ has taken my inherited sin away. That's quite different from literal sins like fornication, lying, drunkenness, stealing etc.

This is why I do say you people don't have indepth knowledge of the scripture yet claiming to be verse in it.

Jesus didn't TAKE INHERITED SIN AWAY.

Inherited sin is what exposed us to commit fornication, drunkenness, stealing, lying e.t.c

So if Jesus took it away means you can't commit those sin you called 'Literal sins' anymore even though there's nothing like LITERAL SINS in the first place.

Request for a Bible study on inherited sin!

As you can see, unrepentant sinners were disfellowshipped from the congregation.

How many unrepentant sinners are still among JWs today especially the Governing Body?

And we all have our weaknesses as imperfect humans, we strive to live a sinless life and do every God's will.

So you know this but claiming JWs are only God's special ones

So being a JWs doesn't automatically make you different from other people claiming to be followers of Christ too