₦airaland Forum

shadeyinka:
Articles of Faith!

This is where the doctrinal believes of a Church is explicitly stated out!
.

Where u given any article of faith before u knew ur church doctrine? Throughout my years in my church, I never saw any article of faith but I knew what the watchman doctrine was. I know the JW doctrine and I have never seen their article of faith. This is what they preach.
I think u have just run our of what to say. I am still to take ur stand on pascal's wager, u didn't respond to my last response to ur comment on it. Stop this joke and get back to topic

amyblessed:
Please my Atheist friends that said there's no God, I sincerely have some questions that are bugging my mind, which I will like to get some answers from you if possible.
�How did this first heaven that we are seeing come to be? You can call it the cloud if you like, and the things that are in it; the stars, the moon and other planets. Did it just appear on its own and hanged there without falling? If yes, when did it appear ? and what is holding it for it not to fall, where are the pillars?
�How did this earth and everything in it come to be? the trees, animals, oceans and so many other things, apart from the ones that were made by man, like cars, houses, etc. And finally,
�How did human beings come to be? Did one man and one woman suddenly appear and started multiplying? If you say they evolved from animals like apes, who created the animals? Did the animals, come out from stones or from the ground? And how did the ground they came out from even come to be?
How possible is it for an animal to start forming into a human being and completely turn into a human being? And why are there still apes today? why didn't all of them evolve into human beings?
Why is it that when apes give birth today, they still give birth to apes, and when human beings give birth, they give birth to human beings? If it's apes or chimpanzee as some claim that evolved into human beings, why don't their offsprings today look like human beings when they are born? Or are the ones that alive now still going to evolve later?�
Are there also black and white apes? That is, white people and black people? I thought all apes have one colour. And are there also beautiful apes and ugly ones? That's why some people are beautiful and some are ugly? I also thought all apes have one facial structure? How come people have different facial structures?
If you say there's no God that is the Creator of heaven and earth and everything that is therein, please tell me how these things came about because I'm confused about your belief.

How does saying there is God answers any of these questions?

Did any atheists tell u he was there when the world started?

shadeyinka:
All I needed was a quote from a written document officially belonging to DCLM. Is it too much to ask from a person who's Justification of not believing in God is Lack of (physical) Evidence!?

Written document of what they preach? Are
u deliberately acting like a yahoo yahoo boy?

shadeyinka:
See how the lying spirit artfully twisted it again!




Every church has an article of belief, it's not difficult to quote out of it!
Lying lier!

Chairman, i, particular was brought up in a Pentecostal church, watchman catholic renewal movement in particular. Here wearing earring or trouser is a sin that can lead one to hell. Praying to Mary mother of Jesus is a sin, while Catholic deeem it fit to continue asking her to help them talk to Jesus.
My dad practically ensured my sisters do not wear earring and till date he complains whenever his sees my wife wear them. I practically heard pastor muoka, choosen founder, say that ladies who wear earring will burn in hell.
I really don't know what u are about. U musnt lie to won argumenta

LordReed:
Here's the difference between Jephthah and Hannah, Jephthah if we are to believe he sent his daughter to become a nun is sad while Hannah is happy, that should have been reversed. Hannah, mother of an only son should have been the one sad because she was losing a man child. A man child in those days was worth his weight in gold while a girl child, well we can see how the bible treats them. What is Jephthah's daughter's name? LoL. There is absolutely no way Jephthah is mourning the loss of his daughter to seminary when girl children are not even that well regarded.



Again another difference between Hannah and Jephthah that tells us their situations where not the same. Hannah's goes to Shiloh frequently to see her son while it is never mentioned that Jephthah saw her again or even thought much of her after because instead there is a ceremony by young women. No mention is made of Jephthah's involvement in this event in stark contrast to Hannah who takes a gift to her son every year.

Another thing, about people dedicated to the god, they were never meant to be celibate. Samuel was definitely not celibate. There is no sign any of the tabernacle workers were meant to be celibate. Not the high priest, not the priests, not the Levites. So where did you get the idea that she was going into a convent that required her to be celibate? Even Deborah the prophetess was not celibate. Anna the woman in the New Testament also was not celibate. Please where did this idea come from?

Muttley you tried but no amount of editorializing can make this story palatable. Jephthah most definitely roasted his daughter as he vowed.

The fact is that nothing in the passages indicated that she went to a convent. Reading his comments u can see how Christians translate the bible just to make it look like a nicely written story.

All we know is that the dude made promise to God that anything that comes out of the his will be used Gods suya, the dude saw his daugther come out and both him and his daughter were said that she will be sacrificed... My muttely is trying to argue that she went to a convent, how he got that is still the eight wonder of the world. To even think he believes he is making sense is still amazing.

shadeyinka:
I can see why it is difficult having an intelligent conversation with you!
...a lie is a comparison/analogy!
SMH



Please find a single document from deeper life that says this. If you cannot find one, we know who the lier is!

Lol @ document from deeper life that claims wearing earring is a sin? Are u for real? And when someone calls u dishonest or lying u take offence.
The fact is that u are yet to take a stand on Pascal's wager... Are u for it or against it?

shadeyinka:
No theist can believe in God as a "backup". That is why the Pascal's Wager is counter Faith to true believe.

Did u say no theist? Did u even read the op, when he said the he opened this thread based on his interaction with a theist?

The Wager isn't for those who believe. It is for those who do not so that they can logically make up their mind as per risk to reward ratio as it concerns believe in God.

By those who do not believe, so u mean atheists? The last time I checked atheists are the ones arguing against it based on what we think the theist or believers stand should be. Instead here u are saying it is very reasonable (for who, I wonder)

With all the differences in religions, the foundermemtal basis is still FIRST a Believe in the Existence of a Creator. Without this, every sect, denomination, religious institutions BREAK DOWN with respect to the God of Abraham

U and I know that the theist stand is beyond just the believe in the existence of the creator... The theist stand on God, which is beyond just the believe in the existence of a creator is the reason why the atheist think the Pascal's wager is not reasonable enough.

This is the issue Blaise Pascal was addressing!

Ya, we know and I wonder why theists always quote it

shadeyinka:
Depending on who you really mean!
If by Allah you mean the God of Abraham, so be it.

After all,Allah can either mean "the God" or the God of Abraham!

By allah, I mean the ones Muslims believe in, the same Muslims u say worship the same God as u. Do u believe u worship the same God with Muslims?

shadeyinka:
No Sir!
The Pascal's Wager/argument is not designed for the theists...infact it is counter Faith!

The Pascal's Wager is for the Atheists. Since it doesn't require faith but logics alone.

The Pascal's Wager isn't an evidence!
It is just a mathematical problem that shows the futility of Betting your life for something of zero reward but infinite loss.

Can it convince an atheist?
Probably not!
Because unconsciously, many Atheists have a problem ONLY with the God of Abraham and it has moved them to a point of rebellious hate.
It might however make an Agnostic who truly seeks an answer to count the cost!

Many Atheists have made up their mind to bravely face the punishment of hell (if it does really exist): after all, their claim is that they wouldn't be the only ones there. The torment would be bareable if more people are in hell: so they evangelize!

The Pascal's wager is usually quoted by Christians and sometimes Muslims. The assumption from the quotee is that his belief in God is the right believe and everyone who believes in God believe it the same way he believes.
If the Pascal's wager must work, or if it must be reasonable as u say, then the assumption is that ur believe in God is the only and right way.
This means that if a Muslim quotes the wager and a Christian quotes the wager, both might end up fighting or arguing.
Multi believes is one of the many reason why atheists argue the existence of God. How can u say the wager is reasonable when theists are yet to agree on one worship system of any God?

shadeyinka:
I have given His identity: The God (singular) of Abraham.
For now, it doesn't matter if He is called Chukwu, Eledumare, ...

Cool, so he can be called Allah?

shadeyinka:
I refer to the God of Abraham.

For this discussion, it is sufficient!

Do u mean Allah?

MuttleyLaff:
Do you see what one of the stand-offs is about here frank317?
What is the wrong, frank317, in commanding another to carry out an act on something that you own?

The act of killing is wrong. It does not matter who owns what. God giving that command is evil and barbaric.

So? What's the wrong in that frank317?

Did God ask anyone else to go kill their children for Him? No, he didnt and hasnt ever did

No perhaps he should have continued, after all, that act is not wrong.

I have a case and a very valid case for that matter. I earlier asked you: "Do you remember how Isaac came about? Do you remember the circumstances before and up until his birth?" but you ignored that comment

I said it does not matter, if u have anything to say, bring it on.

I will test you on things I know you're used to, I will test you on things you are familiar with. I will test you based on your past antecedents. I will test and confirm to you, whether or not you are susceptible to be avaricious, by feeding your greed. Feeding your greed, will be a good test and it wouldnt necessarily be criminal for me, to do so

That's what we are saying. God tested Abraham on what he was used to and Abraham failed. He should have told God that killing was wrong and he will not do it. Why is God satisfied with Abraham for failing the test?

Now, frank317, tell what exactly, is the bad deed, in God telling Abraham to go kill Isaac, his son there as a sacrifice for God, and this same Isaac, Abraham's only son, the one he love, should be used as a burnt offering on one of the mountains God said He will point out which to Abraham?

The bad deed is that killing is wrong( although u say killing is not wrong in Gods sight) but it is wrong to me and God shouldn't have used such a wrong deed to test Abraham's loyalty. He could have used it to test Abraham's greed or desire to obey the old Gods.

That would be resounding YES. Of course, God was satisfied that Abraham was will and prepared to obey His instruction to kill his son, Isaac. God was deed chuffed with Abraham. He was actually pleased for Abraham's sake, that Abraham considering the tricky and awkward situation, Abraham came through passing with flying colours

Good. And him being satisfied with that is barbaric and wrong. If God test u to kill ur son, will u pass the test. And don't go giving me the 'he will never test u will killing" crap. It's dodgy.

It is the truth and fact that the killing never happened. Now if the kiiling didnt happen, I wonder why you guys have an extremely nervous and sensitive temperament to the escapade. Even budaatum, in chillax mode, actually saw the whole affair as a God prank

Off point... This has been clarified. The discussion in not on whether Abraham killed his son on not. We are discussing the event as it happened.

Now that you are aware, at least, you'll take more care, so I dont agree with you that it is irrelevant.

Face the topic at hand.

That is exactly what they've both done frank317. Have you heard or seen God after theirs ask anyone else to go to kill their son for God?

We are talking about Abraham here... Stop asking irrelevant questions.

God will never ask anyone to do bad things frank317. God telling Abraham to kill is son is not a bad thing nor is it wrong for God to do or ask

So killing is not bad?

Cant you see this is not worthy of comparison. For starters, why are you encouraging someone to go steal another person's property?

Exactly what I am saying, why is God asking Abraham to take someone's life?

Of course I responded and did because I didnt want you to accuse me of being evasive.

You think it is funny, me saying, you are using a wrong and invalid scenario. You think it is funny, me asking you: "Why would you tell him to go and steal someone else's property?. Is the property his or yours?" huh? Like I said, earlier, you arent seeing the forest because of the trees, and that is why it's actually you guys, and especially you, who are throwing up funnies of all sorts

Yes frank317, it will be right for the boy to even attempt to steal them, because you told him to go do stealing, you gave him express authorisation to go steal from you. In some parts of world, there is a name for something like that, it is called social experiment

In order words, if God ask u to kill ur son, u will kill him?

It sure does seem like that, dont you think frank317

Lol.. U never fail to disappoint. Of course u know so much about Abraham... Pls tell me his favourite food.

Yes, it does not make Abraham a murderer because there is no dead body, besides, Abraham was following a God command to kill, and so this absolves Abraham of any culpability, blame or wrong.

Ya right... Abraham will be rewarded for killing someone because the person came back to life. Smh.
Again I ask u, If God asks u to kill ur son will u?

Yes, it does not make Abraham a murderer because there is no dead body. It doesnt matter, how many ways you want to pan this, the answer always will be "it doesnt make Abraham a murderer".

A murderer is a killer. Its not the presence of dead body that determines if one is a murderer Mr man.

Number 1, I dont do argument and there is a very good reason for that, to me
Number 2, unlike you, I dont have a truculent bone in my body
Number 3, truth needs no argument

OK, nice to know.

I am just being real, trutful and facing the facts. Wish yo could and are able to frank317.

If u are being truthful u should know the act of killing is wrong.

I wouldnt like you, stretch and/or go as far as saying God loves the act of killing, but can confidently say I know God is not averse to killing, and you can take that comment to the bank frank317

What then is Gods opinion on killing? Mr Gods mouth piece

budaatum:
In fact, a sensible person might argue that Abraham showed he hadn't abandoned his old gods, if one were to assume they were the sort who did appreciate human sacrifices, and therefore, as far as Yahweh was concerned, Abraham failed woefully!

Exactly... I wonder how sensible it is that the new God is testing him with the same instruction that an old God would give. Abraham should have known that something was fishy

MuttleyLaff:
frank317, this is criminally insane, how you walk with these huge big balls of yours. No wonder, it's down to only you and me to face each other, the others have developed shriveled scrotums.

All you'll need to have simply done is to ask me to clarify, instead of carelessly brushing aside me saying "... you are right that God was testing Abraham's faith, but as a matter of fact frank317, it actually was Abraham's obedience that is being tested here... "

You would agree and accept that biblically speaking, faith and obedience are intertwined. One tends to obey because one has good and strong faith

What's this? U needn't repeat urself like I didn't understand ur post. U should have told me u didn't understand my response. I repeat, this same response messed up what I thought of ur first post (I actually liked it)
Faith and obedience being intertwined is not the issue but that u accepted that God was testing Abraham with an act he deemed wrong

Did the killing happen? Was the killing allowed to happen?. I rest my case then

U have no case to rest. Nobody ever argued that abraham killed his son. The argument is that God is satisfied with the fact that Abraham intended to actually kill his son for him. Argue that and stop playing smart.

That is exactly the point frank317, dont you get it that, God testing me with the killing of my son, just is never going to happen?

frank317, God will test you with things you are familiar to. frank317, I know this is hard and difficult for you to stomach, and I noticed how you waved away my earlier "... knowing Abraham's cultural background and his antecedents that one can take advantage of, what would you say would be the ultimate way to test a man, that though already has a promised child, is actually now sterile, infertile and/or impotent" comment with a poor counter defence. You overlooked a telling point when you tried to retaliate with "It does not matter what his cultural background was? U cannot use something wrong to test some and get satisfaction that he actually wanted to do such wrong for u.
I hate stealing, if I adopt a kid who comes from the background of robbery... I wouldn't test his obedience by asking him to go and steal. I will teach him robbery is wrong and if I test by asking him to steal, I will be sad that he can actually rob for me."

I repeat, things u are familiar with is not the issue here. Also, Abraham's cultural background is not the issue here.. The issue is that God is testing man to find out if he is obedient enough to carry out a bad deed for him.
Ur evasion tactics will not work

Do you remember how Isaac came about? Do you remember the circumstances before and up until his birth? [quote]What ever circumstances surrounded Isaac's birth does not warrant God to test Abraham by asking him to kill his son. The fact that Abraham obeyed such instruction should make God sad.

[quote]frank317, lets make this once and for all clear please, that God never is into the business of child sacrifices nor into ritualistic killing of children. God, from the word, go, and on principle, disagrees with child sacrifice practices, so this isnt, as you love to believe, a matter God being satisfied that someone is willing to do something God hates. No, it isnt about that, you are not seeing the wood for the trees, if that is what you keep seeing frank317. The underlining element that need to be put in italic is obedience, that is what God was pleased with, that you are willing to comply and carry out the command.

The actual killing will never happen, as you accept and agree with, that God hates the killing

Hear urself please... Was God satisfied that abraham obeyed his instruction to kill his son? u better answer.

And stop repeating that the killing never happened, that's weak.

his matter is really getting at you because there are so many fat finger typos and misspells all of a sudden, starting to crop up in your comment. I am having to reread your comments now numerous times over, just to get a grasp of what you are trying to message out

OK... But this is irrelevant.

They understood each other, they knew neither of them will wish evil on each other. If God told Abraham to sling his head into an open mouth alligator, Abraham will do it without batting an eyelid. That's the mettle of the man frnk317, and unfortunately I am no Abraham

If they understood themselves, then they should have kept it between them. I am not Abraham and God asking him to do bad things to show obedience is wrong. Asking a child I love who comes from a robbery back ground to go and rob as a test for his obedience is wrong on my part.
Stop talking like u don't get my point.

I have above, responded to this comment but will add that, you are using a wrong and invalid scenario. Why would you tell him to go and steal someone else's property?. Is the property his or yours? Like I said earlier, you arent seeing the forest because of the trees, that is why you guys throw up all these funnies

U didn't actually respond to it, u just quoted it and repeated the same response that made me give the example. Its now u are responding with this funny example. How about if I test the boy to go steal my own property? Will it be right for the boy to even attempt to steal them?

Abraham must have known some wacky and crazy things about God we dont know, dont you think frank317

MuttleyLaff must have known some wacky and crazy things about Abraham i don't know, don't u think?

I like that word, IF and that's exactly what IF is, it never happened, it hasnt happened, but just to placate you and not to be accused to prevaricating, I will answer your question. Capital NO, it does not make Abraham a murderer

If Abraham kills his son and his son comes back to life, that does not make him a murderer? One who kills someone is not a murderer because the person comes back to life? U just wanna win argument. Enjoy.

The son will wear the scar proudly and show it off to his playmates, probably charge them money to listen to the story

Ya right, glad u got ur own joke.

God is not averse to killing. I dont know how or where you got that idea from frank317 that to kill is something God hates

Sorry I never knew God loves that act of killing.

MuttleyLaff:
You seemingly and yet, is the only voice of reason in the so far Dantedasz CreepyBlackpool LordReed trio group

This, as it were, is an opportunistic moment frank317, it is a situation, akin to the proverbial killing of more than two birds with one stone, and you are right that God was testing Abraham's faith, but as a matter of fact frank317, it actually was Abraham's obedience that is being tested here. In truth, it is no different to when in the garden, Adam's obedience too, to God's word was tested. Would Abraham comply or would he not comply, was the moment of truth and self discovery, soon to be found out

This here messes up ur first post in the first page but I trust u will not see it.
God testing Abraham with the killing of his son is the issue here and not the act of testing (which can also be argued as unnecessary for God).
The question is if God tests u with the killing of ur son will u still consider him a good God? Will u attempt to kill ur son for God?
Ask urself, was God satisfied that Abraham was willing to kill his son (for him)? This is something God hates, how could he be satisfied someone is willing to do it for him?

I am sorry and apologise, if that is how you interpreted what I typed. I never intended to give nor gave the impression that "God just wanted to prove to Abraham that child sacrifice is wrong and stop it" C'mon now frank317, you surely must be familiar with the the colloquial: "Experience is the hardest kind of teacher. It gives you the test first and the lesson afterward", so it was with Abraham that after the test, he learned the lesson that God is not into the business of child sacrifices nor into ritualistic killing of children, done supposedly by those looking for wealth, riches, fame and power or done to curry divine favour from these wicked and cruel acts. ]

Again I repeat, sure Abraham was tested, to see, if he will carry out the command but fact is, God, from the word, go, and on principle, disagrees with the child sacrifice practice and so, we have it that, ultimately did not allow Abraham sacrifice Isaac and so the experience, presented Abraham with the knowledge, the understanding and the discernment that God doesnt accept child sacrifices and nor is God into ritualistic killing of children.

And I tell u bringing in test into the equation messes up the 'teaching him by experience' angle.
I will say its okay if God wanted to just prove to him that ritualistic killing is unacceptable, but the fact that he also wanted to test Abraham to see of he will obey him by killing his son for him is wrong in my opinion. Abraham actually intend to kill his son for him, god should have condemned him for such intent and tell him not to be obedient in such instances.

Look at it this way frank317, knowing Abraham's cultural background and his antecedents that one can take advantage of, what would you say would be the ultimate way to test a man, that though already has a promised child, is actually now sterile, infertile and/or impotent?

It does not matter what his cultural background was? U cannot use something wrong to test someone and get satisfaction that he actually wanted to do such wrong for u.
I hate stealing, if I adopt a kid who comes from the background of robbery... I wouldn't test his obedience by asking him to go and steal. I will teach him robbery is wrong and if I test by asking him to steal, I will be sad that he can actually rob for me.

Also frank317, remember the given reason in the bible, for Abraham's intent to kill for God was that, Abraham reasoned that if Isaac died, from after going through the command, God was able to bring him back to life again. Also frank317, besides all those, at times, unpopular decision(s) necessarily are made when making a point to advance a change in the status quo or a behaviour

Just how do not u see that this reason is wrong in all sense?
How many people had God brought back to life in that era? Did the bible record that? How did Abraham get this idea?
If God brings Isaac back eventually wouldn't that still make Abraham a murderer? How will his son feel eventually knowing his father killed him? How did he even view his father after the event? I am already seeing Abraham as a murderer.
Again, why will God be satisfied with abraham knowing that the man was willing to kill(something he hates) for him?

MuttleyLaff:
"²Joshua said to all the people, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says:
‘Long ago your ancestors, including Terah the father of Abraham and Nahor, lived beyond the Euphrates River and worshiped other gods.
³But I took your father Abraham from the land beyond the Euphrates and led him throughout Canaan and gave him many descendants. I gave him Isaac"
- Joshua 24:2-3

Why Did The God Tell Abraham To Sacrifice His Child?

Before answering the question, let's acknowledge and get a few things into perspective first
1/ Abram, before becoming Abraham, was a worshipper of idols, an idolater, in short.
2/ Child sacrificing to these idols was a common and prevailing practice then and Abram was accustomed to it
3/ Deuteronomy 12:30-31 was formalized 400 years plus after the historic Abraham's near-sacrifice of his son Isaac
4/ It is a well known historical and documentated fact that Abram tithed in line with the prevailing Mesopotamia custom to tithe
Artifacts shows and testifies to heathens practice of tithing. Like few other things, tithing was a status quo, same as child sacrifices and/or ritualistic killing of children with Abraham then.

People then and even to date, are doing detestable things God hates and they really, are things, deserving intense dislikes. They are, things like, people believing that by performing child sacrifices and/or carrying out ritualistic killing of children they are pleasing or appeasing the god(s). Off track, another is, performing ritual sex acts, allegedly to get blessings, where males offer themselves as temple prostitutes to patrons for sacred sexual rituals purpose(s) believing they will receive divine blessing, favour, power etcetera at the end or back of it. Anyway back on track, from the slight diversion, so the reason why God told Abraham to sacrifice his child, funnily and ultimately enough, is to end the disgusting, foolish and senseless child human sacrifice practice.

A new Sheriff is in town, a new Person has come to power, the new Person has come into Abraham's life and is going to make changes. This new authority figure in Abraham's life, is taking charge, laying down the rules and letting Abraham know that the line on child sacrifice(s) is drawn. Sure Abraham was tested, to see, if he will carry out the command but fact is, God, from the word, go, and on principle, disagrees with the practice and so, we have it that, ultimately did not allow the sacrifice to happen and so the experience, presented Abraham with the knowledge, the understanding and the discernment that God is not into the business of child sacrifices nor into ritualistic killing of children, done supposedly by those looking for wealth, riches, fame and power or done to curry divine favour from these wicked and cruel acts

Many wont see the wood for the trees, as "test loyal servant... ask him to do something the god hates" is a red herring. It doesnt have to make sense to mortals, God is more sensible than the most sensible ever lived or living man

He does already know the outcome HenryDion, but does the testee know?

Self-discovery, is finding oneself, its taking the journey within, discovering who you truly are and finding out all the mystries that lies within you. Abraham, from that experience, got to know and learned many lessons that day.

"A wise man, can learn more from a foolish question, than a fool, can learn from a wise answer."
- Bruce Lee
cc CodeTemplar, tintingz,

I had to like this because it is a more sensible response compared to what code templer has been saying.

However I still see some faults... Now, the events looks more like God was testing Abraham's faith, or am I wrong?
But ur explanation is tilting towards the fact that God just wanted to prove to Abraham that child sacrifice is wrong and stop it.

This are two distinct reasons why God would ask Abraham to kill his son pls clarify. As for me, I am concerned with Abraham's intent to kill for God whatever God's reason for the instruction was.

Agrogbeide:
I was thinking atheists hates anything or everything concerning God especially the Supreme Lord Jesus Christ, never knew they love songs that glorifies and worship His Holy name. This is funny o.
By the way, as a Christian I appreciate "secular songs" that are not against the will of God e.g Uyo Meyo by Teni is a bomb. I also appreciate some of the songs by Falz and Adekunle Gold which promotes good Morales among individuals in the society. As for Asa she is one specially made for her position for life. For the Reggae artist they have good messages in their songs. But the reason I don't take secular songs and artists serious is that most of them are not replica of what they sing especially those having good messages in their songs.
Altogether in all, whether secular or gospel, is accepted by me when it is not against the standard of the Lord Jesus Christ and when it is also certified by the Holy Spirit in and with me.
Now knowing that some atheists also love gospel songs, it is a clear indication that one way or the other they will one day confess the Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. This I pray Amen.

Confessing Jesus and listening to gospel music is just actions that makes no difference. At this stage I am forced to believe that everyone is somehow an atheist. Theists just chose to believe in a God they have never seen. That does not mean that God exists, it only means they just believe.
If God exists he should show himself for all to see, if this cannot be done, then no one has seen him and if non one has seen him that means both believers and unbelievers do not know if he exists, the believers just chose to believe.
U can confess Jesus from now till tomorrow, it still makes u no different from an atheist.

luvmijeje:
Frank, you are becoming worse and worst. Wetin concern you with the groaning and screaming?

Just pointing out the obvious... See their face like say the woman no get hole and the man no get rod.

After all the holy holy, he is still gonna strip her naked and bang the hell out of her this night and she will be screaming give it to me.

Who is deceiving who?

I love good music... Fuccck God. Some gospel music are plain beautiful.

At the end of the say they are all for man to enjoy.

hahn:
He is just desperate for clicks on his links.

Makes you wonder why he can't just take his own advice and pray for clicks

Lol...

Ihedinobi3:
Yes I can and yes I do. But, I just don't feel like spoon feeding adults, or at least, spoon feeding you specifically, on this. My post was clear enough. I am not going to do the job of actually reading and understanding it for you too after writing it.

You are free to interpret my refusal to indulge your laziness any way you please. Does nothing to me. The post is there. Anybody else who is interested in your question will find their answer there. And you can luxuriate in that lazy fool's paradise of yours that you finally succeeded at proving your atheism right by asking me a question I can't answer.

Chairman, this is ur supposed answer below

If, however, you are confused about whether Christians should deny their Faith in the face of danger, obviously the Bible vigorously celebrates all those who are courageous enough to hold firm to their Faith when they are threatened for it. Your mention of Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah and of Peter's failure obviously proves this. We are encouraged to be like those three and not like Peter.

U say the Christian faith celebrates those who are courageous enough to hold firm to their faith when threatened for it, recall same u said there are few instances in the bible where lies where told to save lives and God blessed such liars... This is speaking with two sides of the mouth.. U are both encouraging and discouraging the behavior of lying to save life... Hence my question:



If, u are caught by Islamic extremests and they ask u if u are a christian or not... What would u answer, having in mind that if u say u are a christian u will be killed.

Will lying and denying Christ at the moment be considered a sin?

Will God be OK with u if u deny him to save urself?

Just a simple answer will do,and stop playing around... Accept u are confused and don't know what to answer

ElidaxZiel:
Answer it ! Let see how quality your dead brain is

It has already been answered na, read through ur responses

Ihedinobi3:
Like I said, I can only do so much as a writer or speaker. Understanding is partly the reader's responsibility as well. I can't make you understand things you are determined not to understand.

In other words, u cannot answer the question directly... I am actually enjoying how ur responses are short and defensive at the moment... Lol.

So u don't know if lying to deny Christ in the face of death is a sin or not? Funny dude...

ElidaxZiel:
Yes , athiest make us know creation start from big bang, so you have to know. you don't need to deny them now

if this is what u think, then u need to go back to school, make sure u even start from primary school.

thank me later for this advise

Ihedinobi3:
���

lol... the bolded did not actually answer my question, u just played around it.

u boldy said God is okay with some lies, especially when it saves lives. here are your words

There are a few instances in the Bible where lies were told to save lives, especially the lives of believers who were in danger. In each of those cases, the Lord God blessed those who lied.

So the lord will bless people who lied to save life, yet the same God encourages u to hold firm to ur faith when threatened? If u lie when threatend are u not saving life?

hence i repeat my question, this time answer directly.

If, u are caught by Islamic extremests and they ask u if u are a christian or not... What would u answer, having in mind that if u say u are a christian u will be killed.

Will lying and denying Christ at the moment be considered a sin?

Will God be OK with u if u deny him to save urself?

Just a simple answer will do.


i repeat: will lying and denying christ be considered sin?
Will God be Ok with u if u deny him to save ur life?

Lol... Hilarious. He should can and take his retards indeed

Ihedinobi3:
Still not my responsibility to make you understand what you read. It's all yours.

At least for the first time u lack words to respond...

Ajibaba101:
so in one word for you God doesn't exist??

Yes, no known God exist. Whatever u call God is just in ur head

Ihedinobi3:
Still not my responsibility to make you understand what you read. It's all yours.

Lol... Got u there right?

Why are u afraid of answering the question?

Mr liewhenitssuitable.

Ihedinobi3:
Do you enjoy being annoyed? Why do you see someone annoyingly dumb who did not even speak to you and then begin a conversation with them that only annoys you? As for the ad hominem, it is only characteristic of you. Have I ever had a conversation with you where you did not attack my person?

First off, obviously, you did not die for my sins. In fact, I have never enjoyed even an appearance of a peaceful relationship with you on this forum. I am willing to bet that if push comes to shove, doing me bodily harm would not be an undesirable option for you. So, why on earth would I ignore the Bible's teachings in favor of your very obvious self-centered ignorance? I will always prefer the Bible's teachings to your opinions.

Next, it is very obvious that I am not picking and choosing anything. The Bible quite clearly teaches that there is a lying that pleases the Sovereign God, that is, the Sole Authority Who decides what is right and wrong - obviously not you - and there is lying that displeases Him. So, I believe both things and work to live and teach both things. If anyone lies to save the lives of believers, I will applaud them and bless them as the Bible itself does too. If anyone lies in a way that the Bible condemns, I will not celebrate them either. If you call this being two-faced, see the previous paragraph.

As for your lack of understanding, I said rather clearly that the Bible teaches that God blesses those who lie to save the lives of other believers and that we are responsible to protect ourselves and those we are responsible for (e.g., our families including our wives) from criminals and enemy fighters in times of war. If you understood that, why would you ask whether we should lie about our Faith when we are threatened for it? What is unclear in the fact that lying is only sanctioned in the specific contexts I listed and explained? It is only your hatred for the Truth that leads you to attempting to confuse issues and attacking my person when your attempt fails.

If, however, you are confused about whether Christians should deny their Faith in the face of danger, obviously the Bible vigorously celebrates all those who are courageous enough to hold firm to their Faith when they are threatened for it. Your mention of Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah and of Peter's failure obviously proves this. We are encouraged to be like those three and not like Peter.

As for Satan being the father of "all" lies, that qualification is quite obviously your own invention (see John 8:44). We know that God blesses lying of a very specific sort. We know that He curses every other practice of lying. Lying ordinarily is clearly not a good thing but this life is a war and it is impossible for human beings with sin nature to fight without getting hit sometimes (many times, in fact). A good warrior exploits every tool at his disposal to acquit himself. So, if we have to choose between being able to pat ourselves on the back for never telling a lie and saving the lives of other believers, then, obviously, we should rather lie to save their lives. Paul was likely the very greatest of all believers and yet his love for fellow Jews led him to wishing himself accursed from the Lord Jesus Himself if that would save the Jews. Obviously, the Sacrifice of Jesus is all that is needed to save even the Jews so a curse from the Lord is unnecessary. But that is the normal attitude of the believer. We protect others to the very limits of our ability - if they will allow us to, that is. God is quite clearly pleased with that. That you are not is, well, completely inconsequential.

If, u are caught by Islamic extremests and they ask u if u are a christian or not... What would u answer, having in mind that if u say u are a christian u will be killed.

Will lying and denying Christ at the moment be considered a sin?

Will God be OK with u if u deny him to save urself?

Just a simple answer will do.

DavidEsq:
So let's see how God shows us wat to do and weda he exists?
Firstly, God has 3 outstanding qualities: love, wisdom and justice. If we have come to know these qualities, then it would be easy to tell is really God extends his omniscient powers to our freewill.
Since we now understand that God has to peer (or actively look into) our future actions, in order to tell if we would do wrong or right, let's see a book a history that tells us much about God. Isaiah 48:17 says: "This is what Jehovah says, your Repurchaser, the Holy One of Israel:“I, Jehovah, am your God,The One teaching you to benefit yourself,The One guiding you in the way you should walk".
This scripture tell us who God is to mankind. That he alone has the ability to decide for us what is right or wrong. Would that mean that he is dictatorial? No. Why no? Verse 18 of Isaiah 48 says thus: "If only you would pay attention to my commandments!Then your peace would become just like a river And your righteousness like the waves of the sea".
Take note of "if". Which means we are free to decide weda or not to accept his guidance.
Would he punish us severely for not accepting his guidance? If he would, how would he do it?
Firstly, he doesn't choose to peer into weda we wld choose good or bad. That is why he says "if". What proof supports this?
If he would peer into the future of our actions are we still agents of freewill? No this is because we would no longer be free to exercise our will or choices. He would be invading into our privacy if he decides to peer into weda we would obey him or not.
Again, wat would he stand to gain if he peers into weda we would act right or wrong?
Let's see an event that showed that he doesn't peer into our choices to do right or wrong. Would u mind?

U are not even making any sense...so u are saying God cannot see into our future because he chooses not to.

What kind of mind game is he really playing with himself?

Yet, he'd rather get angry at outcomes of events and build hell to punish offenders. Instead of lookin into the future and fine tuning it into a more desirable world.

So the moment he put the tree of good and evil in the garden, he turned off his ability to see mans fuckup. He instantly didn't know man will fall, so he excitedly waited for the outcome. Pervert!

He must be playing naija(hevean)bet with the Angels to see if man will fall or not.

So u know God can switch of he omniscient button at will... Tell me more, which part of the body is this bottom located, it's just a mind thing for God?