₦airaland Forum

TenQ:
I have asked them repeatedly :
How come the Almighty Allah is copying the original Sayings of Jesus said almost 700 years before Islam. Who is copying who?

A wise man once said:

A Muslim is one who says and live by the mantra :
Don't confuse me with the Truth because I have already made up my mind!

If only they can sit down and make subjective reviews of what they have been told without allowing any religious bias to becloud their reasoning. Christians are permitted to ask questions in church. They're are not threatened if they decide to leave the faith. This gives room for free thinking. You are never forced to be a Christian. You are a Christian because you chose to. The same does not apply to Islam, that's why Muslims have to reason things out themselves and not be defending Mohammed blindly.

TenQ:
Do they want to know the truth that will lead them to their salvation?

It seems not. They think that they can earn their way to the paradise of God with nodding their heads on the ground five times daily even though Allah guarantees them hell fire as a Decree from him.

You are right, when a case is indefensible, they they feign ignorance by feigning blind, deaf and dumb at the same time.

God and his Prophets CANNOT make the kind of mistakes and errors we see Islam

They don't care about the truth. They only care about mohammed.

rolams:
Continue and congratulations!

Thank you.

We would continue until we're sure that heaven is your home. The devil must lose the battle over your soul. Hell shall not be your portion.

We're watching global events. More Bible prophecies are getting ready to be fulfilled.

TenQ:
As we know, I the questions have remained unanswered till now


Questions :
1. Who else do you know in history to have given a similar Narrative like this: apart from Jesus?

2. Who can we say is copying who with these narratives?

3. Why is it that Jesus is claiming that which only God can do as per judgment of mankind?

4. Is Jesus the Allah Muslims do not know?

They can't answer the questions.

They'll pretend as though they're deliberately ignoring the posts as one rolams has said up there, but it isn't so. If you make any post they think they can defend, you would see them flexing their muscles. They've scoured the net for answers to this post, they couldn't find anything, hence, their silence. Or how would anyone defend the copycat proofs presented here without sounding foolish?

Rather than re-examine the lies that are being exposed, their priority is to defend a false prophet who calls himself mohammed.

FRANCISTOWN:
I maintain that the stories are legends. They were orally passed down from one generation to another . No one, I repeat,no one alive now has an exact memorate of what happened.

If at all, any of the stories has 1% credibility. It would be the king's. Why? It's simple. His g.father was a direct character in that event.

However, the fact that you submitted that the king altered the account of the event further strengthens the disposition that legends are liable to be alterated.

Which means, neither of the two accounts should be taken seriously.

If at all? It should be the king's.

If everyone at Efon Alaye said the same thing. I still won't believe or be impressed. At least I know rumour travels faster and it's more believable than the truth.

Myths, real life stories, legends, experiences, life histories, etc are similarly passed down from generation to generation. Learn how to differentiate real events from fictions. Your opinion about the matter does not change its actual reality. I was at Efon Alaye in 2017. The oba confirmed that the story is true. Your subjective opinion does not affect reality.

LordReed:
LoLz. They definitely will see your attempt to argue with your own evidence. Bwahahahahaha!

Lol. They'll definitely see your attempts to add your incompatible
interpolations. Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:
What answer did you provide? LoLz.

You slandered the alaaye by saying he twisted the story to put his grandfather in good light, no one forced you to do that.

You can hold on to your wrong interpretation. Lol. Any wise investigator can read my comment to see what I really meant. Your opinion is yours alone, and you can't force your interpretation on me.

LordReed:
You are the one arguing. I stated quite clearly that your evidence does not mention snake or invisible people.

LoLz. You brought evidence and are the one casting aspersions on the evidence.

I answered the question of the king not mentioning snakes or invisible people, you later went on to say the king's story about his father was a mismatch. I provided answers for that too. You hung on to say I'm casting aspersions on my evidence I've extensively explained that too, I never cast aspersions on the evidence. I neither criticised the story nor the king. I've corrected your wrong interpretation.

LordReed:
Dude you said he was trying to paint his grandfather in a good light, that is slanderous anyway you try to paint it.

Quote where I said the story is false.

If you're not of the opinion that the story is false, what are we arguing about?

Saying he was trying to paint his grandfather in good light is not slanderous. I never said his efforts were deceptive. Where is the slander? The former king may not offer the general public an explanation as to why he directed Babalola to the evil forest. Hence, while the public holds the opinion till today that the former king did it in sheer wickedness, the current king who's the grandson of the king in question might be setting the records straight in order to redeem the bad image of his grandpa in the story. Whatever you made of what I said about the king is your own personal interpretation.

LordReed:
You are slandering the alaaye and saying he twisted the tale to put his grandfather in a good light. Meanwhile I have expressed nothing against the article, you offered it as support for RiyadhGoddess' tale which of course they don't match so how is it an aspersion to say the stories don't match?

My response regarding what the Alààyè said was to your reference made to the disparity between the Alaaye's account of his grandfather and the general account as a point to conclude that the entire story was false. That's the only new twist to the story apart from what is commonly known of the event. It was this new twist that caused the mismatch, and I provided an answer for that. What might have looked like an aspersion was on the Alààyè and not on the story: by saying he repainted his father's image in the story (which isn't a bad thing to do). I never even said his version concerning his grandfather was false (where then is the aspersion?), I wasn't there. His version might be true while the general version might be the notion of the people that lived at the time of the event, since the king at the time might likely not give an explanation to the general public as to why he directed Babalola to the evil forest. The current king might be trying to set the records straight about his grand dad. I never cast aspersions on him or slander him. It's your personal interpretation.

By criticising the story and saying it's false, citing that mismatch, you cast aspersions on the story.

LordReed:
That is what casting aspersions means.

You don't seem to understand what it means to cast aspersions, do you?

You're the one who cast aspersions on the story saying that there's disparity between what the story said about the King's grandfather and what the circulating story says about the same person. Then, I explained why it was so.

See the meaning of casting aspersions as attached.

LordReed:
Then post where he recounts the 'true' story instead of casting aspersions on the very evidence you presented. Are we supposed to read the minds of the alaaye and the reporter to know what they thought?

I cast no aspersion on the evidence I presented. I only explained why the said disparity about the king's grandpa was present in the king's narration.

LordReed:
LMAO! The alaaye did no such thing since he does not mention snake or running invisible people. Also your attempt to castigate the alaaye's motivation is just pathetic. How can you be offering the story as both correct and wrong at the same time?

The Alààyè is aware of the true story. The story by Riyahdgoddess is all over the place. It's the same everywhere. Check the net. It was an allusion to the story which needed no further retelling that the Alààyè said 'It was a true story.' Check out the story online. It's a common story. The investigator and the Alààyè knew what they wete both talking about when the Alààyè said 'the story is true ' He now went ahead to recast the the portion of the story which had to do with his grandfather.

LordReed:
Then why did you bring the article as evidence if you have all these problems with it?

I modified my last comment. I have no problem with the article because I understand what happened.

The oba confirmed that the story was true, then he quickly used the opportunity to redeem his grandpa's image.

LordReed:
We are not arguing with the alaaye, it's you who is claiming he doctored the tale to put his grandfather in favorable light. LoLz.

No. You were using the Oba's version of the story relating to the role his grandpa played as proof that the entire story was not true. And I asked you if you expected the Oba to present his grandpa in bad light as the true story relates the matter?

The oba confirmed that the story was true, and quickly used the opportunity to redeem his grandpa's image.

LordReed:
Oga na you bring am come as evidence na you come dey argue against am too. LoLz.

How I come argue against am? Oya prove.

LordReed:
How you people end up arguing with the very evidence you produce is so hilarious. Now the excuse is it didn't investigate that aspect. Tell me what the reporter was supposed to ask when the alaaye himself recounted the tale without any supernatural shenanigans? The reporter should have asked him what miracle happened? LoLz.

Go and read again. Scour the net for more facts about Babalola. Visit concerned Locations. Verify things yourself. Don't hide behind the phone to be churning out just anything your brains can conjure.

LordReed:
Bwahahahahaha! This guy you are piece of work I swear. You know how to twist and turn the very evidence you present so it is saying what it doesn't say. So we should believe you more than the very evidence you presented? LMFAO!

Go and argue with the Oba. Or go tell Tribune they published a false story. Screenshot below:

FRANCISTOWN:
I can't help but wonder. Many people on this NL behave like they were home schooled by rats.
I mean man! The incongruities and the inconsistencies in the two different versions of the stories are just too much.
Firstly, I can never believe such story, regardless of whoever narrated it.
One moment it was Babalola who ventured into the town and approached the king.
The next moment it was the king who heard about Babalola and invited him

One moment it was an evil king who surrendered a possessed land to Babalola. Babalola went with his team.

Another moment, the king was kind and went with Babalola who was only with his bible and bell.

What kind of nonsense is this?
This happened 93years ago.
These stories were orally passed down because I'm sure no one who was mature enough to understand what happened then would still be alive by now, even if? Memory must be failing them.

We all know any story which is orally transferred from one generation to another is highly prune to additions and subtractions.

Again and again, y'all have come with your amusing fables. Huh?

Very simple.

The king wants to present his grandfather well to the public. So, you expect him to confirm to the public that his grandfather was indeed evil and that he deliberately gave Babalola the forbidden forest? Haba!

Kobojunkie:
Me? A Christian? How can I be a part of a movement that makes a joke of God every chance they get like with this thread? Go get your head checked.

Christianity isn't a movement. It means a follower of Christ. What you actually mean is that you're not a follower of Christ, and that's true.

LordReed:
I read that part of the article and there is no noise of hidden people or giant snake mentioned. So the tale RiyadhGoddess told is just adding salt and pepper to what really transpired to make it seems more miraculous when it is quite possibly just as mundane as any other forest clearing.

The investigation was not particularly about the event. You cannot expect the king to provide details of things he was never asked. His allusion to it and the result that followed is proof that it happened. Or why did his idol worshipping grandfather abandon his gods, became a Christian and changed his name to Solomon? He confirmed that his grandfather gave Babalola the forbidden forest and then explained why he did so? Didn't he? You can now take a journey to Efon Alaye and ask him why the forest was called 'Forbidden.'

Kobojunkie:
You gave him witnesses, so quit dancing around the place.
Anyways, today is Saturday. And this back and forth with it is pretty much boring at this point. When you have real evidence to prove this what amounts to tales by moonlight, apart from the retelling of the tale ofcourse, let me know.

You can go and tell the Efon Alaye king to his face that he lied about his grandpa. I was the one who provided the king as witness too. Meanwhile, you read about his confession from a Punch Newspaper link I posted yesterday. The king was interviewed by one of Punch's investigative journalists. I was the one who created that too? You're a clown.

Better provide Mohammed's witness fast. Semi atheist posing as a Christian.

Kobojunkie:
1. Yes, what the man is described to have is no different from Voodoo.

2. The same you claimed that this case here had witnesses and hence should be considered factual and the same you claimed much of the claims made by Mohammed were taken from other books. You provided witnesses for Mohammed's stories to fit your own witnesses-as-proof hypothesis.

3. Oh, so, I can't verify that the existence of a cursed forest, I can't verify this human demon, and I can't verify the mythical snake in the story but by hearing the fable retold by other people I can instead take that as physical evidence of all the nonverifiables in the story? And you wonder why I keep asking you if you are indeed high.

4. So you went to the village and interviewed men who told you the same fable. And that somehow makes the fable true?

There's no similarity whatsoever between the claims and that of Mohammed. While these claims of Babalola has thousands of living witnesses, Mohammed didn't have a single 1. Name one single witness of Mohammed, case close.

2. You can verify the existence of the evil forest. It's not far away from the palace. What you cannot verify is the evil that once existed there, since it has been eradicated but eye witness accounts can tell you the before and after truths of the bush. You'll be able to verify several other facts by examining different accounts of witnesses and looking for loopholes. You confirmed that you are high by not being able to read and understand simple English until a more kindergarten explanation is provided to you.

4. There's a church where that bush once stood. Your warped thinking cannot erase the history of that place. It's part of Efon Alaye history for a reason.

Kobojunkie:
This one no even understand wetin him dey argue.

If indeed all of what Mohammed wrote of were merely retelihgz from other books then according to your idea of proof by witnesses, sthere is evidence for his claims. Don't you get it?

2. Did you even read or process the OP'S fable at all? According to the story, Land was cursed, a human was a demon and carrying out what amounts to voodoo rituals saved the day, all after what they claim to have been a giant snake was destroyed. What physical evidence do you have of any of the above? Post am make we read.

3. What exactly would I need to visit the village to verify?
■ An evil bush
■ A demon that is man
■ A mythical gjant snake inhabiting an evil bush

Which one?

You Churchians in your desperate attempts to claim association with the God of Israel drag his mention down in all sorts of muck. If this story had reasonable ended up with the man carrying out a voodoo ritual in his attempt to resolve the "cursed" bush the same you would proclaim it false. Yet that is no different from what this story says he did.

Entering a place and praying "God, let your enemies in this bush be scattered..." Is voodoi rituals to you? You need help you this guy.

Please help provide evidences of Mohammed's experiences. If he has come out clean to say he recopied and retold stories rather than saying an angel wrote the stuff for him, he wouldn't have had any problem..Help Mohammed if you can since you're one of his apologists.

While you cannot verify the things you listed by physically examining the facts on a physical trip to Efon Alaye, yọu can verify the truth of the happenings from very elderly people who were eye witnesses. People who are about 113yrs old today were eye witnesses of those events. The reason why Efon Alaye is made up of mostly CAC Christians today is as a result of that event. I am in a much better position than you to talk about the place because I went, I interviewed and I saw the seeable. You're just merely catching cruise simply because you have two hands with which to hold a phone, some limited internet connection and a little ability to type in English.

Kobojunkie:
If that is your major reason for casting down Mohammed's experiences then you sure don't have a good enough reason at all for much of your fight against Mohammed's tales.

2. The opinion of his contemporaries, depending on when they made their comments also may not be good enough since the may simply be detractors or people who have no trust in the man.

3. Physical evidence that a piece of land is cursed? Are you high on ganja or something? Physical evidence that a human being is instead a demon? You dey smoke something? I bet you would not be fuming in the mouth this same way trying to defend this tale if the story had instead been that the man had conducted a voodoo ritual in order to deal with the curse --- which is exactly similar to what he is described to has done.

4. Please spare me your rambling and delusions abeg!

1. There's proof that Mohammed indeed copied from the Bible, the Book of Barnabas and a few other books including Serbian mythologies. TenQ has a fresh thread on how Mohammed literally copied the words of Jesus. Mohammed's contemporaries were right.

2. You must be high on something to be asking for physical evidence that a piece of land was cursed except you can refer me a full sentence where I refered to physical evidence of a cursed land. You need to tell me what you're smoking that has turned your thinking upside down for you to come up with claims of physical evidence that a human being is a demon instead of a man. If you're wise, you should have asked me about the physical evidences I saw on my visits there rather than reach unfounded conclusions pointing out to evidences I never mentioned.

3. Please spare me your foolish and imbecilic rants and take the next available vehicle in a visit to Efon Alaye to verify the claims yourself as I have done, rather than make hasty conclusions based on a myopic view of God and His power, and a defected reasoning controlled by a dysfunctional brain.

MightySparrow:
Allah itself is a bad copy of the original Go





Allah itself is a bad copy of the original God.

Chai! You no lie.

TenQ:
I have done so.

It is difficult to defend Islam factually because it is a religion based on cascades of lies all aimed at getting people away from the Messiah!

That's why they all run away. Even legalwolf, the 'professor of samaritanism' has given himself some space. Antichristian is frantically searching the net to find new blogs as sources for counter threads since his formerly regurgitated topics are now stale.

In all these, they don't ever look inwards and examine what they are worshipping. After each stunning exposure to which they have no answer, still in their confused state, they'll enter the next available mosque to continue worshipping a lie. Meanwhile, they're forbidden to ask questions. After a while, they'll rationalize and say "Allah knows best", and then continue in their self deceit. The 'Best of Deceivers' has control of their minds. He never allows them to reason out of captivity into liberty. It takes the miraculous work of the Holy Spirit for a Muslim to be saved. People like Speaklove, a former Muslim can bear me witness.

TenQ:
I checked his profile. I He doesn't seem to post much original posts. I This is probably why I don't know him.

Okay bro. Don't forget to add him to your mentions.

Kobojunkie:
Now he resorts to calling it REAL LIFE!!!!

Religion don blaskata this one head so tay him no fit apply the same logic across the board to all tales he hears. See this same clown pretending this is real life whereas tales told by Mohammed are to be considered fake.

Mohammed can be considered fake because he was his own on only witness. No single eye witbess to corroborate any of his famed angelic visits. For the most part, his contemporaries denied him and told him he was a copycat who copies foolklores and stories from other cultures and religions to make his own.

In this current case, the contemporaries of Babalola affirmed him. Go to Efon Alaye and interview people. I have been there personally in 2017. You'll see physical evidences and people would corroborate the stories. There are many towns in South Western Nigeria where Babalola's miraculous activities are richly recorded and evidences preserved. The inhabitants confirm the stories. He was not limited to Efon Alaye alone. Go and get sense.

Atheism has so much blaskata this one's head that he now reasons like a dementia patient who brains are so useless that he doesn't know how to differentiate between actual events and make-believes. Clown.

Caveatemptor:
Fable is a literary genre defined as a succinct fictional story, in prose or verse, that features animals, legendary creatures, plants, inanimate objects, or forces of nature that are anthropomorphized, and that illustrates or leads to a particular moral lesson (a "moral", which may at the end be added explicitly as a concise maxim or saying

So, you can no longer distinguish between fictional and non-fictiinal stories anymore? If an event happened with physical evidence and eye witness accounts, it's no longer fictional. Stories about Ayo Babalola's miraculous activities are not limited to Efon Alààyè alone. There are many other towns such as Odo Ọwá, Ìkejì Arakeji,etc whose inhabitants have one miraculous experience or the other to share about Babalola's visits to their towns. You mean all these are fictional? Why don't you visit to confirm the fictions? Fictions only because you said so?