₦airaland Forum

Maynmann:
They called them chrestians.
Why is “chrestian” a derogatory name, they are murderers that is why, they burnt rome.

Give verifiable reference of the Christians caught red handed burning Rome. Or the evidence of murders committed by them. Nero put up that accusation as an excuse for persecution.

Meanwhile you said they never existed during Nero's time. What changed?

Maynmann:
The fire of rome was when?
Where in the imprisonment was nero mentioned or great fire?



Writing in about 96 CE (1 Clement), Clement of Rome, who ought to have been aware if Paul was martyred in Rome just a few decades earlier, seems to have believed that Paul continued on to Spain and died there:

1 Clement 5:5–6: By reason of jealousy and strife Paul by his example pointed out the prize of patient endurance. After that he had been seven times in bonds, had been driven into exile, had been stoned, had preached in the East and in the West, he won the noble renown which was the reward of his faith, having taught righteousness unto the whole world and having reached the farthest bounds of the West [Spain; and when he had borne his testimony before the rulers, so he departed from the world and went unto the holy place, having been found a notable pattern of patient endurance.

Interestingly, Paul mentioned in his new restaurant letters that he would visit Spain. However, there's no indication that he was able to fulfil that desire before he was arrested.

Spain has no record of Paul's visit. Why should we believe Clement?

Maynmann:
What century was he in Rome?
Who imprisoned him?
Quote references where it was “known”.
where in the New Testament did Paul called himself a “Christian”.

The disciples never called themselves Christians. The unbelievers did. It was a derogatory name first used against Paul and his group in Antioch.

Maynmann:
What century was he in Rome?
Who imprisoned him?
Quote references where it was “known”.

Paul was taken to Rome in AD 57.

I'm avoiding Christian reference even though it is logical to assume that Christians would have the most detailed history about Paul.

The first screenshot below is taken from Journals.com.

You can follow the link below:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/474256%23:~:text%3DPaul%2520was%2520arrested%2520in%2520Jerusalem,lived%2520the%2520procurator%252C%2520for%2520imprisonment.&ved=2ahUKEwiP6vThtM3_AhULfMAKHQbMCBsQFnoECA8QBg&usg=AOvVaw3PWrL7whgX73TCyKZAlUvA

Maynmann:
So how did you know the century when he was killed.
How he died? Why he died? , if the details are UNKNOWN.

Of course someone from 6000 years ago should be dead, that’s common sense .

“But tradition” holds” bwahahahah
The same way “tradition” holds moses wrote Torah

Did you see the part that was not taken from tradition?

Maynmann:
There was no “christian” during Nero Time.
Where in history are they quoting?
Quote the references from brittanica.

It is the details of his death that are unknown, not the death itself. See screenshot below:

https://www.britannica.com/question/How-did-St-Paul-the-Apostle-die#:~:text=Paul's%20death%20are%20unknown%2C%20but,the%20city%20in%2064%20CE.

Maynmann:
Are they not quoting According to “tradition”.

Quote history na

There was no “christian” during Nero time.

Paul was beheaded according to tradition.

Take note of the sentence regarding the possible period of his martyrdom. Britannica says "Perhaps it happened in CE 64 when Christians were being severely persecuted." That's not according to tradition. That's history.

Maynmann:
Yes, “tradition”, quote history bro, oops, they are “unknown”

The screenshot there is from Britannica.

Maynmann:
Roman Catholic is the origin or Christianity.
All the books in the New Testament was complied, edited and arranged by them, look up early church fathers.

There was no “christian” that was persecuted before constastine.
Constantine created the foundation of the christianity you have now especially your “trinity”

How come Nero who existed long before Constantine persecuted Christians in 64 CE according to Britannica?

Maynmann:
He alleged “Chrestians”, chrestians are murderers and assassins.
And nero didn’t even do the allegations, eye witnesses and historians said it was chrestians.

which century was paul in Rome?
What century was he beheaded?
Any references?

See screenshot below:

Maynmann:
Roman Catholic is the origin of Christianity before great schism and further secession.

Your Iesus chrestus is a Roman Propaganda.

Roman Cathilosim is a hijacking and corruption of the original Christian faith.

The Christian faith stared in Jerusalem. The Christians were severely persecuted before Rome during the time of Constantine decided to adopt it as state religion. Constantine met Christianity. Christianity was not created by him.

Maynmann:
There was no “christian” during Nero time but chrestians, bring your historical reference for it.

The AD and BC you are shouting is a gregorian idea, do you think they had AD/BC during antony and octavian time?

Look at what made it uncommon in Roman History.

There were. Tradition has it that when he set fire to Rome, he falsely alleged the Christians and started a fierce persecution against them

Paul was beheaded by Nero during his second trial at Nero's judgement seat.

Maynmann:
Why is constatine mother a saint in Christianity?
Saint helena bwahahaha

Even Constantine himself could be a saint in Roman Catholicism. It doesn't change anything.

Maynmann:
A christian devising a calendar for his state religion doesn’t make characters in his books real.

A fictional character cannot be used for determining such important things as dates. If anyone would intentionally deceive the whole world, such an individual wouldn't deceive himself.

Freedom2023:
Pls I didn't send anybody to troll you. so I don't know the Monicker there who has been speaking for me. I need your help and am aware u don't owe me anything. Help is all I seek for. for God's sake

If you weren't the same person, how come you were able to swiftly refute my claim when I didn't mention you specifically. How were you able to travel the conversation from that thread to this thread? How?

Maynmann:
The notation was used by the romans not the world.
And not to forget Chrestianity was a state religion in Rome, it is common sense for them to devise a new one once in a while, the julian calender also replaced lunisolar calender, all these calenders are for ROME AND ROMANS.
Some romans even till now don’t use it.
China doesn’t use gregorian calender hence there’s nothing like AD/BC.
Even ethiopia doesn’t use the Gregorian calendar created in ROME for ROMANS.

We know it was created in Rome. And we know that a great part of our world currently uses the notation.

LordReed:
You claimed it was changed here:



Yes just Wednesday means Odin is real, Thursday means Thor is real, Friday means Freya is real and Saturday means Saturn is real. I am sure you agree all these gods are real.

I never claimed it was changed. I clearly stated that it was an alternative used by non Christians. An alternative to an original does not imply the change of the original.

Ordin, Freya or Saturn are not dates but days choose by pagans to honour their gods.

When we talk of AD or BC, we talk of particular dates which have a begining and end.

Maynmann:
There was no “christian” during Nero time but chrestians, bring your historical reference for it.

The AD and BC you are shouting is a gregorian idea, do you think they had AD/BC during antony and octavian time?

Look at what made it uncommon in Roman History.

The BC/AD notation wasn't in use even during the time of Christ let alone Octavia who was born 66yrs before Christ.

It's reasonable to say that a notation in use before the Advent of AD and BC was eventually abandoned. The AD and BC are still prominently in use today. Common Era is just and alternative use for Christian Era by non christians.

MisterBanny:
All these arguments are Baseless. You may read the Bible and quote from Genesis to Revelation but know that He who cannot help the orphan in time of distress is no Christian. Your pastor didn't tell u that he who giveth to the orphan lendeth to God? You self acclaimed christians should continue giving deaf ears to the plight of your brothers. You're one of the reasons that guy said christians are wicked. You asked someone to drop his account number only to keep him waiting

I'm sure both your Monica and the one that dropped the account number are the one and selfsame person. Why are you bent on forcing me? Don't I have right to do things according to my own plans and schedules? Please stop trolling me okay.

Maynmann:
And common era are used for connotations of what?

Why didn't you answer the question? What's my concern about connotations?

Maynmann:
😂

Why did you cut off the part of the screenshot that says even Common Era refers to the date Christ was born?

Maynmann:
Yes, Chrestians killed nero.
A new era was ushered in by mark anthony and octavian.

Which history and date of birth? Mention it and let’s trace it together.
Outside of New Testament, where is Iesus chrestus mentioned?
Please mention just ONE of the historical records and biography.

Christians killed Nero? That's a distortion. Bring out your historical reference.

The said New Era that was usheed in by Antony and Octavian has nothing to do with the year 1. What is the distinctive feature that makes the Era new? Moreso, we're not talking about a new era. A new era is not necessarily common.

LordReed:
I saw you screen shot and it doesn't answer my question. When was it changed from Christian Era to Common Era.

If dates and calenders are proof of someone's existence then you also agree the Odin, Thor, Freya and Saturn all exist.

The screenshots as well as my posts made you know that the term Commonn Era was first used by Kepler in his book in 1605. There was never a change made from Christian Era to Common Era. The term Common Era is just a preferred alternative by non Christians.

A date widely used for centuries now to measure time globally cannot be based on a fictional figure.

Maynmann:
Have you looked up the origin of BC/AD, and what was used in rome before that?
Or don’t you know you are using a roman calendar?

Can you now see your Iesus chrestus is a roman propaganda?

A Roman propaganda that was fiercely oppossed by Constantine himself and his predecessors before merging Christianity with state affairs?

A Roman propaganda about a person whose history and date of birth is known? A Roman propaganda about a man with detailed historical records and biography?

Freedom2023:
Please sir, help me. I have since dropped my details. Pls in God's name.

I can't ignore you. Just relax. You don't need to remind me. I'll attend to you.

LordReed:
I said show me where it was written that it was Christian Era before it was changed to Common Era.

Meanwhile see the screenshot.

Did you observe the screenshot I shared with you?

Common Era was chosen as an alternative to Christian Era. This means Christian Era preceded Common Era. It was first used by Johannes Kepler in his book in 1615, and became adopted for wider use by Jewish authors in the 19th century. Truth is that whether Common Era, Christian Era, Anno Domini or Before Christ is used, they all refer to the dates before and after the birth of Christ. A very heavy blow to those who say Christ never existed.

No matter what you choose, those dates still have to do with Christ. The term common era itself is useless except the date of Christ's birth is a Common Era to those who use the term.

God's hand is upon the nations. He has appointed their fates. The same goes for all souls on this planet.

LordReed:
Show me where it was recorded that that was what it was before.

See image below.

Also note that whether Common Era, Christian Era or BC/AD are listed, they all refer to the same dates - before Christ's birth and after Christ's birth. All are still related to Christ.

LordReed:
BCE - Before Common Era

CE - Common Era

Ir has nothing to do with Jesus.

It's originally Christian Era (CE) or Before Christian Era (BCE). Non Christians use the term Common Era only to avoid reference to Christ or Christianity.

Honchoslim16:
Well, as for me... I don't believe in 'sin'


I follow laws stated in the constitution of my country..... Not laws stated by an Israeli god or Arab god!

Sin is simply wickedness done to fellow humans. A breaking of the unwritten moral laws. Most of what constitutes sin have found their ways into criminal laws as well.

So, most times, when you commit a sin, you're also breaking a law of the nation.

Crime has legal consequences. They're short lived because they're judged by men who die. You would only be sentenced for a finite measure of time. Sin on the other hand has eternal consequences because it is judged by an eternal Judge. After suffering the consequences of crime by man's judgement, you'll still be answerable to the eternal Judge for the sin aspect of your crime.

MisterBanny:
I hope so. Because I have been in tht guy's shoes and I stopped going to church till today because there is no love there in church. I haven't left God, but I've left the church. Try and change that guy's mentality and you've won his soul back to Christ that's the advice I can offer u. Make him have a rethink again that He was wrong for leaving the church

Bro, thanks for your advice. You don't know how touched I am by his situation. I'm very touched.

I know there's a lot of hypocrisy in Christiendom. That's why we see little of the power of God. Where there's no love, there can be no power. That's why unbelievers make a mockery of us.

MisterBanny:
I'm keenly following this post and am looking forward to hearing good news from the guy in distress. However, I doubt your willingness and sincerity to help. You asked dat he drops his details followed by an ambiguous statement. Are u the one helping him or u asked him to drop his details hoping to get help from a random nairalander? Nawa for una christians o

Whatever I would do, I would not announce it openly. So rest. True Christians don't give for show.