₦airaland Forum

zeuss:
Ife is subordinate to Benin kingdom by many centuries infact benin birthed the Yoruba monarch system. The title Oba is Benin copyright like Emir is caliphate copyright. The caliphate and Emirship is a foreign 19th century contraption

Lol.

Even your Oba is Ọmọ oba. Not Oba. Ọmọ ọba means prince in Yoruba land. And that's consistent with Yoruba history that says the oba of Benin used to be an Ife prince.

How long is Benin history? What is the population of the Benins? Do you know how far dated the Yoruba history is? And do you know how vast an empire the Oyo Empire used to be from Oyo to Ghana? Do you know how populous the Yoruba race is and the vastness of the speakers of the language globally? How does Benin compare.

Please get your facts right and don't attempt to rewrite history. The Benin king is an Ife prince.

TruthU87:
For context, Israel has blocked food aid, baby formula, and access to international journalists from entering Gaza for months now. As a result, Gaza is facing mass starvation.

Cc nlfpmod Fpmod seun

If Hamas love their people, they should release the hostages.


I'll do the same to you if you hold my loved ones hostage and refuse to release them. I'll besiege you till you cease to exist!

Release the hostages!

FreeIgboho:
Folks ghis is NOT true AT ALL!!! Nicea is recorded HISTORY, recorded by many participating bishops. Produce ONE legitimate source that supports what you say. You can't.
The bishops (including a representative of the pope) debated over several days and in the end voted between "Jesus is God" and "Jesus is NOT God" (Arianism). Constantine just wanted them to come to a consensus. He didn't interfere and didn't care which way they voted

MaxInDHouse, Janosky, LordReed, DeepSight,
tctrills, Dtruthspeaker, Everyday247, Ruke1990, sonmvayina
/////////////
jimRohn, Kobojunkie, FxMasterz, maynman, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer, Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2, kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn

No need to argue with that dude. His head is filled with a lot of conspiracy theories and so much unsubstantiated ideologies. He himself cannot tell you what he practices. He's neither Christian nor Muslim nor traditionalist - just floating here and there on the sea of religious fantasy. I pray that God will open his eyes and show him salvation.

Sand2022:
That's the point. See what there book, Benefit from Theocratic Ministry School book says,

"Although not all examples have to be actual occurrences, they should reflect true-life attitudes or situations. Thus, when teaching how repentant sinners ought to be viewed, Jesus illustrated his point by telling about the rejoicing of a man who found his lost sheep. (Luke 15:1-7) In reply to a man who was failing to get the full import of what the Law meant by the command to love one’s neighbor, Jesus related a story about a Samaritan who helped an injured man after a priest and a Levite failed to do so. (Luke 10:30-37) If you learn to be a keen observer of people’s attitudes and actions, you can make effective use of this teaching device."

They said all these and still refused to apply it fully to.the parables of Jesus. If hell is not a true place of torment, hasn't it rendered this statement of theirs useless?

Sand2022:
There is something about the rich man and Lazarus story I didn't consider while a PIMI JW.

I had long believed that the story is a parable, so everything there had to be explained away as pointing to something else other than real life event. This is because of several scriptures including Eccl 9:5-10; Romans 6;23

However, aren't parables built from events familiar to once audience? Think about it, all the parables jesus told was not what his audience never knew about, it wasn't from fiction. It is true that some elements may be exaggerated or added to make a point, but events in a parable are not entirely from fiction. The good Samaritan story, the Wise Steward, the prodigal son all were stories his listeners could relate to. I mean the man who was robbed while journeying from Jerusalem to Jericho. That was a location people knew was dangerous. But the story Jesus told didn't actually happen. But the location exists, that actual event can also happen. It's not fiction.

There is a reason to think that Jesus was conveying something from the story/parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Assuming it is a parable, what reality did the parable draw from? We can quickly say, it was fabricated from unrealistic event. It is a fiction. But think about this, Jesus audience was the Pharisees, and the Pharisees believed in the immortality of the Soul, they believe also in after death torment of the wicked. Then Jesus began to tell this story of torment. The big question is:

If this torment after death was a false doctrine, why is Jesus making a parable from that? Will that act not in fact be validating a false belief? I was just thinking, let's say a JWs is trying to teach another that a wicked act is wrong, then he begins to tell a story that so and so did this wicked thing to Mr B, then after so and so died, he found himself in hell with torment, how would that JWs think his audience will view that parable, that hell is false? Never! he is in fact validating that doctrine by drawing from it to teach a lesson.

Jesus never said nor condemned torment after death, rather he even used imagery that conveys that doctrine.

We need to also consider that there is no way to allegorize all that Jesus said there. All attempt to convey the meaning in literal sense fails.

The interpretation assigned to this parable by JW leadership doesn't match the account. I will talk about their interpretation and why it doesn't fit next time.

Tags:
jimRohn or Kobojunkie or FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer,
Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2, kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn, achorladey, Jozzy4, MightySparrow, NowYouKnow, TemmyT002, johnw47, Boomark, Emusan, Dtruthspeaker, Gabrielshow24, rottennaija

You have made very important points but you see, these people love their lies.

They will never examine the important questions you asked especially about Jesus validating something that is not true through His parables. Most times, in all Jesus' parables, he uses real places and realistic events mixed fictional characters to drive home His points. The events He describes are always realistic, and the places He mentions always exist. He might just place fictional people in the story but every other thing about the story will will be real. That's the manner of Jesus' parables. If hell does not exist, or torments in hell is not a real event that happens, Jesus will never use them in a parable.

AntlisIaam:
A

Anti.Christian had been banned and vanished from NL for constituting nu!sance here

Is that so?

He should return here. He needs Jesus.

MightySparrow:
Dear Nairalanders, there is a Muslim apologist who use to write things to criticize Christianity here.

It has being a while.

What happened to him.

I am already missing him.

Does anyone know anything about his sudden disappearance?

It is well with him in Jesus name. We declare the peace of God uon him wherever he is.

However, I think both Antichristian and Abutwins are the same person.

Baldwretch:
FxMasterz, we are now in a sacred intersection. The first road leading east takes you to a small village called Divine Predestination and/or Divine fore-ordination; the other road leading westwards leads to a tiny village called Human responsibility. It would seem like if you go eastwards then the road leading to the west eludes you. The same can be said of the other road. Now, this is a subject that has puzzled the saints and philisophers and I would not attempt to reconcile them because like they, you and I simply do not know much about the subject.
It seems to me like a great paradox to reconcile them both, but I would like to think that they are both true. God has predestined at least some things - like the lamb slain from the foundation of the world - and yet, and yet, man is totally responsible especially for what has been made clear unto him.

One thunders God's secret will while the other talks of his revealed will. You have to understand that the Torah is not a ceremonial symbol of do's and don't s; it is a symbol of our accountability and responsibility to God for all time - which God has, time and time again, made clear that obedience to these laws is a part of our obligation to him. As Christians, we still obey the Torah, though in a very limited sense. Can we then say that because God has made provisions for our sins back in eternity, we are not supposed to follow the path he has made plain for all time? Are we supposed to peep and peer into God's hidden counsel?

God's revealed will should be the guiding principle of the believer, not his secret will. God revealed a path as the path we should follow, it would be unwise then to assume that God IS NOT SUPPOSED TO continue with the path he has chosen and instituted because of our nasty
proclivity to stray, or that because Christ has already been made a propitiation for our sins from the foundation of the world - that he is then supposed to discard what he started with, if in time, he thinks otherwise.

That is what your rebuttals amount to. Is God supposed to do anything at all? If you answer no, then you just agreed with me that the Torah is supposed to be a guide for all mankind for all ages. Is God supposed (special emphasis on "suppose" to do away with the Torah
because men are unable to obey all its requirements for all time? Is God supposed to do away with the Torah because Christ has been slain from the foundation of the world? Is he supposed to create man, help man, deliver man or do anything at all for his creatures? No, of course not. God is under no obligations to his creatures. He owes no one. God is not supposed to do anything he has not already done. He is absolutely free. Look at the title of my post again, please.

My post is looking at the subject with a magnifying glass called God's revealed will in time, not God's secret will with the benefit of hindsight. Just as he did not have to forgive Adam, God did not have to slay or even send the slain lamb (who was slain from the foundation of the world) - to propitiate for man's sins. If you say the Torah is not supposed to be the guide for all of mankind for all ages because of
man's dire inability to keep it, then I would respectfully disagree because the fault is man's, not the Torah. The blame is on you, not on the Torah or on God who gave it. The law, as the apostle puts it, is just and good and fair.

It is supposed to be a guide, but turns out, it is not - because of God's great mercy. Is God supposed to show mercy?

The only grounds one can have to claim that the Torah is not supposed to be a guide is if there is a problem with the Torah itself. There is none, however.

If the Jews had obeyed God's law to a certain satisfactory or manageable degree, maybe, just maybe, God might give free rein for the system he's put in place to continue. In that sense, it was supposed to continue as a guide not just for the Jews, but for all of mankind. We simply don't know how much the axle of God's will would turn and should not exactly assume because it turned out differently in time - that God must necessarily do away with the Torah because of men's inabilities.

The Muslims whom the post is addressed to do not believe these. I addressed them, not the Christians who believe in man's fallen nature.

And again, I am talking as a human who has been made responsible by the Law and with a very deep belief in the sovereignty of God. Our God, as the Psalmist said, is in the Heavens and he does as he pleases. If God made a two part movie. Is he supposed to release one or both parts?

We can only say as puny creatures with some level of confidence that what is first in line is supposed to continue, not what came after it. The post is meant to take a jab at Muhammad who claimed that he is the end of the Torah, not to glorify the Torah above Christ's glorious sacrifice.

That being said, Israel were not forbidden from trespassing a predefined territory; they were supposed to conquer anything conquerable and dominate the world. The Bible makes it clear - I think in the book of Deuteronomy - that if the Israelite obey his commands and do what is pleasing before him, that, NLT, wherever they step their foot on becomes a land for them. Do you know the implication of this promise?

The territory becomes theirs!

The land given to Abraham was as far as his eyes could see. It wasn't meant to be taken literally. God was making it clear to Abraham that his kingdom would be established (on earth) through his progeny. And as you know, the kingdom of God is a kingdom without borders! Sometimes the Jewish people trespassed and occupied territories beyond Dan in the north.

If they were forbidden from crossing a predefined limits, then the Torah should never have permitted wars in the first place. It should only have been for self-defense. David, Solomon, Saul and all the other kings who fought offensive wars, not defensive wars, should never have gotten a response from Yahweh when they inquired of him before they went ahead, and they should never have succeeded with their tiny army did fight. God Almighty who is mighty, lol, gave men who obeyed him and whom he loved victory, great victory when they fought offensive wars in the past.

In fact, God often used wars and the victory (he gives to the victors) to stir up people, events, and things as was the case of Saul and David who got similar praises from Jewish women - Saul has killed his thousands and David his ten thousands. It would be silly, very silly, very, very silly to say that ancient wars do not further or serve to further the great and noble purposes of the divine will. They absolutely do!

Reason dictates that when limits for a thing, an event, or whatever is intended by those higher up, then prohibitive commands should be made. If God wanted to contain the Israelite, he would have said it.

God confirmed his promises (made hundreds of years earlier) to give a bunch of people landed property through warfare and you think he never wanted distant nations to feel their way to him through those he has chosen to give victory. WOW! You should observe that before
things deteriorated badly in the book of Kings, that godly kings were, on average, successful when they encroached into other nation's lands and soundly defeated them.

My post is supposed to be an attack on the Islamic faith especially Muhammad who falsely claimed that the Torah is an Israelite thing, and not worldwide.

Ciao! Bye!

My brother, the Torah is indeed an Israelite thing. This isn't complicated at all. My major stand actually is not to explain the role of the Torah in God's scheme of things but rather to let you know that God didn't propagate the Torah by war.

The Islamist have such a myopic narrative because they can't see the big picture of what God was doing when He instituted the Torah of old. As I said in IT terms, the Torah was a Beta, a shadow. The real Image is Jesus, not Mohammed.

Yeah, God can discard what He started if that thing has fulfilled its purpose. The Torah has fulfilled its purpose. We do not need to obey God's law anymore. As Christians, we live out God's law, not observing to obey it. The Holt Spirit lives out the law in us through our Lord Jesus Christ. Why, because we have it written in our hearts.

Right from the start of the diving restoration program, God wanted to continue relating with man as a spirit bring, not as a physical being. That was his He related with Adam before Adam fell. The law cannot produce that spiritual relationship between God and man, it was a carnal law. The lamb slain from the foundation of the world was the long term project of God Kickstarter by the animal lambs slain in Israel. Jesus came on the scene in John 4 and said "...the hour is coming that neither on this mountain or in Jerusalem will anyone need to give carnal worship to the Father. He that must worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth. For the Father seeks such to worship Him. This was the grand picture of all that Moses started. All roads lead to the lamb that was slain. Slain from the foundation of the world. God didn't forget the slain lamb when He was instituting the Torah. The Torah was part of the process. It was not an end in itself.

It follows the line of the process I outlined in my previous post. It's not a matter of revealed will or hidden will. It's a matter of the progressive unveiling of the Divine plan.

Hey, how are wars serving the Grand will today? If ancient wars serve the purpose of the divine will, why did it stop? Did God finally realize that it doesn't work or what? There are many problems with your position. God does not need man's might or swords to make His will happen!

Can you then tell us how many nations adopted the Torah by such wars? Did the wars fail and God now realized it was not a potent method for propagating His will? You err my brother!

helinues:
Aden??

Why initiating this moves when he's just about to leave office

Aba san ma?

Is he not still the president? Doesn't he still have the power until he hands over? Let him continue to fulfil his presidential vision until he hands over.

Baldwretch:
If God had to come down in his persona and in his form, which, by the way, never happened again, to instruct and to give his laws, then you should know that this is not child's play. If God had to tarry with Moses on the mountain for 40 days and for another 40 days instructing him, you should be aware at this point that God means business. In fact, if God had to yank a nation from another nation, one of the most powerful of its time through warfare, and then take this nation into another territory by warfare, and then expand the said nation by fighting wars, it should be clear at this point that these killings are not done for sports. He really wants mankind to know him through the channel he has instituted - which is physical power. There is no overthinking this with God.

Physical power has its limit but there is so much it can accomplish too. You can ask Esther who chronicled an event in which she and other Jewish exiles were in real danger of extermination. You can ask her how vast the empire in question spans - how big of a territory provinces stretching from India to Ethiopia is, Est. 1: 1. Or, you could ask Daniel what his eyes saw in Babylon when all nations and people under the different Babylonian monarchs worshiped and bow down to the Babylonian gods on the threat of death. Or, you could ask the northern Kingdom (Israel, who got displaced by Assyria) what it feels like to have foreigners of mixed nationalities settle in your own territory. There is just so much physical power can accomplish in the propagation of the Torah.

God did everything He did just to have a specimen in His lab. He had a well defined territory in mind when He was doing that, and He never allowed Israel to go beyond that predefined territory. He never wanted to propagate the Torah through wars. The covenant that the Torah represents wasn't perfect. God had something perfect in mind for the whole world. Israel remained under the schoolmaster of the Torah until the perfect came, and then God brought in all other nations to participate. There's no single verse of scripture where God ever instructed Israel to take over the whole world, but Christ gave us a command to preach the Gospel to all nations.

I

magine what God said of Nebuchadnezzar through the prophet Jeremiah and Daniel were true of the Jewish state that he has put everything, even the wild animals, under Nebuchadnessar's control. Jeremiah 27:6-7, Daniel 4 (NLT). Lol! If that was the case and Christ never came, then you and I would have been Judaic professors by fire or by force. Lol.

How would that have happened even when Babylonia itself was never Judahic?

Certainly, the Torah would have snowballed into something else, something mighty, something powerful, something unhinged, but that is not the case.

It cannot be the case because that wasn't God's plan. Jesus Christ is called "The lamb slain from the foundation of the world" for a reason.

Now, you are confusing two distinct commands. The Jews were given two commands as it pertains to war in Deuteronomy 20. One was supposed to be time-bound because it applied to the territory they would displace and occupy, i.e Canaan. The other command applies to distant nation far off from Canaan they would have to wage war against over time. These are separate commands.

Those commands were just rules of war. There was no command for them to proselyte any nation.

In fact, the chapter starts off by saying: When you go out to fight your enemies and you face....

and then it instructs the people and priest on what is reuired of them in the process. One verse I'd like to draw your attention to is chpater 15 and onwards. it reads

15 But these instructions apply only to
distant towns, not to the towns of
nations nearby.

16"As for the towns of the nations the
LORD your God is giving you as a
special possession, destroy every living
thing in them.

17You must completely destroy the
Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites,
Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, just
as the LORD your God has commanded
you.

Yeah, those were the territories already predefined. The Israelites knew their boundaries. God already told Abraham the dimensions of the territory He was giving his descendants.

This is clear enough.

Completely negates your position. Why would God give instructions only for nations nearby which are within the predefined territory God already showed to Abraham, and not include far away nations if He had any mind of the Torah travelling all over the world?

The outpouring of the Spirit, I would like to think, is a medium of last resort. Although I would have you ponder the fact that God had this all figured out back in eternity, but then, yes, we cannot compartmentalize God, so I partially agree with your take. It's just like arguing on what would happen and the sequence of events that would follow if Adam had not sinned.

The outpouring of the Spirit isn't a last resort. It was part of the program originally.

1. There's a lamb slain from the foundation of the world - Revelation 13:8

2. There was a promise of one Seed, not seeds to Abraham, through whom the whole world will be blessed.

3.. David was constantly reminded that a descendant of his will be a forever King.

4. God continued to tell the Israelites that the Gentiles would come to 'His Light' while He makes them jealous.

The outpouring of the Spirit was not a last resort at all.

This is what really happened:

1. God already knew that man would fail, so He prepared a remedy before man failed. Right from the foundation of the world, Christ was already in the picture.

2. To actualise the reconciliation of all things, God had to take the world through a process:

a. Take a role model nation to Himself.

b. Through the nation, He would reveal Himself and give man the opportunity to.know about God's personality.

C. Teach man about the consequences of sin and that man cannot save himself.

d. Make man see that blood is necessary for the propitiation of sin.

e. Make man see that the blood of animals is not sufficient to propitiate sins.

f. Prepare the hearts of men to see the need for a Saviour.

3. Introduce the Saviour into the world at a time the world has learnt one language for international communication. This provides for easy communication to propagate the Good News of God's merciful intervention in a sinful world.

4. Start the global reconciliation movement with the news of an eternal sacrifice for sin.

5. Gather all who subscribe to cleansing, all through the ages.

6. Create a new earth for them.

7. Eliminate sin and Satan forever.

8. Enjoy everlasting fellowship with man forever as it was in the beginning.

The Torah was introduced because of sins. To teach man how sinful sin really is. It was just a schoolmaster to teach Israel until the Lord came. Now, the Lord has come, and He is now the Covenant of the nations. In Him (not in the Torah) shall the Gentiles trust.

jaephoenix:
How am I supposed to demonstrate faith, bro?

You can't keep scorning God and expect Him to act through you.

ValCon888:
Political thieves steal billions including pensions. Thousands of people die from the consequences of their embezzlement and yet they walk free.

On the other hand, we have a young man who steals a fowl and is quickly sentenced to death.

What that tells me is there's something fundamentally wrong with Nigeria. The system is irreparably broken.

The guy and his friend were innocent. It was a case of personal vendetta from a powerful uncle.

Win12345:
when you attack pentecostals they say dont judge. but they keep condemning others only to make themselves relevant.

Pentecostals don't do anything that the Bible does not approve of. Prove me wrong. I'm talking in terms of doctrines and religious practices.

Baldwretch:
God would propagate the Torah and himself by implications and he actually had a well-defined blueprint.

He would first carve out a bunch of people for himself from another nation, a very powerful one of its time. Then he would take this carved out nation into the midst of another well populated region; then he would displace the people who live in this region and in surrounding areas, expand and conquer east and westwards. Of course, so much warfare would occur. All of these would involve brute force and physical and spiritual power, but the warriors' victory is assured and guaranteed because God would be the one to give them victory, not by their swords.

Here is the problem, however, victory is never guaranteed without obedience. The Israelite were very rebellious and could not tap into God's blessing, his solid promises of one warrior chasing a thousand, and his protections. I think it's in the book of Judges or Joshua in chapter 2 or 3 or 4 (don't remember, NLT) where it says God did not quickly drive out the Canaanite from the land because he did so to teach future generations of Israelite who had no experience in battle about the act of warfare.

Now, why is warfare so important? The prophet Daniel, being in a foreign land, would be in a better position to answer this question. He knows fully well and understands indubitably that the most successful war-mongers have their religion and their God as the de-facto one. Everyone in the region and beyond would have worshiped Yahweh through a show of physical power and force had the Jewish people obeyed the laws and lived blamelessly before him. In the end, the Torah would have been a guiding principles for both the Jews and the gentiles. It wasn't because the Jews did not gbe ori duro!

God had to resort to spiritual power, not physical power as is the case with warfare, to get people to know him - and viola, we have a religion with more than 1.5 billion followers, Christianity.

SO yes, God had wanted to propagate the Torah and make it the guiding principle for mankind for all ages but the rebellious Jews didn't make that happen. In fact, they struggled to live up to the righteousness of the surrounding nations God had driven out before them.

I would answer your second objection later.

My brother, it doesn't make sense that God would propagate the Torah through war and then settled for a very miniature portion of the world. Your assertion would make sense if the Israelites were warring from place to place the way the Islamic god propagated Islam.

Infact, God commanded the complete annihilation of those wicked nations. He didn't ask Israel to convert anybody. They were to learn the art of war for defence only, not for the propagation of the Torah. God's intention was Jesus. The Torah was a shadow of some real things that were to come. God didn't tell Israel to go propagate the shadow. When. Jesus came with the real thing, He said "Go ye into the world..."

God clearly just gave Israel a portion in the middle East, and clearly instructed them not to go beyond that portion. Even within that vicinity, there were many pagan nations God expressly warned Israel not to tamper with.

He obviously was in lab, cleared a table for this specimen, and once He was done with His Beta, He released His version 2.0 to the world through the Lord Jesus.

Baldwretch:
The Jews entered the Promised Land through warfare and would almost certainly expand by the same act. It seems logical then to infer that God's tool of propagating the Torah and himself (by implication) is a very effective strategy at the time - warfare. Conversion happens by force, not by some flowery words. Preaching to conquered territories would come naturally. They wouldn't have to be instructed to do it. After all, the nation that propagates the ideas of its God and its religion is not the one that is commanded by its holy books to do so, but the one that succeeds quite well in the act of warfare. That should be quite obvious.

Fighting wars in ancient times is almost inevitable. There would always be reasons to fight. And the more successful you are in the battlefield, the more likely you are to proselytize people and get nations to your God. God already promised and guaranteed victory to the Jewish nations if they obeyed his laws, so it is not true at all that Moses was sent to only Israel and not to the world at large. If God was going to give them a Land through wars, he would almost certainly keep them and expand their territories through the same act. It seems it's only a matter of time before subjugated nations and people worship the one true God even though they would not willingly worship initially.

God does not have to spell out an obvious truth (in the Torah) on how he was going to use the Jews to draw mankind to himself after giving the Law. If the Jews expanded and conquered territories, wouldn't people be forced to accept their religion?

The point I am making is that Muhammad's claim that he Torah was sent through Moses for the benefit of the Jews is gross error. The Torah is supposed to benefit all of mankind for all ages.

Well, I do not think that God wanted to propagate the Torah. He already had a plan for a New Covenant, hence propagating a covenant that would soon be abolished was just unnecessary.

God's strategy was to create a model nation through whom He would reach the whole world. The model nation need a place in an already populated world. To create a place for them, God had to remove the wicked through a just punishment. This was what informed the wars of Canaan.

Baldwretch:
Thanks for thanking me. Lol. . So I was typing and poof - NEPA pafuka the light!



This would inevitably lead to questions: where did we get our morality from; is it from ourselves or from something outside us? And we'd be asking another question, is morality really subjective or objective?

Morality, my dear, is not objective. It is subjective. God decides what is right. There is nothing like absolute morality. Some seemingly "good" things or events are bad because God says they are and vice versa.

Now, let's talk about our first parents, Adam and Eve. The story of Adam and Eve and their Fall, if anything, should inform me and you that morality is subjective, not objective. God impressed upon Adam and on his offspring that He is the ultimate standards of right and wrong. God impressed on him by an innocuous command that morality is neither here nor there unless what he says and by his permission.

If God requires that whole communities including babies, infants, and animals be burnt to ashes (as he commanded to the Israelite who would eventually enter the Promised Land), then the command itself and the people's action afterwards is actually a very good one. That it was a punishment for sin is a lazy coup-out. Everyone don't get punished for sin. And everyone who committed the same sin don't get punished the same way, after all. Warfare cannot even be said to be a punishment for sin. That action of theirs (The holy War, so to speak) is actually a righteous and godly action!

Or what of the fact that He hardens people's hearts, demands obedience from them, and then punishes them when they don't oblige. We can't explain the morality of these actions objectively. God is called the sovereign LORD for a reason. Sovereignty and objective morality are not c- related terms. In fact, they are mutually exclusive. God's will has to be free and outside the forces and balances of nature because he created nature. There is no moral justification to impute another man's unrighteousness on his descendants, and yet, we find in Holy scriptures and by experience that women experience pain during childbirth because another sinned. Men suffer from dawn to dusk tilling and striving very hard to make money because Adam sinned. There is no moral justification whatsoever for this.

I didn't sin, some would boldly say. I certainly do not deserve to be tried in another man's stead. I am going to take the matter to court, haha.

If God's action were tried in a secular court, the depraved wretch of a judge would be screaming guilty-guilty, guilty as tried!

But God is neither guilty nor under obligations to submit to natural laws. What I am saying is this, God never requires his creatures to do something because it is right, it is right because God says so. The order is important. God is the ultimate standard of right and wrong so that whatsoever he says is right is right.

God's judgment, his decisions, his actions are right and good and fair and are sometimes at variance to what we know as objective truths. It has to be then that God is not bound by objective morality, such that whatsoever he does is......... yes, you got it right - RIGHT! Whatsoever he does is right.

You brought up the subject of Adam and Eve. Now on Adam and Eve, they were given a command to NOT eat of a certain fruit. We know how it turned out. But the question I would like to ask you is this: Did they commit a morally wrong action? Is it morally wrong to eat an Apple or whatever the fruit is? What God commanded them NOT to do, is it a morally wrong action? Eating Apples? Of course, the answer is a NO! Is eating Apples morally right? YES, because it is good for your health - as it contains some essential vitamins and minerals. But that action of theirs became bad because God commanded it. You see the point I am trying to make that God does not want you to do the right thing because it is right, but because he commands it. It is always all about God, not whether an action is good, or beneficial ,or helpful.

In fact, the very fact that there are always exceptions to every rule proves that morality is not objective, but subjective. If morality were objective God should never have permitted wars and in some instances commanded. Why? Warfare is just as bad today as it was many, many years ago. If morality were, in fact, objective as you are saying, then women should be able to marry many husbands are many many wives.

Like mathematicians do after a mathematical proof -QED! I hope I have QED!





The passage you just quoted can also read: Act justly before God. Be merciful before God. Be humble before God. These still proves what I have been saying all along.

On the Bablawo, it seems you have difficulty grasping the times and seasons of the past. A Babalawo repenting by eloquent words of the mouth? NO! A man who has encountered and enjoyed immense power from his god giving you minutes of his time? NO na!

Besides, the god he serves has given his own laws which the babalawo and the whole community abide by, so why would he/they want to obey another law from another god? He is just as zealous for his god as you are for yours.

In fact, the same can be said of the whole community. This is the thing, God's law sometimes agrees with the laws of the god whom he serves - like, for example, the law on murder. Now, if the god he serves expressly makes it forbidden (for community members) to commit murder, why would the Abrahamic God send a representative to make the same command? Is it that the god they serve is not as powerful or he is not doing a good job?

You know as well as I do that the devil wants worship at all cost and would shit his pants out if men begin a blood-letting campaign. If that happens, there would be no worshiper left to worship him. What good then is sending prophets to rebuke men of natural laws or the laws of the conscience as you put it when the babalawo and the community have received something similar from their own oracle?



You have not understood the concept of the Abrahamic god. He is more than life; he is life itself, more than breadth, he is breadth itself. Whatever anyone would do that is not done because of him is invalid, null and void, and of no consequence whatsoever. That is why the first and most important commandment of all the commandments is to have no other god besides him. He is the fountain, the spring, the decider and the source of everything. It is simply untrue that right or wrong are independent of God. God decides what is and what is not. Extrapolating you and your kids for God and his creature is false equivalence. E no follow at all.

I agree with your number 3, it is the highest and the loftiest of all righteousness. God did not create man to live in a moral you can "the right thing to do" there is no right or wrong without God.

My brother, we're saying the same thing. We just need some slight clarifications.

There's no right or wrong without God is different from there's no right or wrong without God-consciousness. These are two different things. I believe you actually support the later and not the former. However I suppose both. The two explains our levels of Righteousness.

Yeah, morality or righteousness is subjective but there's that basic form of righteousness that is universally defined. You know, the Lord Jesus spoke about the Righteousness of the Pharisees and enjoined us to raise our bars higher.

When you don't know God or have never heard of Him, God holds you accountable to the basic forms of Righteousness which is governed by the universal law of the conscience:


Romans 2:12-16:

"For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themseflves:
Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another...."

Even the Babaláwos of antiquity also know the basic infractions that could define them as wicked. God is universally involved in the conscience of man. We all know what is right and wrong to a generally acceptable standard. Itt is already coded into our being by God Himself. So, if you're doing righteously, God is involved even though you may not be God-conscious.

The moment you come to know God, you're now having an higher capacity to be righteous. And, "to whom much is given, much is required."

The war that annihilated the Amorites was actually a punishment for their sins. God uses different whips to chastise erring nations. War is one of them. We see this many times in the Bible - Saul and the Amalekites for example.

Baldwretch:
having read your piece, I have to admit that you are living up to your username: a master in theology, good judgment, and excellent manners/morals. I salute you sir. Accept my heartfelt handshake.



I thought about the "natural law" and the law of conscience you just talked about and I actually hinted at it in a separate discussion sometimes back, but this creates some difficulties one might actually find very hard to untangle. The problem is, okay if God sends a messenger to implore a particular people or tribe who do not, in fact, know him and have never had any covenant or intimate relationship with him; if he sends a prophet (to them) to warn them of their natural wickedness and and the people did, in fact, repented of their sins, but have no knowledge of this God, or who even made the command, and have never had any genuine relationship with him and cannot accurately grasp, appreciate, or love his persona, then their repentance is meaningless, unsound, and of no effects whatsoever. It creates a terrible echo chamber that: evil is vile and bad because it is bad, and not because God forbids it. If God cannot get people to repent because of him, then I don't think there would be any motivation to do so, or to send a messenger if the people think they are doing it for a god after their own imagination, or for a local god they already serve. Experience should let you know that it's only a matter of time, they would be worse off than they actually repented. I cannot overemphasize the importance of knowing, worshiping, appreciating the one true God FIRST before doing any kind of services including repentance (because of him) and I think God wants that first. God would be glorified by the least bit of human action that FIRST acknowledge his existence, else such turning from sin has no weight and God would not need to command it.

Let's say a man, fearful to look at, came to your house in 7th century Oyo Empire when your entire family and those around you were babalawos and what have you, and said he got a message from God. Would you take him seriously? Would you even know what he means? Oh maybe I should ask you the more important question: would the Abrahamic God need to send a messenger to such a nation to warn them of what me and you would call "natural laws" and the laws of conscience?

My device screen is going off and on. I would continue tomorrow

Thanks brother for the commendation.

I have only one response to all you have said so far. Yeah, I can see the depth of what you're hitting at and fully understand your valid points even though you are yet to complete your post as you indicated in your last sentence.

This is the only response I have: God does not want anyone to do anything because of Him. He just wants you to do the right things. That's all. Always doing the right things is what brought up the word "RIGHTEOUS". That's all God wants.

Micah 6:8
"He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God."

What God expects of every man including those Ninevites:

1. Act justly

2. Be merciful

3. Be humble before God.

Anyone doing the above 3 is doing the right things, and would be acceptable to God even if he or she does not know God.

The Ninevites, knowing they were wicked humbled themselves and tGod turned away their punishment. The babaláwo family in your analogy would do well to do the same if they know within themselves that indeed they're wicked.

God loves it that way - do the right things, not because of Him but because it's the right thing. This is the best way to live because even if God ceases to exist, you'll still continue to do the right thing.

This is one of the areas I have problems with many of us Christians. We want to do the right things because of paradise and because we don't want to go to hell. That means if there's no more paradise and God announces that there's no more hell, we'll just immediately become as evil as the devil.

It is good to do the right thing whether God is there or not. That's the kind of human beings God wants. Just as I as a father want my children do the right things whether I'm there or not, and not just because of me. That's what will make me have confidence in them. That's the plane God wants men to live on. The ideology forms the foundation of why God put a forbidden fruit in Eden. God wants man to do good, not because he doesn't have the chance to do evil but because he has chosen to do good. He then left them alone with the fruit in the midst of the garden - He wanted them to do good whether He was there or not. That's the ideology God wants us to run on. If all humans run on this ideology, there'll be no evil.

This brings me to the 3 levels of Righteousness

Level 1 - You're doing the right things because you fear God's punishment and want God's rewards. This is the level introduced by religion. It's the lowest level.

Level 2 - You're doing the right things because it's the right thing to do. This is the moral level God created man to live in. It is the natural level of Righteousness.

Level 3 - You're doing the right things because you love God, and do not want God to be pained or hurt by your unrighteousness. This is the highest level of Righteousness introduced by the Lord Jesus. "If ye love me, ye will obey my commandments." This level is only attained through intimacy.

Levels 1 and 2 leave a lot of rooms for hypocrisy but at level 3, hypocrisy is absolutely impossible. You can't be a lover of God and still be an hypocrite.

Baldwretch:
Yes, God spoke to Balaam, but we are not told that he was ever instructed to teach the people the ways, the judgment or the commands of God. There is a big difference. God talks to whom he pleases, yes, but he also does things consistent with his nature. That is like saying God should be able to make a squared-circle because he is all powerful. NO!

The story of Jonah is one that I have wrestled with recently, though. Since the ancient Kingdom of Assyria were never in a covenant with God, there should be no judgment from a prophet to the people of Nineveh from the Abrahamic God. I am still on it, though, even though I believe with utmost faith and with absolute confidence that the book is inspired. I am just looking for an explanation for the difficulty.

However, opinions are what they are - opinions. So much for the opinion that your own opinion is the right one and mine is an error despite writing mine more than a thousand years before you were even born. So much for the selective dyslexia from Muhammed. So how do we know what is truth and what is error when some are just factual information that cannot be proven from the text or with all bits of information. For instance, the Bible said Isaac was to be the sacrificed animal while the Quran said Ishmeal is. Now, both cannot be true. The bible has no reason to lie, the Quran does have good reasons to. Besides, the Bible never hides the sins of the people. We have been able to read some of the saddest, sordid tales of idolatry, incest, rape, murder, thievery, departure from God even by some renowned prophets, and all sorts of depravity - yes, in the bible. Those were not hidden, so why would it conceal so insignificant an information when there was no contrary or competing opinion at the time? So which is right and which is the factually wrong information?

I'm actually enjoying your inputs. They're very logical and sound. I will keep following your arguments till the very end. Please accept my commendation.

Permit me to clarify the Jonah/Assyria problem. I don't need to speak in many words because I consider you a very smart personality. Kindly note that I do not speak on this matter as an authority but as someone who has been privileged to have several decades of study with many questions asked and several answers uncovered. Most of what you've said so far are in line with my thoughts, and I have sometimes presented the same logic on this forum. Especially that God cannot punish a people with whom He had no former relationship or covenant, and that the Bible that exposes the most evil actions of its most referenced personalities could be trusted on any matter.

Now, let's talk about Jonah and the Assyrians. The situation is simple. Even though Good did not have any prior relationship with the Assyrians, neither He had at anytime given them a law to observe, He still had the right to judge them by the natural law - the law of the conscience. Everyone has this law irrespective of whether you know the Abrahamic God or not. Since He is the Creator of the whole world, He can administer justice through the law of conscience which is a universal law. That is why God didn't send Jonah to warn them for not worshipping Him but for their wickedness which they themselves never denied. They knew themselves to be indeed wicked. The king had to call for a national repentance. They knew because they had the law of conscience, and they knew that there's a God in heaven. Inspite of the idols which the pagans worship, they always know that there's one God who is above all. They don't know that God but they know He exists.

God's message to Nineveh would have been wrong if He had sent Jonah to forewarn them of impending destruction for not worshipping or serving Him. This is where the Muslim god errs. The arbitrary command to kill those who do not worship Allah when Allah never revealed himself to them is very evil. I have constantly told Muslims here that the capital punishment for those who who didn't serve God according to the law of Moses was for the Israelites alone, based on the fact that God had previously revealed Himself to them, done them many services, entered a covenant relationship with them and had given them the law with attendant consequences to which the people were in agreement. The people agreed that if we don't serve you, we should be destroyed. The punishment comes as a basis of the agreement (Covenant and laws), and not just an arbitrary decision to execute them just because they were not serving God. Infact, God commanded the Israelites to teach their kids the laws and the consequences, so that when you're caught in any offence, you cannot feign ignorance. There had been no Muslim on this forum who had ever been able to prove to me that God punished any other people apart from the Israelites for not serving Him.

Yeah, nations were punished for wickedness, especially bloodshed which were very grave offences. The nations themselves know they were guilty. If we have problems with the Jonah and Nineveh issue, we'll have problems with the Sodom and Gomorrah issue as well, and indeed a much bigger problem with the destruction of the Amorites.

God is the judge of the whole world. He judges using the universal law of the conscience for those to whom He has no relationship. Otherwise the world would have been a more evil place because of the severity of man's wickedness. Most people hold back on their wicked tendencies because they know that there'll be repercussions. It would have been a much more evil world.

Then, let's remember that He delayed the judgement of the Amorites for more than 500 yrs because according to Him, "The iniquities of the Amorites was not yet full" - Genesis 15:16. God does not just go all out looking for who to punish.

The iniquities of the Ninevites were getting full. God was righteous not to destroy them without warning. He sent Jonah to them and gave them rooms to repent. This is consistent with what He did in Sodom and Gomorrah. The angels were there as a test for the people (Genesis 18:21). They failed the test, and their judgment could no longer be delayed.

Ernesthugo:
hi boss how are you doing
ssd price brief,also subjext to change
128gb 12k,256gb 25k,512gb 50k, 1tb 100k 2tb 200k, 4tb 450k

Okay. Your WhatsApp please.

I really appreciate God for all He has done for me this year. I started this year on a very rough note but God smoothened my path, healed my marriage, gave me increased prosperity, solved a long standing family issue, gave me victory over ancestral powers, healed my ailing heart, did many impossible things for me, and gave me a very promising 2025. The foundation I need to soar higher in 2025 was laid this December - all things were miraculously supplied. I even received a miraculous intervention today concerning an opportunity that would be closing tomorrow. I almost missed it but God intervened using someone in the UK. The financial blessings I enjoyed this year are phenomenal . I give God all the glory. God has been faithful and extremely good to me. He overlooked my failures and extended His goodness to me without minding my shortcomings. I am full of appreciation to the King of kings and the Lord of lords. Thank you Jesus.

Ernesthugo:
2024 the most beautiful year of my existence as a Man, better days ahead i pray.
grateful to God that i have everything i want and need and my family is safe.
AMEN.




CONTACT ME FOR YOUR LAPTOP UPGRADES
I SELL SSD FOR PLAYSTATIONS 3 TO 5
I SELL SSD FOR LAPTOPS SIZE 2230,2242,2280 FROM 128GB T0 4TB
I SELL APPLE MACBOOK SSD
I SELL LAPTOP RAMS DDR3L,DDR4,DDR5 FROM 8GB TO 32GB

How much is SSD for laptops?

jaephoenix:
Right.
I mean what have I to lose by having faith? Nothing
So go ahead…

So, you know you have nothing to lose by having faith in God? Why then have you not demonstrated faith in the past few days as instructed?

jaephoenix:

Okay. So we wait till next week, right?

I want to inform you that I'll not be able to be in Lagos tomorrow as planned.

I'll send a voice note of prayer instead. But that'll be under the condition that you have demonstrated faith in God, had not been a scorner and have had reverence towards God and His Word these past days as forewarned .

jaephoenix:

Okay. So we wait till next week, right?

Yeah.

jaephoenix:
What do you mean by watching my ways? Be specific, bro

Change your attitude towards God abd repent. That would be the only way to prove you indeed have faith.

You can't be scoffing at God and still expect Him to work through you.

Watch your ways.

jaephoenix:
Remember they are heathens. So they may or may not have scorned Jesus earlier but think they came to him when situations were critical, and Jesus didn’t care. All he knew was that they needed help and came to him.
So right now, situations are critical, and I have faith (at least it a the size of a mustard, so that qualifies )
So again bro, do your thing, I want to feel the power of the Holy Spirit and the healing hands befall my patients

The situation is not as simple as that but we can only depend on God's mercy. You already have a serious case with God, and you cannot be the right vessel to convey God's message to those people.

May the Lord pardon your sins in Jesus name. Let's do it this way:

I'll try my best to see if I can be in Lagos next week for this particular purpose. In the event that I'm unable to come, then you'll be the only option, that is, my point of contact with those people. You'll then have to be the one to deliver God's message of Love to them.

Meanwhile,watch your ways. Seek to reorder your life with God before then. Next week Saturday to be precise, I'll try to be in Lagos. And if I'm unable to come to Lagos, I would deliver a prayer note on Sunday.

Watch your ways before then because it really matters.

jaephoenix:
Lol. I don't think the Phoenician woman, Gentiles and other heathen had to pass through all these hoops and rings before Jesus healed them. He simply healed them. No long interviews or jargons

Were they scorners?

jaephoenix:
Yup

You have been known to mock God on this forum. Before we can proceed, you openly confess and repent of your mockeries. Then, profess belief in Christ Jesus' ability to heal. God does not pass His messages through scorners.

jaephoenix:
What if I have faith you'd heal them? After all, there's nothing to lose. Medical science has done its best and its not enough to save their lives. So what's the worse that can happen?
Besides Jesus says a faith as tiny as a mustard is adequate and the sinful heathen woman(can't remember where) told him that even she can manage crumbs of miracles
So bro, do your thing

Do you believe that Jesus can heal them?

jaephoenix:
Yup, Jesus did very well heal unbelievers, heathen, and even healed heathens through other heathen(which is the case here)

Yes, everyone can be healed. Even you but as long as I'm not physically present, someone who has faith and believes Jesus can heal the sick must act as an intermediary. The sick or the intermediary need not be christians. One if them must just have faith.

The Syrophoenician woman who needed healing for her daughter was a Gentile. (Matt 15) , as was the centurion who asked Jesus to heal his servant. (Matt . Neither were God’s chosen people. Don't forget Naaman in the OT
Jesus healed all. There is no mention that his healings only refer to Jews. All means all. If God is the same yesterday, today and forever, then surely this means He does still heal unbelievers today.

The Syrophoenicean woman and the centurion were no believers but unlike you, they had faith. If they both lacked faith like you do, Jesus would have to be there in person to heal the sick.

Naman had faith and dipped himself inside the water. If he lacked faith, he would never have been healed.

jaephoenix:
Are you saying he didn't see the dm I sent him?
Anyways, can't you send me a prayer note to transfer to them? I know Jesus healed folks like that in the bible. Even unbelievers get healed

You didn't tell me you sent him dm.

Yes, I can send prayer notes but you cannot be the handler.

Jesus never sent prayers through unbelievers and faithless people.

That's why I said if you find a relation of the sick that can stand in faith for them, then we're good to go.

Both the relation and the sick must consent to be prayed for and must believe that Jesus can intervene in the body of the sick.

Again, I'm not praying for them to make you believe in God. That's none of my business. I'm praying for them to make them know that God loves them and wants the sick healed.