₦airaland Forum

Goshen360: Na so the bros dey always perambulate all the time, it's not new. As for potentpraise, IF YOU HAVE SEEN IMAGE123...YOU HAVE SEEN POTENTPRAISE. Look no further. He has been caught pants down.

Boomark: Romans 15:26-27
New International Version (NIV)
26 For Macedonia and Achaia werepleased to make a contribution forthe poor among the Lord’s people in Jerusalem. 27 They were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.

@image123

Do you think these people that were pleased to make a contribution did not do it as it pleases them? Read well before you answer.

OLAADEGBU: Why all the stammering, or is it called vain repetition?

OLAADEGBU: Thou shall laugh.

thehomer: What we have is reason and evidence. Sure they can the difference is that the non-theist is willing to admit it while the theist isn't. Wait so no human living today is a worthy investment? Non-theists aren't worthy investments? And that reference to 500 people is the sort of thing that we put in stories and fairytales to convince people who weren't there. And I hope you know that the actual author of the Book of Luke is unknown.

Are you seriously telling me that desiring wealth is theft? Where do you get these laws from? Can something that used to be a sin stop being a sin?

The beauty of the Bible lies in the ease of quote-mining it. So will God have mercy on all who confess and give up sins?

I'll agree with you that they are mostly sheep. Jesus should have known that and been more circumspect in delivering his great commission instead, he did what he did. So, don't blame me, blame Jesus.

What do you think atheism actually is? By answering that question, you'll clear up a lot of the confusion you're showing here. You seem to think that atheists are to conform to one book (like the Bible) or follow one person (like Jesus). So getting married and divorced is a sign of confusion of love and lust? Sorry but that is just ridiculous. What makes you think that love is the only reason for marriage?

No, your answer literally makes no sense at all. You said here that the seed was the man. Now you say the seed is in the man? If the seed is the man and the seed was in the man, then how was Saul living in his father? If the man couldn't have come about without the mother, then how did the contribution from the mother get in? Or was the mother too in the father?

You Christians are the first to shout that the Bible isn't a science text but here you are quoting it at me as if it was one.

Well you're not me since it seems that I care more for what happens to people than you do. I'm not so selfish or conceited that I only worry about myself. God with his power doesn't need to limit himself to those people that he's selected as being "sincere and honest" he can reveal himself to all people at once. Since you're not in disagreement on the issue of a parent's religion, then why should God have allowed multiple religions in the first place? Knowing the effect it would have on children?

thehomer: How on earth is it a fallacy to point out that you were the one who first brought up special? Since it isn't that special, why should I care about what it contains? Actually, you need to show that God changed any laws if we're to believe that some laws no longer applied. I'm not the one insisting that he changed them, I'm saying that we shouldn't even turn to it for reasonable instructions. The changes in the matter of judgement simply became worse.

Wow. Did you even read what you've presented up there? I think you did since you quoted from it but for some reason, you skipped the very first line in what you were quoting and that is clearly dishonest. This is the full quote. Note the parts in bold

This is from the introduction of that very article that you were quoting.

How the NT got its verses from that same article.

What "others" are you talking about? You may have used analogies before but the ones you've been using here are terrible ones.

Are you serious? Do you wish to tell me that you have to be literate before you can touch a computer? Clearly you have no idea of what you're saying. Actually, not everyone has faith so you're factually incorrect. Then how did God deal this measure of faith to people who used to believe but stopped? Did he take it away?

This is all pointless. Was it Jesus or God that was talking to Paul as he wrote? Or was he just writing to people and his words to those people were then collected? Besides, some of those letters being passes as being written by Paul weren't actually written by him but by unknown people.

While those are changes, they're not changes making something that was once permissible impermissible or vice versa besides. And that is the sort of change I'm disputing. I don't even see those changes as worthy of being taken to come from a wise God.

You didn't show me any serious instances with respect to diet and slavery. In fact, you seem to be running from it.

Rubbish. Read that passage and consider the times they were living in. It was referring to a slave-master relationship not the ridiculous notion you're presenting here that wherever we use servant, we replace it with slave.

I've said before and I'll say it again. What is your interpretation on the cloths with mixed materials?

Well you claim to have seen him in Lagos recently speaking English. I hope you weren't lying about that. If you weren't, then you were probably hallucinating.

I'm still telling you that he Noah thing wasn't a warning but all you've been able to say is that it was a warning using what some guy said in the NT but God himself said it was because he regretted his action of creating people in the first place.

It referred to some animals being clean and others unclean. Now are there still clean and unclean animals?

Sure you don't. How do you know that? Can you show me where that is written in Heaven? Or do you just believe it to make you feel better?

Bomar Which ever way you look at it, they gave without measure, compulsion and happily. They are the same thing.

The Matthew you quoted does not apply when priesthood was changed. At that time also the law changed and Christ became the Highpriest.

What else do you want to fulfil in the law when Christ has already fulfilled it?

zikky grammar no fit cause mis-understanding mis-understanding can be caused by inability to comprehend, deliberate twisting of what is written for personal interest or to achieve set goals e.t.c but not due to grammar.

Gosh What else do you want to fulfil in the law when Christ has already fulfilled it?


Abeg teach them elementary bible knowledge o. They will begin dey twist answers soon. watch out!

zikkyy Image123 said he is a pharisee some time back. This your question too strong. Pharisee no dey answer strong questions you will observe anytime Jesus harrass them they will walk away in shame, i expect image123 to do the same

Gosh See, as I dey laugh you in Hebrew-Greek. Okay, First kweshion - What should be done to Matthew 23:23. The answer is LEAVE IT IN ITS ORIGINAL CONTEXT TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED TO AND STOP APPLYING IT TO THE CHURCH OF GOD EXCEPT YOU ARE NOT PART OF THE CHURCH BUT SCRIBES AND PHARISEES.

Are we to discard it Rabbi? I have answered - leave it in context to those it was addressed to except you're among those it was addressed to. Hence, we don't discard it BUT it wasn't addressed to the Church of the Living God. It's an insult to the Grace of our Lord and the church, the body of Christ to 'indirectly' refer us to scribes and pharisees by apply Matthew 23:23 to us and the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Repent!

zikkyy Before nkor? when you decide to see the needy as dogs, what do you expect
I don't know what you are talking about here o!
I did just that. Your post showed that pastors are a higher or superior breed while the poor and needy are not fit to eat from the same table. abi what does child and dog signify?

zikky What belongs to God and what belong to satan? you are making more blunders almsgiving now amount to giving to lucifer abi? you are desperately trying to make unnecessary distinctions here. what do you mean by substitution? if am giving to the poor, God is not pleased abi? so if i bring my offering to 'church' and share it among the needy in church as thanksgiving that is not valid abi? God no recognise that one. who make up the 'church' am i giving my offering to the building or the people?

BTW where is God's house? God no dey your house abi? you only meet God in your church abi? where is it stated that Christians should bring offering to God's house?

Go back to church (where the spirit of God will guide you) and reflect over what i have written above *afterall God no dey your house*

Bomar Do i need teach you that when it "pleases you to give," you are giving as it pleases you? In other words, without compulsion, when you are happy to make a contribution, you contribute as you happily want to.

Goshen360: Na eim you never still understand comprehension passage and context .....especially Hebrews 7 and your Matthew 23:23. If you're asked to answer grammatical context of Matthew 23:23 that, who was Jesus talking to in the grammatical context of Matthew 23:23 Oya, what will your answer be

Image123: and what should be done to Matthew 23:23? Are we to discard it rabbi?

Goshen360: Na eim you never still understand comprehension passage and context .....especially Hebrews 7 and your Matthew 23:23. If you're asked to answer grammatical context of Matthew 23:23 that, who was Jesus talking to in the grammatical context of Matthew 23:23 Oya, what will your answer be

Zikkyy: So the needy is now dogs abi? just because i gave them the money you want me to dash pastor, ehn image123 pastor is now child of God while the needy in church and outside can be considered dogs you see yourself you see what greed can do to your reasoning pastor and needy members of congregation no dey the same level again?

Goshen360: I know say you'll never go beyond Matthew 23:23 because E BE LIKE SAY you be part of the SCRIBES and PHARISEES wey Oga Jesus dey talk to na..... . Scribes and Pharisees ARE NOW THE CHURCH of GOD

Zikkyy: Lol! na grammar you dey correct for here jobless tither

Zikkyy: what do you mean by 'higher'? i pay my tax, bills and other government dues & rates (Ceaser), and i express my love for God and neighbour by doing ma best (as the Lord as prospered me) to meet the needs of the needy and church. how high do you want me to go again, do you me to contribute my self? i already do that by contributing time and knowledge; or you want me to give all ma earnings to pastor?....that is not going to happen

Boomark: The principle of giving has never ended. Tithe law was never observed by Christians. Read this and see the kind of giving/sharing Christians practice.

Romans 15:26-27
New King James Version (NKJV)
26 For it pleased those from Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the POOR among the saints who are in Jerusalem. 27 It pleased them indeed, and they are their debtors. For if the Gentiles have been partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister to them in material things.

they were not asked to pay tithe to help the saints, but as it pleased them they made a certain contribution to the POOR among the

Zikkyy: have paid ma tithe already. gave it to the needy ma church don't need ma tithe, they got more than enough from our voluntary contributions. we show true love in our church, not percentage love

Zikkyy: am going to church maself. i will be back conclude on your case

Bidam: bro..no mind this tight fisted antithers jare..God don bless them but wen e come to pay back time na wahala..the unrighteous mammon strong o.

Goshen360: Bidam, Bidam....I dey feel your groove o. But wait for me....I dey come The ONLY thing I beg of you is, please stay with this thread because your other colleagues has vacated even the one that started the tithe thread. But make sure you still till the end so we/I can expose you properly.....

JIL: Cherry picker, I agree that tithing is a biblical principle given to the Jews so are the ones listed below among many others.

Kindly read through and tell us which ones you have kept and vehemently defended.

Not adding to the Torah commandments — Deut. 13:1

Saying the Shema twice daily — Deut. 6:7

Wearing tefillin (phylacteries) on the head — Deut. 6:8
Putting a mezuzah on the door post — Deut. 6:9

Not walking outside the city boundary on the Sabbath — Ex. 16:29

Afflicting oneself on Yom Kippur — Lev. 16:29

Not eating or drinking on Yom Kippur — Lev. 23:29

Not eating fruit of a tree during its first three years — Lev. 19:23

Not eating untithed fruits — Lev. 22:15

Separating the tithe for the poor — Deut. 14:28

Carrying out the procedure of the burnt offering as prescribed in the Torah — Lev. 1:3

Burning incense every day — Ex. 30:7

Bringing a sin offering (in the temple) for your transgression — Lev. 4:27

Paying wages on the day they were earned — Deut. 24:15

Not lending to others with interest — Lev. 25:37
Not borrowing from others with interest — Deut. 23:20

I am very certain that you don't even know what Shema or Mezuzah means, but you understand tithing even more than the Israelites because it involves money.

thehomer: That's just it. What we have are stories of stories of people who say that those things happened. The problem is that what we know about people tells us that they can be fooled.
Jesus was happy to show himself to Thomas for his holes to be felt but he was shy about presenting himself to historians of those times.

Then there are those who tried and failed. I've not heard about people "falling into" homosexuality. What we've heard is that people just find themselves attracted to the same sex in the same way that you find yourself attracted to the opposite sex.

What fine print are you talking about? From what I can see here, you've not shown that this mercy is conditional.

You seemed to be implying it when you brought him up while you were talking about the sorts of question you could answer. Sure you can decide to avoid me but the fact remains that Christians have been debating in the past and usually, if they're worth their salt, they won't be scared of being challenged.

Exactly. If you Christians are already confused, then why are you surprised that many of us don't want to join you guys in your confusion? Nietzsche was also a philosopher was that the cause of his confusion? He was also a man could that too have been a cause? You see I still don't understand how you think showing me that one atheist had a bad outcome somehow means that atheists are bound to have bad outcomes. There are mathematicians who have been hospitalized. Does that mean that Mathematics makes people prone to mental illness?

And I've shown you that you answer makes no sense. Men don't live in the loins of other men. If you say that the seed is the same thing as the man, then you have to realize that you're not making any sense. I've been asking you about the mother but you just keep running away and trying to ignore it. Is there some seed in the mother or not? Please answer this question.

Surely you cannot ignore the fact that getting born in Saudi Arabia to Muslim parents means that the child will most likely be Muslim. And for all you know, they may never come across one Christian in their entire life. What does God do to such a person? He fries them forever in Hell.

So you're scared about your interpretation being discovered to not be the correct one? Don't be afraid.

Are you sure you weren't hallucinating? You saw Jesus by reading a book and heard him speak in English? I've heard about Jesus and I've heard about Santa Claus. I don't believe that any of them did anything for me.

I mistyped there because I've been saying that it wasn't meant to be a warning because God himself said he regretted the creation and decided to wipe them all out.

Check you quotes here. It is the one with Acts 10. No it wasn't in that context, but in the context of certain animals being clean and others being unclean.

the point is that it is easy as a sacrifice to perform.

thehomer: Obviously, you're still having a deep problem with communicating. Merely saying "perhaps" doesn't absolve you. Notice that it was you who who began all this talk about special right here.

You're still failing to show that God changed the laws. e.g are tattoos now permissible since they weren't mentioned in the New Testament?

This is why I said you're ignorant about how the Bible came about. If you knew anything about that process, you'll know that the paragraphs and spaces weren't already there. You keep saying that the divisions were inherent yet so far, you've been unable to show that these divisions were inherent.

No, it is the case of ignorance begetting more ignorance. When you don't know what you're talking about, your analogies will tend to be rubbish.

Are you serious? Do you seriously think that there are more people who actually have access to this supernatural than there are people who can interact with a computer?

God spoke to Moses. Jesus' disciples were said to have written Jesus' words.

I don't know about you but my translation says slaves. So your God is satisfied with enslaving other people.

JIL: You fail to include testimonies relating to deliverance from the doctrines of men.

Logicboy03: So all atheists are dead? Poor philosophy

musKeeto: Still waiting for an explanation of this eternal life...