₦airaland Forum

Tallesty1:
∆ A man and his wife were separated but not divorced, the woman got pregnant and formally filed for divorce. The man accepted, bride price was returned but the man told her to use it to take of his child that she was carrying. Claimed it was his own since she took in while still married to him. Court ruled in his favor. Whether that is still in practice today is what I don't know. The man was my neighbor and I believe you know where I'm from.

The Customary Marriage Laws in Nigeria have not been changed for many decades.

Expanse2020:
∆ You are joker and continue twisting lie in ur heart

I am not the joker. Rather you are in your attempt to explain the things of God using human ideas which you ought to have known are not even applicable in all circumstances.

Adam and even sinned. What their children inheritance is the consequences of their sin. That is what is written in that book. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar and you religious folks seem very adept at that.

Expanse2020:
∆ If a person father is a debtor definitely the son automatically inherited the debt and when the father died the kid must pay the debt back unless he maybe subdue to a slave....
∆ When Adam committed sin and you inherited and now you still said the person doesn't have the sin on his record but he just inherited it...is that not confusing

1. Wrong! I can't inherit my father's debt unless the Law makes allowance for that to happen.

2. Wrong! No man inherited Adam's sins. Rather, what all men inherited where the consequences of his sin.

Blkpanda:
∆ The main thing I’m still lost with is who should the rest of us be worshipping? I saw an older post of yours questioning why we praise Jesus as he told us not to.
∆ Are non Jews damned from birth since God only cares about this one tribe?
∆ my statement about Jews seeing non Jews as goy/livestock - I meant it in regard to the attitude they carry with it which seems to tie into everything g else you are saying about God having one favourite/chosen group of people
∆ Can you recommend any reading (outside of the Bible) to explore this topic some more

1. You are free to Worship whatever you wish. That was the freedom Adam and Eve bought for mankind when they chose disobedience.

2. By virtue of Adam's sins, every man descended from them were damned by God - Genesis 3 vs 16 - 24.. There is nothing special about that. The israelites whom God chose, were eventually cursed by Him about 1900 years ago; this other curse in addition to the previous curse that was from Adam and Eve down through the line. So, compared to an Israelite who is living under the curse of The Law of Moses -- [b]Deuteronomy 28 vs 15 - 57 & Leviticus 26 vs 12 - 4[/b]3, I would say you have it a whole lot easier.

3. The attitude has nothing to do with God. We are talking of people who are referred to as the lost Sheep of Israel here -- Every Israelite living today is of that class, those condemned to the curse of sin ajdb death by the God of Israel. And No, the israelites of today are not more favored by God. They live under His curse to this day with Jesus Christ as the only path to redemption available to all of them.

4. I am afraid there is no other book to find this information in. All you wish to know of is in that book. Read it as you would any novel of epic, paying close attention to all the God depicted in the book said and did. It is the only way to learn what is written from the that which is not.

Blkpanda:
■ Let’s go in on this then…. Jesus Christ said He was sent only to the Lost Sheep of Israel; Jews are but a subset of the Nation of Israel. Jesus Christ said non-Israelites -- those He refered to as Dogs -- are not welcome to have the Kingdom of God as His Father sent Him only to the Lost Sheep of Israel. undecided
I’m guessing you mean “Jews are but a subset of the TRIBES of isreal”? And not nation. is this akin to the 12 tribes of isreal that the black Israelites in the us preach about?
■ Jews refer to non Jews as goy and believe they are inferior/lesser humans on the same level as livestock - assuming this relates to the dog part.
■ Are the rest of us from somewhere else? Different God? Or simply here to serve Jews? How do you reconcile this? What is his beef with the dogs?

What God gave to Moses and the children of Israel in the wilderness, after He took them out of slavery in Egypt was the National Constitution of the Nation of Israel in the Land of Canaan; God of Isreal formed a Nation which He called Israel by way of the Law of Moses.

After the death of Solomon, the original nation of Israel was split into two nations — the northern nation of Israel and the Southern nation of Judae, both of them Israelite nations. The Southern Nation consisted mainly of Israelites of the tribes of Judah, Levi, and Benjamin. whereas the other tribes went with the Northern nation.

So the Jews being a subset of Israel means both the Nation of Israel(before it was split in two) and the Tribes of Israel.

2. This isn't about what derogatory terms Jews use for those who aren't one of them.

3. Nope! After Adam and Eve chose to go it alone without God in the beginning, God washed His hands off the affairs of men, so men could have His way. God chose for Himself a people of His own to use in accomplishing His very plan from the beginning, a plan to create Sons of God with whom to rule over the world. That seemed to be His plan from the beginning and it remains His plan, regardless of what men choose for themselves.

Blkpanda:
∆ Thank you sha, this is stuff I’ve never come across before. This leaves me with more questions but I won’t hold you and bore the thread.

Questions on the topic does not bore me.

Blkpanda:
∆ Enjoying this debate. Quick question as my knowledge is lacking on this topic….Are you saying Jesus referred to/sees non Jews as dogs?
∆ Implying God is strictly a Jew God? Where does that put everyone else?

Jesus Christ said He was sent only to the Lost Sheep of Israel; Jews are but a subset of the Nation of Israel. Jesus Christ said non-Israelites -- those He refered to as Dogs -- are not welcome to have the Kingdom of God as His Father sent Him only to the Lost Sheep of Israel.

2. He referred to Himself as God of Israel and proclaimed Israel His only inheritance in the land of men. This is His plan made clear in that book from the beginning.

Bobbynobobby:
∆ *you only wife her if she's a 'good thing'. Logically, it follows that if you don't come across any you consider 'good', don't force it. Adam was created in God's image (to look like the Creator), Eve was created as an afterthought. The Bible says God made man perfect but man seeks many inventions for himself.

You are still trying to weave a contradiction into a valid statement. Look, the say is,"He who finds a wife finds a good thing," meaning as long as you find a wife -- irrespective of her character -- you have found for yourself a good thing. It is that simple.

You chose to bring a passage written for a different people in Scripture into this. So why are you working overtime to twist what is written to get it to say something else?

Qasim6:
■ At least Muhammad claimed he was receiving revelation from God, it is Left to you to investigate if his claim is true or not.
■ The Bishops Voted to conclude that Jesus is a part of a Trinity.

Your response makes no sense whatsoever! Mohammed's claim to have received some sort of revelation from a deity whose message not only ran counter to that proclaimed by the man Jesus Christ almost 650 years before proved Mohammed no better than the rogue bishops before him.

2. Well, Mohammed pretty much took to overturning all that Jesus Christ declared 650 earlier and proclaimed himself a messiah of sorts using the same name. How does that make Mohammed's tale any less preposterous than what the Bishops went with?

Qasim6:
■ U don come with your
"you Muslim don't understand "
"You Muslim are parroting bla bla bla"
The good for nothing Bishops were sitting down in whopping 300 yrs after Jesus left the scene to discuss Jesus nature, they even voted on the subject to reach a conclusion. Why did they need to vote if it is crystal clear in the scripture? Do you think you will be trinitarian if that council did not take place in history? Do you think the original apostles believe Jesus is some part of God?

Does this make the case any better for Mohammed who showed up almost 650 years later to turn the entire script on its head?

Abegi! All religions — Judaism, Christianity, Islam —that claim to have any dealings with Jesus Christ seem to be led by dogs, the very same that Jesus Christ made clear had absolutely nothing to do with Him and His Kingdom of God.

Obrigardo:
■ Seriously! They just reinterpreting what they feel can settle their bias thereby making Yahuah looking like a very evil entity. Even King James had to make sure his version fits the reinterpration to his bias.

That there in bold is the ultimate goal of the entire religion — to make the God of Israel and Jesus Christ seem nothing more than liars and deceivers. Jesus Christ warned about it all!

Ohyoudidnt:
Arianism, a Christological position in Christianity, was proposed by the Alexandrian presbyter Arius in the early 4th century. It emphasized that Jesus, as the Son of God, was created by God and gained popularity across the Eastern and Western Roman empires. However, it was declared a heresy by the Council of Nicaea in 325.
Beliefs of Arianism
Arianism is often viewed as a form of Unitarian theology that prioritizes God’s unity over the concept of the Trinity. Arius believed in the uniqueness of God as self-existent and immutable, contrasting this with the Son who was considered a created being without self-existence. This belief led to controversies regarding the nature and divinity of Jesus Christ.
The Council of Nicaea condemned Arius as a heretic and affirmed through a creed that the Son is “of one substance with the Father,” establishing orthodox Christian belief. Despite this, conflicts persisted for years, with various councils and emperors supporting different factions within Christianity.

Look, the major problem with all of what is known as Christianity, even from its beginnings, is Jesus Christ who drew the line in the sand, not only when He disavowed religious leaders/authorities in addition to their many doctrines, beginning with those of His time. How can the same Jesus Christ considered to be in support of religion when He declared it instead of the antiChrist — lies?

In addition to that, Jesus Christ declared that He was sent only to the Lost Sheep of Isreal, by His Father, YHWH of Israel. He went ahead to warn His disciples not to give that which belongs to the Lost sheep of Israel to the dogs — Non-Israelites— Matthew 7 vs 6 & Matthew 15 vs 22 - 24. He explained in John 3 vs 14 - 18 & Matthew 11 vs 28 - 30 that the World which He came to was the very same world to which God caused the bronze Snake to be raised in the desert up to — the condemned ones among Israel aka the Lost sheep of Israel(Ezekiel 34 vs 1 - 31). How then could the same Jesus Christ, who declared that His Word was everlasting — Unchangeable, the same yesterday, today, and forever — be associated in any way or form with a religion largely founded by non-Israelites? No be Juju be that!

So, OP, your argument when put up against that which is Scripture fails from the get-go. So long as dogs and religion are involved, it has no part with that stated by the God of Israel —YHWH— and neither Jesus Christ Himself!

Niklaus398:
1. Common sense should tell you if the followers of Christ was called Christians then and they didn't reject it, and the name stuck and they went about still preaching about Jesus while people of Antioch and surrounding kept calling them Christians then it means that were they became Christians first cause that's wh re they were knew as Christians first. Weather by a bunch of pagans or not. Still that's were they were called Christians. Nigeria was first called it name by lugard's wife and it stuck.. today we are known as Nigerians.
2. Peter speeches were recorded. John testimony in Revelation was recorded. In the book of act, many of the apostles works were recorded. So what are you saying?
3. They created it. Might not have been deliberate but they did by both their actions and inactions and by their words too since when they were constantly called Christians by the pagans, they never rebuked the pagans and say "stop calling us Christians we ain't Christians"
.

1. That reasoning of yours does not compute at all. That a people do not put much effort into rejecting a thing does not necessarily mean that they accept it particularly when they had been commanded by their master in this case not to lift a finger against those who would stand as their enemies. That they were called Christians by the pagans does not serve as evidence for the establishment of the religion of Christianity which is in no way connected to them, the disciples.

That the name Nigeria was supposedly coined by Lady Lugard does not mean the country itself became known as Nigeria from that very moment on.

2. Neither Peter nor John has anything to do with the religion of Christianity which is instead recorded to have been founded by those referred to as church fathers who were majorly removed from the original Jewish movement except for the many mostly spurious claims made by those men of having some distant affiliation or removed connection to the original disciples.

3. Wrong! Christianity is founded on ideas and doctrines that do not line up with any of what Jesus Christ and most all of what His followers preached. How can you say they created it when it looks nothing like what they taught?

ThothHermes:
You are deranged. Deranged people are usually the last to know.

Look who's talking!

Obrigardo:
■ Does that mean a 4 month old baby violated God's law? what kind of destructive doctrine is that?

A 4-month-old has not violated any of God's Laws.

Even the so-called age of accountability peddled by Christians who claim to belong to Jesus Christ is bullsheet! Anyone living outside of God's Law cannot be a sinner because sin is a direct violation — disobedience —of God's Law and those who are under God's Law — either the Old or New— are those who are of the blood of Jacob. So, how can one born of a dog — a non-Israelite — have sinned against God when the Law was not even extended to them by God?

To become of the Law that is Jesus Christ, one who is first of the blood of Jacob has to knowingly and intentionally subscribe to enter and become a citizen of the Kingdom of God, an eternal Covenant. And no third party can sign another up — parents cannot sign or force their children into the Kingdom of God neither can a man or woman conscript a partner or another man or woman into the covenant that is the Kingdom of God. No one is born into this agreement. One has to mentally and physically accept the contract of his or her own volition. As such the age of accountability idea that is thrown around by Christians begins to break when you consider this.

In addition, Jesus Christ said except a man(not a child) is born born-again, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. this causes one to question whether a child can even become born-again or gain access at all to the Covenant that is Jesus Christ. Yes, Jesus Christ said those who are in the Kingdom of God are like children but throughout the Gospels, Jesus Christ never suggests that children are also able to enter into the Kingdom of God. They can be accepted by those who are citizens of the Kingdom of God and equally cared for by them. But for a child to have to be put through the swearing-in required for all those who would become born-again, there is no solid evidence of such in the Gospels. This further sets the age of accountability idea as more of an assumption and nothing else created by the Christians.

P.S. Dogs are non-Israelites who are considered able to fend for themselves whereas sheep are those who are born of the blood of Jacob and considered by God to be unable to fend for themselves without Him of course.

lawani:
■ There is invention.and there in institutionalization. Paul was the one to start saying Jesus liked Gentiles. He was the one to start saying he died for Gentiles forcibly when Jesus himself publicly referred to Gentiles as dogs in the Bible. The problem.with Christianity is saying its nonsense is absolute truth for the whole world. If restricted to one country it would not be cancerous. Therefore Paul invented religion and he never met Jesus while the Roman empire turned it into a force. That is the true position

There is also a misconception. Paul never said the ones he referred to as Gentiles were the very same ones that Jesus Christ referred to as dogs - Non-Israelites. The other Israelite tribes — non-Jewish people — whose country — the nation of Israel— had been destroyed by the God of Isreal by way of the Assyrians back in 720BC were out there roaming among the Gentiles. That leap that by Gentiles Paul meant the dogs was instead made by those who constructed the religion of Christianity through their many dubious twists of the word of Paul.

Nazgul:
■ He said culture not law. Let me rephrase the question for you... which culture in Nigeria openly accepts children an unfaithful wife gave birth to?

What you consider Culture is defined by rules/laws and that law is what is indicated.

Niklaus398:
so if those pagans had called them satanism, they would've not say anything or reject it and instead say what the point of rejecting it?

They were considered blasphemers, and even Satanists by their own Jewish brothers. Did they resist them?

Niklaus398:
■ tell me the truth, why didn't these apostles reject the tag of Christians by those pagans calling them that?
■ Shey if I call you a thief or a murderer, you will reject the tag and tell me to stop calling you that?.

What would have been the point of rejecting the tag? Did you intend for them to fight the pagans or what?

2. You don't know me, do you? I would just simply ignore you and keep on doing my thing.

RoyalBlu:
■Shuo😂😂. Kobo get your mind off the 'bedmatics' na. That's not what all a union entails.

The man chose to remarry barely more than a year after his first wife passed. he could have gotten house help but he chose a wife instead. What for, if not for bedroom functions?

Niklaus398:
■ even you self dull. Christianity started in Antioch in Syria.. Paul wasn't even converted then when Christianity was founded.
■ The disciples when about preaching about Christ till when Paul was Converted. The only thing you can say is Paul did the most. Went the most ... But you can understand why... After years of persecuting the Christians... Remenber before his convertion it was said Paul was persecuting Christians..not Jews.. Christians so if Paul founded Christianity, then how come before his very convertion he was persecuting Christians?
■ Lol same Peter and John that went about preaching about Christ? His death and resurrection? The.moment they went about preaching about Christ then truly they have added hands in growing Christianity because without Christ death and resurrection Christianity is nothing.
But since he died and the John and Peter were clearly preaching it, then truly, they did join in growing Christianity

1. What is instead recorded is that the followers of Jesus Christ were labeled "Christians" by a bunch of Pagans out in Antioch, Syria. They probably even meant it as a derogatory term as well. How in the world did you turn that to then mean that Christianity was founded in Antioch, Syria?

2. How can you objectively conclude that Paul did the most when the accounts contained in the book of Acts from where you draw this conclusion were supposedly written by a man whose major focus was on recording Paul and not the first 12 disciples, or the many others after that?

3. You accuse them falsely. John and Peter also knew well that Jesus Christ considered religion to be antiChrist. So, how could you conclude without evidence that they created that which was against their master?

Niklaus398:
∆ lol it was invented by Paul and yet Peter and John the beloved helped built the Christianity. Wow wow wow. So u telling me they will help build something that goes against Christ their master for Paul?

1. These accusations against Paul, Peter and John are all false.

Niklaus398:
lol it was invented by Paul and yet Peter and John the beloved helped built the Christianity. Wow wow wow. So u telling me they will help build something that goes against Christ their master for Paul?

None of this is in fact true. Paul did not invent Christianity. Rather, his writings which were largely twisted by those who sought to gain from what they saw was a political movement which they later use in creating what you know as Christianity today.

Peter and John did not help build Christianity either since the contents of their letters were also twisted by those who created Christianity.

IVYWonder9:
Jesus Christ was believed to have been crucified on Friday, widely and popularly celebrated as ‘Good Friday'. If Jesus Christ died on Friday and resurrected on Sunday, How come he spent 3 days under the earth as predicted by the prophets? Should we say the prophecy is not literal or accurately untrue.. To find out facts about this, read...

Jesus Christ was instead on the day after passover which also happens to be the first day of the festival of unleavened bread, a holy day with a holy assembly.

Expanse2020:
The baby is genetically a sinner but he is also innocent..you people and your story book are confusing each other

That is just as stewpid a claim to make.

Babies are born under the curse which was afflicted on Adam and Eve as a result of their sin against God. God does not judge a baby for sin.

Obrigardo:
∆ You guys are distorting it as usual.
He wrote, paraphrasing that " a 4 month old SINS" not born into sin. He literally said a 4 month infant SINS.

Even when the verse quoted from Numbers clearly suggests that God did not consider guilty those who were less than 20 at the time, he still chose to impose his own interpretation to suggest instead that they were guilty of sin. That is to show you how truly Christianity does not abide at all by the details of what is written in Scripture but rather by the interpretations --- all lies --- of men.

Obrigardo:
∆ As expected, you people have read your own meaning into this. Please read it again and tell me if he meant what you are claiming.

Na automatic reflex wey Christians get be that, to lie that is.

IamR:
God bless Prof Soludo
God bless Anambra State

No be trash be that wey full still for one side by that fountain picture?

Carcholce:
∆ In what culture? Does it happen it happen in your village?

That happens to be the default as far as customary law in Nigeria. Insisting that paternity fraud has been committed amounts to seeking requesting divorce from one's spouse in that case whether or not the accusation is proven true.

RoyalBlu:
∆ Act like robots how na? A wife slightly genuflected to greet her husband in public and you think it's awkward?

I believe it to be that. Again, for two individuals who we expect have seen themselves naked and even gone on to do the do so many times,it does seem awkward. Does she also genuflect right before she gets in bed with him for sex as well or is this only when others are around to see her acting skills? It's really weird.