₦airaland Forum

FreeIgboho:
You the one talking crap. See all these versions of the Bible below, most of them by competing interests and from original sources, yet they all say approximately the same thing

LMFAO! Damn! You have lost the plot. Who is talking about translations? Translations have their own problem but we are talking about origins. Are you sure you are alright? Do you need a cup of coffee to focus?

Image123:
It's not a game of first to mention Jesus Christ or God like you just did. It's simple logic.

LoLz. You accuse me then start with the shadow boxing. You are just being disingenuous and you know it.

FreeIgboho:
The OT (ie the Torah and Tanakh) used by the Jews was not put together by any committee. There are different versions of the Bible not just KJV, all derived from original sources and they all say approximately the same thing

LoLz. Go read up on the history of these books. You too ignorant of them to be having this conversation.

MaxInDHouse:
YES!
I did but not to question your position!

You still quoted me first so that the next time you get triggered you don't start saying I am the one who broke it.

Image123:
It's about your independence from Jesus or God. Is it?

Do I mention god or Jesus?

Image123:
i mention the Bible because it is central to religion and it's discuss. Bible will be mentioned and quoted in a Christianity or religion section of a forum, that's common sense. Your posts cannot be busy talking about God and Jesus and not giving a hoot. i or most Christians will not likely come discuss Bible with you where you're discussing family or US politics. Stop being disingenuous.

The conversation you joined wasn't about god or Jesus so again you are being disingenuous.

MaxInDHouse:
This is why i don't blame atheists and agnostics saying the Bible is a myth.

How can a right thinking person say the book is a masterpiece yet he couldn't explain what is written in the book in a convincing way?

The same person said it's not a book to be understood yet he insult individuals who queries the intention of it's Author?

He keeps ignoring the fact that in the absence of a practical application which supposed to help observers grasp the intention of the author the whole thing is rubbish.

There are many books written all in the name of sacred writings and many people have fabricated stories about God/Gods of all kinds, contradictions is everywhere as if they are all speculating with nothing to show as evidence of the presence of their God/Gods.

Any intellectual will ask for the WORKS of this so called "God" in the midst of His worshipers so that we can all observe what this God is up to.

If it's just about what is written in books then we have to start going through thousands of books written about thousands of Gods after all none of these Gods has showed up for a verification!

A true carpenter can only be justified if products having to do with carpentry are not missing in his showroom, a true chef should be able to cook good meals, a true physician supposed to have drugs for different kinds of ailments in the same manner the true God should be able to maintain PEACE among His worshipers who are from different nations, tribes and ethnic groups.

The universal definition of God is Supreme Being and no one is can claim supreme if there is no peace among His subjects.

In the absence of a practical application that's working out real benefits among adherents either the Author or Translator is wrong!

LoLz! I think you can see that it is you who broke the agreement not to quote each other now right?

FreeIgboho:
Why did the person who produced such an enduring masterpiece of a storybook produce only one?

I actually appreciate the ribbing. Didn't know you have a sense of ribbing!

You mean you don't know the Bible is a compendium that was put together by committee? Men you really need to go and rethink your life.

Image123:
Not chasing you away, just saying that you talk about the Bible every other day. Nothing stops you from talking philosophy all day. You can't be discussing about the Bible year on year only to say you don't give a hoot. Do you discuss hockey or art or boxing same way, all day?

Very happy not to if y'all don't bring it up where it doesn't belong. It was you who mentioned bible in this conversation, I wouldn't have mentioned it if you didn't so stop being disingenuous.

FreeIgboho:
See the way it happened with Jesus, that's the way. Instead of using your puny human reasoning to decide whether God exists and who is God!

Forever is a figure of speech!

The way it happened in a storybook? What are you 12? LoLz.

Of course it was. I was using it to rib you.

Image123:
i said you talk about it every other day. Who'd bring up the Bible for you if you were busy in the sport section instead of the RELIGION abi na CHRISTIANITY Section?

Until Seun creates a philosophy or other religion sub we are gonna be here. Deal with it. LoLz.

FreeIgboho:
I did NOT say I don't believe the world around me. Of course I do! Only that just my senses and reasoning are NOT the final proof of anything.
In case of Jesus, things writen in a book that has been in existence since forever are the deciding factors NOT my senses and logic!

LoLz. Dude this is still crazy talk. In what way are supposed to receive evidence if not your senses?

2000 years is not forever. See why I think you don't know what you are talking about,you can't even properly evaluate the age of a storybook. Bwahahahahahaha!

Image123:
Lolz, if you didn't care, you wouldn't be here talking about it every other day. When last did you talk or refer to the hindu or muslim texts. We really know what we're doing without knowing.

LoLz. I don't bring up the Bible it's y'all who do.

FreeIgboho:
The book is not dependent on my reasoning. If I were told to use my reasoning to decide whether Jesus is Son of God, I can't.
Unlike you that use solely your faulty reasoning to decide such things

LoLz. Where did I say it depends on your reasoning? Have you started going blind or your reading comprehension is regressing? I said you believe a story book without evidence despite saying you are unable to properly evaluate the world around you. It is unfortunate that you cannot recognise how insane that sounds.

DeepSight:
Another thing is that it is impossible for everyone to be informed about the specific gender pronoun preferences of everyone else.

Yeah especially in situations where contact is brief.

FreeIgboho:
"Reality" is whatever signals are transmitted to your brain, no matter their source. What has that to do with what is actually there??

Not being aware of that is what is dumb!

LoLz. The tone deafness of this post is why I think you're playing with less than a full deck. How are you saying you are unable to properly evaluate the reality you are experience right now but you believe a story book from 2000 years ago which have no evidence of? Don't you think you need to count your marbles?

FreeIgboho:
True! - if you've NEVER read the Bible!

Dude have YOU read the Bible?

DeepSight:
Legislating it was way too far.

I agree.

FreeIgboho:
Ouch!
Who's more sane, he who acknowledges limitations of his reasoning, or he who doesn't even know he has enormous limitations?

Limitations? You don't think you can properly evaluate reality. That is not a limitation, that's insanity.

DeepSight:
Such a pity. I liked him at the beginning but I later realized that was because I was only seeing one aspect of him, namely his opposition to the forced gender terminology of trans people. I was also very opposed to that so everything he said resonated with me.

But the minute he began to have debates with people like Sam Harris on societal and existential issues, I began to see him more holistically and clearly. He hadn't even come out then as borderline white supremacist.

As of today, he has lost so much integrity, goodwill and respect which he initially had. It's such a shame.

It taught me a lesson. Not to jump to conclusions about anyone because you strongly agree with their views on one subject.

Maybe because I was kinda ambivalent about the issue. People don't want to be disrespected by being misgendered, accord them that courtesy, it won't cost you anything. On the other had I don't think it requires legislation. It's like setting up a law to stop people from saying "Fųck You", it's extreme for what I think is a courtesy issue. Jordan Peterson in my opinion was entirely too combative about it to the point LGBTQ haters had him as their prophet. Not somebody I want to give my time listening to.

FreeIgboho:
This proves you're not as dumb as other atheists.
Why not go all the way and accept him as your Lord and personal savior?
What do you have to lose?
Really, what do you have to lose??!!!

My sanity as evidenced by the way you reason.

DeepSight:
A man that started out well but has now been revealed as a true nut job of the highest order.

Never liked him. Jordan Peterson is going to cause many people to wreck themselves imho.

Image123:
i see you feel pain in this truth from scriptures. Scriptures command to have no other god before God, we all have gods. Some of us are even gods. i tell you Bible my dear.

LoLz. Disingenuousness on full display. Who gives hoot what the Bible says? We are talking of words and their meaning.

Image123:
Worship is devotion. God made every human with a spirit and that spirit worships just like the brain thinks. Humans always look for something or someone to worship. Who or what you devote your life to is your object of worship. To some like me, it's God. To others, it can be money, self, fame, a goal, another man, education, science, a subject, a job, or some other god.

This is an absurd take just like I suspected. Why is that when religious people want to prove a point they mangle up words and their meanings just to fit whatever bunkum they want to push. Why do you folks just love being disingenuous for your religious beliefs? Do you in your daily living ever consider your devotion to your family, job, hobbies, etc worship?

Conciousnigeria:
…as Bende Stakeholders Hail Anyaso


https://independent.ng/ebsu-anyaso-believes-event-will-inspire-next-generations/

Obvious Public Relations article is so painfully obvious.

FreeIgboho:
I feel bad not also posting proofs Jesus obviously existed. It ought be beyond debate just from the Bible - no one can make up all that!

These are all ONE minute long:

https://youtube.com/shorts/M_b6qZcQ2VY?si=2hQR-hPTFNa30NLw

https://youtube.com/shorts/R3RF-3NkWII?si=83kTmj0p89zaaAas

https://youtube.com/shorts/pZN-8_LL8a8?si=hYcHAzwpfRHAR8iG

https://youtube.com/shorts/dGqJFjms6LI?si=p0AtgJEiO6JjnLBI

tctrills:
Trust me, they will still argue. You can't change their minds. They prefer to believe any story that disproves Christ no matter how unproven it is.

Have you ever seen me argue that Jesus did not exist?

Kobojunkie:
Atheism isn't a lack of belief. Rather, it is a belief that there is no god— a belief in the idea that there is no god.

2. Not everyone watches TV while it is on, either.

3. Your first statement was regarding cable channels. And my response was that it doesn't matter whether or not there is a cable channel on or not. It is a TV whether there is white noise on, tuned to a particular cable TV, no one is watching or not, or even turned off. A TV is a TV.

Atheism is the lack of belief in any gods. Therefore it is not a belief.

Maybe stoned people do that. Are you stoned?

It doesn't matter when the TV is off it not displaying a channel therefore you cannot claim to be watching a cable TV station when the TV is off.

Kobojunkie:
Atheism is a belief system -- a belief grounded on the idea that there is no god -- not an absence of religion itself.

2. There are days I spend with the TV in and me not paying attention to the programming at all. And there are other days I spend not even bothering to turn it on at all. Irrespective of the kind of day I may be having, the TV remains a TV.

LoLz. I mean this is the exact thing I am calling out and you just repeated it. Atheism which is a lack of belief is also a belief? Na wa o.

Yeah but nobody watches a TV while is off is the point. And you made it for me with the first part of your response.

Kobojunkie:
He story has it that she was already living in the land of Canaan meaning she was probably of Hebrew descent— the father of the Hebrews is Eber, Abraham's great, great, great, great, great grandfather(I think) — only that she may have gone on to marry an Israelite after she defected from her previous nation, right?

Anyways, no question that she may have done that but no evidence that the Rahab mentioned in the book of Matthew is Rahab, the prostitute.

Point taken.

Damn. Can't make simple responses anymore. Is this word count thing not excessive?

Kobojunkie:
There is no scriptural evidence that the Rahab mentioned in Matthew is the same Rahab you refer. Christianity is wholly responsible for creating that particular link you posted.

Well that is true that there is no place from the Bible that evidences the 2 Rahabs as the same person. But it is both Jewish and Christian tradition that she married into the Hebrew community of the time.

Goosethetruth:
It is funny how Christians argue points in a circular manner.
1. Tamar engaged in incest .
2. Bathseba engaged in adultery.
3. The assumed writer of Mathew's gospel decided in his wisdom to mention Tamar who committed incest in the genealogy of Jesus but for reasons best known to him alone decides NOT to mention Bathseba in the genealogy but rather identifies her through the name of her murdered husband Uriah.
4. In conclusion incest is a better sin than adultery because God cannot be fooled .


This is the manner in which some Christians make circular arguments that are contrary to all forms of logic.

Christians need to open their minds and proceed to go down the rabbit hole. It costs you nothing to research the SYNOPTIC GOSPELS PUZZLE to understand that the writers of Mark,Matthew and Luke were scribes who were not witnesses to the ministry of Jesus and and such either 1.Copied the accounts from one another. 2.Copied the accounts from the same sources. 3.Relied on oral traditions.

Each of these nameless writers wrote their accounts from a particular point of view and with a decided agenda from the beginning.
Mark which was the first gospel written was obviously written with the aim of telling the Jesus story with no frills and direct to the point while Mathew's gospel which obviously was copied from Mark had an agenda to tell the story from a Jewish stand point. Luke on the other hand copied both Mark and Mathew and embellished the Jesus story from the Gentiles point of view. The gospel of John on its own part is a story for another day.

Not to mention Rahab was a harlot and gets a mention by name. If adultery was the big bad who is more adulterous between a harlot and some one who was probably intimidated into sex.

Moremii:
Yes, pretty much. I've elaborated a bit on this in the couple of posts that followed my OP.

Oh OK I'll take a look. It is very rare to see someone admit to being into Gnostic text.