₦airaland Forum

Bobbyaf:
Christ was fully human, and fully God. He couldn't be both at the same time when He was here as a man

While not denying the deity of Christ, you actually have missed the whole point. Christ was fully Human and fully God - and he certainly was both at the same time. His humanity did not reduce His deity at any point, and what He was before He became Man remained while He ministered among men.

mukina2:
@you all get thee behind me you demons

You're coming close by trying to quote Jesus' words in the Bible in Matt. 16:23 - "get thee behind me". I bet Muhammad forgot to insert that one in the Qur'an.

mukina2:
m4malik i see you are back again . .

Told you I was already on my way out; but since you won't let me rest, I decided to keep you company for a while and show you where Dr. Tariq's brains was taking you.

mukina2:
havila say more do more . .i am not nigerian,senegalese,malian or gambian but i am a west african the linog dere is wolof

Oy-yo-yoi!! Apart from the size of your 'country' (West Africa), your IQ endears you to many concerned people - including me! See what Islamic 'research' is doing to you? 

PS: it's supposed to be 'lingo' and not 'linog'. . . but we all have our moments when spelling fails us badly.

babs787:
malik,
why picking only ffrom my response to ndipe and not from my response to mrpataki or belloti's response to babyosis.

Are you having a bad day already? When did the rules on Nairaland change so that you can decide whose post I respond to?? I responded to what caught my interest at that moment, and belloti knows I've severally responded to his inputs elsewhere.

babs787:
no ned to wait for another thread when uve not done justice to the one already on ground.

Okay, since you're withdrawing your shakara, I'll forebear for now.

babs787:
u read the discussion between babyosis, mrpataki in which belloti referred babyosis to a site and also in which mrpataki asked me questions and i responded. still u never find anything to add to these but rather waiting for another thread.

You have a good way of making me laugh!! Who was shouting at ndipe in capital letters that he was sporting another thread about Christ's crucifixion?

babs787:
go the issue raised and respond or contribute yours.

Did you just speak English there? Can you rephrase, please?

babs787:
no need to rush yourself to see new threasd, ve always done that i will continue doing that but its just uve not been able to provide proff in all my threads, check all my threads for verification.

I wasn't rushing - and if you understand English, did you miss the word "patiently" in my earlier response? Check again:

m4malik:
I'm waiting for just such a thread. . . patiently waiting.

Secondly, "proff" or proof have been offered - but in your typical Islamic polarization, you just won't have eyes to see.

babs787:
waitying for your response

I just did. Shallom.

babs787:
@malik,
where in the bible did jesus say he is sinless or where was it written that he was sinless (please don't quote paul's letter to me). only the sayings of jesus.

@babs787,

You're so hilarious. What are you assuming by that joke of a statement? Okay, if you haven't cured your hatred for Paul, let me offer you Peter's inspired quote instead. In speaking of Jesus, this is what he said:

"Who (i.e., Jesus) did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth" - I Pet. 2:22.

As to where in the bible Jesus said He was sinless, please read these words carefully:

"Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?" - John 8:46.

I offer you the very same challenge Jesus threw above - if Muhammad could not convict Jesus of having sinned once, are you now the next Quraish prophet to denounce Jesus as a sinner?

Anyhow, your question was suggesting that Jesus must have sinned. Could I ask you to prove it from both the Qur'an and the Bible, please. Then, if your confusion is not yet cured after reading through your own 'holy book', I'll be back to help you see what you missed.

Shallom.

Bobbyaf:
Wrong only in terms of doctrines, and teachings. So when you loosly use the term "everyone else is wrong" you are not expounding on my major point of doctrines. I hope you see the point I am making.

I did not loosely use any term - in exactly the way you communicated your ideas was the same I highlighted them.

Bobbyaf:
I see you're trying hard to put a label of legalism on me. As I have said before thats not my objective. I am simply saying that I believe that the SDA denom is the closest in doctrinal teachings when compared to apostolic christian tradition. Making that claim does not make me legalistic. It may come over as a bold statement, but so be it.

No one needs to try half as hard as you have labelled others, and it shows from your inconsistencies that "all" and "every" denom is used conveniently about how others are wrong except the SDA.

Bobbyaf:
Mine included. In other words the church that continues in the teachings of Christ and the apostles is still open to learning from further understanding of the word. No where did I imply that the denom to which I belong was perfect. I simply said that I believe it has come the closest to what I believe is in keeping with what Christ and the apostles have expected.

Okay, yours included. At least, you're beginning to sound so unsure about your previous premise.

Bobbyaf:
Not once did I introduce a quantitative degree as to how far other denoms may be in their doctrinall position.

And what is the meaning of "closest" as used for your SDA denom if not categorically introducing what you're denying?

Bobbyaf:
Your use of the term "so far from the truth" is your concoction, not mine. Besides, it is easy for me to make that claim unlike those who would very much want to say what I was bold enough to have said.

Concoction or not, you've been classic in "concocting" several other things about others - and others have been bold to have said it, as again I am doing.

Bobbyaf:
The sad thing is, is that those of you who are apart of a denom believes that that denom comes closest to what is taught in the bible, or else you all wouldn't be congregating there.

That is indeed the sad thing, that you're a part of the SDA denom which "comes closest" to what is taught in the Bible - or else you wouldn't be congregating there. Keep introducing quantitative degrees and denying you ever did so.

Bobbyaf:
All of us wants to be sure that where we congregate is where all truth is being taught. All of you who are opposing are guilty of the same thing you think I am doing.

Don't make me laugh. Who is "opposing"? Have you not been "opposing" others and promoting your own as coming "closest" to the apostles? Right, we're all guilty - incuding you, since you admit you're doing the same thing. So, let's just say that every denom "comes closest" to the teachings in the Bible - and I'm sure you'll come back with another long epistle to show how guilty other denoms are, except SDA.

Bobbyaf:
Thats only in your head.  I wouldn't be where I am if I weren't using the bible to measure the SDA denom.

At least I have a head to think with and not wait for SDA to do the thinking for me, thank you. And what do you suppose others have been using to "measure" (quantitative degree again) their denom? Have they been using a magazine or newspaper?

Bobbyaf:
I have always used the bible to measure a denom, and thats how I became involved with the SDA church.

Keep "measuring" and come back denying you're introducing quantitative degree.

Bobbyaf:
Remember my friend that my denom believes that light has the potential to get brighter. The scripture says that "the path of the just is as a shining light, that shines more and more unto the perfect day"

And what denom doesn't believe that scripture regardless of what your denom believes??

Bobbyaf:
I am not implying that at all, but no doubt you would like others to see me in that light. I am not surprised. I believe that God can reach others in all denoms, because His people are still found everyhere, but more can be accomplished by those people when they are where they aught to be in terms of sound biblical teachings.

And what have you implied that is any different from what I've stated before? So, God can reach "others" in all denoms - but SDA, not so? Or, what are you meaning by: "more can be accomplished by those people when they are where they aught to be in terms of sound biblical teachings"?? So, where do others ought to be??

Lol. . .

I didn't see you had one set up already. Just be honest with yourself for once, mukina2 - if the Qur'an equates men to women in Islam, what was Dr. Tariq Al Swaidan reading when he came to the following verses in the Qur'an:

¤¤¤ the Qur'an prescribes 4 wives to 1 man, but it is nowhere permitted for a woman to have 4 husbands (again, 4 is not equal to 1) / [Q. 4:3]

¤¤¤ the muslim man can beat the muslim woman; but it is unthinkable for the muslim woman to dare the same to muslim men (Quran 4 vs.34 - infact, it declares there that men are superior to women)

¤¤¤ women can be flogged eighty stripes without evidence, whereas not so with the men (Q. 24 vs.4)

So, is 24 still equal to 24 in these instances, or Dr. Tariq didn't have those verses quoted above in his own readings?

Even then, this theory of men = women according to Dr. Tariq Al Swaidan falls flat on its face in light of the Muslim belief that ==

¤¤¤ it requires 72 virgins to send 1 jihadist to his untimely death; (72 is not equal to 1)

If you really take this Dr. Tariq Al Swaidan seriously, you need to ask why muslim women must be covered up to their face, but men can go about with long beards and a small cap on their heads? Even in social concourses, you know for certain that the mathematical inferences of Dr. Tariq is a laugh.

I was almost on my way out as nothing grown up was forthcoming from you. I don't really have to belabour the point - your brethren ran because they can't keep up with their 'research'.

And how many people have you managed to convince with long beards and drops of water? Good job at sticking out your tongue, though. . . lol. Maybe that's another 'research' on its way. . . we're waiting.

Backslider:
@malik

Why I said that The holy host is The Captain of The Lord of Host is The Replicate command given to Joshua in Joshua 5 is the same given to Moses at the Burning Bush then when the disciple were baptised in the holy Ghost remember flames of tongues. Well I am happy that we can try to look for the truth and have our own mind in the truth this is the replicate nature of God where the Holy Ghost the father and the son act and they are similar that you need the holy spirit to see them distinctively.

I can not categorically say that it is the Holy Ghost but I know that What ever anyone says We have a triune God (Elohim) Jesus that has appeared as God the Word in human flesh Worshiped by man and angels.

God bless you bro - we are all learning, and my present knowledge is dwarfed by what some others have said. Blessings and Happy New Year!

I suspect that the only reason why all the active muslims haven't come back is because they have no answers to the theories they propound.

Muslims (not all of them) who use the Forum have said some very unfair things about others as well - if you only take the time to read through. However, do I suspect that one reason you as an active muslim is still here is because you're not one of those propounding theories you can't defend? That makes more sense than connecting some imaginary dots between 'long beards' and 'drops of water' to 'science', doesn't it?

Haba, mukina2. . . you're disappointing me. Who shows up with knives when non-muslims say something worthwhile? Haven't we had enough evidence that your claim is just so descriptive of your brethren?

Even now, ridicule aside, how did Olabowale and Belloti arrive at their scientific theories about the long beard and drops of water?

Where is shahan?

Oya, cabali - over to you.

@muske & babs787,

I'm trully sorry you chaps are finding it difficult to read. Answers have been proffered, and the best you could have said is you're not satisfied, rather than 'no answers' have been offered.

In anycase, muske. . .

muske:
u claimed your religion is superior but lack enough proof to back it up rather devised strategy of using question to answer question.

The claim of "superiority of religion" is the trademark of Muslim apologists, far less so with Christians. Our one premise is pointing out the truth that Muhammad denied in order to claim the status of a prophet of the same Biblical God he never knew.

Second, there's nothing wrong with answering a question with another question - as long as it brings you back on course to the gist of the discussion. Go through my posts on Nairaland and see how many times our Muslim friends have evaded my questions one and all. I really don't mind, afterall they are not accountable to me; however, your accusations are best directed to your brethren.

muske:
ve gone through all the topics on this nairaland most especially the one involving christians and muslims in which you christians failed woefully in defending your faith.

For the mere fact that you're often careless with language, no one would take you seriously about your having gone through all the topics on this nairaland - every single one of them! And if we have to examine a few, you perhaps might have to eat back your words.

muske:
u claimed that all your questions have not been answered. can you re-phrase your questions again but that will after uve answered those asked you.

Let me for one moment oblige you that sad claim of not having satisfied your queries; in fair exchange would you first be so gracious as to proffer answers to this recurring decimal in the Qur'an: who are the "WE" and "US" in the following texts:

Sura 6 vs.94
"And behold! ye come to Us bare and alone as We created you for the first time: ye have left behind you all (the favours) which We bestowed on you. . ."

Sura 10 vs.12
"When trouble toucheth a man, he crieth unto Us (in all postures)- lying down on his side, or sitting, or standing. But when We have solved his trouble, he passeth on his way as if he had never cried to Us for a trouble that touched him! thus do the deeds of transgressors seem fair in their eyes!"

Sura 7 vs.11
"It is We Who created you and gave you shape; then We bade the angels prostrate to Adam, and they prostrate; not so Iblis; He refused to be of those who prostrate.

More to come when you offer answers to those. Shallom.

Belloti,

belloti:
Am sure if you can ask any muslim woman you can find around you, she should gladly tell you how wonderful and sweet it is to be a muslim woman. I think you should consider it too. There is nothing like being a muslim, We thank God for His guidance.

Are muslim women in Afghanistan enjoying such sweetness?

What do you think about Ayatollah Khomeini's display of the sweetness you mentioned?

Okay, I'm not scaring your enquirer. . . but perhaps we would have the opportunity of digging more about this subject from Islam's revered scriptures.

Shallom.

I'm waiting for just such a thread. . . patiently waiting.

mukina2:
mockery

mukina2, no vex. Bad boys - all of them!!

Trust me, they won't mind me calling them bad boys, even though I am now one of their brothers.

So, tell me: do you subscribe to the ground-breaking scientific research of uncle Olabowale's long beard thesis? As long as he hasn't produced his formulas for that, it would only continue to leave 'us rascals' wondering who the real mockers are. See what zeal without knowledge does - long beard and science??

Anyway, Happy New Year.

@Bobbyaf,

It doesn't seem that you're consistent in your persuasions. Here:

Bobbyaf:
What I do believe though is that in every denom there are God's people who will eventually come out and be apart of God's bible-believing followers. Christendom today is referred to as "Babylon" or religious confusion, of which the RCC is head. (See Revealtion 17)

. . . and then here again:

Bobbyaf:
Besides, it is obvious that God's people could not have come out from all denominations, because that would include the one that is truly His chosen. God already has His true believers here on earth who have continued from the traditions of the apostles.

So, on the one hand, you do believe that God's people will eventually come out from every denom; but on the other hand, it is obvious that God's people could not have come out from all denominations. Quaint.

What this sounds like is as Shahan has put it: some men are persuaded that everyone else is wrong except them.

shahan:
. . . legalistic and rigid men who see themselves alone as "bible-believing" Christians. All other groups are wrong but theirs alone.

This is all the more evident in the way you have been made to see Christians in other denominations, though you little realise it yourself. Here are a few lines to that:

Bobbyaf:
As I have said before there are christiasn in all denoms, but not all denoms have truth in its entirety. It so happens that I believe that my being a SDA christian is in keeping with the belief that of all denoms so far, the SDA church comes closest to what the apostles believe, and what Jesus expects of His followers.

Okay, there are Christians in all denoms - and that includes your own, yes?

Furthermore, not all denoms have the truth in entirety - including yours again, abi??

It's so easy to see others as being so far from the truth while claiming that the "the SDA church comes closest" to what the apostles and Jesus taught and believed. If other churches do not bend to the rules and doctrines of the SDA, then they are far away from Jesus Christ, hmm??

You may think SDA says it all. It would rather help our faith to rejoice in what God in His sovereignty is doing in many non-SDA churches.

Ehn. . . wetin I hear    

A big and hearty congrats, Babyosisi!! May your expectations in married life be continually fulfilled! I just heard the news - what a way to enter 2007.

I beg, una no go mind me digressing, abi?

Back to . . . ahem!! This long beards and science - is that the next level in research now?? Where's uncle Olabowale?? Which Islamic scholar put this idea in your mind?

Again, I'm impressed. Thank you, sokislam.

However, I wonder what our friends have up their sleeves in asking:

muske:
can u tell me how sins can be forgiven? lets start from there

It sounds as though you chaps do not believe in the forgiveness of sins. Of course, I'm not speaking broadly of the mindset of many muslims, that's why I'm careful to narrow my enquiries to you for now and try to see where you're both coming from.

Glory!!

Well, Christianity is quite distinct from Judaism, and you only have to read the Gospels to see this for yourself. The important thing to note, however, is that both the Old Testament and the New are a collective revelation of the one true and living God. Let me leave you some lines of scripture that might help:

But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. . . But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

- Galatians 3:11-12 & 23-25.


As to Judaism being the oldest religion in the world, it does not appear so, even from the Bible itself. The key to understanding this is to ask what exactly was Judaism.

I'm impressed. . . very impressed! You have added to my understanding, and may God Himself bless and increase you.

belloti:
You guys are derailing my topic with your deliberate policy of side tracking on serious issues. Tell us what makes you believe that Jesus the wonderful son of Mary is your own God. Tell us about the fate of those generation that passed away before the "Gods" mother became pregnat and finally delivered him. There were born and taken away before the arrival of the Lord himself. Funny, huh?

Oga Belloti,

Sallam. I often read the refrain Muslims make about people derailing or digressing from questions they ask. I wonder how many times you guys have derailed and detracted from questions others ask. I haven't seen anyone of you guys attempting the very simple one posed by shahan, and I here repost it for you:

Well, if Christianity is wrong because of Who Jesus Christ proved Himself to be (sinless and loving); could Islam be right if we apply the same test to who Muhammad proved himself to be?

If you pay close attention to the rejoinders to your concerns, could you possibly miss the gist that you had no point at all to convey? It would be interesting to read some new concerns of yours, if you have any.

@muske & babs787,

I was a muslim, and I would like to see how you defend the polytheism of the *Allah* being worshipped in Islam.

Happy New Year and God bless.

Happy New Year to all.

@Backslider,

While I fully agree with your summations that the Holy Ghost is God, and bowing to an angel is expressly forbidden in Scripture, I'd like to comment on just one line in your submission:

Backslider:
But notice in Revelation where john wanted to bow down to an angel he was prevented to do so. The Captain of The Lord's Host is The Holy Ghost he is The Commander in Chief of The Heavenly forces he is God. He could not be an Angel bowing down to an angel is not tolerated.

I'm rather persuaded that the Captain of the Lord's Host is the Lord Jesus Himself, and not the Holy Ghost. Certainly, the Holy Spirit leads and guides believers; however, He points believers to Jesus Christ who is our Captain.

Rev 19:11-16
"And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS."

Two things stand out clear: (a) the One who in Joshua 5: 14 & 15 stands as Captain of the LORD's host is none other than the very same Lord Jesus Christ in Revelation 19:11-16. He is the One who gathers the heavenly armies that followed Him upon white horses; (b) the LORD's host include those described in Revelation as "the armies which were in heaven", as well His covenant people.

In Job 25:3 we are told that the armies of the LORD cannot be numbered; and in His divine economy or dealings with His covenant people in the OT, Israel was usually referred to as the armies of the LORD of hosts (for example, 1 Sam 17:26 & 36 - "the armies of the living God"; and Exo. 7:4 where God calls them "My armies, My people, the sons of Israel,". Further, in Gen. 31:1-2, the angels are referred to as God's host.

The point here is that it is rather the Lord Jesus who is always seen as the Captain of the LORD's host - as in Revelation; and as in Heb. 2:10 where He is called the Captain of our salvation.

Reverend:
We preach that you should not be preached to by anyone!

Okay, Rev - at least you should have screamed that to your dad and the kinky-crew. The message is clear: tell him to pack it and not preach to anyone.

Reverend:
There are too many religious zealots that use the Bible as a tool to manipulate and physcologically torture people.

Is that why your kinky zealots have used the Bible "as a tool to manipulate and physcologically ('psychologically', you mean?) torture the poor folks under your kinky club with just about anything from naked baptism to your cannabis jesus?

Reverend:
These trash trawl the Bible looking to find chapters that can be adapted and used to brand otherwise normal people as sinners.

Aye. . . such adaptations from your crew have been evidently exposed on Nairaland - and in good faith may God deliver those 'otherwise normal people' from the nude pictures your crew subjected them to.

Reverend:
The sad and pathetic thing is that they do not follow the teachings of the fairy story books themselves, they just use it as a weapon against normal human beings

Just as above - when was the last time your own crew followed the teachings of the fairy books in your kinky library?

Reverend:
As George Carlin said:

When it comes to bullshit, big-time, major league bullshit, you have to stand in awe of the all-time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims, religion. No contest. No contest. Religion. Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!

But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!

Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed. Results like these do not belong on the résumé of a Supreme Being. This is the kind of shit you'd expect from an office temp with a bad attitude. And just between you and me, in any decently-run universe, this guy would've been out on his all-powerful ass a long time ago. And by the way, I say "this guy", because I firmly believe, looking at these results, that if there is a God, it has to be a man.

And for those of you who look to The Bible for moral lessons and literary qualities, I might suggest a couple of other stories for you. You might want to look at the Three Little Pigs, that's a good one. Has a nice happy ending, I'm sure you'll like that. Then there's Little Red Riding Hood, although it does have that X-rated part where the Big Bad Wolf actually eats the grandmother. Which I didn't care for, by the way. And finally, I've always drawn a great deal of moral comfort from Humpty Dumpty. The part I like the best? "All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty Dumpty back together again." That's because there is no Humpty Dumpty, and there is no God. None, not one, no God, never was.

Happy New Year!

So what new thing has G. Carlin said other than his rhetorics on exactly what's going on in your kinky club?

Take heart - Happy New Year.

It's either you deliberately closed your eyes to the answers proferred already, or you are still struggling with simple statements.

@4get_me,

I coulldn't have debated our Muslim friends better. Thank you, and a blessed Happy New Year.

Thankfully, it is not.

It's always easy to be accusative, but what version of "nonsense" are your dad and the kinky-crew preaching?

@Pain,
Where in my post did I sound like my perception and understanding of Christianity is wrong?

@Gamine,
Could you be more specific? Thank you.

Wonders shall never end. . .

iamhe/i-am-he. . . who really are you? I wonder that you could hardly resist the temptation of taking a swipe at Christianity in order to gain some attention. Phew! Na wah! Is that all IME (Israel Malik Esters) could offer?

There's really one Malik who is really tired of rhetorics like your first post - please pass that on to IME. I guess angelz and babyosisi answered well. I'll only add that the real "I AM" - Jesus Christ - gives true life.

@Backslider,

Well, we are all learning, and I am certainly humbled by the spirited debate with good points that drew me to contribute. In all things, may God's love continue to warm our hearts, even over subjects that are deep. One verse has often helped me in situations where strong persuasions are offered:

"Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you." - Phil. 3:15.

God bless ya both richly. . . and a very prosperous New Year to all.