₦airaland Forum

DaddyCoool:
.

DaddyCoool:
You keep harping Bill Clinton. Same Clinton that celebrated the moon landing anniversary so immersively.
Below is exactly what Clinton wrote, which of course YouTube manipulated. See him stating as a fact that the astronauts walked on the moon. That's why I keep telling you to stick your conspiracy nutcase loonie skull out of YouTube!

Former President Bill Clinton in his 2004 autobiography, My Life, states: "Just a month before, Apollo 11 astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong had left their colleague, Michael Collins, aboard spaceship Columbia and walked on the moon...The old carpenter asked me if I really believed it happened. I said sure, I saw it on television. He disagreed; he said that he didn't believe it for a minute, that 'them television fellers' could make things look real that weren't. Back then, I thought he was a crank. During my eight years in Washington, I saw some things on TV that made me wonder if he wasn't ahead of his time."

DaddyCoool:
Have you ever wondered why moon-landing deniers are always conspiracy loonies like you, never a serious scientist?? (See below)

As for Christ, He is only one person in the God-head, and He was sent by the Father. So stop repeating your nonsense. Mary was not yet married to Joseph and stayed a virgin till she gave birth to Christ (nobody slept with her, as you stupidly keep repeating!)

I like what this astronaut said:
“If people decide they’re going to deny the facts of history and the facts of science and technology,” he said, “there’s not much you can do with them. For most of them, I just feel sorry that we failed in their education.”

DaddyCoool:
.

DaddyCoool:
I told you to stick your conspiracy nutcase head out of YouTube. But I know I'm wasting my time. Anybody who, after reading the Bible, still believes that Christ was invented by Rome is irredeemable.
And he's still clinging to Van Allen Belt that has been totally explained!

Read below carefully.


A moon landing HOAX is actually NOT possible
To think of all the things necessary to pull of the hoax!

>>You have to fake all the precursor missions, going back to 1960. Did the Mercury and Gemini programs happen? If so, at what point did it switch to a hoax? The conspiracy theorists have no good answers.

>>You have to fake all the hardware: Saturn V rocket, Apollo capsule, flight computers, rocket engines, etc. Remember that literally tens of thousands of people, both at NASA and at contractors, worked on this.

>>You have to fake all the software. Same deal. Oh yeah, and fake all the flight plans. Do all the people at all levels know this is fake? If so, you have to keep tens of thousands of people perfectly silent. If not, you have to be really good at fooling some of the smartest people in the world.

>>You have to fake a series of test launches, and then the actual Apollo launches. Millions of people watched the rockets go up. What were they seeing?

>>You have to fake all the telemetry that the professionals and amateurs around the world were monitoring. In short, you have to build a huge Saturn V rocket and you really need to send it to the Moon!

>>You have to sneak the crew onto and off of the rocket, then sneak them to the landing site without anyone noticing, which is harder than it sounds.

>>You have to fake all the imagery. ALL of the imagery. Lunar landscape, shots at all kinds of different angles, the hammer & feather experiment, falling down in low-gravity, views of Earth from the Moon, all of it. As many people have pointed out, this job alone would have been far beyond the imaging technology of the 1960s.

>>You have to leave equipment on the Moon, like the retroreflectors that are still there. OK, so maybe NASA really did launch a Saturn V rocket and really did land on the Moon and really did leave equipment there, but just didn’t bring the astronauts. Sure. But now you need some kind of rover to deploy the hardware on the Moon…which means you need a whole other secret program to carry out the real, robotic Moon landing. Where did that happen? Who worked on it? How did the other stuff get on the rocket?

>>You have to fake the Moon rocks and other scientific readings from the lunar surface, like the ultraviolet galaxy images taken by Apollo 16. The Moon rocks don’t match any rocks on Earth, so that is going to be one hell of a tricky fabrication job. Send a robot to bring back real Moon samples? Maybe, but you need a giant robot to do the job. Oops, another secret program that nobody has ever seen or heard about.

>>You have to fake the Apollo 13 near-disaster. Why would you do such a thing?

>>You have to make sure that China, the USSR, and all of the other world’s countries keep the secret. Why would they do that, exactly?

>>You have to make sure that no hostile foreign intelligence agency is able to find out anything about the hoax in the subsequent 50 years.

>>You have to make the Apollo-Soyuz and Skylab missions exactly match up with the fake hardware used for the Apollo landings. Or are those missions fake too? No good answers from the hoaxers.

>>You have to fake the subsequent Soviet and Chinese robotic missions to the Moon to make sure that all of their images and samples match the fakes that NASA created. (Good luck with that one.)

>>You have to fake all the images from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter so that they exactly match the Apollo landings. In other words, you now need to keep the entire space science community in on the hoax—with no leaks, ever!—for a half century and going.

At this point, the hoax seems to involve millions of people, most of the world’s governments, and a likely cost of trillions of dollars. Going to the Moon for real would be a whole lot easier!

ZekeYeager:
Everyone agree 100% that:
The criminal, illiterate, subhuman, shithole dwelling, brain filled with shit animal called ZekeYeager is too stupid to even insult

DaddyCoool:
.

DaddyCoool:
KUKU! KUKU!! KUKU!!
YouTube Kuku, quoting someone on YouTube quoting someone quoting a book, AFTER being told most of YouTube is MISINFORMATION! Never mind he's been shown that artifacts left on the moon are still clearly visible in photographs taken by unmanned missions! Bye bye!

DaddyCoool:
Just as, if you had any COMMON sense you'd KNOW Rome couldn't have invented Christ of NT, likewise if you had any common sense you'd KNOW anybody who fakes a moon landing will be evasive about the topic going forward - not land on it 5 more times!
No common sense. What you have is conspiracy nutcase sense!😅

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which circles the moon, has photographed each of the Apollo landing sites, revealing that the flags are still intact. Only one flag, the one planted during Apollo 11, appears to have fallen over—which matches a report from Aldrin that exhaust from the lunar module’s engine knocked down the flag as he and Armstrong lifted off from the moon

Some of the items left behind are highly intentional and sentimental, including a Bible and a photo of astronaut Charles Duke’s family. And others—such as vomit bags, facial wipes, nail clippers and earplugs—are less glamorous. But across the surface of the moon, these motley artifacts contain clues to a history of courage, ingenuity, exploration and unprecedented achievement.

Lucifyre:
.

Lucifyre:
Man, I really wanted to remain courteous and didn't want to be condescending, even though from the onset it was glaringly obvious I was talking to someone with nothing but polluted air between his ears. So, let's have at it. It's funny you should say "my Jesus," because, one, I'm not even a Christian, and two, I'm not even a theist—just to show how much you're living proof that it’s possible to live without a brain. Because if you had one, you wouldn't have just made moronic assumptions like a rabid raccoon.

Like I said, if you'd like,, scream into the abyss, it wouldn't change what is a consensus fact decided upon by scholars whose feet you can't even lick. Do you even know what a fact or consensus is, you illiterate Bleep, or do you need to ask ChatGPT? 😅 If I were as dim-witted as you, I would quickly accept the claim that the historical Jesus didn't exist, as it supports my position of being irreligious and all, but nah, that's for room-temperature IQ morons like you who can't set bias aside. "Data over Dogma." I follow the evidence to come to a conclusion, even if it contradicts my original stance—simple common sense, which unfortunately forever eludes you. It's ironic you ridicule Christians because of their belief in Jesus when your own nonsense beliefs are just as deluded, but instead, more archaic and barbaric—supporting genocide, infanticide, rape, patricide, misogyny, sexual assault, discrimination, racism, hypocrisy, and whatnot from the insecure tyrant YHVH.

As far as I'm concerned, all your Abrahamic religions are major horse turd 😅, but that doesn't change the fact about the historical Jesus. At least you put your only two brain cells to work to manage to string words into sentences instead of shamelessly ripping off AI verbatim this time. As for your shallow, half-baked AI rant, save it for your fellow retards—you'll need it. A data scientist who creates data models and works with AI doesn't need info from someone who shamelessly rips off AI and couldn't articulate a simple thought process of his own for an ordinary forum discussion. The oaf couldn't even at the very least rearrange the format so it doesn't come across as AI-generated text to those who make frequent use of it.

Then again, it isn't my fault to have those expectations from someone whose only two brain cells are fighting for third place. It's interesting to see the amount of energy you put into not letting education get in the way of your ignorance. Still, I'd say go educate yourself, grade A m0ron. You're too dumb to be reasoned with so i'll be ignoring your daft ass.

sonmvayina:
Like I said earlier in one of my post, Christianity started as the worship of serapis in Egypt much earlier . Say like 430 BCE. It rose to become the predominant religion in Egypt and in Greece. Because it was an idea introduced by Ptolemy 1.
The Romans where predominantly mithraisic...
When the empire was expanding and Constantine needed a single religion for the empire to stop all the wars, the delegates at Nicea had to come up with one. They had to choose between mithraism and Christianity (worship of serapis). They voted to go with Christianity and went ahead to fine tune the creed of the religion. Most of the delegates there where of Greek origin, little wonder.
The serapis was the Christ up until the council of chalcedon.
I think this is when the gospel as we have it now started taking shape.
The priest where throlling round the Jewish scriptures looking for passages they can pass off as being a messianic prophesies just to deceive....

So the bottom line is still that the Jesus that is brought forward is still an invention...and never existed in history.

Moreover, the Messiah the Jews where expecting is a mortal man, not a demi God, from the line of David. He would be a king . He is not coming to die for sins as God has already provided a solution to the problem of sin.(See 2nd chronicles 7:14)

DaddyCoool:
What a ridiculous conspiracy KUKU!!😅

If nothing else, this your still going on about the moon landing tells me you're beyond redemption and their is no pont in continuing to teach you. Even if Christ himself came down you'd point him to a YouTube video that proves he doesn't exist!😆 (Same way you keep citing a fool Russian Nationalist)

You think US went to the moon only once? US went to the moon 6 times and each time left artifacts that can still be SEEN there today (including American flags, footprints, and human feces) due to lack of atmosphere on the moon (see below)

If you're a conspiracy nut about that why won't you be conspiracy kuku about something as obvious as that Romans couldn't have invented the Jesus of the Bible.

Conclusion: you're too far gone and beyond redemption. Bye bye

DaddyCoool:
*thick NOT tick😁

Now back to your skull. Now that you’ve gotten my teachings on moon landing and YouTube, I taught you to always ask FUNDAMENTAL questions. Go to any of the other stories and read them. See if they're supported by a 1000's years Torah (that Jews know very well - so saying Rome destroyed it is YouTube nonsense), see if there are some powerful words from the person, then Christ's brothers that also wrote, John the Baptist, Elizabeth, the apostles who all wrote, St. Paul, Turin shroud that can't be replicated, dead sea Scrolls, etc. Instead you'd have a flat story by some bad writer. Read the NT and see if there's any literature that comes alive like it and obviously written by different authors over a period of time.

Finally, speaking of fundamental questions, if you were making up a story to fool Jews WHY would all the parts not agree? Why would there be inconsistencies? Why won't there be drawings depicting who and what you're talking about? Why won't you make sure it gets in the hands of leading jews, etc

Here's that my post again:

But the important question (which you dodged because you know you're talking nonsense) is, why would Rome let a Christ they invented transcend their own gods? They no longer believed the sun was god, nor Zeus, nor the emperor. Not only that, the emperor was now a lowly sinner headed to hell.
Also, this sinless Christ they invented was not crucified by their enemies but by they themselves! Not only that, all Christ-related stories put their country and leaders in bad light - not a single positive image of Rome in a story they invented! Those Romans must have really suddenly gone bananas😅!

DaddyCoool:
I don't think you and "intelligent questions" go together. Elon Musk already answered all the questions about moon landing. Google it. He knows more than your YouTube nut, and he KNOWS for sure US went to the moon!

DaddyCoool:
Once again, get this into your skull because it is very easy to miss: 90% of YouTube is MISINFORMATION!
ANYBODY can post any nonsense on YouTube and they do!
That's where people go to post nonsense and make it very believable with deceptive logic combined with manipulated video clips!

See below, Paul almost convincing a Roman king to believe in the Jesus he made up!

DaddyCoool:
YouTube messiah!
Google latest Jewish messiahs and see if you will see this guy's name. The first and only mordern name you'll see is the old man I posted.

Even so, this guy is 36 and alive, NOT 30 and dead at 33, in the interim demystfying Jewish leaders and doing nothing to help with Rome. You must be CRAZY to invent such a messiah for Jews!

DaddyCoool:
Below is who Jews currently believe is their Messiah. See how he looks? Not some 30 year old guy!

Lucifyre:
Already told you. You can argue all you want, what's consensus fact is fact no matter what you write, except you want to write a thesis for peer review to change the current consensus of biblical scholarship, but i seriously doubt that, seeing as you can't even write your own comments without shamelessly ripping off and copy pasting chatgpt. It's akin to telling a flat earther the earth is spherical, no point(pun intended😅).

DaddyCoool:
FUNDAMENTAL questions,my friend, ask fundamental questions. And insist they answer them - not gloss over them and bury DaddyCoool in details and minutae!

DaddyCoool:
See STUPIDITY!
Russia was in COLD WAR with US. Never mind the "cold" it was virtually war. And anything is fair in war. You don't think USSR would be jumping up and down like Evander Holyfield after Tyson bit his ear if they detect ANY iota of cheating by US? And US KNEW it too and dare not try any nonsense. Ten years later you bury your head in YouTube and start quoting some fool!

Those people were not invented! Nobody would invent a messiah for Jews to keep them from attacking Rome and invent a 30 year old guy, or invent the Jesus we have in OT. Simply impossible. He said he came to die for sins of the world NOT to help Jews with Rome (which would have made sense). He said his kingdom was not of this world (you invent a messiah for Jews and make him say that!). He said powerful Rome can't keep him dead - he'd rise on the 3rd day (which he did). He went about calling Jewish leaders hypocrites and whitened sepulcher - the same Jews you're trying to ingratiate. He said Rome would destroy Jerusalem and not a stone would be left on top another, which happened on schedule (and you want Jews to clap for him). He said God didn't need Israel, that He can raise descendants foe Abraham even from stone!

Gabrielshow24:
You are confused. A nation divided against itself cannot prosper. No nation spreads propaganda that goes against it. Even Nigeria is a simple example how many people have been tracked and jailed who spoke up against the government? You saying Romans invented Jesus to enslave the Jews which later enslaved them to(permit to say) as they were the first empire to declare Christianity has its religion.

DaddyCoool:
Your problem is that you don't ask FUNDAMENTAL questions. You start in the middle and write loong, rambling commentary.
WHICH IS WHY YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!!

Moon landing. Here's the fundamental question you should have asked right away:
Russia was in breack-neck competition with US as to who'd first land on the moon. Russia had the technology to call out ANY cheating whatsoever by US and really shame the country. YET, when US said they've beaten USSR to the moon, they humbly accepted defeat. You don't think they made sure there was no iota of cheating b4 doing that??!
It was only years later that some conspiracy nut without Russia's technology came up with ridiculous "moon landing was a hoax" and of course rushed to YouTube!

Here's another example of fundamental question: why would ANYONE invent a 30-year-old messiah?? Why not a wise, old man with flowing white beard, which people will more readily respect and accept?!)

Lucifyre:
At first when writing my previous comment when i said you move from conclusion to evidence i wanted to add that you're like someone who stumbled across some random youtube video but i thought it was condescending so i left it out. Unfortunately you've gone ahead to prove my thought right by actually citing a youtube source which is quite shallow for a source even if based on Atwill's work.

First of like i said earlier my position is not an opinion, its consensus fact, so it doesn't matter what some random online person says. Scholars way more knowledgeable than i'ld ever be, that have dedicated their lives to the study of the subject matter came to this conclusion and not even anytime recently. It's not a debated matter anymore by scholars. So when i hear people with this your theory i know, they haven't got a clue, no offense.

I've talked about this with an atheist on here as well and he too cited youtube sources which was really funny and I'm not even a theist. Reputable scholars like Bart Ehrman, Dale Allison, Maurice Casey and John Meier to name a few have rubbished this claim. Even mythicist scholars like Richard Carrier who don't believe Jesus existed have rubbished this particular roman claim from scholars like Joseph Atwill who i referenced in my prev comment that hold this view. And his case is way more put together than the shallow defense you put up here, sourced from some random youtube video with a similar title to Atwills book and likely based on his work. Like seriously who uses youtube as a source, you're not going to be taken seriously by anyone who knows what they're talking about be it theist/atheist or agnostic, in biblical history terms.

As for my Torah questions, i knew you didn't know what you were talking about ergo dodged giving responses. Like its funny, what original or fake Torah contains absolute differences in the content i mentioned about morals, extermely laughable to then suggest Christians changed it, besides the Torah is just the first five books of the Hebrew bible or Tanakh and not the whole thing like you allude to. That claim is basically nonsense as well. If you would like a reputable source to educate yourself i'll suggest Professor Hayes' "Introduction to the Old testament" course from the University of Yale.

ZekeYeager:
The animal using the name ZekeYeager is too stupid to even insult

DaddyCoool:
It is out of pure frustration I said those words. Something you ought have rejected outright is what you entertained to the extent of actually deeming to believe it! Just start with: WHY would Rome write themselves down as the ones who killed the sinless messiah they invented??!
Read through stories in NT and mention for me an instant Rome was portrayed in good light.
Not to mention the powerful words of Christ himself or the extremely textured stories amd letters in the OT. Have you ever sat down and actually read the Bible? How can those words be about anyone trying to convince people NOT to rebel against Rome? If anything anyone who reads the stories would reject Rome and their god-emolperor!

As for YouTube, it is very easy to forget that ANYONE can post any idea on YouTube no matter how ridiculous (except explicit sex) and throw in deceptive logic, outright lies, and manipulated videos to support it.
If you watch YouTube enough you'd believe the earth is flat, Michelle and Kamala are men, Bill Gates is the devil, the moon-landing was a hoax, everybody taking covid vaccine would be dead in two years, etc. Because it is in visual form, it is very easy to forget that 90% of YouTube is misinformation. Which is why it is best you leave it alone. Get your information elsewhere.

Here's that my post again:
But the important question (which you dodged because you know you're talking nonsense) is, why would Rome let a Christ they invented transcend their own gods? They no longer believed the sun was god, nor Zeus, nor the emperor. Not only that, the emperor was now a lowly sinner headed to hell.
Also, this sinless Christ they invented was not crucified by their enemies but by they themselves! Not only that, all Christ-related stories put their country and leaders in bad light - not a single positive image of Rome in a story they invented! Those Romans must have really suddenly gone bananas😅!

DaddyCoool:
I KNEW IT!! YouTube is where our man does his research. YouTube, the conspiracy nuts' Bible!

I wrote this earlier:

Do you realize how silly and convoluted you sound??
Every other time Rome simply went to war. This is the ONLY time in history this has ever happened - to defeat a much weaker adversary, you create a messiah for them (whose every story tarnished you). Then when it didn't work, you turn the Messiah on your own people, and use your fake messiah to destroy your own gods that made you a great empire, and your made-up messiah now becomes the only true God! WOW!! DO YOU REALIZE HOW STUPID YOU SOUND??!

And, created by WHOM exactly? ("Rome" is not a person - even King James appended his name to KJV). And what other great works did this our great author write afterwards? This greatest of authors who came up with the powerful words of Christ in the NT couldn't have just stopped there and wrote nothing else!

DaddyCoool:
Do you realize how silly and convoluted you sound??
Every other time Rome simply went to war. This is the ONLY time in history this has ever happened - to defeat a much weaker adversary, you create a messiah for them (whose every story tarnished you). Then when it didn't work, you turn the Messiah on your own people, and use your fake messiah to destroy your own gods that made you a great empire, and your made-up messiah now becomes the only true God! WOW!! DO YOU REALIZE HOW STUPID YOU SOUND??!

And, created by WHOM exactly? ("Rome" is not a person - even King James appended his name to KJV). And what other great works did this our great author write afterwards? This greatest of authors who came up with the powerful words of Christ in the NT couldn't have just stopped there and wrote nothing else!

Lucifyre:
How does this in any way prove that Jesus was a fictionalized invention of the romans created to do what you said. If anything it even counters your claim by pointing to an actual historical Jesus which Josephus did. All you did was show me what we already know that christainity was an offshoot of Judaism, where you expecting a new created sect to have fully formed . According to academic scholar Dan Maclellan, even by the time of the writing of the first gospel of Mark around 70CE, the no of christains compared to the general population was like 1000 to basically millions, besides Jospehus was talking about Jewish sects. This doesn't serve the purpose you think it does.

Yes there were several individuals named Jesus as it was a common name but again i don't see how this helps your claim instead again its the opposite since he was uniquely identified out of the others because the unique identifier was how he was popularly known, and was sufficient enough to identify him. Even if that wasn't the case how does the lack of "son of lead" to the conclusion you came up with. Its rather poorly done, maybe read Atwill's book to form a better argument to support this your claim.

Like most theists you come to a conclusion and look for and as well bend evidence to support that conclusion when it should be the other way round with the evidence leading to the conclusion. Like i said earlier it's ready a consensus and has gone past opinion amongst scholars, there was a historical Jesus the Christ, did he do what was said in the bible?! That's a different matter all together. Even for mythicists that deny the historical Jesus, the claim that a historical Jesus was a roman invention is clearly disputed and not consensus. So this your proof is rather poor cause it doesn't support you claim at all, even though its a legitimate source.

P.S You keep dodging my questions about the Torah, right from your first thread. Lol!

DaddyCoool:
Funny thing is that you and your ilk don't understand that expecting Christ in history books is like expecting history of British empire to include some obscure preacher in a village in Ogun state, with no money, no high connections, virtually homeless, virtually no following at his death by crucifixion (which was nothing special because it was common in Rome those days).
WHY would a historian of British empire include such a person?? Only his closest eye witnesses would record about him, which was exactly what happened!
You confuse what Christ was in the world THEN to what He is in the world NOW!

DaddyCoool:
Our man has gone from kuku to totally bonkers. What has any of these to do with what you were asked:

But the important question (which you dodged because you know you're talking nonsense) is, why would Rome let a Christ they invented transcend their own gods? They no longer believed the sun was god, nor Zeus, nor the emperor. Not only that, the emperor was now a lowly sinner headed to hell.
Also, this sinless Christ they invented was not crucified by their enemies but by they themselves! Not only that, all Christ-related stories put their country and leaders in bad light - not a single positive image of Rome in a story they invented! Those Romans must have really suddenly gone bananas😅!

I see you are NOT debating that those closest to Constantine were already Christians BEFORE he said he saw a sign.
You've already been told that non-fundamental aspects of Christianity were modified to accommodate new converts. You don't make people to suddenly change from Sunday to Saturday when Saturday worship was not fundamental to Christianity, neither was the exact birth date of Christ nor even it's celebration at all!

DaddyCoool:
See this one, trying to obscure fundamental nonsense with copious, voluminous, ramblings. Ain't gonna work. Here it is again:

Do you know that every important person around Constantine was already a Christian before that sign - including his own mother and top generals, that he ultimately really had no choice?
But the important question (which you dodged because you know you're talking nonsense) is, why would Rome let a Christ they invented transcend their own gods? They no longer believed the sun was god, nor Zeus, nor the emperor. Not only that, the emperor was a lowly sinner headed to hell.
Also, this sinless Christ they invented was not crucified by their enemies but by they themselves! Not only that, all Christ-related stories put their country and leaders in bad light - not a single positive image of Rome in a story they invented! Those Romans must have really suddenly gone bananas😅!

As Christianity grew, of course concessions were made in non-fundamebtal things to accommodate the new converts. One of them was Sunday worship - since Christ said we should worship God everyday.

DaddyCoool:
Kuku.. kuku.. kuku...
I'd stop calling you child because that's an insult to children. I'd simply call you Kuku!😆

Do you know that every important person around Constantine was already a Christian before that sign - including his own mother and top generals, that he ultimately really had no choice? But the important question (which you dodged because you know you're talking nonsense) is, why would Rome let a Christ they invented transcend their own gods? They no longer believed the sun was god, nor Zeus, nor the emperor. Not only that, the emperor was a lowly sinner headed to hell.
Also, this sinless Christ they invented was not o be crucified by their enemies but by they themselves! Not only that, all Christ-related stories put their country and leaders in bad light - not a single positive image of Rome in a story they invented! Those Romans must have really suddenly gone bananas😅!

At least we now know you're NOT saying the OT was also invented, nether were the apostles and their works. Only Christ! If you were not kukuish you'd have seen that the stories are intertwined, that they can't be separated. You should have claimed ALL the Bible was made up by Rome. That way there'd be no pretense about not lying.
See below, how many times various scholars (including atheists and Jews) said Christ's comming was prophesied in the OT.