₦airaland Forum

DSDLIVEREPORT:
for say I see the facade of the mosque I 4 know whether na that big one 4 Peckham -one Street away from asda like say person dey waka from bellenden towards lolak .
But I no really notice any mosque on old Kent Road sha

Lolak is in Peckham, just off Rye Lane.
As a matter of fact, that mosque, 3 minutes walk from Lolak or behind ASDA, is on Choumert Grove.

Kophschmerzen:
I have been in this mosque twice when I was in London,
it's a Nigerian mosque built in the 60's.
Very nice folks there and they answered all my questions about Islam and the terrorist situation in London.

It was never a mosque in the 60s

gypsey:
which part of london or Old kent road is this mosque?
i have never come Across any mosque in Old kent road.

There are two mosques on Old Kent Road.

Kophschmerzen:
After Tesco crossing.

gypsey:
Towards Elephant or lewisham?

One, on the right hand side just after coming down or going past the flyover when driving from Elephant and Castle

The other, is this one, after Tesco Superstore, on the right hand side,
just before the Old Kent Road Fire Brigade station when facing or heading towards New Cross or Lewisham

drlateef:
I pray there every Friday. It's the Muslim Association of Nigeria mosque.
The fair complexion man is the muazim. Everything there is authentic.

Kophschmerzen:
Towards lewisham, opposite the Somalian shops.

gypsey:
cheers! i will check it out, i haven't been to old kent Road since 2002
i wonder what that area looks like Nowadays.

kapelvej:
I am telling you bro you are right .
is not same old Kent road in Peckham, leading to elephant and castle?,
I beg no mosque for here

gypsey:
I wonder oo! they say it's near Tescos crossing,
I grew up Around pekham, old kent, Elephant, camberwell, surrey quays and london bridge
but Although i have not been to old kent since 2002 i don't remember coming Across any musque in that area.

kapelvej:
bro, nothing like that, even surrey quays is already too far. Trust me no mosque like that.
They said the mosque was built in the sixties

The property was a pub, up until 1978
Actually, as a matter of fact, the property opened and traded as a pub from 1856-1978

Its the Muslim Association of Nigeria that was formally established in the sixties as a branch of M.A.N in Nigeria by a group of then Nigerian students and not mosque

Its the same Muslim Association of Nigeria, who in February 1993, acquired this property for use as a mosque, in an auction for £65,000.
The building or property was never a mosque in the sixties

bloodofthelamb:
Bro MuttleyLaff, "if I get you right you have an issue with the word, Christian."
And what was their reason for calling the disciples of Jesus, Christians?

Affirmative, my highly esteemed brother.
Similar way, I would have, for ignorantly accepting being called a nigger or referred to as one.

Check history, the people of Antioch are known for their penchant of coining nicknames.

When they give anyone a nickname, it's not for love or favour, nor is it as a form of compliment.

The word Christian doesn't escape their mischievousness

bloodofthelamb:
Dear Father, your Truth(Word) is your power unto salvation to us that believe, I pray thee may it be done unto us according to thy good will through our faith. Amen!
Christianity means Christlike.
The word Christianity came to be when observers saw the disciples of Jesus Christ, the living Lord behaving like their Master.
This people noticed that the disciples were bold like there Master whom was unjustly accused and was put to death by the religious cabal of the day. They speak and do all things like their Master( Jesus Christ ).

This is why they they branded and called them Christians (like- Christ)

If you really know what sort the people of Antioch are,
then you would know that they DIDN'T brand and/or call the disciples, Christians because of them being "like- Christ"
That is the propaganda version pushed for public consumption
and it is far from the reality of what the term Christian actually means

bloodofthelamb:
But we know by the record available unto us in the scriptures that this guys were nothing like Christ before Pentecost
(The day the Holy Spirit came unto them Acts2:1-4).
They were timid, faithless and annoying.
The best of them being Peter even betrayed Jesus Christ by denying Him three times( John 18:16-27).

So what is my point?
"My point is this, Christianity is being like Christ,
but you cannot be like Christ, if you have not the Spirit of Christ and you cannot have the Spirit of Christ,
if you don't believe in your heart of heart that Jesus Christ is your way, your truth and your life."

Non of us were born by our fleshly Father and Mother with the Spirit of Christ.
So you atheist ( Jonnydon22, Hopefulandlord, dalaman, Martinez etc.) forming former Christians, with this my post hopefully your eyes will be open to see that you were nothing short of being a Christian.

I stake my life that no one who has the Spirit of God(Christ) will turn back to say God and Jesus does no longer exist.
So many are like you guys today in the Church,
identifying themselves with Christianity physically,
but spiritually they don't belong to God. Jesus does not know them; because their hearts is far from Him as the east is far from the west.

I will re-echo the word of my Lord Jesus and Vine.

"Come unto my Lord and He will give you rest." Amen!

Keep believing and keep transforming!

⁵Jesus answered and said unto him,
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
⁵Jesus answered,
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
- John 3:3, 5

OP is right that no one is born a believer by just biological parents
Truth is, any that's to enter the kingdom of God, needs being birthed by biological parents and be born again (i.e. be born from above)

The last thing, anyone, ever wants to be, is a christian

damosky12:
Your " formal religious title" is not needed.
This discuss isnt about adopting formal religious titles.
Cut the slack on "Daddy G.O".
Its just refers to FATHER in the Nigerian church parlance.

It's not down nor up to me, to cut the slack
Our Oga at the Top, that laid down the rule, meant what He said.
Take it up with Him.

damosky12:
Paul referred to himself as a father.

1 Corinthians 4:15
[15]For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

Galatians 4:19
[19]My little children, of whom I travail IN BIRTH again until Christ be formed in you...

It'll either be dishonest or grammatically unintelligent for anyone to contest the above.
Paul CLEARLY presented himself as a FATHER

You have displayed your dishonesty and grammatical unintelligence for the world to see
Now where exactly and how in, 1 Corinthians 4:15 and Galatians 4:19, did Paul refer himself as "father" or "Daddy G.O"?

Do you know what analogical reasoning is?
It is used to develop understanding and meaning
Let me give you an example, over the course of my working career, I've had so many people that have being like a father and mother to me.
They are protective over me, behave kindly & warmly towards me, watch over me, have my best interest in their hearts etcetera
but that dont mean, they are my father or mother
I dont call them my father or mother
I dont call them "father" or "Daddy G.O"
I dont call them "mother" or "Mummy G.O"

Of course, they know their behaviour and acts towards me, is like being a father or mother
but they never once address, call or give themselves designated "father/mother" or "Daddy/Mummy G.O" titles

Do you know what metaphor is?
damosky12, father(s), in 1 Corinthians 4:15, is used as a metaphor,
and not used as the designated "father" or "Daddy G.O" popular title. Pftt.

damosky12:
Calm down and learn, sir.

Pride comes before a fall.
What an irony
as unbeknownst to you, by the time this all ends, you would have learned a thing or two.
Put on your seat belt

damosky12:
Timothy was only written to in the Bible.
The whole Bible has no quote at all from Timothy.
He never spoke AT ALL in all the Bible.
So, we can't tell how he addressed Paul. We can however tell how Paul addressed him.

1 Timothy 1:2
[2]Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith.

If Timothy is the son, who is the father... Again, calm down, sir.

A lot of people address me or call me son,
yet no one says they are my fathers

It's you who needs to find a chair to sit on, so you can calm down

Again, I'll ask you:
1/ Did Paul refer to himself as "father" or "Daddy G.O"?
2/ Did Paul start or end his letters with "father" or "Daddy G.O"?

damosky12:
I think it will do you some good to go through the post again...
BTW, why bar biological/adopted father? Did Jesus take exception?

I explained well enough and gave proofs why Jesus wasn't giving a law.
If he was, then that would mean you shouldn't even call your biological father your father...
Yet, the same Jesus called Peter the son of his father...

Hence, if he isn't referring to biological father, he isn't referring to spiritual father as well.

PLEASE DO WELL TO READ THE POST THOROUGHLY THIS TIME.

Feel free to like again.

I think it will do you some good to go over Matthew 23:1-11 again
I particularly advise you ponder over Matthew 23:9, keeping in mind that Context is King
damosky12, is the context in there about biological fathers?

PLEASE DO WELL TO READ THE VERSE THOROUGHLY THIS TIME AND REPEAT HERE WHAT IT SAYS

Is it necessary to covet the titles, be addressed or called "father" or "Daddy G.O"?
Be honest. Put the devil to shame damosky12.

damosky12:
This is to correct the errors and misinterpretation of the thread (by lightblazingnow) that surfaced on the front page earlier... https://www.nairaland.com/4623674/why-it-wrong-addressed-daddy

The writer made some scriptural errors that will be quoted and duly addressed below...

Scriptures are to be studied in context. Before you make certain conclusions, it will be smart to ask questions such as "who is the passage addressing", " why did he make such address", "what led to the address". This will help us put things in perspective.

Now, the above scripture quoted by the writer was about a statement of Jesus to his disciples... Let's however see the whole event in context from verse 1 so we can understand the point well...

Matthew 23:1-11
[1]Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
[2]Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
[3]All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
[4]For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
[5]But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
[6]And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
[7]And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
[8]But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
[9]And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
[10]Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
[11]But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.

Apparently, this was Jesus correcting His disciples not be as the Pharisees. The issue was about the Pharisees who hypocritically loved to be exalted by men. The issue was peculiar to the pharisees!

Jesus only commanded His guys not to be as the Pharisees who were evil, highminded and hypocritical. The Pharisees love to be exalted by men, to be called father, master, etc. Jesus only warned His disciples against following such culture. He did not prohibit being called a father, or calling one your father.

The statements in verse 9 and 10 are not meant to stand on their own... The moment you separate them from the real issue as established in the previous verses, you intend to give them a meaning of their own..

If Jesus really means that one shouldn't call anyone on earth his father, what about earthly fathers? Does that mean you shouldn't call your earthly father your father?
If it were so, Jesus Himself would have breached this principle when He called one of his disciples as the Son of His earthly father...

John 1:42
[42]And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

Besides, the Bible recognizes the place of earthly fathers...

Colossians 3:21
[21]Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

Hebrews 12:9
[9]Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?

You will agree with me that if Jesus means for man to call no man on the earth His father, the portions above would definitely not have referred to persons on earth as fathers...

Apparently, this portion of the scripture doesn't prove his point... Rather, it does the contrary... See the next verse,

Romans 12:4
[4]For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:

That's why there is need for each person to think soberly according to the level of grace given Him as said in verse 12.

Yet again, this doesn't prove the writer's point. This is Paul's admonition to the Church at Philippi. The address does not by any means infer that Pastors should not be given their place of authority. That will be absurd. Paul, being their Apostle did not say in verse 3 "let us esteem each other better than ourselves" (of course, he isn't included). He says "let each (Church members) esteem other better than themselves".

To make it clearer, see

1 Thessalonians 5:12-13
[12]And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;
[13] And to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake. And be at peace among yourselves.

When it comes to pastors and the likes, what does it say? ESTEEM THEM VERY HIGHLY.

Yet again,

1 Timothy 5:17
[17]Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

Wouldn't this "double honour" involve calling them (the pastors, Apostles) fathers and they calling their church " Children"?

Let's see how the Apostles refer to themselves...

1 Corinthians 4:15
[15]For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

The Apostle Paul sees himself as the FATHER of the Corinthian church. He was their "Daddy G.O".

Titus 1:4
[4]To Titus, mine own son after the common faith...

To Titus, He calls Him His Spiritual Son.

1 Timothy 1:2
[2] Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.

1 John 2:1
[1]My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not....

This is John (the disciple that is reputed to be the closest to Jesus in His earthly walk) writing to the church, calling them HIS CHILDREN.

Clearly, the Apostles understood the point Jesus made in Matthew 23...

They knew He was only cautioning his disciples against the proud lifestyle and hypocrisy of the Pharisees...

Jesus was not commanding that you shouldn't accord your fathers their due respect (whether Physical or Spiritual).
Jesus didn't command that you shouldn't call your children (whether physical or Spiritual) your children...

Calling our pastors Daddy is Biblical.
Like Paul said in 1 Corinth 4:15, they begat us through the gospel. They are our fathers.

1 Thessalonians 5:12-13
[12]And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;
[13] And to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake. And be at peace among yourselves.

It will be against God's word to not accord them their their due honour.

Thank God for our Daddy G.Os!
Lalasticlala

damosky12, I've gone through lightblazingnow's post
and I am comfortably pleased to write that there are no errors nor misinterpretation whatsoever in the entire writeup

damosky12, what you failed to acknowledged in your refutation are that:
1/ Paul, no where in the bible is found to use "father" (i.e. "Daddy G.O'') as a formal religious title.
2/ Paul, no where in his letters, in the bible, ever referred to himself as "Father Paul" (i.e. "Daddy G.O'')
3/ No where in the bible, does anyone, not even Timothy, call or address Paul with a honorific religious title "father" or "Daddy G.O"
4/ Jesus explicitly said, call no man on the earth, bar the biological and/or adopted, father
5/ No one needs to covet the honorific religious title, be addressed or called "father" "Pope" or "Daddy G.O"

PS: I initially liked the writeup, but after gone through the post proper, I had to withdraw and unlike it.

Primesky:
My dear stop denying yourself!.
You misquoted and misinterpreted a verse of scripture saying Jesus didn't say anything in the open without a parable.

Now, I have shown you an example of a non parable Jesus made in the open, and you're here twisting tongue. If you're wrong why don't you own up and stop dancing around?.

Primesky:
Only the ignorant will buy your lies.
You appear to be defending the bible, but you're not!. Stop trying to fool the people.
You say one thing now, and another later.
Why do you do this?.
If you want to serve God, then serve Him honestly!.

I have shown you the error in your assumption of parables where they don't apply, yet, you're still beating about the bush. Stop it!.

1/ Show me the reason why you have/had to show me a parable of a non parable Jesus made in the open
2/ Reproduce here my comment, exactly how I wrote, as in, what word for word did I write, that said "Jesus didn't say anything in the open without a parable"
3/ Please reproduce here, where I typed and you claim I've said:
Jesus always speaks in parable to the non disciples, but plainly to His disciples.
4/ Reproduce here, where I have said one thing and allegedly have said another

If you cant, if you are unable to, then please retract ALL your false accusations
and tender unreserved apologies accordingly

I know you are defiant, as I know you cant, simply because your accusations are unfounded
Now, you being one, that doesnt understand the meaning of honour and integrity
cant be expected to know the needful that needs to be done

Primesky:
Hahhaha... All I'm saying is, do not add what isn't in the bible to it. The bible is OK the way it is. It was never written to confuse anybody, God is not the author of confusion. So no need for assumption by suggesting, figure of speech, meaning of parable, this and that.

The bible is literal in meaning!.
Where that isn't the case, it will also tell you.

All of this books down to the truth that hell fire exist, and people choose to go there by their decisions. Let no man deceive you.

Jesus describes it as the fire that never shall be quenched!, no need trying to twist the meaning of it.

You can hahhhaha as much as you like.
Enjoy doing it at your expense because the joke is on you.

If you arent levelling false accusations,
you jump on to one strawman to another strawman.
Typical characteristics of someone without substance, depth and informed knowledge.

You still are defiant as you have no proof to tender.
Simple and easy three questions are scaring you to respond to.
What a pitiful sight to behold. SMH

0temSapien:
Seeing is believing my brother

"Seeing is believing" is a blindspot remark
Seeing is seeing.
It is plain good old just and only seeing. No more, no less.

Seeing is never believing
If it once was, sorry to burst a bubble
but for a very long time ago and since the photoshop age, seeing ceased being believing

Seeing, at most unfortunate times, is deceiving (i.e. make you believe something that is not true)
Example is when the woman saw that the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes,
and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom, she took the fruit and ate it.
She also gave some to her husband, and he ate it. Wow.

What happens when those two verbs swap positions?
What happen when the cart and horse swap positions?
We find out that the opposite is true, in that, the remark becomes: believing is seeing

"...blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
- John 20:29b

People have copped on.
They are beginning to understand the situation that "seeing is believing" leaves us, like woman in above comment, open to visual deception

Believing is being confident, towards and/or over a matter, without seeing.
Believe, when others, are doubting

0temSapien:
I was taken back into times to see these things for myself.

You come across as a tourist rather than a traveller
How are you sure of the authenticity of what you saw, when even salt looks like sugar?

Perception is a clash of eye and mind,
the eye believing what it sees,
the mind seeing what it believes

0temSapien:
The writeups in the bible are full of fictions and exaggerations and I saw it all, as it happened.

You're absolutely right that the writeups in the bible are full of fictions and exaggerations
but you failed to acknowlege sighting good sides in the bible
maybe because people often see things, not as the seen things, really are,
but they see things, as they themselves, are.

Primesky:
My dear stop denying yourself!.
You misquoted and misinterpreted a verse of scripture saying Jesus didn't say anything in the open without a parable.
Now, I have shown you an example of a non parable Jesus made in the open, and you're here twisting tongue.
If you're wrong why don't you own up and stop dancing around?.

1/ Show me the reason why you have/had to show me a parable of a non parable Jesus made in the open
2/ Reproduce here my comment, exactly how I wrote, as in, what word for word did I write, that said "Jesus didn't say anything in the open without a parable"
3/ Please reproduce here, where I typed and you claim I've said:
Jesus always speaks in parable to the non disciples, but plainly to His disciples.

If you cant, if you are unable to, then please retract your false accusations
and tender apologies accordingly

I know you are defiant, as I know you cant, simply because your accusations are unfounded
Now, you being one, that doesnt understand the meaning of honour and integrity
cant be expected to know the needful that needs to be done

Each to their own. SMH.

PS: The main challenge for some here, is information overload,
so write up, is shorter, no more anyone becoming, a victim of information overload

Primesky:
Hahaha.... Please stop filling the page with words.
Your whole write up is full of misup, confusion and assumptions.

You are used to fast food write ups.
You are at home with easily prepared processed food, as a quick meal or to be taken away,
like the kind served in snack bars, McDonalds, Mr Biggs, Tantalizer and other restaurants.
You prefer, their prepared and served quicker, typically less nutritionally, less valuable and unhealthy food
than the wholesome, well prepared, seasoning added, traditional healthy food

Reading requires actual and full concentration.
but you're averse to write ups with detailed information because you lack discipline and concentration

Primesky:
You have completely contradicted yourself

I have given you opportunities to reproduced here, my exact words, where, when and how I have contradicted myself
but alas, you keep on shying away from doing so

Primesky:
If what Jesus said in Matthew chapter 5 isn't a parable, yet He spoke in public/openly to the crowed.
Why don't you then believe that other cases exist where Jesus didn't use parable?.
This is simply because you misinterpreted the scriptures!.
Please ask the Holy Spirit to guide you before you misquote and misinterpret the bible.

I will reask you here again

Primesky does Matthew 5:2-12 come across as parables to you?
Are those parables? Hmm?
Answer the question now, let's put the devil to shame

Primesky:
I feel so bad that these kind of misinformation is spewed out like this.
Quoting all manner of scriptures and making absolutely wrong assumptions, and misinterpretations.
Rather than answer the questions, you are stylishly dodging it.

You're the one using head knowledge to interprete the scriptures,
you're still the same person quoting spiritual discernment.
Why are you confusing people?.

I feel so bad that you're more confused than confused.com
If you cant grow up like I earlier advised
then go for a change into a snug and/or close-fitting apparel,
instead of that oversized jacket, oversized shirt, oversized trousers and oversized shoes you have on

TATIME:
Fully understood

Your point, TATIME, is?
What is the point(s) you're trying to make with that screen grab?

OneJ:
Mutteylaff,
Trinitarian folks (ntgreek, Emusan who said "Jesus is not the Father' & Primesky who argued that Jesus is the Father),
as shown above your views contradict each other because Una false doctrine dey confuse all of una.
Confusion transmission . Hahahahahaaa!

OneJ, that's the beauty of paradox

We see evidences of God being God, then being God the Father and God the Son in the bible
but the absurdity of the situation, is the pigeonholing God into trinity

God is not limited to 3 persons
because God is ''I AM THAT I AM'', ''I SHALL BE THAT I SHALL'', ''I WILL BE THAT I BE''
so since, God is, not-known-number-of-persons
God, then, is x-persons. God, then is ∞-person

Adam, Noah, the patriarchs, the Israelites etcetera didnt know God as a Father
The realisation or knowledge of God being a Father came with the advent of Jesus

Who knows what other person(s), during the passage of time, God will also reveal Himself to be

OneJ:
U too are confused. See the evidence below....

OneJ you're wanted on confused.com website
as, in actual fact, you cant see that ntgreek.org admitted that "the word was a god" is very incorrect.
Una no see am, ntgreek nefa agree say "the word was a god". For where?
Hin know say the "the word is not a god" but is God

Besides, Philippians 2:5-8a above, in fact, hin ntgreek, too come korokoro, conclude, say: "Jesus is God" Allelulai!
See am, from the previously above screenshot blue highlighted section

OneJ:
" HAVE THIS IN YOUR MIND,which was also in Christ Jesus,
(who existing in God's form, didn't consider equality with God a thing to be grasped... "
Mutteylaff, since its true that Christians have the mind of Christ,
therefore, we "didn't consider equality with God a thing to be grasped"
(we too are equal with God. That's the absolute conclusion too. U can't deny it !!).
Phil 2:9 " But God exalted him to a position where he is today.

Do you exist in God's form?
Your conclusion is absolutely and seriously flawed

Having an understanding of how the president thinks doesnt mean I am the president
Think about that.

OneJ:
There is no scripture where Christ gave command or orders to his Father.
Why? John14:28 the Father is greater than Jesus His son.

Why should you think or expect Christ to give command or orders to His Father?
I am glad you accept that the Father is greater than Jesus His Son.
but if you know that on humanly terms, this is a fact and true,
why then should it be different with God the Father and Jesus, His Son?

OneJ:
However, 1 Cor 2:16 says " we Christians have the mind of Christ," not the mind of God.

Context is King.
Let this be the last time, you ever read and quote bible verses in isolation.
That verse is talking about having the ability to understand Christ
Contrary to your " not the mind of God" ludicrous remark,
by same Christ, equalling by this Proxy, also have the ability to understand the mind of God

OneJ:
Jesus said (John 14:24. 7:16) "What I teach is not mine, but belongs to Him who sent me"
Matt 24:36 " Only the Father knows that Day & Hour" because Jesus is not God & he does not know what God knows.

Jesus replied,
It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by His own authority.
- Acts 1:7

Keep telling you that: Context is King.
It is not for Jesus to tell, even if He knows
He is not in the position to tell, even He knows
It is not within His remit to tell even if He knows of the day and hour

OneJ:
Christ never claimed or said he is God.
Trinitarian folks imposed Godship on Jesus by fire by force.....
Shalom

Unlike how some would readily and without hesitating blow their own trumpet,
He, Christ didnt have to claim or say He is God,
didnt need to claim or say He is God
and had no need to outrightly claim or say He is God

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, those that ate and eat, know that He is God

Primesky:
My Lord and my God!. What lies!. What falsehood!.
What trickery and misinterpretation!.
Open denial, wrong assumptions, aaaaah!
When I thought I've seen the worst, then comes the mother of subtlety!.

Primesky please
1/ What are the lie charges you're levelling against?
2/ What are the falsehood charges you're levelling against?
3/ Show the trickery you accuse me of
4/ Provide the misinterpretation you alleged I did

Primesky:
Engaging you on this level is to make room for huge deception!.
Your reply above has clearly exposed who you are.

Primesky, since you said my reply above has clearly exposed who I am
now I ask you: Who do you say I am?

Primesky:
Jesus and figures of speech?!. Wonderful!.

You come across as being uncomfortable with this "Jesus and figures of speech" fact and truth
1/ Are you saying Jesus didnt use figures of speech?
2/ Are you denying that Jesus made use of figures of speech?

Primesky, I've come to notice that people hate the truth.
The truth actually bothers people
Also, that when the truth is no longer hidden, people strive to hide from facing it

You know what Primesky, truth is like the sun.
You can shut it out for a time and/or hide from it,
but that doesnt mean its gone or going away

Primesky:
Is the Holy Spirit coming to explain parables
or to remind us of what Jesus has said before, lead us into the truth, and show us things to come?.
For every parable given, there's always an interpretation!.
Stop the assumption already

Yes, the Holy Spirit will come to illuminate and to enlighten spiritually

I guess, if going along with your kind of reasoning,
then there are no more truths to know, no more truth to learn about.
and so what is there for the Holy Spirit to teach. Right?

Primesky:
Stop the assumption already

You say my comments which are centred around factual information assumptions.
What do you know. Pfft. SMH.

Primesky:
Does man have a soul and spirit or not?

Depends on what sort of man you're talking of
or what kind of man you're referring to

Primesky:
You're demanding for apologies and withdrawal of statement.
Please on what ground?.

On the grounds, that you misquoted me.
You took my comments, distorted it, gargled it up
and then not only wrongly representing and misinterpreting them
but also out of context made remarks about them with your false accusations.

Primesky:
Did your position which you misinterpreted from the bible mean a different thing from what I said?.

What position?
What "misinterpreted"?
You got caught up in your misunderstanding that you ended up giving a misreport of what I said in my comments

Primesky:
Your statement means that Jesus does not speak plainly with non disciples!. I stand by that!.

Please reproduce the statement here.
Reproduce here, word-by-word, exactly the same I wrote the statement
and lets both examine it to see what I was expressing

Primesky:
Or does Jesus speak plainly to non disciples secretly like he does to his disciples?

I dont know what you're talking about with this

Primesky:
Please, did God tell you that the arrangement of the chapters and verses of the scriptures by a man later in time, was not inspired by Him?.
I'm just asking, did He tell you so, or are you assuming?

Seems the import of that info,
about when I remarked, that the Bible originally didn't contain chapters or verses, went over your head

Primesky:
If Jesus is speaking to His disciples, does He need to speak in parables and later explain to them again?.
It's clear you misunderstand the context in which Jesus was said to have spoken in parables.
Was that statement for all of His life time, or was it for a particular time, occasion, event etc?.

For example,
Jesus had a chat with Zachaeus, He had a chat with Nicodemus,
He had a chat with alot of other persons, and their dialogue was documented.
Are those words of Jesus to these persons parables, because this were not Jesus disciples?.

Are you aware that these dialogue happened between Jesus and Nicodemus?.

John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him,
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world;
but that the world through him might be saved.

Was Nicodemus a disciple of Jesus Christ then?, was all these and all that followed in that discussion a parable?.
From your position, Jesus shouldn't be speaking plainly to a pharesse, since he isn't a disciple.

Can you please tell me, what it is,
tell, what this supposedly position of mine is?
Also I'll very much appreciate you reproducing in inverted commas, my statement, my remark or comment you based this on

Primesky:
Again, here is another place where Jesus spoke to not one person but a crowd.

Matthew 5:1 [b]And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:
5:2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,
5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
5:4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
5:7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
5:10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
5:12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.[/b]

Please is this a parable, or a figure of speech?.

None of both Primesky.
This is not a parable nor is it a figure of speech
Those, collectively, are called, the beatitudes

Primesky:
Why didn't the disciples demand for it's explanation secretly like they use to?.

²⁸When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at His teaching,
²⁹because He taught as one who had authority, and not as their scribes.
- Matthew 7:28-29

SMH. Facepalm
Why are you asking, "why didn't the disciples demand for it's explanation secretly like they use to", Primesky?
Are those parables? Hmm?
Does Matthew 5:2-12 come across as parables to you?

Now, Primesky, for your information, that event in Matthew chapter 5, went on, right across Matthew chapter 6
and up on to Matthew chapter 7 before the event, then came to a close, at Matthew 7:28-29

Primesky:
It's clear, you're misinterpreting the bible

It's clear, you need to grow up.
I can bet my bottom dollar, you would easily misinterpret, my comment about you needing to grow up,
so I have to spell out, what I mean.
You need to beef and buff up, to fill in to that oversized jacket, oversized shirt, oversized trousers and oversized shoes you have on.
Spiritual growth.

Primesky:
And you're doing it with so much head knowledge!.

¹⁰But God has revealed it to us by the Spirit.
The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God.
¹¹For who among men knows the thoughts of man except his own spirit within him?
So too, no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
¹²We have not received the spirit of the world,
but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.
¹³And this is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom,
but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.
¹⁴Primesky The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God.
For they are foolishness to him Primesky,
and he Primesky cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
- 1 Corinthians 2:10-14

Wishful thinking.
You wish I am doing it with so much head knowledge.

Yusuf54:
......Without the Permission of Almighty God He would not have performed those Miracles...
Jesus is a Prophet and servant of God..
Pls go n read ur Bible very well..U r very fully,
U Mean Your God (Jesus) that was Kicked, Slapped, Beaten and flogged by those He Created,,
How on earth is that Possible? God Die for ur sin

alBHAGDADI:
He had to endure all of that to redeem mankind from eternal damnation their disobedience placed them in.

He was the lamb sacrificed for our sins.
Have you ever seen where a lamb to be slaughtered I petted and kissed?

He was abused and punished, but he didn't open his mouth.
He was led like a lamb to the slaughter.
He was like a sheep that is silent when its wool is cut off.
He didn't open his mouth.
- Isaiah 53:7

The passage of scripture which he was reading was this:
"He was like a sheep that is taken to be slaughtered,
like a lamb that makes no sound when its wool is cut off.
He did not say a word.
- Acts 8:32

alBHAGDADI:
He is the son of God.
King James which is the earliest, not all thesenperverses versions inspired by heresies

KJV isnt the earliest

Primesky:
I thank you very much for your patience and civility in answering the questions.

Maybe it's because I am a glutton for punishment

Reading your next nine sections below that I am responding to, is evidence of this

Primesky:
However, by your own explanations, you seem to have shot yourself on the foot!.

Wishful thinking.
You wish, I have shot myself on the foot.

Primesky:
According to you, Jesus always speaks in parable to the non disciples, but plainly to His disciples.

Please reproduce here, where I typed and you claim I've said:
Jesus always speaks in parable to the non disciples, but plainly to His disciples.

If you cant, if you are unable to, then please retract that false statement
and tender apologies accordingly

Primesky:
Please read Luke chapter 16 :1 to the end.
Who did the Bible say Jesus was speaking to?.
He was speaking to His disciples, so was He also speaking in parables to them?

He did not say anything to them without a parable.
But privately He explained all things to His own disciples.
- Mark 4:34

When Jesus had left the crowd and gone indoors, his disciples came to him and said,
"Tell us what the parable about the weeds in the field means."
(i.e. please explain to us that parable of the tares and of the field.'')
- Matthew 13:36

Later, when Jesus was alone with the twelve disciples
and with the others who were gathered around,
they asked him what the parables meant
- Mark 4:10

His disciples began questioning Him as to what this parable meant.
- Luke 8:9

I remember vividly posting Mark 4:34 above, with the emboldened and underlined.
How could you have missed not reading or seeing it?

Even if you missed Mark 4:34, what about the other three, namely Matthew 13:36, Mark 4:10 and Luke 8:9?
Seems you willingly ignored the greater part of the content of my earlier post

Primesky:
Another thing you failed to observe is that, whenever Jesus spoke in parable, the bible always indicate that from the beginning, that look, here Jesus was speaking in parables.
But that cannot be said of the two cases in Luke chapter 16

It is ignorance that leads you to make such an unbearable comment.
I will leave anymore response on this section until later because I'll adequately be addressing it somewhere else down below

Primesky:
Another example I want you to consider is this

Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

Here Jesus literally mentioned the fact that one can go into hell fire that never shall be quenched

Who was Jesus talking to?, to His disciples, read from verse 38 of Mark chapter 9. The matter is very clear

What exactly is your point here Primesky?

1/ Are you saying, dead people still have hands, after they are buried and their bodies get decomposed?
2/ Do you not know what Mark 9:43 is?
3/ Is it that you think/thought Mark 9:43 is a parable?
4/ Are you familiar with common figures of speech Jesus often used in His earthly ministry teachings?
5/ Do you know from answering #4/ above, which of the figures of speech, Mark 9:43 comes under?

Primesky:
Again, I will strongly disagree with you, even though you can pin point bible verses to back up your claims. Whenever Jesus spoke in parable, the bible will always indicate that, however in Luke chapter 16, and some others, He spoke plainly!.

1/ Primesky, do you know that, all scripture is inspired by God?
2/ Do you know that, translation of the bible into other languages from the original text is not inspired by God?
3a/ Do you know that, when the books of the Bible were originally written there were no such things as chapters or verses?
3b/ Do you know that each book of the bible was written without any breaks, from the beginning to the end.
4/ Now do you also know that, dividing the bible into chapters and verses is not inspired by God

When Jesus noticed how the guests chose the places of honor, He told them a parable:
- Luke 14:7

The first step Primesky, in Bible understanding and correct interpretation, is to ignore its chapter and verse divisions.
Now Primesky, if you had abided by this useful rule of thumb,
you would have noticed that Luke chapter 16, traced, actually goes, as far back, as Luke 14:1
and that Luke 14:7 reproduced above, is the start, of a series of parables spoken, that extends to Luke chapter 16.

Primesky:
Whenever Jesus speaks in parable, the bible does not expect you to explain the parable, it interpretes it by itself, to avoid confusion.
Now look at what you're saying. Someone else will come and say a different thing. And God is not the author of confusion.
If the water the richman was asking is the word of God like you said,
what does he then mean by asking father Abraham to send someone to go and warn his people.
It should have been, let someone go and give my brethren water!.
Why the contradictions?. You can see the flaws.

I am not responsible for convincing you.
I have told you what water symbolically meant in the parable,
if you like, dont accept what it symbolically meant in the parable.

1/ Do you know what happened, what Jesus did, a few weeks after He narrated that parable of the Rich man and Poor man named Lazarus?
2/ Most of the verisimilitude characters in Jesus' parable hardly have names, but the name of the poor man was given.
Do you know why Jesus, on purpose, gave Lazarus, as the name of the poor man, in that parable?

Primesky:
The bible is clear and plain.
Even parables, when used are explained!.

But the Holy Spirit will come and help you, because the Father will send the Spirit to take my place.
The Spirit will teach you everything and will remind you of what I said while I was with you.
- John 14:26

However, when the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth.
For He will not speak on His own,
but He will speak what He hears, and He will declare to you what is to come
- John 16:13

Primesky who does the explaining?
Who is responsible for the explanation? Hmm?

I know John 14:26 and John 16:13 above, both, easily are understood and so need no interpreting them.

Primesky:
I hope you know that it is a very terrible thing to add to the scriptures what isn't there?.
The bible is clear, and can stand on its own. It needs no addition from anybody.
Your position is born out of someone's feelings and believe of how things should be,
but unfortunately, that's not the way it is in the bible

The truth will always be the truth even if no one believes it.

You come across like one of the people in the bible Jesus tells parables to.

Hearing, they dont really listen, nor do they even try to understand
Reading, they do not read posts properly nor read to understand
Seeing, they do not see
because the more, they look, the less, they see.

Truth will always be truth, regardless of lack of understanding, ignorance or disbelief.
My special sympathy for your lack of understanding, ignorance and/or disbelief.

Primesky:
Hmm... Excuse me sir, the story of the Richman and Lazarus, was it real or a parable?.

When Jesus noticed how the guests chose the places of honor, He told them a parable:
- Luke 14:7

Then Jesus told them this parable:
- Luke 15:3

Jesus also said to His disciples...
- Luke 16:1a

And He told them many things in parables, saying,
A farmer went out to sow his seed
- Matthew 13:3

³⁴Jesus always used stories and illustrations like these when speaking to the crowds.
In fact, he never spoke to them without using such parables.
³⁵This fulfilled what God had spoken through the prophet:
"I will speak to you in parables. I will explain things hidden since the creation of the world."
- Matthew 13:34-35

He did not say anything to them without a parable.
But privately He explained all things to His own disciples.
- Mark 4:34

Primesky, remember I earlier wrote,
just because you're telling a joke, it doesnt necessarily mean, the joke is devoid of some element of truth and reality
well, so is the same with parables
and particular so too, with the case of the parable of the Rich man and Poor man, Lazarus.

As can be seen with Luke 14:7, Luke 15:3, Luke 16:1a etcetra above
Jesus, told quite a sizeable amount of parables, varying in total, between a number of 45 and 60.
They usually have a plethora of lessons and moral truth in them.

Also, a good amount of the parables, are a faithful representation of reality,
told, as a story, with verisimilitude characters, the Rich man & Poor man named, Lazarus characters, are examples of one

Primesky:
In the story of the Richman and Lazarus, the both of them were in Sheol as you said, was there any demarcation between them both?.

Yes, there is/was a demarcation,
and its a demarcation that is impossible to cross.

By the way, contrary to popular belief/opinion,
there is not an interim place, called Hell or Hades where people, go to and languish in fiery torment, pending the white throne judgement
That is part of Greek mythology

Grave/tomb/sepulchre sites are merely places of deposit for a corpse.
So, sheol, in an oversimplified or elementary manner, can be grave or has been referred as grave
Sheol, as a matter of fact, is the realm of the dead or departed souls

Souls, do not, in the land of the living, linger in the air.
Souls, do not, in the land of the living, stay in limbo.
Souls, do not, in the land of the living, hang about.
Souls, do not make revisit(s), to them/those in the land of the living.

Sheol is more of a proper and real biblical Israelite concept, of where, the dead, their souls, are ''interned''
Sheol, as at times, its a grave and at another time, its like an ''airport transit lounge''

Every human being, after drawing their last breath, ends up in Sheol
and remain there, waiting, until boarding to their final and respective destination

So, Sheol is like being in an airport terminal's departure area
The area where you (i.e. think of the Rich man here) hold your ticket, boarding pass and wait with your luggages before taking a flight to your final destination

Some airlines, as a service to premium or selected passengers, operate airline lounges,
providing the premium or selected passengers with comforts in these lounges,
that are better than and beyond, those available in the airport terminal's departure area for regular or economy passengers

These premium or selected choice passengers (e.g. think of Father Abraham and the Poor man here),
enjoy plush and more comfortable seating, quieter environments, advantage perks are provided.
Other privileges may include private meeting rooms, telephones, wireless internet access and other business services, along with provision of free drinks and snacks to enhance passenger comfort.
- looks and sounds like a place of bliss, doesnt it?

Sheol too, has a model similar to this:
There is the Rich man's side aka Hades
and there is Abraham's side aka Abraham's bosom aka place of bliss

How did/does Sheol exist?
Well, until Jesus' parable in the NT, sheol in general, without necessarily distinguishing between righteous or unrighteous souls, has been the realm of the dead or abode of the dead.

We have verses in OT (e.g. Psalm 9:17 etcetera) suggesting that the wicked go to sheol
but it was Jesus in the NT that brought things into perspective when he shared the hyperbolic illustration of sheol with the story of the Rich Man being elsewhere and Abraham with the Poor Man being on a different side

From Jesus' parable, we got to know, Sheol, has two sections with a dividing gulf (i.e. demarcation, as you Primesky, like to put it)
The two sections were the Rich man section and Abraham's bosom section

Those, initially and who would have been, in the good side of Sheol, (i.e. Abraham's bosom) are now in Paradise

The etymology of afterlife from a Jewish point of view and concept (i.e. Sheol, with 2 sections) has changed over time
and Sheol, since, has being interchangeably replaced with Gehenna and Hell/Hades

Primesky:
Why did the richman request for water and Lazarus didn't?

First and foremost, there's the saying to:
Prefer knowledge to wealth, as one is permanent, the other isnt

Primesky, the Rich man made three requests
and the first one, was an inexcusable self centred one, where he was looking out for himself first
Not surprised though, as in the parable, he was potrayed as someone, who lived selfishly during his ifetime
Anyway, it wasnt until when he found out that his first request cant be granted,
that he then switched to making a second and third request, for the sake of his other five brothers, now looking out for them

Water, in this context and in that parable, is used as a metaphor, representing truth and knowledge

Lazarus, already knows the truth and has had the knowledge, so has no need to request for water
The Rich man, on the other hand, has just developed a thirst for truth and knowledge,
but for him, especially where he is, it is too late for him, to be requesting for water (i.e. truth and knowledge)
even a drop of it, is out of the question, because in the location where he's in right now, it's not just a matter of too little, too late
it's the fact that his destination, at the point is SEALED, and so cant be changed or reversed.

Primesky:
Since the both of them where in the same Sheol,
why did the richman complain about being in torment and Lazarus was being comforted in Abraham's bossom in the same Sheol!.

You're right that the Rich man complained about being in torment
and noted that Lazarus was being comforted in Abraham's bossom in the same Sheol
but the Rich man never once asked why he was in the place of torment part of Sheol
and why Lazarus was in Sheol's other part, the place of comfort

The Rich man seems, to have not fight the decision of being in the place of torment.
Seems to know he belonged there
He didnt even try to get transfer across to the Lazarus Sheol's other part, the place of comfort
Looks like he knew he deserved to be in the place where he found himself

One of the things, to take away and learn from that parable,
is that, there is a place, after death, that people will find themselves
and wont dispute or argue for being there

Primesky:
I will appreciate a clarification here.
Thanks.

When Jesus had left the crowd and gone indoors, his disciples came to him and said,
"Tell us what the parable about the weeds in the field means."
(i.e. please explain to us that parable of the tares and of the field.'')
- Matthew 13:36

Later, when Jesus was alone with the twelve disciples
and with the others who were gathered around,
they asked him what the parables meant
- Mark 4:10

His disciples began questioning Him as to what this parable meant.
- Luke 8:9

lightblazingnow, more in spelt out clear and uncertain terms is needed on the easy thing(s)
that will give one a free pass welcome into the Kingdom of Heaven
Need more info on the deception too

Primesky:
TATIME, please don't be economical with the truth, and claiming to be doing away with old Greek dogma.
Hell fire exist as much as heaven exists. By teaching otherwise, you are not telling the truth!. The origin of your position is not from the bible neither is it from the old Greek letters. The originator of the no hell fire doctrine is the founder of your religion. Charles Teze Russell, your founder was born a baptist or say he was a baptist believer, later he became uncomfortable with the teaching about hell fire, and for that decided to quit and establish his own sect. To butress his ideology, he had to twist and amend the scriptures, an act that continued for centuries just to perpetuate a man's self impulse. Since then, several verses of scriptures have been bastardized by your group through out of context explanations, change of meaning, additions to the original text and other doctrinal murder and fraud has continued over the years. The sad thing is some of you the adherent do not know these and many more.
If you say there is no literal fire, then you are indirectly calling both Jesus Christ and the bible liars!.
Jesus spoke about hell fire on several occasions.
Tell me TATIME, will you believe your dead founder or would you believe Jesus Christ and the bible?.
It's good you tell yourself the truth and tell others too the same.
Deuteronomy 32:22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.

Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Mark 9:45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

Take a look at the last scripture above. Then see the one below. Was God talking trash in Deuteronomy or was Jesus speaking in tongues in the new testament?. My dear, JW is built on falsehood and fasle teachings, you need to research it carefully and exit. Forget about the tongues that will wag. Look at this one below.

Matthew 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

TATIME:
"HELL is real and HEAVEN is real" of course both places are REAL
but what we are saying is
"forgo the dogmatic attitude of following the ideologies of the Greeks that has taken over religious people's brains worldwide
and go for a thorough research as to what God actually said about those who won't live by HIS standards" that's all.

Hell simply means Grave(simplified English) Sheol(Hebrew) Hades(Greek) and Heaven has two different meaning in the Bible (1) is the visible solar system we can see when using a telescope (2) the invisible dwelling place of Spirit beings.
That's why the Bible could call the place where the throne of Almighty God is situated as the "THIRD HEAVEN" 2Corinthians 12:2
So in conclusion God's word is clear on this issue,it's either man chose to be obedient in order to live peacefully without harming himself and others and be allowed to live forever or become disobedient and in one way or the other continue to cause harm to himself and others,then Jehovah has no other option than to return him to dust! Romans 6:23 It's the wickedness in the heart of men that makes then feel that death is not enough punishment for wrongdoers but before Jehovah evildoers are just not fitting in his perfect arrangement so they're to return to noneexistence period! Psalms 37:7-11 And you said "Otem was a Christian" is it one who thoroughly searched for the truth before agreeing to become one or just another churchgoer born by parents following the long time (traditional) misinformation passed onto churches of Christendom? Well Muhammad lived during the 6th century ce and that's exactly what he learnt from the Catholics and today true Christians have unravel all those secrets

Hell or better put, Hades, actually is a Greek concept, the Jews have no concept of Hell or Hades
they have sheol, alright but the concept of Hell or Hades, is a Greek one.

Sheol is more of a proper and real biblical Israelite concept of where the dead are ''interned''

Sheol in an oversimplified or elementary manner can be grave or has been referred as grave

Grave/tomb/sepulchre sites are merely places of deposit for a corpse. Sheol is the realm of the dead or departed souls
- Souls do not linger in the air. Souls do not stay in limbo. Souls do not hang about. Souls do not make revisits

Until Jesus in the NT, Sheol in general, without necessarily distinguishing between righteous or unrighteous souls, has been the realm of the dead or abode of the dead

We have verses in OT (e.g. Psalm 9:17 etcetera) suggesting that the wicked go to Sheol
but it was Jesus in the NT that brought things into perspective when he shared the hyperbolic illustration of Sheol with the story of the Rich Man being elsewhere and Abraham with the Poor Man being on a different side
Remember just like because you're telling a joke, it doesnt necessarily mean, the joke is devoid of some element of truth and reality
so is the case with the parable of the rich man and poor man.

Sheol (i.e. the original Hebrew concept of afterlife) now has gray lines shared with Gehenna (i.e. the refuse dump in Jerusalem hyperbolically referred to by Jesus in Matthew 5:29 Matthew 18:9 and Mark 9:47) and Hell (i.e. a Greek mythology and Greek concept of afterlife) which arent really understood
The etymology of afterlife from a Jewish concept (i.e. Sheol, with 2 sections) has changed over time and Sheol, since, has being interchangeably replaced with Gehenna and Hell/Hades

Reiterating, hell which has become synonymous with Hades, is neither Hebrew or Greek in origin

Sheol is, what you'll find in the original Hebrew text for any word for Hell
In other places, Hades or Hell was the Greek substitution for the part of Sheol where the Rich man is from the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus

As a matter of fact, Hell, actually finds it roots in the classic Greek mythology, Hades

where Hades interestingly and actually, was the ancient Greek god of the underworld.
This god's name (i.e. Hades) later turned to mean the place or abode of the dead, which actually is exactly what Sheol is, what is signifies or represents.

Talking about Gehenna,
well it is a valley, a valley in Jerusalem, used as a dumping refuse site and so was used by Jesus to depict the Lake of fire
(i.e. it is a place of destruction, as in, via incineration, a place for destroying things)

As earlier mentioned, Gehenna was the incinerating refuse dump in Jerusalem
Hades however, historically and originally is the name of a Greek god until it got turned to meaning the place or abode of the dead
It later got interchanged with hell, which is from a German word root
It was bible translators who were substituing the original Hebrew word Sheol (i.e. the part where the dead of the Rich man sort are), with Greek counterparts Hades/Hell that made hell stick with us today

Death is not a physical person but it will cease to exist because it will be destroyed when figuratively thrown into a physical lake of fire

orisa37:
God, Modafucker, Yes. Holy Mary was His Creation. And He said, "This is My Beloved Son, Trust Him yea".
The Serpent, Lucifer, Satan, was an "Evefucker", the Father of all Evil and of this particular Yahoo-Boy. It is the one no one must trust.
God won't kill you, Yahoo-Boy, just for your asking.
He is preserving you in Satan's Army and Police to do more evil to the evil Ones.

But I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go, unless a mighty hand forces him.
- Exodus 3:19

He is, being left kept, for such times as when

TATIME:
Fully understood

Your point, TATIME, is?
What is the point(s) you're trying to make with that screen grab?

Primesky:
Please, can somebody help me ask OneJ, what he is saying?.
Why are you confusing yourself?.
You have a verse with you, explain it and you're saying something else.

1. Oga, tell us why Jesus whom you deceptively call 'a god', is given a name equal with the Father?.

1.Tell us Mr OneJ, is Jesus Christ a true God or not?.

OneJ:
Primesky make I break am down for U....

(i) Bcause of sin ,Adam the father of all mankind lost the God's gift of eternal life (Romans5:12. 6:23). God restored it back to man thru Jesus ransom sacrifice. God sent Jesus the second Adam & gave him the title of "Eternal Father". Jesus is Eternal father of everyone who believe in him & exercise faith that he is the God sent Messiah.(1Cor15:45. John 3:16). Also, because Jesus is our Eternal Father, he has authority to resurrect the dead (restore eternal life )back to faithful mankind (John 5:24-29. Acts 24:15). A human father gives life to his offspring . The Eternal Father grants eternal life to faithful believers.

(ii) Primesky, why U no wan use your brain? Is the usage of word "father" or any compound word with "father" limited to Baba God?
Is Godfather a reference to the Almighty God? God?

(iii) Primesky said "tell us Mr OneJ is Jesus Christ a true God or not?".

Nairalanders,Jesus has provided the answer. in John 17:3."Now this is eternal life: That they may know you ,the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent".
Also ,see Matt16:13-17. John 20:30,31.

Primesky, did Jesus say he is "the only true God"?

(iv) Even sef , ntgreek.org wey U dey quote up and down done deny U finish..... https://www.ntgreek.org/answers/answer-frame-john1_1.htm

"....when the Greek omits a definite article, it may be appropriate to insert an indefinite article for the sake of English translation and understanding.....
However since (John 1:1c) does not have the definite article, it does indicate that this Logos (Word) was not the same person as the Father God.."
(In other words, ntgreek.org admitted that " the word was a god" is very correct.
Una see am, ntgreek done agree say "the word was a god". Therefore, Jesus is not God).
Primesky, ntgreek.org ,your fellow Trinity peddlers done rubbish una doctrine finish.
Dem done destroy una Trinity lie lie forever.

(V) For the sole reason that John 1:1, Acts 28:6, Acts 12:22 have the same grammatical construction. Therefore, what is good for the gander is also good for the goose. To argue & deny "a god " in John 1:1c amounts to double standard & deceit to promote the trinity fallacy.

Primesky , I pray U receive sense &wisdom of understanding. IJNA.....

[img]https://s1/images/OneJ.jpg[/img]

⁵Have this in your mind, which was also in Christ Jesus,
⁶who, existing in the form of God, didn't consider equality with God a thing to be grasped,
⁷but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men.
⁸And being found in human form...
- Philippians 2:5-8a

OneJ, in actual fact, ntgreek.org admitted that "the word was a god" is very incorrect.
Una no see am, ntgreek nefa agree say "the word was a god". For where?
Besides, Philippians 2:5-8a above, if fact, hin ntgreek, too come conclude, say: "Jesus is God" Allelulai!
See am from the above screenshot blue highlighted section

Primesky:
You see why I don't say these things?.
No body will believe it, or few persons will accept it.

My dear, this is not made up alright?. What you see on Hollywood movies are not just fictional creations.
They're real!. Oh please believe me. They're real as real!. Subliminal programming of the mind is going on, even with cartoons!.

You have no idea what's going on in the world you live in. If you sleep and wake the next day, it's a big miracle. You need to give God thanks. God keeps us and has put restrictions until the time. Have you not read it in the bible?. One of the greatest lie the devil has told is to make people believe he doesn't exist.

2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

My dear, this is what is keeping them from going full scale. God restricts them because of His love for us. But if we reject His truth and ways, then He will back off!. But His children will be secured. Please, what ever you do, don't joke with this times we're living in!.

Get close to God, I assure you, nothing will take you by surprise. The secrets of the Lord is with them that fear Him. He reveals hidden things. This is not my pride. My pride is Jesus Christ. Yea, it's all about Him.

Everything you're saying, bar the old wives' tales, are irrefutable
Please stay focus brother.
Leave out fiction and moving into realms of fantasy

Primesky:
Please, can somebody help me ask OneJ, what he is saying?. Why are you confusing yourself?. You have a verse with you, explain it and you're saying something else.

1. Oga, tell us why Jesus whom you deceptively call 'a god', is given a name equal with the Father?.

1.Tell us Mr OneJ, is Jesus Christ a true God or not?.

OneJ has so far been faring well and not doing badly actually.
However, if there's one thing to agree to disagree with OneJ on, it is these two fundamentals

Primesky:
Knowledge is a waste if you choose not to believe. Knowledge will make sense to you when you believe and accept it as being factual and true. The challenge you will probably have is the fact that you haven't had a personal encounter with God himself. Saul was so brutal and cruel working against what he called a sect. As far as He was concerned, this so called Christians were mad!, why?, they acted against what he believed, as a result, He set out to destroy them. Everything changed the day he encountered Jesus Christ personally, everything else he thought he knew was pushed aside. And he became even more committed than the very apostles.

It will be very difficult for anybody, scientists, devil or whoever to tell me that God doesn't exist, I know Him for a person, and it shocks me to my bones when people say God doesn't exist. My respect for him is boundless, the fact that He is so powerful, and yet very patient, taking insults, abuse and all sorts of nonsense. But that won't continue for ever. See, God can wipe out the whole planet earth in one second, not minute!. I doubted it when He said it at first, until He showed it to me. Then I feared Him and respected Him the more. His love is simply amazing and patient. Let's not play with fire!

I have had several exposures to what Otem is spreading around as truth. I can tell you, I just managed to escape by the grace of God. Those guys are demons, not just aliens. They have amazing technological instrument the world can not imagine.

They have every possible explanation for everything. Far more wiser than we are, why not?, the devil have been around before us. They know what tickles our interest, they can predict our reaction., mesmerise our visions. But it's all lies!. Mind-blowing wonders and mesmerizing occurrences will come. I can't say certain things here because it's not yet time. But you need the bible, you need to read it very carefully and thoroughly. The truth any believer has of it now, could be what makes the difference in those days to come not too far from now. But the good news is, we, God's children will rout them in the name of Jesus Christ. That's why they want to first of all disconnect us from Him. Read about failed alien abductions. There's power in the name of Jesus Christ. My simple question is, why are they harvesting the eggs of women and the sperm of men, what do they want to create. Food for thought. I'm not saying trash. Common guys, we need Jesus Christ now!. Something deep is going on.

I can tell you, that a time is coming when man will be helpless over certain things, then these liars will come, pretending to help us, having disconnected many from God, but that's the beginning of terror. The shocker is that they won't look like what we normally see. They look refined. The truth is, they are already here. Full appearance won't come until the set time. So, the likes of Otem will increase. The day I saw their fake Jesus and read his own version of the bible, I knew from that day, that man is In for a huge deception. Deception so great you can kill as a Christian to defend it as being true. But God also warned us about it. That is why I keep an eye on that Otem of a guy. That thing he's doing is not a joke, it's apart of the plan to deceive man.

For you saying there's no God, it becomes even easier to mess you up, because you have absolutely no defense. If the so called Christians will so greatly fall, how about the non believer?

C'mon now Primesky, stay focused
and avoid or steer clear of old wives' tales

Freh:
Check the greek or hebrew word used there that's how you get the meaning

[img]https://s1/images/Longsuffering.jpg[/img]

You like Greek salad, right?
Want some mayonnaise with it?.
Knock yourself out. Bon appétit

Freh:
Second longsuffering is old English if you even browse it online you'll see the meaning there.
This is not an argument it is fact

You're trying to force an acceptance that longsuffering is old English for forebearance or to endure
This is an argument for you,
as you're bent on exchanging your ignorance on here
It is not fact, as your statement doesnt add up to reality

Freh:
The bible uses repititions all the time like you are my shield and buckler when both of them are the same thing.
It shouldn't be surprising to see forbearance and longsuffering in the same sentence.

Do you at all know the difference between shield and buckler?

If you don't recognise the nuance between shield and buckler, as the reason why they're both used in a same sentence
Why am I not surprised, you dont recognise the nuance between forbearance and longsuffering, consequently why they're both used in the same sentence

Longsuffering is a function of forbearance

Freh, show where the bible uses repetitions all the time, like, you are my shield and buckler, when both of them are the same thing
and let's both you and I, examine the verse together, to see whether or not they both, really are the same thing

Freh:
If you even look at a different translation it will be patience or something else that is there

If you had slowly and carefully read the comments I posted, you would have found your comment being ignorant unneccesarily.

Longsuffering is an adjective describing the noun forbearance

Forbearance, is patient self-control, restraint and tolerance.

Longsuffering, is patiently enduring lasting offense
having or showing patience in spite of troubles, especially those caused by other people, things or bad behaviour

Longsuffering means, to politely or patiently forbear
forbear, as in, restrain an impulse to do something
or to stop oneself from doing something, though you have the opportunity or the right to do it.

Freh:
Don't interpret based on convenience.
Study to show yourself approved.

But Jesus said,
Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
- Matthew 19:14

SMH. You must be a learner, just plain ignorant or both,
to within the context of the OP, to have said, God is not suffering and cannot suffer in His true form

How is God longsuffering? How can God suffer? How is God suffering?

Reiterating, God can suffer, God is suffering or God longsuffers, by putting up with us
God can suffer, God is suffering or God longsuffers, by accepting, in a patient way, an unpleasant situation
or continue to accept, in a patient way, someone who behaves unpleasantly
So, God can suffer, God is suffering or God longsuffers, by accepting someone or anything unpleasant, in a patient way

orisa37:
That He is suffering all our Pains and by that we are healed.

By His stripes we are healed
but that He is suffering by being patient, holding back judgement, buying and giving us time, to repent and receive salvation

Freh:
Longsuffering is old English for forebearance or to endure.

Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering;
not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
- Romans 2:4 KJV

Longsuffering is an adjective describing the noun forbearance

Forbearance, is patient self-control, restraint and tolerance.

Longsuffering, is patiently enduring lasting offense
having or showing patience in spite of troubles, especially those caused by other people, things or bad behaviour

Longsuffering means, to politely or patiently forbear
forbear, as in, restrain an impulse to do something
or to stop oneself from doing something, though you have the opportunity or the right to do it.

Freh, we see, in Romans 2:4 "old English" KJV above,
forbearance and longsuffering used together and at the same time, in a single verse, to make a point.

Freh:
God is not suffering and cannot suffer in his true form.

And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed,
The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth
- Exodus 34:6

The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression...
- Numbers 14:18a

God is suffering, actually correctly put, God is longsuffering.
God can suffer, God suffers, God is suffering, and in every sense of the word, God is longsuffering

How is God longsuffering? How can God suffer? How is God suffering?

God can suffer, God is suffering or God longsuffers, by putting up with us
God can suffer, God is suffering or God longsuffers, by accepting, in a patient way, an unpleasant situation
or continue to accept, in a patient way, someone who behaves unpleasantly
So, God can suffer, God is suffering or God longsuffers, by accepting someone or anything unpleasant, in a patient way.

Freh:
But the Spirit within us, that is trapped in matter cries out for release for quickening.

¹I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
²With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing, one another in love;
³Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
- Ephesians 4:1-3

Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
- Colossians 3:12

And we exhort you, brethren, admonish the disorderly, encourage the fainthearted, support the weak, be longsuffering toward all
- 1 Thessalonians 5:14

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith
- Galatians 5:22

What part(s) of God's gift to us, are we keeping imprisoned?
What part(s) of God's gift to us, are we keeping from seeing the light of the day?
What part(s) of the Spirit within us, cries out for release for quickening?

Freh:
It is this cry and groaning from within that the prophets portray in their texts

Gone off the track with this comment
What is "it is this cry and groaning from within that the prophets portray in their texts"?

[img]https://s1/images/MuttleysGato.gif[/img]

budaatum:
I just wish that when people post this meaningless crap they'd do some research first, or at least, think a little.
If it were true, wouldn't Yahweh atheist believe in Orunmila, or Sango, or fairies at the bottom of gardens, for that matter?

Here's a little link to what the https://www.chesterton.org/ceases-to-worship/ has to say about it in case you care.

One man's crap is another man's treasure.

budaatum:
Hollad!

What does "Hollad!" mean?

budaatum:
Again!

What's with "Again!"
I said:
"Let me know if you accept and agree to having it done in camera,
then I'll holler you, in camera there, what the terms are."
but you havent, made it clear nor come back yet to say, whether or not, you dont mind, the in camera arrangement

budaatum:
All this story just to inform me of terms again muttley! You tire me.

Post your terms and arrangements in the more than one way camera please and stop the wriggling

I even tire myself.

Yes, because you're a GOAT,
and only one worthy on the thread that showed genuine, sincere and honest interest
plus the hunger, craving, glutton for information, swayed to share and go into depth with you on the matter.

Let me know if you accept and agree to having it done in camera, then I'll holler you, in camera there, what the terms are.
If the terms suit you, then we can rock and roll

We going to have a ball, so look forward to filling your boots up.

budaatum:
I would love to have Bible verses to wave in front of the anti-gay brigade.

Wrong move.
Premature ejaculation (PE) loading things

dalaman:
Ogbeni leave atheist alone and stop arguing with them.
Didn't you tell your man butterfly that you'll heed to his advice?

I hear you.
This is the last one.
It was one out of my gesture of goodwill responses