₦airaland Forum

PastorAIO:
Without any sources for your claims there is no argument

Of course, no argument because they are incontrovertible

PastorAIO:
You say Daniel served under Cyrus.

Yes, he served King Cyrus
and you heard right, the first time

PastorAIO:
Where did you get this notion?

The bible to start with

PastorAIO:
I'm not aware of any text that supports this

You don't say?
Oh wow! Why am I not surprised.
Not a first time and certainly wont be the last of reading ''I'm not aware of any...''

PastorAIO:
Not even the bible

Ow! You're hurting me!
SMH facepalm!

PastorAIO:
The book of Daniel says that the king of Babylon made Daniel leader of the Magi (wise men),
but obviously the Magi in this case doesn't refer to Persian Zoroastrian priests

Exactly
and for sake of budding ''Bereans'', Daniel, as, chief of the Magi, can be found in Daniel 4:9 and Daniel 5:11
Same or similar title, (i.e. Rab-mag) used for someone else, can as well, be found at Jeremiah 39:3 and Jeremiah 39:13

Now, if you re-read well my earlier post, you'll see where I typed:
No one presumes Daniel to be a Zoroastrian
Daniel is a Magi and not a Zoroastrian

PastorAIO:
So there we have one example of the word magoi used to refer to wise men other than Zoroastrian priests.

I'll from my previous post, repeat here, once more
What and/or who, is Zoroastrianism named after sef?

PastorAIO:
In fact the word is also used to refer to a Jewish sorcerer in Acts 13:6

So?
Dont other occupational titles have their own fair share of the good, the bad and the ugly?

Magi arent necessarily sorcerers/shamans
Historically, they're powerful, intelligent, skilful, learned and shrewd sages, well versed in science of astronomy/astrology, mysticism and/or occult sciences
and their skills or strong abilities, singly, combinedly or selectively chosen, range from being astrologer-priests, magicians, physicians, prophesiers/diviners/psychics/seers/fortune-tellers/soothsayers/augurs, interpreters of dreams etcetera

Acts 13:6 shows where and how degenerated the word, magi has become,
that its turned into being used for anyone, that's full of all kinds of deceit and trickery
or full of distorting the truth about the way God wants us to live.

Considering the circumstances, being sorcerers/shamans is a latter add-on to the Magi's repertoire

PastorAIO:
The book of Daniel was only accurate up to the point it was written.
All prophecies thereafter failed. That's how scholars know when it was written

All prophecies thereafter failed? That's fiddlesticks and you know it.
Why dont you just pull the other leg, its got bells on it

frank317:
Even though I am not clear what cheeky means, but I didn't think her tone was a rebuff... Our conversation was friendly to me.

Didn't know u were having my back... Sorry for coming at u.... Cheers man

Nothing spoilt bro
We all were having banter
Banter makes the world go round

1Sharon:
Uncle, what does the word cheeky mean? how is that a rebuff?

Fact of the matter is, cheek was prominently on display shown
Young man publicly appreciated it, only to be told he is cheeky
I retorted, in an amusing way that you first was ''cheeky''
Or was I wrong? Werent you cheeky first?

1Sharon:
I don't know why ur going on and on for?

Ask frank317

1Sharon:
It's not that deep..jheezz.

Exactly, its not that deep, a wordplay.

1Sharon:
I'm out

Same here too
You have pert glutes by the way
Keep the squats going

frank317:
Oga leave that thing...

What thing?
What is the thing I am to leave?

frank317:
U heard me mention that her ass is cute and quickly rushed to view her profile to view for urself...

I had seen her profile longest time before you, but didnt comment about it
Dont get me wrong, there isnt anything remotely bad in complimenting any physique of God's gift to man
and so you showed and expressed that you understand how good her buttocks are
but instead got a rebuff and being told you're cheeky
I stood up for you and in your defence, said:
It cant be you that's cheeky
because it's her that was cheeky, showing buttocks first

frank317:
Why are u now being hypocritical about it?

Hypocritical?
Being hypocritical about/over what?
Suddenly its hypocritical, for saying, narcissism/selfie is a real turn off.

frank317:
Pls stop forming superman for us...

Where and how exactly, was superman being formed for anyone?

frank317:
Na ur the de molest small pickin

SMH, you turned this an inverted 180 degrees
and some got the hint, that, it is a freudian slip, betraying a repressed hidden and darker fantasy

frank317:
Oh, lepasharon... Didn't know u were the one using this moniker...still think ur ass is cute though.
I think my fiance will understand.

1Sharon:
you are cheeky

No.
Correction, it's you that was cheeky, showing buttocks.
Narcissism is a real turn off.

MuttleyLaff:
No.
Correction, it's you that was cheeky, showing buttocks.
Narcissism is a real turn off.

hopefulLandlord:
I don't think she gives a rats ass behind what you think of her

Thank God she doesnt gives a rat's ass ... I can sleep easier now.
Behind every girl's selfie is approximately 39 nearly identical snaps, that just didnt make the cut
The mention of narcissism, is in relation to the selfie fad

frank317:
Oh, lepasharon... Didn't know u were the one using this moniker...still think ur ass is cute though.
I think my fiance will understand.

1Sharon:
you are cheeky

No.
Correction, it's you that was cheeky, showing buttocks.
Narcissism is a real turn off.

Sarassin:
Yup, I incurred a ban for what I don't know, but it probably came at the right time.
Hopefully we can get back to meaningful discussions.

a ban for what I don't know? I suspect the ban had to do with referencing the post with the primate with tail mentioned in it,
I got banned too and the only thing after reviewing my post pointed out the primate with tail as the likely cause

Spambot is very tetchy and easily gets peeved off

You're lucky that it didnt snare you again, for using the F word, for maximum and positive effect, when you warned, by saying:
all I saying is move along and dont mess with me,

LoJ:
I would say way more than that.

It is only in religious people's psyche, that strongly reacting is equated to being unholy.
There is nothing wrong with using strong words or even being angry when justified.
Even in the Bible, there are references to Jesus being seriously angry and having to perform acts of such nature.

I have made acquaintance with Sarassin for some years now,
and it is not surprising to me that although he is a very kind hearted and polite, when you look for trouble,
he puts you in check with full sense of meaning.
The above individual is not the first one, even in this forum who had to be "put in check" by him.

That is why, above, I quoted Aristotle, the Greek philosopher and polymath

Sarassin
1 . The nice, quite sweet and knowledgeable guy
2 . The funny, crazy and great sense of humour guy.
3 . The until you pi$$ him off you never want to see, until he's done with you side guy

The 3 sides of Sarassin
People only see the #1 and #2 sides of him
They hardly have seen the #3 side
but it doesnt mean the #3 side about him doesnt exist,
if anyone thinks so, such is totally misled

oaroloye:
SHALOM!
Be careful of falsely accusing people, when talking about things that you are not familiar with.

PastorAIO:
Oga, you sef abeg try to take some of your own advice.
This issue has a history long before this thread

https://gifyu.com/images/steadylaugh.gif
How can anyone forget that thread
Brilliant thread not to forget in a hurry
Being meaning to give it a re-visit asap

PastorAIO:
Now frankly I was not directly aware of translations that used the word Magi. My kjv says 'wise men'

That, right there, is the clue.
The rule of thumb, is to always check, double check and cross check with each and all available translations out there, augmented with other credible and reliable great literary resources
and not be relying or depending on just one translation

PastorAIO:
And indeed the Greek word ''magoi ' is used to mean a wise man or an astrologer or a magician even.
In the book of Daniel, Daniel is called the leader of the Magi in Babylon.
Most translations would say the leader of the wise men.
No one presumes that Daniel was a Zoroastrian.

and rightly so, as no one presumes Daniel to be a Zoroastrian
Daniel is a Magi and not a Zoroastrian

PastorAIO:
However I am aware of a creepy move to try to appropriate the dignity of Persian religion which was held in high regard

There isnt anything creepy in appropriating or trying to appropriate any or whatever religion, considering that, the adherents of the religion(s) accepts, admits the existence of Jesus and truth of about Him.

PastorAIO:
It is such a move that would lead someone to translate that word as Magi knowing that the Magi are the priesthood of Avestan Religion

Avestan Religion? Isnt that a Freudian slip?
Why be vague, which Avestan Religion are you referring to?
Isn't Avestan a language originating from Persia?

PastorAIO:
The person I was actually addressing has already attempted to make such a move in a previous thread. Without knowledge of that you would have no idea of the context of the exchange or even of what is really being discussed

The person you actually was addressing and Sarassin suffer each other gladly.
This is why both, air their divergent interpretations without rancour

Now, the person you actually was addressing didnt make such move in any previous thread.
Part of what I recall the person said, is that there's nothing wrong in ''borrowing'' and/or ''importing''
Also made another point, that the irony is that, the Magi must be privy to some sacred truth & knowledge for them to have journeyed and come to Bethlehem to worship God

The last sentence, that the Magi must be privy to some sacred truth & knowledge, is true because Daniel served in at least two Kings', Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus; courts.
You seem to know this, as you've already accepted, by stating that, in the Book of Daniel, Daniel is called the leader of the Magi in Babylon
The Magi's source is strongly and likely from Daniel's sacred truth books & knowledge writings
and remotely from another's prophet; Balaam's Numbers 24:16-17 prophecy

PastorAIO:
This creepy attempt to legitimise Christianity by hitching it onto Zoroastrianism is a long historical thing

Creepy attempt to legitimise Christianity?
Besides, the truth that christian (i.e. precursor to Christianity) is a contemptuous term, as good as the word, nigger, is,
why would anyone with the right sense be interested in re-legitimising a Roman invention state religion Christianity?
Also, no attempt or need to hitch Christianity onto Zoroastrianism
because fyi, the life of the chap, prophet Zarathushtra, known to the Greeks as Zoroaster, is based heavily on the life of Daniel.
What is Zoroastrianism named after sef?

PastorAIO:
There was even a gospel written called the Syriac Infancy Gospel which claimed that Zoroaster the founder of Zoroastrianism prophecied Jesus' coming and that was why the 3 wise men went in search of the king of the Jews.

The need for the Syriac Infancy Gospel is unneccesary because that prophecy was, in the Old Testament and was actually made by Daniel
Recall from above, that, the character Zoroaster is based heavily on the life of Daniel

PastorAIO:
ps. And please sir, it is not everything that someone is interested in that everyone else will want to share interest too.
On many occasions I've tried to start conversations that no one responded to.
I even started threads that didn't go beyond the OP. It is important to respect that

He does make some noticeable and interesting points
but really needs to be tidying up his posts and/or improve his posting skills

PastorAIO:
All these your extended verbosity that is so dire and tiresome is nothing short of an act of violence on, and wilful pollution of, this space we all share for the exchange of ideas even if we don't agree with each other most of the time.

He isnt guilty of extended verbosity at all
but rather is guilty of the misuse and abuse of carriage returns
Allowing next words, typed in his sentences, appearing dropped down on new lines, done unchecked or uncontrolled
is causing the passive white spaces expanse on the right hand-side margin
and contributing to the post becoming excessive in size or amount
It's not only torture to read but its painful, extensively scrolling down wasteful spaces on the right, to read post appearing on a left side margin only

MrPresident1:
He accepts his chickenhood

With no regrets
You're still lying like a Persia rug though.
The devil has competition the way you fabricate lies and pretend I havent answered you
You cant quote me where I was making mouth, saying I'll do this, will do that because it never happened that way
Reiterating, even though I had already answered you,
I wouldnt mind doing it again and/or refer you to my earlier response, if you produce the mention and proof of me saying: ''I'll do this, will do that...'

MrPresident1:
Oya answer the question na if you are not a olodo
shebi U were making mouth, you will do this, you will do that,
simple question now you turn to chicken

1. Answer
or
2. In silence, accept that you a olodo rabata

https://gifyu.com/images/RegretNothing2.gif
You lie like a Persia rug
You are competing with devil, with your lying and pretending I havent answered you
If you can successfully quote me where I was making mouth, saying I'll do this, will do that
then, even though I had already answered you, I wouldnt mind doing it again and/or refer you to my earlier response

Rilwayne001:
I can very well tell that he pushed you to the wall for I have never seen you get angry this much. Pardon the old man sir.

ANYBODY can become angry, that is easy;
but to be angry with the right person,
and to the right degree, and at the right time,
and for the right purpose, and in the right way,
that, is not within everybody’s power, that is not easy.
- Aristotle
Greek philosopher and polymath

Philosophers have long thought about the causes of anger,
their consensus, is, usually, it's an emotional response to being provoked
Sarassin never alluded to being a saint, so I am not surprised he has a threshold

MrPresident1:
Aorist nonsense .
What Aorist tense is in this one, What is hard to understand here?

MrPresident1:
Thanks for the knowledge on Aorist tenses

OK Muttleylaff, I have been reading up on Aorist tenses .
So, in the context that Paul used it, there was no time or duration attached .
You are right.

OK, you are not an olodo because you taught me Aorist tense , .

MrPresident1:
Muttleylaff olodo

How can you say someone doesn't know anything after you've earlier said he knows
Can you now see from the bolded in the above mentions, that you're inconsistent

Sarassin, there is something in that post causing the hiding and ban
When the post is mentioned, it triggers hiding the post and banning the poster
After your ban expires, just post your response without doing a mentioning of the post
else you get the same treatment all over again

---

---

Sarassin
1 . The nice, quite sweet and knowledgeable guy
2 . The funny, crazy and great sense of humour guy.
3 . The until you piss him off you never want to see, until he's done with you side guy

Sarassin:
Leaving talk of airborne primates aside for a moment.
And talking about this Magi business, we then have to face an obvious conundrum.
It is Matthew who describes the visit of the Magi and the subsequent decision by the family to Flee to Egypt to escape Herod.
Luke on the other hand says nothing about such a journey, not a hint about the Massacre of Innocents in fact he writes that the baby Jesus is presented at the temple (which would have taken place within 40 days of his birth).
In addition, the adoration story of Luke 2 makes it clear that the annunciation was to shepherds, who in turn came to worship the baby Jesus, no mention of Magi.

Both stories are incompatible, if one is correct, the other is necessarily wrong, the possibility exists that both accounts are pious renderings and are entirely made up

I beg to differ, there is no conundrum
This is anything less than three-dimensional
The characterization and representation of events were done three-dimensionally.
Whatever Luke missed out in his perpective, Matthew is there seeing it from his point of view
so both stories are true

PastorAIO:
I mean it in the sense found here:

¹⁶But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.
¹⁷For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do.
¹⁸But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
¹⁹Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity
- Galatian 5:16-19

More my reason of asking ''Does a template(s) mean anything to you at all''?
And further asking ''What is a template?''

That Galatian 5:16-19 above, you referenced, is without discussing at length, talking about the second template
The first template is a living soul that became reduced in quality after losing life
(i.e. it became this way by losing faith in God's word and wilfully ignor‌ing it)
whereas the second template is a life-giving spirit
(i.e. it gives not only life but also deliverance from sin and its consequences)

Really would have appreaciated if you had define sin.
I mean, in in a thorough manner, define it to a large and detailed degree,

PastorAIO:
Did I not read that the flesh is inclined to sin?
If so, and Adam was flesh then the sin was already inherent in his fleshly nature

Define sin

PastorAIO:
Further more there will be no salvation from sin cos the will be a resurrection of the flesh, which means a resurrection of sinful nature

Does a template(s) mean anything to you at all?
What is a template?

PastorAIO:
Who told this monkey that any Magi came to bow down to baby Jesus?
Which verse of the bible said magi bowed to Jesus.
And if it is not from the bible then which other dubious source did you conjure this misinformation from.

¹After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea,
during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem,
²asking, “Where is the One who has been born King of the Jews?
We saw His star in the east and have come to worship Him.”
³When King Herod heard this, he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him
- Matthew 2:1-3

Eyahh, peele, missing and looking for your long lost cousin, are you?
Though sometimes, I wish I was a monkey
so I could throw poop at deserving people like you and it would be legit
but thank your stars, I am not
and I aint the one you're looking for

Now put up or shut up with Matthew 2:1-3 above
Continue and make me unleash your cousin flying monkeys on you

MuttleyLaff:
https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
I expect to see your rottweiler out soon. Kikiki

PastorAIO:
It is quite fascinating that this one will still be jaunting around and even tell other people that they are 'posturing'.
This is truly a wonderful world and Homo sapiens sapiens is truly a wonderful species.

Talk of the devil
Now that you've turned up,
why dont you, for the avoidance of any doubt,
slam an ''out of order'' sticker on your forehead and call it a day
Mtcheeewwww...

Sarassin:
No apology required my friend, and no need for a thread "dedicated" to me

It's your point of view, your perspective, your posturing, I am interested in and not necessarily others
I wasn't intending to set up a Jankara mall or market place thread

Sarassin:
you can set up a thread for the generality to discuss their take on God and gods, I would be more than happy to contribute

As I've said, your definition of the nouns, God and god, is of the most interest to me

Sarassin:
It is no secret that my outlook on God is essentially for lack of a better term Pantheist, and that humanity is an integral part of the Divine ecosystem. I believe that all religions are essentially false although most contain grains of universal truths. I hope my humble views will reach your exacting standards, set up the thread if you please and let's get to it

Religions are the least of my concern
Talking of religion, you know, as well as I do, what true and pure religion is anyway, so anyone believing in anything else (e.g. Christianity, Islam, Buddism, Hinduism, Penterascalism/Pentecostalism etcetera) parading itself otherwise are just kidding themselves

LordOfNaira:
You talk about experience as though Adam and Eve had any experience before they disobeyed God

They had never disobeyed before. They had never seen anyone die before and yet God said they would die if they ate the fruit.

The possibility that Adam was aware of deviation was not even there.

For how could they have known that eating the fruit would bring them misery when they had never witnessed misery?
How could they be scared of death when the were supposedly created and put into a perfect world?

The reason why you all can easily judge Adam is because you are aware of the pains of repercussions.
Adam had never felt misery or death or another sort of existence from the one he had. There was no other life he could compare with the one he used to have until he lost it

You should never call that test an integrity test. What integrity are you testing when the people you are making the test on had never witnessed any other life aside goodness?

The only way we can agree on this story is if you agree that Adam and Eve already had experiences with which they compared goodness with evil
If you can agree that they had once been punished and felt pains to understand the significance of repercussions.

Just like a baby who has just been born. The baby has no knowledge of good and evil. Has no experience. Threatening to smack the baby may even make the baby laugh because she has never been smacked before. But as she grows older and she gets beaten once, when next you threaten to smack her, she may become scared or burst into tears because she knows that spanking is painful. Also, if a baby loses its mother, it would certainty not be aware of grief. Imagine threatening to kill it. You can even point a gun at it and it would not feel alarmed.

Like I said earlier, we can only agree if you agree that Adam's knowledge of good and evil came from experience or from eating the fruit. But to tell me he was aware of good and evil without any experience to make comparisons is nothing but ridiculous

I've read your beautifully presented post and clearly see everywhere you've misunderstood and/or misinterpreted points I've made.

When I come off the road, I will asap sectionally respond to each and every aspect of your post (i.e. the bolded especially and if possible more)

kkins25:
me self wan know...,,,
muttleylaff in all his wisom just dosent know that adam means MAN and eve means LIFE.
so the tale of adam nd eve is not an historical one.

You're actually spot on
that Adam means Man (i.e. human being made from dust)
and Eve means life (i.e. Adam on highsight realised this and appropriately called her so)
The bible isnt necessarily a historical narrative

LordOfNaira:
Explain, please.
How can somebody who has no knowledge of good and evil be expected to pass an integrity test?

Knowledge doesnt always have to be empirical
We at times know things through second-hand or third-hand parties experiences
and not through our own personal experience

The proof of the pudding is in the eating
Does man have integrity?
OK, let's put it to test and tell him about not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil
The capital punishment will be death,
death because it is the highest punishment for such an act of disobeying the command,
deemed not to be ordinarily an act of disobedience
but is the ultimate treason against God

MuttleyLaff:
You have no idea.
I'll tell you what, I had an epiphany of what's being making me feel better
Looking back on, I keep seeing that, I suffered you gladly,
you can't understand or imagine how much that means to me
That, right there, my dear friend, every time I remember it, makes me feel better

Wilgrea7:
if believing this makes you feel better.. then by all means do

https://gifyu.com/images/ShakeHeadHeDontGetIt2.gif
Oh, stop it because, you just dont get it

Wilgrea7:
.
if saying that will make you feel better.. then keep saying it

You have no idea.
I'll tell you what, I had an epiphany of what's being making me feel better
Looking back on, I keep seeing that, I suffered you gladly,
you can't understand or imagine how much that means to me
That, right there, my dear friend, every time I remember it, makes me feel better

Sarassin:
I am happy to do so and indeed have done so in the past

Would you?
Ah, would mean a lot to me if you do.
Thanks for obliging
You have not in the past done so. You have?
How did I not notice, see or find it?

Sarassin:
but I think we have deviated from the topic of the thread.

Oopsy daisy, my bad
but I thought the thread's topic is on/about "Spirit Lives", so isn't God, a Spirit then
Never mind, my apologies for my part and role I played in deviating from the thread's topic.

in order to makes amends and to respect your wish to bring sanity back to the thread, I'll create a separate thread dedicated to you, so you'll have the stage and the opportunity to define God and god for me

I really want and/or hope to be overawed

Wilgrea7:
this back and forth is pointless.. you are hell bent on attaching experience as a compulsory means for acquiring knowledge .. you're criticizing me for using a dictionary yet you compulsorily make reference to Google dictionary.. nowhere does “to know" or knowing imply experience... experience is a way to acquire knowledge and it was not listed anywhere... you seem to be eager to add to the Bible .. goodluck with that.. you went from accepting what is plain and written there to adding google and philosophy that didn't exist when Genesis was written.. once again.. good luck..

https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
I am no match for your level of ignorance(s)
and you've realised you're caught out,
that's why instead of obliging the questions,
you rather, throw a tantrum and spit dummy out.

Sarassin:
However my reply was succinct and directly to the point, you may have missed it.
And who is described as the Morning Star?

I can give you a list of at least three whom are described as (M)morning star(s)

Sarassin:
The brightest and best of the Sons of the Morning?

SMH. You must be winding me up?
So is this your ''The brightest and best of the Sons of the Morning'' exactly the same words as used originally from any bible verse?
If you cant give me the bible verse for it, please retract, without hesitation, your question

Sarassin:
Please don't tell me Lucifer

Nope wasnt
I could have, because legitimately Satan apart from Jesus is called this translated ''Lucifer''

Sarassin:
and what is the morning star if not the Sun?

Ah-ha haba Chief bwah hahaha,
OK, I notice you propercased ''sun'', so what are you getting at?
Are you trying hard to tie yourself up in a knot now?
If you think and claim it is the physical sun,
then you certainly are aware that God, not only in Ezekiel 8:15-16, found facing east, bowing low to the ground, worshiping the sun abhorrent
and need to get acquainted with an earlier warning about it in Deuteronomy 4:19

Sarassin:
In my view, per the verse you have quoted in Ezekiel you run the risk of tying yourself up in knots when you arbitrarily ascribe a biblical verse to the non-existent doctrine of the diminishing presence of God in a progressively easterly direction

Ha haha ha ha
You've misconstrued my:
''To go east, nine times out of ten, is a euphemism, for and/or about moving away from God''
to mean a diminishing presence of God in a progressively easterly direction

God is Omnipresent, but the fact is, one can still withdraw and be withdrawn from God

You earlier wrote in admiration of those (i.e. Muslims, supplications to virtually all Hindu deities etcetera) who begin their prayers facing an Easterly direction,
so I brought up Ezekiel 8:15-16, to show you how God isnt impressed of them, even if Muslims, that begin their prayers facing an Easterly direction.

Sarassin:
According to Philostratus, Apollonius was a miracle worker and worshipped variously as a god throughout his life

What would you have expected Philostratus say?

Sarassin:
I daresay that that the present identikit of Jesus today is a composite of many others including Apollonius of Tyana and Orpheus in my view.

Yeah right.
Coming from what Philostratus copied from the Gospels, and wrote about Apollonius, 150 years after the crucifixion of Jesus
You sure know how to pick them
Never mind, it doesnt matter because I dont want to fall out with you over Philostratus

Sarassin:
Honestly I would not get too hung up over the issue of the visit of the Magi

You do know who and what the Magi were, dont you?
Of course, I am not expecting a ''wise men'' or ''three kings'' response from you

Sarassin:
The biblical accounts are indeterminate and in any event we know that many ancient gods, kings and heroes were said to have been born under some sort of celestial sign, heralded by Angels, wise men or what have you indicating their greatness and role as "saviour" as well, it's all par for the course, Buddha, Krishna and Christ, even Osiris

Coming from an Inclusivist that you are, I am not surprised by this remark
One of them has to be the real McCoy
Sarassin, convincingly define God and god please,
Exhaustively and to the best of your understanding do this for me please

Sarassin:
It is obviously astrological in nature, and it goes back centuries to millennia prior to the common era.
Indeed, like so many other religious and mythological stories, the "three kings" represent motifs that long predate Christianity and actually the stories of the Magi represent an Egyptian influence on early Christianity

Magi are Persians

Sarassin:
And lets not forget, those "wise men" could not have been that smart, they got lost along the way and had to ask (of all people) Herod for directions

¹³Then the king said to the wise men,
who knew all the Persian laws and customs, for he always asked their advice
¹⁴The names of these men were
Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan
--seven nobles of Persia and Media who had special access to the king.
They met with the king regularly and held the highest positions in the empire.
- Esther 1:13-14

Just like their counterparts in Esther 1:13-14 above, those ''wise men'' understood what protocol means
It will only be ''unwise men'' that wouldnt be smart enough to follow proper diplomatic protocols by approaching Herod and approach for directions

Wilgrea7:
you're drifting.. this does not relate.. the tree served the reason for which it was created? ..
what was the reason? to aid the fall of man or to give man knowledge of good and evil..
if it was to aid the fall of man, then man is not to be blamed..
so let me ask.. what is the purpose of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?

You cant come to terms with it

Wilgrea7:
you're starkly ignoring what i said earlier..
is it the tree that gave Adam and eve the unpleasant experience
or it was the punishment for their disobedience..
you're trying to paint the tree as a bad tree which it is not

The tree opened the door for all sorts of experiences
The punishment for the disobedience was death,
Death being the possible highest form of punishment for treason
(i.e. for the betrayal of God, man will pay with his life)

No one is painting the tree of the knowledge of good and evil bad
I am just stating the facts of the matter and reality about it
The tree isnt neccesarily bad but
if you're comfortable with the term, the tree is a necessary evil
and after serving its purpose, ultimately gets removed from the garden
(i.e. when Eden is restored the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is nowhere to be found)

Wilgrea7:
putting experience countless times in the place of knowledge will not make experience equal to knowledge.. the bible stated knowledge and knowledge.. why specify that its by experience evidence says the contrary

choose one.. Albert Einstein or the bible..
a quote from Albert Einstein doesn't change what knowledge is..
a science student has knowledge of the boiling point of water.. doesn't mean he experienced it

both are not the same.. refer to my point above.. knowledge can be gotten irrespective of experience

how many times will i say it?... how does “to know" equate to “knowledge by experience" ?
you're not making any point.. you're further proving my point that experience is not stated anywhere there

If you really want to know how ''to know'' equate to ''knowledge by experience'', you'll have to meet me further down then

Wilgrea7:
memory of what .. good lord..
where in the bible did it state that the fruit was bitter?
i ask again.. what bible are you using?

Are you really this plain and unsophisticated?
I use all and/or every available bible translations I can lay my grubby hands on
but honestly speaking, knowing what bible I use, ought to be the least of your concern
because it's seems you have a lot of familiarity to do, catching up on what poetic license is about

Wilgrea7:
it was a wrong comparison as i have already showed you countless times

what i.. this.... this does not relate

again with this your forceful injection of experience

ok... let me explain it for you... the tree of knowledge of good and evil gives the eater knowledge of good and evil.. simple... plain... the tree of life gives you eternal life.. simple.. plain.. the experience philosophy is just trying to put what isn't there

yes

no premise for this

it is very possible.. in fact.. in that verse its the only possibility.. what is good is good and what is evil is evil... knowing it is knowing it.. knowing the boiling point of water is knowing it.. as long as God defines what is good and what is evil(as the creator of the world) then knowing what is good and evil does not involve experiencing it.. experience is experience.. it being bitter doesn't mean it is evil.. taking aloe vera is bitter due to the taste.. but medicinal .. God defines what is good and bad adam and eve only need to know it.. simple .. no need for this complicated philosophy.. the bible wasn't written like that so its best to avoid it.. you can have a better knowledge of something through experience.. yes.. but having knowledge of something is also possible without experience.. plus.. you still try to be biased by wanting to paint the tree of knowledge as bad.. when it was not

You cant even refer to posteriori knowledge properly
If philosophy is a stumbling block, then cancel it out and forget philosophy.
It doesnt matter, nor make any differences, whether philosophy is in there or not,
What matters, is accepting that, the knowledge is empirical

Most of, if not all my points, understandably, went over the head anyway.
so sorry for the overestimation

Wilgrea7:
attaching philosophical terms that were invented after the bible was written is also invalid..
also noting that you quoted from google dictionary.. or at least claimed to

''attaching philosophical terms that were invented after the bible was written is also invalid''? SMH
Please meet me further down

Wilgrea7:
why did you leave out the good?
did they experience good before eating the fruit?
if yes.. then what good did the tree offer and why wasn't it called tree of experience of evil?..
if no.. then why wasn't the good evident after eating the fruit?

Same questions Adam and Eve asked themselves repeatedly after eating

Wilgrea7:
how do you expect me to give you experiences when I'm clearly against the experience claim?...
or did God lie when calling the tree that name?

Sorry for asking the question

Wilgrea7:
refer to points above

Nope! No can do.
You reconsider my points, after, you'll realise, the tree, considering the circumstance, was the best teacher for Man

https://i64.tinypic.com/b4fgx3.jpg

''also noting that you quoted from google dictionary..
or at least claimed to''
- Wilgrea7 ©

I found the scepticism in your above mentioned remark unfortunate and hilarious. SMH

Anyway, as seen above, I have reproduced my earlier definition of knowledge
but you ignored & countered it, by giving an alternative definition of knowledge, in the screenshot you provided, that hasnt a mention of experience

I have allowed you to have a good run with your obsessive interest in and/or disingenuous feeling about knowledge and experience
but I guess now is one of those, when push comes to shove moments

Please check Genesis 3:5 and Genesis 3:22, to confirm what kind of part of speech ''knowing'' and ''to know'' are?
In other words, are ''knowing'' and ''to know'' used as nouns, adjectives or verbs?
Also what is experience and/or how does one get experience?
Thank you

Sarassin:
Revelations 2:28 " I will give him the morning star..."

https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
You must be having a laugh with this rash hasty reply and verse.

I expect to see your rottweiler out soon. Kikiki

Sarassin:
That the Magi came to pay obeisance to the Christ child is neither here nor there. The history of the world is littered with the myths of demi-gods who received obeisance from supplicants at birth. Apollonius of Tyana springs to mind

https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
I am not impressed by your knee-jerk reaction short of substance replies.
You know, you don't necessarily have to, for the sake of it, immediately reply back

Apollonius of Tyana sprang to your mind?
Yeah? But it didnt register in your mind, that Apollonius of Tyana was a contemporary of Jesus, yet, not a diddly-squat of Magi from the East, turned up to pay him obeisance, talkless, worship him

Sarassin:
Then what is it about? Christ said, 'Love your neighbour as yourself', 'do unto others as you would be done by' and 'God is Love' What more could possibly be added to those words?. Everything else is man's folly.

Exactly,
and you do accept that, it all revolves around and centres on the Father
It is about everything and all that has to do with God's interest

Sarassin:
Far be it for me to ever posit that you post rubbish

Hmmm, interesting...

Sarassin:
That said, clearly, I can't agree with the above. The sun rises in the East, why do you think Muslims begin their prayers facing an Easterly direction? the invocation of the Qabbalah cross, the most potent form of protection given to Judaism and Christendom begins with the intonation of invocation of the four Archangels beginning with Archangel Raphael facing Eastwards and then progressing clock-wise, the supplications to virtually all Hindu deities are made in an Easterly direction. I think the implications are clear

¹⁵He asked me,
"Son of man, do you see this?
You will see even more disgusting things than these."
¹⁶Then he brought me into the inner courtyard of the LORD's Temple.
At the entrance to the sanctuary, between the entry room and the bronze altar, there were about twenty-five men with their backs to the sanctuary of the LORD.
They were facing east, bowing low to the ground, worshiping the sun!
- Ezekiel 8:15-16

You can't agree? Bwah hahaha
Make up what you think from Ezekiel 8:15-16 above, what God thinks of those, even if Muslims, that begin their prayers facing an Easterly direction.

Sarassin:
Eastern religious spirituality Pre-dates Christianity by centuries, therefore by the same logic, any Christian who does not accept the supremacy of Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is also doomed.

You've probably by now, have sussed I am not into that Christianity jazz or nonsense as much as anyone calling others niggers.
Now, using your Christianity terminology, pre-dating Christianity by centuries or not, didn't stop the Magi, from sticking their necks out, worshipping and acknowledging Jesus for whom He is.
So much for pre-dating Christianity. Pfft
It ain't about Christianity men.

Sarassin:
I had no idea that spirits had smart-phones to receive texts these days, but there you go

https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
There goes one of your legendary sense of humour again.
They dont have smartphones.
They don't need smartphones, because smartphone technology is inferior and archaic to what is at their disposal

What you read was an auto-suggestion and/or a predictive overtype.
I immediately noticed this, so did correct the "text" to "test" in my own mentioning of Ken4Christ because it was obvious that was the intent he meant to type

Bible translators definitely would have done similar mistakes with the Bible, but imagine me spotting and interpreting an anomaly correctly, just like I've done with Ken4Christ's "test" mistyped as "text, some will be coming down on me with not just stones, but tons of bricks

Sarassin:
There isn’t a lot more to add to the comments of Wilgrea7 I think he hit the nail on the head

He might have hit the nail on the head but only scratched the surface

Sarassin:
For me Christianity is one of a multitude of religious doctrines seeking to assert its own supremacy but like all religions, and though there is much to admire in the Christian paradigm it is a construct of man. No religious text validates itself, at best they are exhortations, admonishments and moralistic guidelines

Jesus didn't come to set out to Christianity.

No matter how humble and much of a pacifist you might be, you wouldn't be found accepting being called a nigger. Or would you now?

The Magi weren't interested in Christianity but came out to Jesus, to worship Him, out of recognition.

Sarassin:
If Christianity, Islam or Shintoism were to go the way of the Dodo tomorrow, the spiritual realm would still remain, inter-planetary spiritual beings of Jupiter, Mars and Saturn whose attributes have endured from the beginning of time will still be there, closer to home the elemental spirits of the earth, water, fire and air will remain as they have done and continue to shape our lives, the ascendancy of our spiritual beings remains in flux, we continue to expand our circle we bring others into our lives for a net positive influence and sometimes when these bonds transcend these others become family members in another life.

All religions whether Christianity, Islam, Shintoism, Hinduism, Buddism, Penterascalism/Pentecostalism etcetera or all that jazz, are not immune to extinction.

There is only one religion God approves and loves.

Whether now or after death, each will be asked of their belief in Jesus. Will be given the opportunity to believe in and accept Jesus as the Savior.

Don't be mislead that the headstrong, will not look Jesus directly in the face and unceremoniously rub salvation back in His face

Sarassin:
We live our lives, fulfil our destinies in spite of religion

I love this quote.
There is nothing closer to the truth than this remarkable comment