₦airaland Forum

rev king again?

It waz pure luck.

My God help us to qualify . . . we now depend on prayers.

^^ lwkm.

I think we have always maintained on this forum that YHWH and allah are not the same, allah is an arabian idol as opposed to YHWH, the supreme beign.

^^ Dont you do anything else than spew trash on NL? Imagine him making posts as early as 5am till sometimes 3am. Haba? you no get anything to do than NL?

Wishes to her success.

I only pray FIFA dont sanction us.

I think chukwudi answered this question:

chukwudi44:
The holy spirit once asumed the form of a living being in the form of a dove during the baptism of Jesus,this surely proves that the holy spirit is a personality,it is one of the forms of the nature of God.

The trinity is for us to beleive by faith,we cannever understand the nature of God,he created us in his own image and not in his nature.

Cant compare that dump with V.I. Why do Nigerians like been negative?

This is just a fight against terrorism, not a fight against islam.

At times I wonder why people reason the way they reason. May God help us all.

Too bad . . . so called university dons resorting to juju? this is barbaric!

Discussions on NL have now degenerated to unintelligeable, meaningless and sometimes very stupid posts. Some one ran to open a thread here because the English version of the Bible is to be revised. Does this translate to the fact that the Hebrew and Latin texts are to be revised too? are the Ibo, Hausa, Yoruba, Tiv, etc. etc. versions of the Holy Bible to be revised too? . . . even more than that, is revision of a text bad? how myopic are these people. For example, in the olden English, phrases like 'thou saith the Lord' were considered good English, but now, it is more appropriate to say 'your Lord says', etc., etc. I think for good scholarship, every text has to be revised after a given number of years to allow for change in lexicon.

The other question is: Does a revised text loose its meaning? absolutely not! it rather makes for further understanding of the original text.

Another question: Is it only the Bible that has been revised? No! English versions of the koran has been similarly revised. Even in the original arabic, there are variations in text and recitation of the koran (warsh, etc., etc.,).


Lets be posting intelligent arguments, please.

A talk show? I think she will be good at it.

We ought to be proud been Nigerians . . . . . Arise O! compatriots.

@ Vortex;

1. Symbolic of personal responsbilities for your actions.

2. To guide the Israelites into realising that they are personally responsible for their actions. If everytime they err, they atone, they get to gradually cultivate sound moral responsibility as well as other virtues.

Those are the simple explanations. That's the simple message I tried to pass across. Which corner have I boxed myself into?

You now got me thinking and I am going to question your beliefs.

1. How can you say a sacrificed animal has changed into you, hence took responsibility for your actions?

2. What was the object of atonement? was it not the sacrifice of the animal? cant you see that blood was spilled before the atonement? because God specifically instructed that an animal that just died from other complications should not be sacrificed to Him except the one that was killed, hence spilling blood?

If God didnt want blood to be spilled, He should have instructed that another object be sacrificed to Him rather than animals that were killed.

JW denies the existence of Hellfire, denies the divinity of Jesus, etc., etc., they message is not for real.

LWKMD, Victor Osuagwu ordering for Mary Kay products and wigs to disguise himself?

^^ Dont you think it would have been more fair for allah to send a revelation to all people, including Africans (and Nigerians) by given them a prophet and a scripture of they own? bollocks!!

^^ Well, well, well. I dont think I will be able to hit the mother of my kids, and the woman who has been with me through thick and thin . . . . . I dont have the mind, it is barbaric!

sharp man:
[size=20pt]I am sorry, but there's NOTHING to be happy about.

After using under 30 to play against under 17, what do you expect.[/size]

We are just deceiving ourselves.

sayso:
for using under 30 years to win this tournament,Nigeria will not qualify for South Africa 2010,that will be their punishment for cheating in football.

I think the advise given below is directed at all of you sadists:

princekevo:
[size=20pt]The only truth we need to tell ourselves is that we have some haters in Nigeria who believe nothing good can come out it, and you are one of them. [b]If you don't like the Success of this boys then i think you should go and buy rope, you know what to with it. [/b]HATERZ!!![/size]

I think we can beat the swizz. God help us!

I dont think respect comes from been quiet or not, it is earned from character.

whether the Bible is revised or not, the basic message flows . . . so why are muslims crying? or do they now the Holy Bible as a devotional?

Hi Nezan. I do believe in God. But I do not believe that blood of an animal, human or even that of Jesus, the son of God is required for the remission of sins. I have in several threads given my reasons why I believe that the blood of Jesus did not atone for any of mankind sins but rather burden mankind with a sacrilege. I will not repeat them here. My question is simple "Is the blood of Jesus Christ divine or rather is the blood of Jesus Christ God" Stay blessed.

Too bad you didnt read my earlier post. From your question emboldened above, I think you should have started by asking God whether the blood of animals sacrificed in the Old Testament was divine, because it was used for the atonement of sins.

@ m_nwanko;

The core question is what is it in the blood or the act of shedding the blood that allows it to forgive or remit sins? Is the blood or the shedding of blood divine?

Do you believe in the existence of God? If not, no need reading further. I think this question should be directed at God, who long before the death of Jesus, instituted the shedding of innocent blood of animals as a way of atoning for sins.

The very thought that the LORD God and sinful man are brought together in an intimate love relationship is expressed in the word "at–one–ment." Behind this word is the presupposition that alienation and hostility have been overcome. Reconciliation and forgiveness are also associated with atonement (Romans 5:11).

Atonement is needed because of the depravity of man (Romans 1-3). The LORD God is a holy God and He can not look upon sin. The word "atone" has the idea of "to wipe out," "to erase," "to cover." It is often translated "to make atonement," "forgive," "pardon," "purge," and "reconcile."

In the Scriptures, the means of atonement was the offering of a bloody sacrifice. God is seen providing the sacrifice and man performing the rite. Man is not seen initiating the relationship, but God. God made the provision for sin in an act of grace. The shedding of blood is the central action in making atonement for sin. This theme is developed through out the Scriptures.

Leviticus is a bloody book. You read only a few verses and you are into blood, sacrifices and offerings. There is the shedding of blood and sprinkling of blood on altars and veils. You can't escape it. It is not beautiful, but it was never meant to be beautiful. It fully meant to paint a picture of the awfulness of sin. Sin is not so beautiful as portrayed every night on our TV. It is ugly and it is deadly. "The wages of sin is death." "The soul that sins will surely die."

Sin is always sinful. God has never treated it lightly. It outrages the holiness of God. The "wrath of God" is God's opposition to all sin (Romans 1:18, 24, 26, 28; Ephesians 2:3).


In the Old Testament, the shedding of blood in sacrifices has a special significance. The sprinkled blood is a "covering" for sin. The life of the animal was poured out in death as a substitute for the people. The animal's life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment was carried out by transferring the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. The Passover lamb and the scapegoat are substitutes for the offerer. The animal sacrifice was a sign that death had already taken place. Therefore, the death angel passed over that individual. It is the termination of life, the infliction of death that atones. Death had violently taken place as a substitute in the Passover sacrifice (Exodus 12:13).

The shedding of blood signifies a violent death, killing or murder. Life is associated with blood that flows through our veins. Life was given up in the pouring out of its precious blood. Death occurred. The dominant thought of the Old Testament is the infliction of death rather than the release of life. The natural interpretation when we think of blood and shedding of blood is death. The "blood of Christ" is a clear expression for the death of Christ. Blood is the symbol of sacrificial death; a life poured out in death. It is not the releasing of life, but the end of the life, death. Redemption is only possible by blood life poured out. Hebrews 9:22 summarizes the whole Old Testament teaching on sacrifice. " And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness."

By offering the sacrificial blood, the worshiper was acknowledging his own guilt and the just penalty of death. By the atonement, God was "passing over," "overlooking" and "covering" sins until Christ came. When Christ came and died He did not pass over or cover it, but took it away (John 1:29; 1 Peter 2:24). God's infinite holiness was satisfied in the death of Christ (John 19:30). The sacrifices in the Old Testament anticipated the efficacious blood of the perfect Lamb of God. The atoning blood of the animal sacrifices, by symbolizing the shed blood of Christ, served to cover (atone) sin until the day when Christ would actually deal with the sin. The death of Christ proved that God was righteous in passing over the sins for which the animal sacrifices had been shed before His coming. God had forgiven sin based on the promise of a sufficient Lamb. The death of Christ proved God to be righteous in all that He promised to the Old Testament saints.

@ Vortex;

Can you not see that those animal sacrifices were merely symbolic, the whole purpose of which was to guide the Israelites? You and others like you make it look like your god was feeding on those sacrifices and wasn't satisfied until he finally drank the blood of his own son! What a shame!

Symbolic of what? To guide the Israelites to what? You see how you boxed yourself into a corner? Yes it was symbolic of a greater picture to come- the shedding of Jesus’ blood on the cross.

It was also symbolic in the sense that blood had to be spilled for atonement. What other blood that was fit to be spilled for the salvation of the entire mankind than the blood of an innocent Son of God?

It was also to guide the Israelites into this future truth- That God will sacrifice His Son for the salvation of mankind!

@ Vortex;

What image of a god are you painting that would at one time say 'Thou shall not kill' as a law etched in stone but a short while later, (our 1000 years is as 1 day with Him, remember?) say, 'Though I said 'Thou shall not kill', but it's alright, you can kill my son, I need his blood to slake the thirst that your sins has awakened'.

Your argument boils down to the fact that God does not kill people because of the injunction ‘thou shalt not kill’.
A question for you : were the laws made for God or for men? God can never take any excuse for any of His actions. Do you forget that God killed people in the Old Testament for going against Him? Don’t you know that He is a consuming fire? God’s word said that the soul that sinneth shall die. Thanks to Jesus’ atoning sacrifice . . . those that believe in Him are saved.

As in the reason for the blood sacrifice, I will quote my earlier post:

Reading through the book of exodus and other books in the old testament (or the Jewish torah) can be a very shocking experience: it is replete with stories of countless animals been killed and sacrificed to God. You may ask, why the need for the sobering and disturbing spilling of blood?

The bible says that ‘the wages of sin is death’ (Romans 6:23), and that ‘all have sinned and come short of the glory of God’ (Romans 3:23). Jesus also, shortly before His death, shared a cup of wine and declared: ‘This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sin’ (Matthew 26:28).

The sacrificing of animals was given to the Israelites as a lesson about the cost that God will pay in the person of His Son to redeem humanity to Himself. God also told Moses that blood represents life. The blood of the sacrificed, innocent animals represented the cost of redemption in the blood of God’s own Son.

From your post:

In the scenario, your god is supposed to be the beast who gave up its child to
another being who offended it, so that when this other being killed its (your god's) child, the blood spilled will now somehow, mysteriously, appease the anger of your god. Read the write-up again and respond accordingly. Your present response is not in line with what I wrote.

Why are been confused here? You are creating a scenario that is quite different from what we are saying here.
To whom did God gave His child to? Man? Jesus was not given to anybody, He willingly sacrificed His life for mankind.
Your argument is out of line here please.

Assuming your god did turn away at the high point of the sacrifice, what does that action imply? That he did not know what was in store for him when he ratified the 'sacrifice'? he turned away, then had an about-face to accept the sacrifice. If that's not hypocrisy, I don't know what is. He didn't enjoy it but he accepted it. Have you started seeing the extent of your blasphemy now?

You like posting unreasonable posts. What is blasphemous about the very picture you painted? You mean if you are trapped in a building that is on fire, your father should not run into the building, burning himself in the process to rescue you? Because he will not enjoy going into the fire, he should not accept going into it? What a warped reasoning you are posting here. Any father that does this is simply not a loving father.

The Greatness of God lies in His simplicity!

No wonder Jesus said 'except you become like a litlle child, you cannot see The Kingdom of God'.

Your posts tends to atheism, why them do you claim the greatness of god?
Your reasoning is definitely not like that of a little child, so no need quoting Jesus.

Law prince:
U're obviously short of words. i can see.

N.B: There is nothin like "show some intelligence man", it is "show some intelligent men"
pls, dont bring Biblical fallacies into Naira Land.

I guess you are still an undergraduate that is while you dont understand english, your post only show why our educational institutions  are churning out half-baked graduates.

'show some intelligence, man' = You should show some level of intelligence (in the singular)
'show some intelligent men' = You should show men who are intelligent (in the plural)

So much for our graduates

paddy_lo:
Mr believer,it is a well known fact that most stories in the new testament didnt happen,most are fairy tales

i guess u also believe in that white JESUS that hangs in your church,mister believer

You can't just sit behind your computer and make spurios claims. Provide evidence that the stories in the Bible didn't happen I will engage you.

Argue intelligently, man.

Can u pls explain this to me. Mark 10:17-18 -"Jesus said: only God is good, He is not"
I thin this is another BIG FALLACY in the Bible.

Is this thread about Jesus deity or fallacies in the Bible?

Until you come up with an intelligent analysis, I will not honour your posting of snippets of biblical verses with replies. Show some intelligence man, you are too duh!