₦airaland Forum

. .  . Category C: Those who heard the gospel, received it and backslide.

1. what does it mean to HEAR the gospel? . . . .This simply means hearing the good news of Jesus Christ, His gift of salvation. death, resurrection and eternal life. His redemption and forgiveness of sins, His promises associated to His divinity and the inherent LOVE He symbolises.

what does it mean to RECEIVE the gospel?. . . .This simply means accepting the gift of salvation of God through Christ Jesus, by acknowledging past sins and repenting of them. receiving the baptism by water and the HS baptism.
The most significant basis of receiving the gospel is largely to be saved. Salvation alone does not make one the Son of God. The main purpose of Christ coming is to make us God-like and live in eternity where there are no limitations. But salvation as described above does not give anyone that right. Believing and accepting the gospel does NOT make u the Son of God. . . .it only gives u the POWER (Holy Spirit) to become the son of God (John 1:12)

So how does one become the son of God? . . . . .simply by exercising the power given to u at the point of salvation. . . . . .Romans 8:14
simply put. .  .when u submit urself to the spirit of God, u become a Child of God. . .but u cannot get that spirit unless u first acknowledge the gift of salvation through Jesus Christ.

2.  what does it mean to backslide?. . . . .This simply happens when a person stops submitting themselves to the spirit. when they stop doing the will of God as commanded by His spirit. . they stop being a child of God. To backslide is to stop being for God which could also imply to stop believing in the gospel, to loose faith or hope in God through Christ Jesus, to rationally or dogmatically reject the gospel u have once received with a great heart. To stop being in fellowship with God. . . , stop being a Christ-like person as the spirit has always encouraged u to be. To backslide is simply to love the world. . . a world not of Christ.

3. What judgement awaits this people? . . . .Jesus clearly states that such men are NOT fit for the kingdom (luke 9:62). . ,  . .a biblical example of a backslider is Demas recorded in 2 timothy 4:10.

Conclusively those who belong to category C. . . . .will partake in HELL FIRE.

toneyb:
Noetic please can you explain to me why the "Polystrate fossils" aren't all the same age and why they aren't in the same layer which is what one would expect if they were caused by a single worldwide event. Please go and do some learning before coming here to embarrass yourself please. In addition to what I have written there are "Polystrate fossils" that are forming outside Anchorage Alaska in the USA where the earthquake that occured in the 60s sank that section of forest into salt water. Trees are still standing, and they are being buried in layers of sediment as they stand presently.

a. what mechanism was used to detect the age of polystrate fossils? is this mechanism porous when it comes to elements that have lived in water?

b. why do the polystrate fossils found in Australia have no root? what happened to their roots?

toneyb:
What is this? Who really is the illiterate amongst us? You who shamelessly provided a non scientific evidence and claim it is an evidence for your mythical flood or me that provided actual scientific evidence (hydrodynamic sorting)that shows that the mythical flood never happened?


It is a term is used for fossils which intersect several beds (layers), usually in sedimentary rocks they also extend through more than one geological stratum.

good to know u have a definition.

Scientist(geologist) have provided so many explanations for their existence. In geology, such fossils are referred to as upright fossils, trunks, or trees. Brief periods of rapid sedimentation favor their formation. Upright fossils are typically found in layers associated with an actively subsiding coastal plain or rift basin, or with the accumulation of volcanic material around a periodically erupting stratovolcano. Typically, this period of rapid sedimentation was followed by a period of time, decades to thousands of years long, characterized by very slow or no accumulation of sediments. In river deltas and other coastal plain settings, rapid sedimentation is often the end result of a brief period of accelerated subsidence of an area of coastal plain relative to sea level caused by salt tectonics, global sea level rise, growth faulting, continental margin collapse, or some combination of these factors. For example, geologists such as John W. F. Waldron and Michael C. Rygel have argued that the rapid burial and preservation of polystrate fossil trees found at Joggins, Nova Scotia was the direct result of rapid subsidence, caused by salt tectonics within an already subsiding pull-apart basin, and resulting rapid accumulation of sediments. Contrary to the claims of creationists, these sedimentary basins are considerably smaller than the state of Texas. The specific layers containing polystrate fossils occupy only a very limited fraction of the total area of any of these basins.

is there anywhere above where u mentioned the source of existence of polystrate fossils? . . . . I cant see anything above that states that.

According to scientists, polystrate fossils are just fossils which were buried in a relatively short time span either by one large depositional event or by several smaller ones. Geologists see no need to invoke a global flood to explain upright fossils. This position of geologists is supported by numerous examples, which have been found at numerous locations, of polystrate, upright, trees completely buried within either late Holocene or historic sediments. These polystrate trees demonstrate that conventional geologic processes are capable of burying and preserving trees in an upright position such that in time, they will become fossilized. Unfossilized, late Pleistocene polystrate trees have been found buried beneath glacial deposits within North America along the southern edge of the Laurentide ice sheet. These polystrate forests were created when the southern edge of the Laurentide ice sheet locally dammed valleys. As a result, meltwater lakes filled these valleys and submerged forests within them. Sediments released by the melting of the adjacent ice sheet rapidly filled these lakes, which quickly buried and preserved the submerged forests lying within them. One forest of in situ, 24,000 year-old unfossilized polystrate trees was exposed by excavations for a quarry near Charleston, Illinois.

All they have done is simply to express an opinion that has not been proven. why should geologists express an opinion on a term (polystrate fossils) u claimed they considered unacceptable?  does that make any sense? are u confused? 

Do u mind educating me on how else the polystrate fossils got to their present locations since they have no roots?

I have answered them can you name just one geologist that agrees with your illiterate  position that polystrate fossils were caused as a result of the mythical flood? Please name just one geologist that agrees with your shameful and illiterate position.

google would be very useful for your search,  . .go ahead and consult google.

Deep Sight:
This is fine by me so far.

But before we proceed, just a few posers.

1. In Category A - Those who lived before Christ - how come Elijah was taken up into heaven without any need for Christ going to Hades first? Also note that he appears with Moses beside Christ at the Transfiguration, thus showing that Moses, too was not "in Hades" or "in the Grave". Clearly these guys had been risen to eternal life even without the sacrifice on the cross.

A. Jesus stated clearly in John 3:13 , . . . .that NO ONE has been to heaven except for Himself who descended from heaven.

B. For the prupose of this thread I will define heaven as THE ABODE OF GOD AND HIS HOLY ANGELS, WHERE JESUS ASCENDED TO.
Given this definition. . . . did Elijah ascend into heaven? . . . . .the answer is NO . . . . .why not? . . . .below are two reasons why Elijah or moses never saw heaven until Jesus resurrected.

reason 1: There are three kinds of heaven recorded in the bible. the first heaven is the heaven I defined above, where God resides. (hebrews 8:1, deuteronomy 26:15 and 2corinthians 12:2)
The second heaven recorded in the bible is the outer space. This refers to the planets, the sun, moon, stars (Genesis 26:4, psalm 8:3, deuteronomy 26:62, Isaiah 13:10, deuteronomy 1:10)
The third kind of heaven described in the bible is the sky and clouds above us, which we can visibly see. The sky where birds fly and rain drops from. Genesis 7:11-12 talks of windows of heaven opened for rain and flood. we know that rain drops after being formed in the atmosphere. . .this atmosphere is also called heaven in the bible.
The birds are also called birds of heaven (Jeremiah 16:14 and Job 35:11 paints a good picture) . . . . . those are the three kinds of heaven described in the bible.

reason2: when Elijah was taken away by the whirlwind . . . .several men (50) went out looking for him to ensure he was safe (2 kings 2:17). This shows that quite unlike our present belief, these people believed that Elijah was taken to a different place and not heaven, God's abode like we assume today.
Their belief is strengthened by the fact that Elijah eventually sends a letter to the reigning king of Israel many years after his whirlwind ascension (2 chronicles 21:12-15).
The king who recieved the letter was king Jehoram. Jehoram was the son of King Jehosaphat. Jehosaphat ruled during the life of Elisha's prophethood. . . . . that was after Elijah's ascension.
Are letters sent from heaven?. . , .Elijah was simply in the outer place in an unknown land, recorded as heaven.

3. The bible never recorded moses or Elijah descending from heaven on the mount of transfiguration. Considering the words of Jesus in john 3:13 . . . .they came from hades. . .the place of the dead.
The transfiguration as recorded in the bible (luke 9 and mathew 17) makes no mention of either Elijah or Moses descending from heaven.

2. Why would God have one rule for the goose and another for the gander? Is God not immutable, unchangeable, adamantine? Does the Bible not say that he is the same, yesterday, today, and forever? That accords with his perfection, for that which is perfect cannot change? Why would he give different criteria for salvation at different times? Is that not something like shifting the goal post?

where did u get that from?
Salvation was offered once to the living. . and that gospel is still being spread today.

Deep Sight:
Thank you. Do i understand you to be saying that for Categories A & B, those who lived before him, and those who lived after him but never heard about him, judgment will rest in the measure of their moral "holiness" according to works?

Yes. I hope u remeber that I specifically captured what the bible exemplifies as "holiness" in my first response?

Deep Sight:
Hi Noetic - Top of the day to you. Thank you also for accepting this interview. And also for the great categorizations.

Let me understand what you have said so far. Your Category A - People who lived before christ and therefore did not hear the gospel.

Is my understanding correct that you refer to this category as being taken care of by Christ's visit to the underworld, where he preached he gospel and made judgment?

u are welcome.

And yes. . .ur understanding of category A, captures my analyses.

. . . .Continued

Category B . . .  
To understand what awaits those in category B, one must understand the essential reward attached to the gospel of Christ. The crux of His reward was a place in eternity. . .which was a promise no one was ever given (as far as the bible and xtianity is concerned).
Prior to the coming of Jesus . .  . .if a man dies, his life is over. . .both the body spirit and soul go to the grave, . .suggesting that there is no human life as weknow it after death.
this is butressed by:
a. psalm 115:17-18 17 It is not the dead who praise the LORD,
      those who go down to silence; 18 it is we who extol the LORD, both now and forevermore.  Praise the LORD.
b. psalm 88: 11-12  Is your love declared in the grave,
      your faithfulness in Destruction ?  12 Are your wonders known in the place of darkness,  or your righteous deeds in the land of oblivion?

It is deducible but debatable that the dead pre-Christ have no spiritual inheritance with God. The purpose of the gospel is to biuld a bridge between man and God o ensure that life does not end right here on this planet. That explains why
a. hell was not originally made for man. . .but for fallen angels.
b. The gift of eternal life CANNOT be obtained by works or self-righteousness. It is a Gift beyond comprehension that explains why it is obtained by grace and mercy.

Conclusively members of category B get the judged on the same basis of those in category A . .  , simply because they NEVER got to hear about the gospel. They were not aware that Christ came and died. They do not know of the promise of eternal life. . . .  That explain why the last earthycommand of Jesus was that the gospel be preached to all nations.

toneyb:
The person that referenced ridiculous articles that do not even make any sense is you. You referenced a NON scientific source as scientific evidence for a global flood, a reference that NO geologist on earth agrees with. I told you to name just ONE geologist that agrees with you that "polystrate fossil" is a scientific evidence for a global flood, please name just one geologist that agrees with your ridiculous position. You can begin by providing your own personal evidence for a global flood. I will provide my personal evidence against it and we will compare and see whose position coincides with reality. No copying other peoples arguments just provide your own personal evidence for a global flood and I will provide my own personal evidence against it. No need for any scientific evidence since you don't have any besides hydrodynamic sorting proves hands down that a global flood did not occur.

I simply asked ur illiterate self and mazaje if u understood what "polystrate fossils meant"? . . , . both of u declined to answer and when I did make an analysis. . . u both started screaming foul

A. WHAT DO U UNDERSTAND BY POLYSTRATE FOSSILS?
B. HOW DID THEY COME INTO EXISTENCE?
C. WHATS THE BASIS OF THEIR PRESENT LOCATION?

answer questions for once and stop referncing ridiculous articles

Krayola:
Noetic15

If everyone that ever disagrees with you is always wrong, it means u are always right. You are infallible. You are God.

Can I get your autograph?

honestly, I am sorry if I come across as described above.
most of the opinions I express on this forum are products of personal but extensive reasoning/analyses. Many times I would expect superior arguments and not insults or attacks to disprove or counter my points. That explains why I hardly bulge to such statements.

I am not infallible and I am not God. . . .guess what. . . . . . many times I am also wrong, but it does not dispute the fact that I am sometimes right.

Purist:
@noetic15

Lol. . . I knew you'd say something. I've realised you always love to have the last say in every debate you engage in. I used to be like that. I should leave all my dogma? Do you even know what dogma means? Yes I admit I'm running, because I know the debate isn't going to be a healthy one. Anyways, have fun!

far from it. . . I have actually abandoned many threads as soon as issues stopped being discussed. My only fear was u simply picked on me cos of my xtianity and not my views.

Purist:
@Deep Sight

I love the way you have categorized this.  I have always been of the opinion that most people do not reject the gospel just for the sake of it. Most reject it because it simply doesn't make any sense to them at all.  Even for those who previously accepted (most likely by virtue of being born in that religion), I believe that they only reject on the basis that everything no longer made any sense to them anymore, most likely due to some personal experiences or some deep reflection, and not because they wish to be deliberately rebellious. I find it really ridiculous that anyone would seriously believe that anyone else that isn't an adherent of their own faith would have, as a reward, some negative post-death experience.

I will put the above in cognizance when analysing the said category.

Deep Sight:
NOETIC -

Yes, please carry on. . . i strongly appreciate your categorization of the different groups. . .

But if you don't mind, i would like you address youR category (e) in three groups -

 1. Those who heard, understood, and rejected it and

 2. Those who heard, but could not understand on account of belonging to a foreign culture or belief system

3. The nation of Jews, still practicing Judaism and still awaiting the Messiah even today

I am listening.

I will do that soon as I get to category e

banom:
Noetic ? in a debate ? No i am signing out, the debate can never be objective.

Deap Sight, continue at your own risk.

banom can u just get off my back?. . . . dont start stalking me like u do to tpia

toneyb:


I don't have to provide scientific evidence against the mythical flood because a fellow christian has already provided that evidence which is the hydrodynamic sorting, there are more than enough scientific evidence that proves that the flood only happened in the pages of the bible according to mazaje.

Why is there no mention of the Flood in the records of Egyptian or Mesopotamian civilizations which existed at the time? [/b]Biblical dates (I Kings 6:1, Gal 3:17, various generation lengths given in Genesis) place the Flood 1300 years before Solomon began the first temple. We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C. Unfortunately, the Egyptians (among others) have written records dating well back before 2250 B.C. ([b]the Great Pyramid, for example dates to the 26th century B.C., 300 years before the Biblical date for the Flood). No sign in Egyptian inscriptions of this global flood around 2250 B.C.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

This is my own historical reason to believe that the flood is a myth because it is reported only in the bible and other civilizations that were keeping records at that time did not mention it at all.

when will this guy start to think for himself and stop referencing ridiculous articles? . . .how many times have u carried out this shameless excercise?

I appreciate ur hunger for a healthy debate. I would however take my time in making this analyses.
ur question can be divided into five segments of people:

a. Those who lived before Christ and as such did not have the knowledge of Christ.

b. Those who lived after Christ and still did not hear of the gospel

c. Those who heard of the gospel and received it and backslide.

d. Those who heard the gospel, received it and remained saved.

e. Those who heard the gospel and rejected it.

The bible teaches us what awaits this group of people. Group A were judged in mathew 27:52-53.
The bible records that those who died in holiness in all generations were resurrected. The bible however does not list the criteria for holiness in this context. So while in the generation of moses we can say that the holy ones are those who obeyed the 613 commandments, In the generation of Abraham and other primordial antediluvian generations we can assume that the criteria for holiness was obedience God's inherent convictions disguised as morals. This is largely butressed by the story in Genesis 20.
we also understand that the descendants of Esau, the edomites were also given laws which the bible makes no record of . . . . . this as such is their own criteria for holiness

To all other generations that pre-date Jesus outside of this era, it is pertinent to state that holiness is a measure of their convictions as depicted in their conscience and widely acclaimed as moral values. moral values may vary from society to society, but the conscience is unique and constant.

For those in Group B. . . , brb

toneyb:
All I want is for you to name just one geologist that agrees that there is scientific evidence for a global flood. I have named one christian geologist that not only agrees that there is absolutely no scientific evidence for a global flood but he presents that greatest scientific evidence against the global flood which is the hydrodynamic sorting in fact hyrodynamic sorting proves hands down that a global flood did not occur.

only small minds discuss people . . .great minds discuss issues.

why do u think noah's flood did not take place?

toneyb:
You were asked to provide evidence for a global flood and you brought up "Polystrate fossil" which is not even a gelogical term as your evidence. But the problem is apart from the fact that it is not even a scietific term it is NOT an evidence for a global flood at all.
The article  from wikipedia describes different types of polystrate fossil and the differing conditions that led to their formation. Next time provide scientific evidence for a global flood and stop providing unscietific evidence. Now tell me how you have "educated" me.

do u remember that u ran away from the three threads where I exposed ur ignorance?  

PS: polystrate fossils do NOT have to be geological terms. . . .they simply describe the existence and location of "elements" that could not have been in their present location without noah's flood happening? . . . .i tot i educated u on that  

@OP

and u think one single person has all those qualities? . . . .think again

toneyb:
There is NO scientific evidence for any global flood, in fact please name just one geologist that agrees that there is scientific evidence for a global flood. I can name some christian geologist that agree that there is absolutely no evidence at all for a global flood.

Hydrodynamic sorting proves hands down that a global flood did not occur. Unless you wish to change the law of gravity, if you mix fossils and sediments with water, certain things have to happen. Lots of geological evidence regarding hydrodynamic sorting proves that a global flood did not occur. The following evidence is from Glenn Miller, who is a conservative Christian, and is a geophysicist. Hugh Ross another christian scientist also agrees that there is absolutely no evidence at all for a global flood and says that the biblical story is that of a local flood because of the lack of evidence for a global flood. You can read Glenn Miller's scientific evidence against a global flood in the link below.

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/gflood.htm

same old rhetoric

toneyb:
How have you exposed my ignorance

are u suffering from a memory loss?

Deep Sight:
This is very well said, and i am already aware that it is also the view point of Krayola.

But two things need to be noted.

  1. The creation of a Child-Board does NOT restrict freedom of speech, because everybody can post topics still. It only ensures that THOSE who want to fellowship without being heckled or irritated can do so in peace. For the skeptic, he remains free to post whatever he likes in the general section. Why must we insist on a Noetic going over to the Muslim Board to harras them unduly? Cant he harras them in the open section

 2. If the Muslims have people who are intolerant, the truth is there are also some fanatically intolerant christians, and they, just like the muslims, deserve to have their peace if needed. Importantly, this is not about intolerance, but about the right of some people to have an e-fellowship without being heckled. Again, skeptics are free to post anything in the general section.

In a multireligious nation with two predominant religions, it can never be justified to have a Child-Board for one religion and not have one for the other.

this is becoming irritating . . .what does harassment mean?. . . .when did it become a big deal to freely express oneself?
for all ur criticism of the church/xtianity on this forum as an agnostic. , does that constitute harassment of xtians? . . . .please learn to be objective.

wirinet:
To me i like the way the religious section of Nairaland is being run. If you segment and segregate the sections into childboards and sub-childboards, you will kill the very essence of Nairalland that makes it so popular.

People should learn to live with criticism of ones ideas and faiths, we should learn to argue our belief against the beliefs of others. That would make us see the other persons point of view and make us learn to tolerate other people's religion in real life.

You people should learn that the world had left autocracy and embrace democracy, and the main tenant of democracy is Freedom of expression and association. If you advocate for restricting and segregating religious opinions, then you are also advocating for physical segregation of people based on religious views. You should as well advocate for Christian only schools and universities, where other religious faithfuls are shut out. You can then extend it to political views, sexist views, and a whole lot more.

Y[b]es you get the occasional Abuzola and Noetic,[/b] that part of life, we have to learn to accommodate them, just like we have to accommodate an errant family member. I think the moderators is managing them as much as they can, besides they bring their own flavour into the mix.

I think a child board was provided for the Muslims because they are much more intolerant to criticism. The ones who could stomach criticisms like Abuzola find the general thread more exiting and spends more time there.  The ones that gets a fit if Mohammad or Allah is insulted restricts himself to the muslim board.

We are living in a religious global village  now (except Iran and a few Muslim states), learn to live in it.

what is the similarity between me and abuzola? You just love fooling urself. ,   , how many times have u absconded from healthy debates? 

depends on how u see it . . . . . .

Pastor AIO:
From my experience of Christ I believe that knowledge of him results first in a sense of being Loved. The world suddenly becomes more cosy, nothing will harm you. The Love is almost tangible it emanates off everything around. It is out of this feeling of being loved, or love pouring unto you that it gets to a certain level that it overflows and you start to exhibit the love back in your actions. It then seems like the love is pouring out of you.

You're not forcing yourself to love (or act as if you love) because that is what it says in the rule books. It is a part of your nature, you can't help it. Love becomes effortless. Whereas with the carnal mind it is something that you beat yourself up over. "I must be more loving. I must be kind because this is what the bible says I must do. Why didn't I show that other guy kindness, that was wrong of me, father please forgive me, I will make myself a more loving person by force by force by force."

As for the matter of dodging questions, there are some questions that I may not want to answer directly for any number of reasons. eg. I might be unsure about the premise of the question. Or I may just be trying to protect my privacy. I won't deny not wanting to answer certain questions, but that's my prerogative, don't you think?

why did u evade the question?

Krayola:
@deepsight

I think this forum is a place to debate issues one is interested in. I personally, most of the time, debate for the sport. My posts are not necessarily reflective of my convictions. SO that someone PASTOR AIO, or anybody else, has made a post at some point saying one thing, and another post saying something else, means little to me. It depends on what is being debated, and what position the individual, on the day, chooses to argue for or against.

A lot of the time I want to argue for Christianity, against atheists, on this forum, but unfortunately most Christians here are quite cynical, and they use some of my posts to brand me an atheist, even though i'm pretty much everything but. I'm not sure if you see what i'm getting at, but basically it is all about learning both sides of an issue. Not about choosing one over the other. Arguing, for instance, against the existence of a spiritual realm does not necessary mean one dismisses the possibility of such a realm existing. It could just be an attempt to engage someone who is convinced such a realm exists, and may have lots of knowledge that I don't, in healthy debate that will hopefully lead to both parties learning from each other.

It means little (or nothing) to me what someone else believes, or practices. If it helps the person to be happy or to find peace, great. I wish him/her all the best. But as far as the forum goes, it should, when it boils down to it, just be about having a healthy debate. . .abi? how u see am my broda?

your post makes a lot of sense and I do agree with your notion of a healthy debate. I have been debating with myself about the moral stance of "yahoo yahoo". .  .I chose to debate for the motion. And I realised that morality and human values evolve from generation to generation. . . . . .  .my point is that it is healthy to debate even against our beliefs.

But let me join issues on the "Pastor AIO" debate here.

1. "Pastor" AIO is a FALSE prophet from the pit of hell. I have no problem with anyone expressing their opinion, no matter how disagreeable it is. . . . that explains why I am comfortable with atheistic, agnostic and islamic opinions. But I do have a problem with people who choose to shield themselves with one thing to offer an opinion. AIO has repeatedly attempted to redefine the gospel with his assertions, and just as DeepSight pointed out, the contradictions are enormous and very very disturbing.

2. If u think that there is no God or that Jesus is not the only way to salvation, then u have no business being a Christian. If u think that xtinity is a false religion and that the gospel is untrue then u have no reason to be a christian or a pastor. That is why it is easy to listen and understand atheistic postulations. If "pastor" AIO has any reservations about the existence of God, the ontology of Christ, the genuineness of the gospel, the divinity of God, the salvation of Christ, the merger of IFA and xtianity then why exactly is he a xtian. . .does he know the meaning of xtianity?

3. This is not a conclusion I arrived at just now, this is a conclusion I arrived at a long time ago after observing the trend of his posts. The crux is that the gospel of Christ is very dogmatic and his gospel does not leave room for editing and human "rationality" like the resident anti-Christs want to have us believe.

KunleOshob:
[size=24pt]^GBAM!!! [/size] The highlighted above is what a lot of people find difficulty in coming to terms with. It's so simple yet so confusing. I guess the problem is religious dogmatism and over zealousness on the part of adherents right from the time the biblical texts were being written. More to come whilst i eagerly await pastor's confirmation or rejection of m_nwanko's submission.

It is OK if u have ur own beliefs about love. but it is not OK if u falsely relate them to Xtianity. The above is a FALSE doctrine. It is impossible to have the love of Christ without Christ.
The love of Christ is embedded in salvation. . . . . .how can anyone be saved without the knowledge of Christ?

why are u so bothered about hell? and how does fear and love not go hand in hand?

toneyb:
What really was the purpose of the story? Personally, the biggest line of reasoning against the biblical flood is the sheer incompetence displayed by the biblegod in the story.

The whole point was to destroy evil, right? To reset the world back to the mythical garden of eden where there is no evil, right?

This is the best that an all-powerful, all-knowing supernatural being could do? destroy the earth according to the story, destroy all its inhabitants, refuse to destroy his worst enemy devil(because according to the story the devil was not destroyed) who is supposed to be his worst enemy and the being that is responsible for evil in the world. After allegedly destroying the earth with a flood according to the myth, men continued to disobey him and he sometime had to come down from heaven and fight with men using his mighty sword of slaughter, shouting and crying while killing men as recorded in some books of the bible .

So what was the purpose of destroying the earth with a flood assuming the story were true? Why destroy all of humanity and leave out the devil who was responsible for leading them astray in the first place according to the story. After destroying humanity people continued to sin and rebel against this deity. So what was the purpose of the flood? what did it accomplish?

Myth, myth and more myth

how many times have i exposed ur ignorance on this issue?

Purist:
@noetic15

Lol. . . I am not attempting to reconstruct DeepSight's intent and question to suit any preconceived notion, and I'm glad he's come out to explicate his stance on this issue.  I don't agree that he shifted the goalpost in the middle of the game, rather, it's you who didn't realise the correct positioning of the goalpost in the first place.  Anyways, I guess it's all settled now, and I hope you'll take some time off to reflect on your own comments so you'll realise that you've been so-so NOT objective at all.

On the issue of the rationality or otherwise of faith, I suggest we just drop that argument, as I see your ridiculous rejoinders as an attempt to initiate some circumlocutory debate, which I'm very much UNinterested in.

Regards.

u confirmed my fears about ur preconceived notions. next time u get into a debate with anyone, leave all ur dogmas behind and address the issues.
stop running from healthy debates.

timmy7:
What's this guy talking abt Are u trying to impress a muslim babe or what

yes he is . . . .her username is uplawal.

Abuzola:
You misinterpreted them, read it meticulously

and what EXACTLY is ur meticulous deduction?

a. cheating. . , .physical or emotional. I might forgive, but cant forget.

b. fall out of love.

Abuzola:
Don't be ridiculous, Muhammad is a man and not spirit

so whats all the rubbish above by ur fellow slaves about mohammed being in the bible?