₦airaland Forum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vnMkW1xfW8&t=43s

OMOTOWO:
what

You number no come dey go again. whatsapp self

OMOTOWO:
Another #4600 chopped from lionsbet.com..me and bet9ja ..ka ma pade mo..11.5 odd

Bro, Na wa oo. Ahn ahn

@Avosoft:

Need something within the lines of instant payment notification interface (Paypal) only that the user is not required to input card details just name, address, id, phone number etc that will be used to generate an invoice, then the user is redirected back to the site. I need it as an alternative to paypal payment for Nigerians in Nigeria.

Point 1) Its what is it. A loaf of bread. It doesn't matter if its Agege bread or Mr.Biggs' bread. Whether its baked in an LG, Sharp Oven or spread out on a rotten iron palette and lowered into a clay housed furnace in a remote village in Arigidi; both are still bread.

Point 2) Both breads falling head on into the puddle shows that irrespective of where the two loafs where baked, they both didn't have any mystical power.

Point 3) Individual A may have chased down the fellow because he was bigger and older. As well, individual B might have walked home because he was smaller and not as strong after all. Individual A might have as well been in his neighborhood with friends around that could come to his aid and the fellow, probably a stranger in town, who brushed into him would rather have a single person beat him up than fall into the hands of a mob. - lots of factors

Point 4) No one is going to blame the two loafs of bread, a non-living thing, for the actions of both men, living things with a thinking faculty.

I think an appropriate example would be to evaluate the reaction of Mr. Biggs and Agege bread manufacturing associations. Should both bread manufacturers take to the street because a single loaf of their bread was thrown into a puddle? Are not the two Bread manufacturers the ones that placed their breads in every easily accessible stores for anyone with money to buy for consumption?

@Vexdacool: My statement read;

I'm certain that people who don't share your faith[b] hardly[/b] go to your section to post on stuffs not even controversial in nature.

Hardly isn't the same as Don't go! I'm certain you are well read enough to know that. Scroll back up to refresh your memory.

Why the Holocaust can't be compared in any way is the mere fact that the Holocaust wasn't just about burning the Jewish sacred book but the awful, dehumanizing tragic experience of a Jewish people. The primary objective of the Holocaust was to wipe out the Jews from the face of the earth. It wasn't the Jewish Torah that was been burnt, it was their lives that were been taken for the fact that they were Jewish. 3 million died in gas chambers alone. Holocaust is a crime against humanity. It directly involved HUMAN life. To compare the Holocaust and the Quran burning would mean you are equating the value of life and book as the same. Another copy of the Quran can be made, but a single life taken is lost forever. The Quran doesn't breath, has no blood flowing through it, does not procreate. That burnt copy of the Quran hasn't left behind a father or a mother or siblings. The Quran is an IT meaning a NON-LIVING THING. The two don't just go along. If the Holocaust had simply been about the Jewish Torah been burnt, then maybe the two could be comparable but as it stands, they don't in any way. I totally disagree with you!

I'll consider killing a turtledove for you.

for a whole (small) me?

@Vedaxcool; Apparently you've totally lost foot in the whirlwind of Islamic ideology and you're grabbing at every ocean current to stay afloat. Holocaust to Quran burning? I feel pity for you Vedaxcool. Really I do. It shows you are really a lover of your faith. I'm sure you are naturally a good fellow in a wrong cause. You should really not reply again. Safe your pride, whatever is left of it anyway. Even the devil's advocate walked out on a case once it dawned on him it was to his peril. I'll pray for you as I'd do to TheHomer as well. I look forward to exchanging ideas with you on any other board. Should you have any question as regards the Christian faith, feel free to ask. I'm certain there are lots of Christians here filled full with the Word of God to reply. Jesus loves you and he longs for you to know him and accept him as your Lord and Savior. Same goes for you TheHomer.

Accept my sincere apology for any derogatory word I might have used in any of my posts to you. I get caught up in the heat of things, sometimes, when I see a very good motorist driving on the wrong lane. Cheers bro

Vedaxcool !!! 

The first thing that needs to be made clear is the fact that a few years back, you (muslims) wrote to Seun Osewa with a polite but clear message, do something about what's been said about Islam on Nairaland, or a Fatwa will be issued on you. Have seen Seun Osewa say lots of total rubbish about Christianity but not once has he dared comment on anything pertaining to Islam - "his usual dumb reply would be I don't know anything about the religion". The Fatwa message prompted the "Islam for Muslims Board". Now, theirs something called decorum - an observance or requirement of polite society. You (Muslims) were the ones that decided to isolate yourself away from the general religious section and I'm certain that people who don't share your faith hardly go to your section to post on stuffs not even controversial in nature.

Where decorum comes in is that since you came to this board, remember Muslims are the only ones with a separate board because they could tolerate what was been written about Islam, and identify yourself as a Muslim and its Muslims that have taken lives of innocent people over the issue of quran burning, mere common sense demands that you be very sympathetic in a board as this. Now, before you go cause further damage to your health  with a high blood pressure, what I imply is the fact that you need not come here and explicitly spit on all our faces with statements like this "In my opinion, a healthy limit has to be placed on this priceless liberty and in this case its an expression of hatred. burning a relic of their faith and purpose to their lives. Its similar to Nazi propaganda." by Kay_17 and this; "blaming some one for the killings is not the same as supporting the killing" from a very confused YOU You should blame the killers but not support the burning.

The same decorum that wouldn't let you fart in a board meeting or at the dinning at your inlaws', or one that would let you tell your host to his face that his wife is the worst cook you've ever tasted applies that when you come to the general religious section on Nairaland, since you demanded for a separate board for Islam, you watch your words and be sympathetic to issues. If this same thread had been posted in the Islam for Muslims' board, I'd care less about what you muslims think, but out here is a lot of us who remember things you muslims seem to forget at will.

Do you remember the Theodoor "Theo" van Gogh's story a few years back? He was shot eight times by a muslim who then attempted to decapitate him with one knife, and stabbed him in the chest with another. WHY? because Theo produce the film "Submission", which was critical of the treatment of women in Islam. Yet there was the Da Vinci Code and not one Christian burnt any body's effigy. Many Christians attacked back by writing books, video productions etc. Anything but Violence as retaliation. Imagine if Van had done a movie about Muhammad and Islam itself, what would have happened? World war III. What tolerance lies in your actions?

Only if you'd written something as sensible as this in your very first post; I support people being trialed and given the chance to defend themselves rather than a mob that is acting irrationally to carry the law into the hands. If the law of the land makes the pastor liable for death so be it. and nothing more, you wouldn't be gasping for breath from being so bitter. But you went on about how people were trying to do this and that to Islam. As well, KAY_17 would have done well if he'd stopped at "In my opinion, a healthy limit has to be placed on this priceless liberty and in this case its an expression of hatred. but he didn't, why he would mess up such wonderful line with burning a relic of their faith and purpose to their lives. Its similar to Nazi propaganda.

The western world didn't want the book burning to go on because they are aware that majority of muslims in the middle east are like dogs on a leach waiting for the slightest opportunity to bite. Why can't you all just prove the rest of us world wrong by pretending to be the religion of peace that you falsely claim to be.

NB; could you kindly put all the venom all in one paragraph and the bit sensible things you have to say on another should you want to reply next.  Thanks

I do not think its okay to murder anyone. I'm thankful that you chose to use the term ancient Israelite. According to conventional Bible chronology, Joshua lived between 1500–1390 BC. While the story of Troy, King Author and the likes are considered as mere myth, they give insight into the realm of things during middle earth. People all through history have fought and killed over land and property. Even long before the Children of Israel were to be delivered out of the land of Egypt, Abraham went into war in Genesis 14; Here we see kings that had served a particular king, Chedorlaomer king of Elam for twelve years. This can easily be interpreted that the King of Elam had won a previous battle and five kings were his subjects but they rebelled in the thirteenth year. That verse further tells us how the King of Elam reacted brutally, attacking and killing many that opposed his supremacy. What I'm trying to point out here is show that the lives of the ancient Israelite was one of war. Its like "You keep what you kill" drill. Just so to show that the Israelite weren't all about killing every kingdom, there's a verse in Genesis that shows us the Children of Israel pleading with a particular king to let them pass through his farm and whatever got damaged they would re-pay. He refused and they had to go follow a longer route.

King of Elam wasn't a Christian nor was he ordered by Yahweh. The ancient greeks, romans, saxons, Akhadians etc weren't Christians as well but they all engaged in war, many times wiping out villages. Ever before Columbus sailed to the Americas, the Red Indians fought wars with neighboring kingdoms. Am sure you've heard about the Mayan Calendar, these folks were once a striving powerful kingdom. Going from Alexandria the great, we know that for any kingdom to be great, it must engage in war, conquer lands and exterminate kingdoms not willing to become subjects. War, no matter when it's fought, either 5,000 years ago or the one presently in Iraq, none brings an all round good result.

In the case of Palestinians and Israeli land dispute, Israel has my support any day any time. Palestinians willingly left Israel during the first Israeli-Arab war thinking the coalition of Arabs countries would wipe out Israel and then they could return. Moreover, Palestine was at no time before Israel declared independence itself a sovereign state. They were under the Ottoman empire and later Britain. Muslims laying claims to the land of Israel is about as ridiculous as it gets. Even Muhammed only claimed to have visited Israel in one single night and returned to Saudi before the break of dawn the next morning, yet Muslims lay claim to the land of Israel, so I'd have to say that can in some way justify the claim that religious belief is really putting the world on its feet.

I get your point. God is a title or more like a pronoun. I don't think there's a law in Israel prohibiting writing G-d as God though. Have read a few comments from Jews who admit that while God is not God's name, they write God as G-d out of respect for anything being associated with God.

What coherent argument?

That I follow suit in your reasoning. TheHomer asked you a question you refuse to answer so here is it, again;

It seems that you only condemn this action because aid workers were killed. Would you support this action if the pastor was killed?

Last year when the man incited the Burn the Quran day, lots of Christian organizations came out openly to condemn his plan. That speaks volume about how majority of us Christians feel about his actions. However, that still doesn't justify the actions of the lunatics that went on a killing spray. You asked (as where did my entire reply call for killing people in retaliation for Burning the Qur'an?) Apparently, TheHomer as well sees through the lines of your writing. Its the reason he asked that very simple question you have failed to answer.

How better a coherent argument do you want than ask if it is too much for someone in Iran or Iraq to simply switch to a local channel not showing a man in USA burning a copy of the Quran? Why couldn't they utter the words "HARAM" and flick to another channel.

No country permits the killing of people at the slightest provocation?

No country does but how many of these crooks in the middle east have been brought to book? And how many of you their counterparts in the west will not stop at saying that the man who burnt a book in USA is the one to be blamed for the deaths of people killed in the middle east.

Now whose got a lose bolt somewhere in his brain?

Your infinite stream of Fallacious replies and Comparison is becoming mind boggling. yes you are right

@Sweetnecta

this is getting interesting.

To say the Palestinians were the philistines is not only wrong but totally ridiculous. Now, Ismael was circumcised I bet you agree with that right?

Here's 1 Samuel 17 vs 26 "David asked the men standing near him, "What will be done for the man who kills this Philistine and removes this disgrace from Israel? Who is this UNCIRCUMCISED Philistine that he should defy the armies of the living God?" - Thank God for the Bible

But Ismael was circumcised. How come the Philistines at the time of David weren't if truly they were the descendants of Ismael? Circumcision was a covenant between God and Abraham and Abraham's descendants.

If Muslims wanted to justify their claim, they ought to have a story about Ismael and his children. Isaac and Ismael are step brothers, Isaac gave birth to Jacob (Israel) and Esua. Moses' father was from the house of Levi, one of the twelve sons of Jacob whose grand father was Isaac the step-brother of Ismael. Since Arabs claim to be from Ismael, why isn't that Arabs have stories about Ismael and his descendants. Why include the story of Moses in the Quran, why include the story of David, Solomon etc Oh, God totally forgot that they existed but when he got tired of the stiff-neckedness of the Children of Israel, decides it was time to revisit the descendants of Ismael from outta the blue?

Even if Arabs claim to be the descendant of Esua, the step brother of Jacob (Israel), they still do not have any right to the linage of Jacob's children. The prophets you claim were disobeyed and killed, where they from the descendants of Ismael or Esua or from the direct linage of Jacob (Israel)? And if Arabs were truly descendants of Ismael, should they not have a story about their own ancestors as well? Why would Allah felt it was best to recount an half-baked story of the children of Israel when he could easily have told Muhammed everything about Ismael and how the descendants of Ismael lived?

Who's telling the side of the story of Ismael's generations? Did they fight wars like the Children of Israel, which land did they occupy? Who were their kings? who were their prophets? Did the descendants of Ismael ever peaceful with all their neighbours, were they only worshiping the God Abraham was at the time of Muhammed? Was that why God decided he was done with the Children of Israel and move over to the supposedly Children of Ismael? reply!!!

Do you actually believe that these three are Gods in the same way that Jehovah is a God? (I'm only trying to rule out metaphors and Gods that in your opinion do not exist.)

We all believe in something. Even folks that don't believe in the existence of any deity as well believe in something. I can confess what I believe which is that there is a God who created all things and made man in his likeness. Science has not been able to give an accurate explanation as to how human came to be and do not as well have the explanation of what will happen when I'm dead. So, I cling to HIM that has got answers and the book divinely inspired by him.

Now, Mammon mandated that his worshipers sacrificed their children in fire to him - Can't believe in him because I can't imagine having to be under the obligation to sacrifice my child for a image someone somewhere sat carved out of wood.

I haven't studied much about Zeus but from the little I know, was called the father of gods and men and had a mother and father. That means his father must have had a father who had a father till infinity. More so, his siblings could, as he was the youngest, could have much more power than he had.

As regards Allah, I'd love to go into concrete details but I wouldn't want to offend Muslims here on Nairaland - You know how they get - nevertheless, lets just say the Quran contains details about the culture and people of another kingdom yet it claims to be valid. Its like an Igbo man named Nnamdi who had never been to Oyo but had heard the story of Oduduwa and the children of Yoruba land. Nnamdi then retells the story to Igbo people, spicing it up to woo them and tells them that Oduduwa's name was actually Chineke but that the Yoruba people who had held on to Oduduwa for over 2,000 years even before Nnamdi was born had mistaken Chineke's name as Oduduwa. He tells Igbo people about Sango, Oranmiyan, Obatala, Oya etc great men that had existed in the linage of the yoruba people and claims to be the final messenger to such great men and that it was through him that the religion everyone was to accept had come. Problem is that the Yoruba people had been instructed by Oduduwa to write down his instructions and events. So the Yoruba people know their own story, they know Oduduwa. Even if the Nnamdi is able to sell the story to his fellow Igbo people in Port-harcourt, do you think he could do the same in Oyo town? Do you think any Yoruba man would buy such watery milk? I wouldn't as well. Fast forward like 1,000 years to the future and you now have the Igbo people telling yoruba people that Oduduwa was a made up story. One problem is that the Igbo people can't do without referencing Sango, Oranmiyan, Obatala to prove their point.

Sorry if my story above was boring but the above is why I cannot believe in these gods Mammon, Zeus and Allah.

How do this two compare? no country permits the killing of people at the slightest provocation, a more sensible comparison will have been restriction on the "right" to incite people, If a man burns a book in h back yard, who will be bothered or even know? But when a man creates a media hype on such actions which like is making an announcement to the world I bought a book and it is going on trial, and it will be sentenced soon, it is plain commonsense that his intenton or the actions we see was clearly to incite violence and gain popularity with such political satements. I  bet those that are here saying the man has the freedom to Incitively Burn Book for cheap popularity are the same individuals that would say wearing a bouka is against civilised norms, indeed the Hypocrisy is stinks.

Is it a must that Muslims have to switch to the TV channel showing the book get burnt? Is it? Could they not just have hissed at the man's attitude and flick the channel somewhere else. Use your common sense!!! please, because I see someone burning a Bible on CNN, the next step of action is to take to the street and start killing anyone from the same country where the Bible was burnt? In what manner did it incite people? That he went inside a mosque to burn the Quran? What would have happened if it was a Mosque that got burnt?

Just about three weeks back, a group of Muslims burnt down a church in Cairo, Egypt because a Muslim got into a heated argument with a Christian. That Church had Bible[b]s[/b] in it. Did Christians anywhere else in the world take to the street killing Muslims?

Matthew 7 vs 5 : "You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst." (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

Did you read the part that said And all Israel?

"Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods.

Read again the part where it says in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you. The Bible isn't instructing them to spread Judaism all over the world. God promised them a specific location, a place where they could be his "God's" people and he "GOD" could be their God. He never asked them to wage war against every kingdom in the world until the world subject themselves to Judaism as a religion. All what they had to do was live accordingly to the injunction God had given to them in that piece of land that "flows with milk and honey". Answer this simple question; Have you ever heard a Jew preach to anyone to convert to Judaism. That is how much the guide their culture, its the rest of the world that calls it a religion.

If that is not enough for you. Here is another. Israel came back together as a nation in 1947, this year will make it 64 years they've been back as a nation. They operate a FREE PRESS. In-case you don't know what that means; it means the government doesn't censor what is been published by the press. Now in these 64 years, when have you ever read that Israel stoned someone to death for committing idolatry or adultery? An Israeli past president was sentenced to jail just about two weeks back for sexual molestation - the clue from that is that even Israel, the same people that had in their cultural law some 3,000 years are presently using a judicial system in par with our time. Don't you know that there was a time in Nigeria when a King would have his queen beheaded for adultery? Wasn't there a time in Nigeria when if a man discovers that a woman he's just married isn't a virgin on the wedding night, could wage war against the tribe of such girl.

Did you not read the part where Jesus asked the same Jewish people that anyone whom hadn't committed the same offense the prostitute did should "Cast the first stone"? They all left. Why? because they were all guilty but were living an hypocritical life like they do in all Islamic countries today. They engage in everything that is done in the west secretly yet pretend to be holy and would take the fore front in making an example out of any one caught openly.

You are clear with that now?

In my opinion, a healthy limit has to be placed on this priceless liberty and in this case its an expression of hatred.

What liberty should the healthy limit be placed? The one that so much gives people the right to kill at the slightest provocation or the one that permits going to the book store to purchase a book with your hard earned money and do as you so please with such book? Its a shame on your intelligence that YOU can make such claim without even sitting back for one minute to think through what is it you are implying.

Matthew 7 vs 5 : "You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

@Tundeprime: oh my gosh. such wonderful accolades for a whole (I mean: SMALL) me! Thanks man
It takes being endowed with great wisdom to recognize tiny bits of it in people like me.

Can you please name three of these other [b]g[/b]ods?

1) Mammon
2)Allah
3)Zeus

Putting aside the sole religion calming to be the exclusive chosen ones, its one thing to act in the direct opposite of what your religious text teaches and its another to have several passages in your religious text authorizing you to destroy everyone not practicing your religion and allowing them to live only if they opt to come under your authority. Its one thing to stay put in your little country, not bother the world except react when its got only to do with your national security against enemy neighboring states. Its another to travel to other countries, with other cultures and want to super impose your culture on them.

@Sweetnecta:

Its one thing to want to defend the actions of your fellow muslims but I'm not the kind of person you'd want to play the words game with. I didn't come up with the word "stiff-necked" of my own will. Its in the Bible, the same one you (muslims) say has been extensively falsified. Now, Ismael is the first born no doubt but you erroneously mention Ismael being the only son of Abraham and that his descendants are the Palestinians? Do you realize that from what you've just confessed, you've categorically broken off the false link you Muslims had hitherto had to Abraham. So who built the alleged Kabba if Ismael's descendants have always been living in Israel. Do you guys not claim that Abraham built it? *I'm spending more time laughing at your (Muslims) ignorance than I do writing this piece*

Yes the Israelite were stiff-necked and the Bible shows us how they paid each time they went against God's will. The destruction of the first and second temple and the sending to exiles on several occasions and the last of such which was the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 in the Jew-Roman war was as a result of their stiff-neckedness. Their stiff-neckedness wasn't against neighboring kingdoms, it was actually because they joined their neigbours in idol worship. It was  for this that God punished them but guess what, he made a vow with them, an everlasting vow, because it's through them that salvation was to come to the world. Salvation through the Lord Jesus.

The Hittites and the likes you made mentioned were drove out of the land as God commanded the Israelite because God had promised Abraham to give the land to Isaac and his children. It should as well interest you that Abraham bought a piece of land from this same Hittites during his life time.

Next time, before you start writing about Israelis acquiring land through conquest, try reading the brief history of your own country Nigeria. read about how OYO Ile ruled and how it lost its kingdom even to the extent of relocating from the porch King Palace in OYO Ile to the present day Alaafin's residence. Better yet, read about the conquest of the Caliphates. Yes, The four Caliphates that ruled after the death of Muhammed and read about how they conquered lands and spread religion. Where was the Crusade fought? In Mecca or in Europe? Was the Caliphate and his army teleported to Europe? They fought wars, conquered lands and established kingdoms. Also, have you ever sat yourself down to reason how come a mosque sits on the Temple Mount? A Place that had housed two separate temples built by the Children of Israel to worship God. Did the Mosque disappear from Saudi Arabia to the Temple Mount? Was it not built after one of the Caliphates conquered and ruled over Jerusalem? Pointing at the details of wars fought, won and lost by the Israelite as a yard stick in our modern age is simple being hypocritical of sensible reasoning and common sense.

Now to the verses from Quran. After reading the above do you really still seriously think we should dive into that? really, do you think you can walk the work with me?

One last note, I'm deeply sorry if I sounded rude or disrespectful in anyway in the above post. Sincerely I am but that wont stop me from taking you head on though should you want us to kick ourselves in the balls and see who's gonna hurt the most.

No. But you (Christians in general) think that there is only one entity that bears the title God that is referred to by anyone who believes as you do.

No. We belief in one [b]G[/b]od but know that there are other [b]g[/b]ods.

Abi ooo. Even the Eye for an Eye concept was confined within the boarders of the ancient Israeli land because the Bible admits that the Israelis of those days were "Stiffnecked people", they had to be rehabilitated  because of the 430 years they had spent in slavery.

Was that the sole surviving copy of the kuran that was burnt? Whats wrong is wrong. Its as simple as that.

Sure I do but Daddy isn't the name of the "man" through whom I came about this world yet I wouldn't be calling my friends dad "Daddy" now would I

Luke 16 : 27 - 31 : Then he said, I pray thee therefore, Father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, if they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

There was a little typo error before. I missed the "s". its http://thegiftedhands.com

One of the greatest MIRACLE of the BIBLE is the continual EXISTENCE still of the children of Israel whom readily identify with their origin and culture. Questioning the authenticity of the Bible is a mirage. Why? Before recent archaeological findings, the Old Testament has always been the subject to being called a made up story. The question is by whom and for whom were the story made up? With archaeological findings shattering the various unfounded accusations at the Bible, many have resulted into the next phrase, attacking the New Testament. Many would say that Jesus even never existed, while some would say he was just an average dude who got "God-di-fied" by his followers. The question is for what reasons? Can you question the New Testament without questioning the Old Testament?

Considering that their are several intellects on Nairaland not in agreement with the Bible and who frown at Christians who quote from the Bible to answer their questions, lets walk on your thread by tapping into our objective reasoning. WHY?: We need to question the foundation and objectives on which the Bible stands and was written upon.

Its not too irrational to think that Bible was made up so as to bring the unknowing under control. To make a Naive submissive and subsequently bring under control the entire world. However, Judaism is about the most strict culture to convert to. In fact, its so much a close, restricted religion that the Israeli government is actively involved in conversion to Judaism. This shatters the subjective claim. If they had primarily been interested in subjecting the world to their rule and ideas, they'd have made Judaism easy to get into but hard to get out of. Contrarily, Israelis don't preach conversion to Judaism and in the last three years alone, there's been more Jews returning to their homeland than any other country in the entire world. Why return to your homeland when you could easily integrate into other society, spread your beliefs and culture and bring into subordination by enforcing or persuading people of such adopted homelands. People even without common sense know that isolating oneself means you are not willing to meddle into other peoples business and don't want theirs in yours as well. The point is the Jewish people have something they don't want to share with the world. Its something that has held them together long before and even after their homeland was destroyed some 2,000 years ago by the Roman army.

Israel calling on Jewish people in diaspora to return home still does not answer why an Israeli, Moses, was inspired to pen the Book of Genesis. Through out all of history, the only battles Israel has fought as a nation is defending that little piece of land. There were written documents forecasting the destruction of Jerusalem 4 decades before the eventual Jew-Roman war in AD 70. This was not written in the Council of Nicaea in AD 325. As an historical fact, Israel had fallen as a country over 200 years before the council sat and there were two kinds of Jewish people at that time. The Jews that believed in Jesus Christ as the Messiah and Jews that were still expecting a Messiah, a Son from the line of David, their once ancestral warrior king, that would finally reign from Jerusalem and bring back the Temple worship. The Council of Nicaea had in its attendance between 250 - 318 people and was held from the May 20th to July 25 AD 325. The council was about interpreting written text that were already on ground. The Dead Sea Scrolls discovered starting from 1946 shows that the whole of the Old Testament existed as a single unit hundreds of years before the Council of Nicaea and it contained no alterations from what was in the Bible before and after the Council of Nicaea.

Many students of battles in history during middle earth are stunned at how spoils were treated. Spoils included children, women and commodities. It would therefore be historically inaccurate for the Bible to not include stories of battles the Israelis engaged in without revealing how they were instructed to treat their spoils after victory. In order words, its the concept of war. Is it fair to incite the Bible as a complete instructions for genocide, when the reality of war even at any time of history includes ones of horror and heart breaking stories. Have you all read of the Bataan Death March that happened as recently as 1942 in the Philippines. The United States dropped bombs on Hiroshima, not flinching that kids were running around on the street playing soccer. When describing the war, historians would detail what went down. This does not make the details of war an instructional book for genocide. This therefore isn't the "WHY" the Bible was written.

In the last hundred years alone, believers of the Bible have been subjected to persecution than any other group of people in the world. The crusade, often pointed out as a kingdom filled with violence, was a counter attack on the spread and conquest of Muslims and Islam into Spain and Europe. The best form of defense is attack but yet again, that does not explain why the concept detailed in the Bible. The instruction to go war in the Old Testament was to take that piece of land only. It wasn't to conquer the world like Alexandria the Great or the Romans, or the Caliphates. it was to possess that little piece of land that had so meticulously been divided among the twelve tribes of Israel even before they set foot on the soil. WHY?

any questions and comments before we move on

Questioning The Bible By Objective Reasoning

jpworld:
God should forgive Satan.

Soliciting for him

Hi everyone,

Kindly visit www.thegiftedhands.com

comments and suggestions.

Thanks