₦airaland Forum

Kobojunkie:
When did the compromise you speak of supposedly takre place?

I should be asking you.

tctrills:
Why qoute or believe some parts of a book that has no guarantee. What does that make you

Answer the question please! I asked you a question. Who is there to guarantee the credibility of the book called your bible since you obviously assume the book to be so?

tctrills:
I should be asking you.

I never said the book was compromised... you came up with that idea all by yourself.

Kobojunkie:
Surely, you realize that all 4 accounts given by the writers cannot all be credible, right?

If this is your belief, it's misleading of you to argue based on the bible. That is why you shouldn't be taken serious

Kobojunkie:
I never said the book was compromised... you came up with that idea all by yourself.

You said it's not credible, it contains falsehood, how else do you want to put it.
For something to be compromised means it has been infected, infiltrated or corrupted.
You made me understand that the bible is corrupted with falsehood.

tctrills:
If this is your belief, it's misleading of you to argue based on the bible. That is why you shouldn't be taken serious

I don't argue anything about God based on the bible since it would be stupid to do that knowing what I know. Instead, when it comes to that which has to do with God, I consult that in fact attributed to God as written in scripture.

tctrills:
You said it's not credible, it contains falsehood, how else do you want to put it.
For something to be compromised means it has been infected, infiltrated or corrupted.
You made me understand that the bible is corrupted with falsehood.

The Book was written by humans in human language and meant for human consumption meaning it is expected to contain errors from its inception. I never said anything about credibility in regards to the book itself. That argument has been wholly yours.

If you are done derailing your own thread because you are confused and unable to wrap your mind around what I said of my approach to that presented in scripture, can we get back to the Topic then?

---

The accounts provided by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John of the day Jesus Christ and His disciples ate the Last Supper do not correspond in any way or form meaning there is a clear error in the report. This also reveals that a day may have been lost in the accounts given by the writers as a result of the error.

Another key point I forgot to add to my list is that Jesus Christ, the one billed by the writers as the Passover Lamb of God could not have eaten Passover on any day order than the Passover day as that would have amounted to a sin against God on His part. That would have made Him a blemished lamb, and unacceptable as a Passover Lamb according to Exodus 12 decree by God.

So the claims made by Matthew, Mark, and Luke that the Last Supper took place on the First Day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread is in error.

Kobojunkie:
The Book was written by humans in human language and meant for human consumption meaning it is expected to contain errors from its inception. I never said anything about credibility in regards to the book itself. That argument has been wholly yours.

If you are done derailing your own thread because you are confused and unable to wrap your mind around what I said of my approach to that presented in scripture, can we get back to the Topic then?

---

The accounts provided by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John of the day Jesus Christ and His disciples ate the Last Supper do not correspond in any way or form meaning there is a clear error in the report. This also reveals that a day may have been lost in the accounts given by the writers as a result of the error.

Another key point I forgot to add to my list is that Jesus Christ, the one billed by the writers as the Passover Lamb of God could not have eaten Passover on any day order than the Passover day as that would have amounted to a sin against God on His part. That would have made Him a blemished lamb, and unacceptable as a Passover Lamb according to Exodus 12 decree by God.

So the claims made by Matthew, Mark, and Luke that the Last Supper took place on the First Day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread is in error.

you don't seem to understand the credibility issue you brought up. You made it clear that we can't rely or believe the words of the bible writers. That is the credibility issue. You made it clear that the records of these men can't be relied on. That mean they are not credible

tctrills:
you don't seem to understand the credibility issue you brought up. You made it clear that we can't rely or believe the words of the bible writers. That is the credibility issue. You made it clear that the records of these men can't be relied on. That mean they are not credible

There is no credibility issue except the one you keep trying desperately to create.

Kobojunkie:
I don't argue anything about God based on the bible since it would be stupid to do that knowing what I know. Instead, when it comes to that which has to do with God, I consult that in fact attributed to God as written in scripture.

The scripture was written by men, so why consult it since you don't even see the writings as reliable or credible

Kobojunkie:
There is no credibility issue except the one you keep trying desperately to create.

Are the writings in the bible credible and true?

tctrills:
The scripture was written by men, so why consult it since you don't even see the writings as reliable or credible

We have already been through this. Stop derailing what is your own topic.

tctrills:
Are the writings in the bible credible and true?

Based on whose standard? God or men?

Kobojunkie:
Based on whose standard? God or men?

1. Based on man's standard are they credible?
2. Based on God's standard are they credible?

Kobojunkie:
Based on whose standard? God or men?

How do you know God's standard? Have you been to mountain Everest and spoken to God?

You only have one standard and it is that of men. Because, God never wrote any Bible, nor did he speak, or give laws.


Why is this true? Because, you omcannot know God more than what you read in the Bible. If indeed you do, tell me about God without quoting the Bible. hehehe. checkmate!

Kobojunkie:
We have already been through this. Stop derailing what is your own topic.

My point is simple, if you fill that the bible contains falsehoods don't base your arguments on it passages.

kkins25:
How do you know God's standard? Have you been to mountain Everest and spoken to God?

You only have one standard and it is that of men. Because, God never wrote any Bible, nor did he speak, or give laws.


Why is this true? Because, you omcannot know God more than what you read in the Bible. If indeed you do, tell me about God without quoting the Bible. hehehe. checkmate!

So you don't know God's standard right?

kkins25:
1. How do you know God's standard? Have you been to mountain Everest and spoken to God?

2. You only have one standard and it is that of men. Because, God never wrote any Bible, nor did he speak, or give laws.

3. Why is this true? Because, you omcannot know God more than what you read in the Bible. If indeed you do, tell me about God without quoting the Bible. hehehe. checkmate!

1. His standard refers to His Law !

2. God didn't need to write anything to men for Him to set His standard for men.

3. Yes, you can. Even before your written scripture was passed down, men knew and followed God. That you have scripture to refer to today does not men God now only exists within the pages of scripture.

tctrills:
1. Based on man's standard are they credible?
2. Based on God's standard are they credible?

1. I wouldn't know since I don't subscribe to the standard of men in these things.

2. God never endorsed your Bible as His Truth to begin with. So?

tctrills:
My point is simple, if you fill that the bible contains falsehoods don't base your arguments on it passages.

Your point is meaningless to me since you assume the book to have not been filled with falsehoods from its beginning - that the falsehoods were somehow not intended so or expected to begin with..

Kobojunkie:
Your point is meaningless to me since you assume the book to have not been filled with falsehoods from its beginning - that the falsehoods were somehow not intended so or expected to begin with..

I never assumed anything. You made the claim of certain things in the bible are false. I am only wondering if you should be referring to the bible then.

tctrills:
I never assumed anything. You made the claim of certain things in the bible are false. I am only wondering if you should be referring to the bible then.

I am not the one having problems with accepting the book obviously contains errors here.... you are.

I am not the one with expectations as far as credibility is concerned. You are! So, yeah!

Kobojunkie:
I am not the one having problems with accepting the book obviously contains errors here.... you are.

I am not the one with expectations as far as credibility is concerned. You are! So, yeah!

Is a book with errors a credible source of information to you?

tctrills:
Is a book with errors a credible source of information to you?

Again, credibility of a book is no issue for me where God is concerned. That issue is entirely all yours.

Kobojunkie:
Again, credibility of a book is no issue for me where God is concerned. That issue is entirely all yours.

So what has been your problem? If you believe that the bible is a credible testament of God then you would be wrong to claim that there are falsehoods in it. There cant be falsehoods in a credible testament.

Kobojunkie:
Again, credibility of a book is no issue for me where God is concerned. That issue is entirely all yours.

Demented bat. Lmao

Kobojunkie:
1. His standard refers to His Law !

2. God didn't need to write anything to men for Him to set His standard for men.

3. Yes, you can. Even before your written scripture was passed down, men knew and followed God. That you have scripture to refer to today does not men God now only exists within the pages of scripture.

1)What is water?
kobo: water is liquid....
You haven’t said anything here sir.

3) you know this how? If the written law wasn't necessary then(when men were not different from savage beast) why is it so necessary now?
I am yet to see any man who has come to know God or jesus without having to flip through his Bible. All does who know Jesus heard of him through others. Go to remote Arabic communities, islands, no one knows master chesus..facts!!!! .

2) well, I wonder why he had to, on Mount Everest. Also, why is there need for Jesus nd the disciples if ur case 3 was valid?

checkmate!

tctrills:
So you don't know God's standard right?

Nope. Afterall, The jews never knew. Hence Jesus comment on the law of adultery when he said, "he who looks at a woman and lists over her...."
If you knew God's standard, the path to heaven would be a vast and obvious road.. *winks*.

kkins25:
Nope. Afterall, The jews never knew. Hence Jesus comment on the law of adultery when he said, "he who looks at a woman and lists over her...."
If you knew God's standard, the path to heaven would be a vast and obvious road.. *winks*.

I guess I understand you a bit. You do not understand God's standard so you follow what is written in the bible to the best of your understanding

kkins25:
1)What is water?
kobo: water is liquid....
You haven’t said anything here sir.

3) you know this how? If the written law wasn't necessary then(when men were not different from savage beast) why is it so necessary now?
I am yet to see any man who has come to know God or jesus without having to flip through his Bible. All does who know Jesus heard of him through others. Go to remote Arabic communities, islands, no one knows master chesus..facts!!!! .

2) well, I wonder why he had to, on Mount Everest. Also, why is there need for Jesus nd the disciples if ur case 3 was valid?
checkmate!

1. It is OK if you don't understand that God's Law is His standard.

2. I don't follow at all.

The disciples were sent out to teach the God's Law to those who are in the world, those who do not believe in God and know His Truth.

3. Many of the first Christians came to a knowledge of God without needing to read your Bible first. Open your mind to the time before the books so you realize that God is not limited to the pages of the books.

tctrills:
So what has been your problem? If you believe that the bible is a credible testament of God then you would be wrong to claim that there are falsehoods in it. There cant be falsehoods in a credible testament.

Stop pretending your confusion as mine abeg!

tctrills:
Is a book with errors a credible source of information to you?

Again, the issue of whether the book is credible or nor is all yours and not mine.