₦airaland Forum

NNTR:
Inexactness. You see that? Thats what the point is all about.

The obscurity in '... and caused the earth, which God filled with good things to become empty, earth became empty of good, earth became empty ... ' is the point you're digging your heels in

Of course, yes, thy will see, being they are mind readers

You constantly amaze me, but not in any particularly good way.
No, its not simple enough, this is rocket science stuff. Its too much for me

I did not call you a clown, but whoever the cap fits, wear

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

If it’s too much for you then you say you do not understand. If you say that then I’m liable to explain better to you. Life is simple my dear friend.

If you say there was an inaccuracy in the video, you’re saying you understand it and have seen some fallacious statement in it. That’s another case and this is why I have been telling you to watch it again.

I stated that a person must think critically about the video then state if it’s true. You spoke that it has in accuracy and I assumed you’ve thought about it.

There’s room for question dear friend, especially when such questions are open minded questions. But if you made a claim of inaccuracy first and ask malicious questions afterwards then no one will answer you. However, I have tried to explain to you well enough but it appears our focus is different.

Anyways, I believe you think you’re right in your own eyes while I think (in my own eyes too) the video is perfect for the message I passed.

If you wanted to speak constructively, you would have given suggestion that I try to explain better in subsequent videos, and maybe I’d have said thank you or I would have said I wanted to make the video as short as possible but what you did was not a suggestion. You came with a faulty judgement, and I know that there’s no fault in the video, if anyone faults any part of it, it’s to say they did not understand the message.

So pls let’s make this a conversation where you explain your difficulties in the video and I’ll pick up what should be added. At least now, I know that thumbnail affect rating and visibility and that’s thanks to you.

Techobeys:
If it’s too much for you then you say you do not understand. If you say that then I’m liable to explain better to you. Life is simple my dear friend.

If you say there was an inaccuracy in the video, you’re saying you understand it and have seen some fallacious statement in it. That’s another case and this is why I have been telling you to watch it again.

I stated that a person must think critically about the video then state if it’s true. You spoke that it has in accuracy and I assumed you’ve thought about it.

There’s room for question dear friend, especially when such questions are open minded questions. But if you made a claim of inaccuracy first and ask malicious questions afterwards then no one will answer you. However, I have tried to explain to you well enough but it appears our focus is different.

Malicious questions? Smh. Pfft.

You owe me no explaining to do, instead go do your explanation directly on the YT video

Yeah, you are right, your focus is your customary navel-gazing obsession and nothing will distract you from your elaborate exercises, in navel-gazing

Techobeys:
Anyways, I believe you think you’re right in your own eyes while I think (in my own eyes too) the video is perfect for the message I passed.

No one knocked the message you passed, it's how you passed an element in the message that was drawn to your attention, but you are almighty teach, how dare anyone throw spot lights on your video

Techobeys:
If you wanted to speak constructively, you would have given suggestion that I try to explain better in subsequent videos, and maybe I’d have said thank you or I would have said I wanted to make the video as short as possible but what you did was not a suggestion. You came with a faulty judgement, and ...

We are beginning to see the reason for the pushback

Techobeys:
... I know that there’s no fault in the video, if anyone faults any part of it, it’s to say they did not understand the message.

Its so say, you weren't explicit, meaning, in the video, you didnt state clearly and in detail, to your intended audience, what you meant with saying: '... and caused the earth, which God filled with good things to become empty, earth became empty of good, earth became empty ... '

I know what you meant, I understand, but this cant necessarily, honestly sincerely and truthfully be said about your intended and/or targeted audience

Techobeys:
So pls let’s make this a conversation where you explain your difficulties in the video and I’ll pick up what should be added. At least now, I know that thumbnail affect rating and visibility and that’s thanks to you.

In the video, you said '... and caused the earth, which God filled with good things to become empty, earth became empty of good, earth became empty ... ' then in trying to justify and defend the comment, you resorted to making an unsubstantiated statement, saying that 'God, said the earth shall not produce good unto Adam'

If you want a conversation, then kindly say, where in the bible, did you find God say to Adam, that, the earth shall not produce good to him?

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

NNTR:
Malicious questions? Smh. Pfft.

You owe me no explaining to do, instead go do your explanation directly on the YT video

Yeah, you are right, your focus is your customary navel-gazing obsession and nothing will distract you from your elaborate exercises, in navel-gazing

No one knocked the message you passed, it's how you passed an element in the message that was drawn to your attention, but you are almighty teach, how dare anyone throw spot lights on your video

We are beginning to see the reason for the pushback

Its so say, you weren't explicit, meaning, in the video, you didnt state clearly and in detail, to your intended audience, what you meant with saying: '... and caused the earth, which God filled with good things to become empty, earth became empty of good, earth became empty ... '

I know what you meant, I understand, but this cant necessarily, honestly sincerely and truthfully be said about your intended and/or targeted audience


In the video, you said '... and caused the earth, which God filled with good things to become empty, earth became empty of good, earth became empty ... ' then in trying to justify and defend the comment, you resorted to making an unsubstantiated statement, saying that 'God, said the earth shall not produce good unto Adam'

If you want a conversation, then kindly say, where in the bible, did you find God say to Adam, that, the earth shall not produce good to him?

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

I thought you would have understood this when God said the land is cursed. What do you think happens to a good thing that become accursed?

Like I said, the video is for those who are willing to think, bc I made it by thinking about these things too. Maybe you’re refusing to think or something but it’s fine. I’ll only answer you next if you ask proper questions. Thank you so far for your engagement. It’s help the thread grow but I must leave you now. Good bye. You can follow my handles on other platform, maybe we’ll have a direct conversation or talk about this or phone in person but I’m done here.

Techobeys:
I thought you would have understood this when God said the land is cursed. What do you think happens to a good thing that become accursed?

Its nothing about me, but all about did you make yourself unambiguous in the video Of course you didnt

Techobeys:
Like I said, the video is for those who are willing to think, bc I made it by thinking about these things too. Maybe you’re refusing to think or something but it’s fine. I’ll only answer you next if you ask proper questions.

Conceit is self-given, be careful

To attempt to advise self conceit person is like whistling against the wind

Techobeys:
Thank you so far for your engagement. It’s help the thread grow but I must leave you now. Good bye. You can follow my handles on other platform, maybe we’ll have a direct conversation or talk about this or phone in person but I’m done here.

Good bye and good riddance

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

NNTR:
Its nothing about me, but all about did you make yourself unambiguous in the video Of course you didnt

Conceit is self-given, be careful

To attempt to advise self conceit person is like whistling against the wind

Good bye and good riddance

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

But thank you for your fair criticism of my first work. I have actually gotten better and my next video (a real video of my teachings) will come with subtitle and everything needed. Hopefully you’ll find this interesting than the last.

NNTR:
Its nothing about me, but all about did you make yourself unambiguous in the video Of course you didnt

Conceit is self-given, be careful

To attempt to advise self conceit person is like whistling against the wind

Good bye and good riddance

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

Here’s my first video session, still learning but it’s a lot better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40JBRlJoKv0