₦airaland Forum

QuinQ:
➜😅 I'm sure even you yourself can see you're NOT making sense. First of all you initially said there was no persecution! So, Paul and all his inspired letters were made up by Rome.
➜ Why again exactly?😆
➜ Then Rome was trying to hijack them but couldn't, (you initially said Rome hijacked them o) so they started persecuting them (you said there was no persecution o) but they kept gaining political power (where and how exactly?). Wow!

Paul was persecuted, not by Rome, but by Jews— his own people. That's what his letters say about his persecution. Paul eventually went to Rome because of charges leveled against Him by his Jewish brothers, whom he sought to get away from when he invoked his Roman citizenship.

2. Again, Paul was not persecuted by the Romans nor by Rome but by the Jews. He, to escape their possible stoning of him, invoked the audience of the Roman government to escape the Jews.

3. Well, a successful hijacking would have only been possible if they had been of the correct bloodline. Romans are non-Israelites, and that is the reason why I insist that it was an unsuccessful hijacking, meaning that what the Romans ended up with was not the real thing but a dud— not the Gospel. Since what they had was nothing of the original movement, it follows that even the persecution or tales of them had nothing to do with the original movement.

Kobojunkie:
The context of that conversation was well established in the verses following these verses you conveniently pulled out in order to pretend they say something else, though.

Samaritans are Israelites, given that they are descended from Joseph.

Isn't that the lost sheep of ISRAEL you keep harping about?? Yet Jesus would have nothing to do with her. Notice what she said to Jesus "you are a JEW" NOT "Israelite"! She was surprised Jesus spoke to her at all (a fellow Israelite o - the quintessential lost sheep of Israel in fact!)

QuinQ:
➜Isn't that the lost sheep of ISRAEL you keep harping about?? Yet Jesus would have nothing to do with her.
➜ Notice what she said to Jesus "you are a JEW" NOT "Israelite"! Then she was surprised Jesus spoke to her (a fellow Israelite o - the quintessential lost sheep of Israel!)

Again, the term "Lost sheep of Israel" is clearly explained in Ezekiel 34 vs 1 - 31.

2. Yes, Jesus Christ of Israel was a Jew — He was born of the blood of Judah. (Jews are a subset of the Israelite population comprised of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi.). But His Father didn't just send Him to the Jews but to the Lost Sheep of Israel - all 12 tribes of Israel.

Given the general animosity that existed between the Jews and the Samaritans, her shock is not out of place.

Kobojunkie:
Paul was persecuted, not by Rome, but by Jews— his own people. That's what his letters say about his persecution. Paul eventually went to Rome because of charges leveled against Him by his Jewish brothers, whom he sought to get away from when he invoked his Roman citizenship.

2. Again, Paul was not persecuted by the Romans nor by Rome but by the Jews. He, to escape their possible stoning of him, invoked the audience of the Roman government to escape the Jews.

3. Well, a successful hijacking would have only been possible if they had been of the correct bloodline. Romans are non-Israelites, and that is the reason why I insist that it was an unsuccessful hijacking, meaning that what the Romans ended up with was not the real thing but a dud— not the Gospel. Since what they had was nothing of the original movement, it follows that even the persecution or tales of them had nothing to do with the original movement.

So you even believe the letters of Paul were real yet still saying all this. Weren't the letters of Paul written to gentile Christian churches? Wasn't Paul arguing with Peter wether they needed to be circumcised?
Yet you kept saying Christianity was confined to Jews till it was "hijacked"!

Kobojunkie:
Again, the term "Lost sheep of Israel" is clearly explained in Ezekiel 34 vs 1 - 31.

2. Yes, Jesus Christ of Israel was a Jew — He was born of the blood of Judah. (Jews are a subset of the Israelite population comprised of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi.)

The lost sheep of ISRAEL yet Jesus would only deal with fellow Jews (we Jews know what we worship).
Don't you see a non sequitur there??

Kobojunkie:
Paul was persecuted, not by Rome, but by Jews— his own people. That's what his letters say about his persecution. Paul eventually went to Rome because of charges leveled against Him by his Jewish brothers, whom he sought to get away from when he invoked his Roman citizenship.

Is the below (from John 16) not Paul being persecuted? Was it by Jews??
Was it also Jews that banished John to the Island of Patmos and persecuted all other disciples.

--------------------------
20 They brought them before the magistrates and said, “These men are Jews, and are throwing our city into an uproar 21 by advocating customs unlawful for us Romans to accept or practice.”

22 The crowd joined in the attack against Paul and Silas, and the magistrates ordered them to be stripped and beaten with rods. 23 After they had been severely flogged, they were thrown into prison, and the jailer was commanded to guard them carefully. 24 When he received these orders, he put them in the inner cell and fastened their feet in the stocks.

QuinQ:
✓ So you even believe the letters of Paul were real yet still saying all this.
✓ Weren't the letters of Paul written to gentile Christian churches?
✓ Wasn't Paul arguing with Peter wether they needed to be circumcised?
✓ Yet you kept saying Christianity was confined to Jews till it was "hijacked"!

Paul was an Israelite, was he not? I don't believe in his letters; rather, I believe he likely wrote those letters of his.

2. The Gentiles are Israelites who were not of Jewish descent. Genesis 10 vs 1 - 5 explains the application of the term.

3. That issue has nothing to do with anything.

4. The term Israelites is not the same as Jews.
⚉ All Jews are Israelites,
⚉ All Gentiles are Israelites
⚉ All Jews are not Gentiles, and all Gentiles are not Jews

The movement that was Jesus Christ of Israel was confined to the Israelites(of both Jewish and Gentile roots) by the person of Jesus Christ of Israel. The attempted hijacking was carried out by non-Israelites(mostly of Roman descent) and resulted in the creation of the religion of Christianity, which you have today.

Again, Stop confusing yourself, please.

QuinQ:
➜ The lost sheep of ISRAEL yet Jesus would only deal with fellow Jews (we Jews know what we worship). ➜ Don't you see a non sequitur there??

Wrong!

Again, since Jesus Christ of Israel is confirmed to have also dealt with Samaritans who were not Jews. Therefore, it is erroneous to continue to assert that Jesus Christ of Israel only dealt with Jews. 🫤

2. Please stop confusing yourself in your rush to assert your religion above what is right in front of you. Look at the many errors you continue to make.

QuinQ:
✓ Is the below (from John 16) not Paul being persecuted? Was it by Jews??
✓ Was it also Jews that banished John to the Island of Patmos and persecuted all other disciples.
--------------------------
20 They brought them before the magistrates and said, “These men are Jews, and are throwing our city into an uproar 21 by advocating customs unlawful for us Romans to accept or practice.”
22 The crowd joined in the attack against Paul and Silas, and the magistrates ordered them to be stripped and beaten with rods. 23 After they had been severely flogged, they were thrown into prison, and the jailer was commanded to guard them carefully. 24 When he received these orders, he put them in the inner cell and fastened their feet in the stocks.

1. If you carefully examine the passage yourself, you will find that both men were instead accused of committing unlawful acts. How does that constitute persecution if their act was deemed to have been against the law at the time?

2. Where is it written that John was banished to the island of Patmos, and by whom?

Kobojunkie:
Paul was an Israelite, was he not? I don't believe in his letters; rather, I believe he likely wrote those letters of his.

2. The Gentiles are Israelites who were not of Jewish descent. Genesis 10 vs 1 - 5 explains the application of the term.

3. That issue has nothing to do with anything.

4. The term Israelites is not the same as Jews.
⚉ All Jews are Israelites,
⚉ All Gentiles are Israelites
⚉ All Jews are not Gentiles, and all Gentiles are not Jews


Again, Stop confusing yourself, please.

This is beyond laughable. "All Gentiles are Israelites"! What Nonsense! See below.
At least from now on you know not to keep harping "Jesus of Israel" when in actuality if you insist on that, it is "Jesus of Jews"!

QuinQ:
➜This is beyond laughable. "All Gentiles are Israelites"! What Nonsense! See below.
➜At least from now on you know not to keep harping "Jesus of Israel" when in actuality if you insist on that, it is "Jesus of Jews"!

I told you earlier that Google is not Scripture and Scripture is not Google. Well, in Genesis 10 vs 2 - 5, you will find the first use of the term Gentile, and the described application.

2 Japheth’s sons were Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras.
3 [/b]Gomer’s sons were Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.
[b]4 Javan’s sons were Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim.[a]
5 All the people who lived in the area around the Mediterranean Sea came from these sons of Japheth. The people separated and went to different countries according to languages, families, and nations. - Genesis 10 vs 2 - 5

Here's the Orthodox Jewish entry for this.

2 The Bnei Yephet: Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Yavan, and Tuval, and Meshech, and Tiras.
3 And the Bnei Gomer: Ashkenaz, and Riphat, and Togarmah.
4 And the Bnei Yavan: Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim.
5 By these were the coastlands of the Goyim divided in their lands; every one after his leshon, after their mishpechot, in their Goyim. - Genesis 10 vs 2-5

This is to refer to members of the same family/clan/nation of people.

2. Nonsense! 🙄🙄

Jesus Christ was born a Jew, yes, and Jews are Israelites. And by His own Words, He admitted that He was sent by His Father only to the Lost sheep of Israel, hence making Him Jesus Christ of Israel, not just the Jews.

Kobojunkie:
Wrong!

Again, since Jesus Christ of Israel is confirmed to have also dealt with Samaritans who were not Jews. Therefore, it is erroneous to continue to assert that Jesus Christ of Israel only dealt with Jews. 🫤

2. Please stop confusing yourself in your rush to assert your religion above what is right in front of you. Look at the many errors you continue to make.

This discourse is really becoming too ridiculous for me.
It is obvious the way Jesus dealt with and spoke to the Samaritan woman he did NOT consider himself also "Jesus of Samaritans (Israel)" only "Jesus of the Jews". He was not in the habit of interacting with them, and refered to them as "you" (you people) who "don't know what you worship but we Jews do". There was a clear "us" and "them" and no inkling of "I was also sent for you"!

QuinQ:
➜You must really feel ashamed writing this. Paul was spreading the gospel!
➜ Says it right there!
➜ That's an unlawful act till Constantine. That is what is called PERSECUTION!!
➜ Read your book of Revelation

1. Ashamed of stating what is clearly stated in the book of Acts? Are you certain you are OK?

2. The passage you quoted does not state that they were persecuted. So, why do you take it on yourself to add that to it?

3. Constantine came in at least 200 after the locking up of Paul and Silas back in Judah. Yes, the government has the power to change laws and sign edicts. And no, that is not what persecution is. If you break the law and are punished for it, you are not persecuted but instead judged and condemned by the law.

4. The book of Revelation says nothing of what you claim.

QuinQ:
➜This discourse is really becoming too ridiculous for me. It is obvious the way Jesus dealt with and spoke to the Samaritan woman he did NOT consider himself also "Jesus of Samaritans (Israel)" only "Jesus of the Jews". He was not in the habit of interacting with them, and refered to them as "you" (you people) who "don't know what you worship but we Jews do". There was a clear "us" and "them" and no inkling of "I was also sent for you"!

It is? I mean Jesus Christ of Israel is written to have stayed two days with the Samaritans, preaching to them in order to fulfil the prophecy that He, the Messiah, would be the one to directly reach out to the Ephraimites.

WOW... you religious folks have your own ideas separate from what is stated in the Scriptures for sure.

Kobojunkie:
1. Ashamed of stating what is clearly stated in the book of Acts? Are you certain you are OK?

2. The passage you quoted does not state that they were persecuted. So, why do you take it on yourself to add that to it?

3. Constantine came in at least 200 after the locking up of Paul and Silas back in Judah. Yes, the government has the power to change laws and sign edicts. And no, that is not what persecution is. If you break the law and are punished for it, you are not persecuted but instead judged and condemned by the law.

4. The book of Revelation says nothing of what you claim.

Bros, I hope you are not totally dense.
Just being a Christian was against the law, talkless of preaching it. Christianity was illegal, AGAINST THE LAW!!! And you were punished for it, up to execution. That's what persecution means!! jeez!!

QuinQ:
➜Bros, I hope you are not totally dense. Just being a Christian was against the law, talkless of preaching it. Christianity was illegal, AGAINST THE LAW!!! And you were punished for it, up to execution. That's what persecution means!! jeez!!

Go back through the story to realize what, in fact, happened. Paul cast a demon out of a girl who never asked him to or desired his help. He was arrested by those around the girl who saw him render her of no use to them by his actions on the grounds of causing problems. Read what is, in fact, contained in the book there and stop trying to play the victim card here. There was no mention of his belief or Jesus Christ of Israel or the fact that he was a Jew as the reason for his prosecution and imprisonment.

Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group, often based on religious, racial, or political grounds

Kobojunkie:
Go back through the story to realize what, in fact, happened. Paul cast a demon out of a girl who never asked him to or desired his help. He was arrested by those around the girl who saw him render her of no use to them by his actions on the grounds of causing problems. Read what is, in fact, contained in the book there and stop trying to play the victim card here. There was no mention of his belief or Jesus Christ of Israel or the fact that he was a Jew as the reason for his prosecution and imprisonment.

Stop being DISHONEST! It says right there why they were being punished! They were being punished for PREACHING! Here it is:
“These men are Jews, and are throwing our city into an uproar 21 by advocating customs unlawful for us Romans to accept or practice.”

QuinQ:
➜Stop being DISHONEST! It says right there why they were being punished! They were being punished for PREACHING! Here it is:
“These men are Jews, and are throwing our city into an uproar 21 by advocating customs unlawful for us Romans to accept or practice.”

They were punished for breaking the law— unlawful act. Na you post am, and na you come dey call me dishonest for asserting exactly what is stated... how come?

Kobojunkie:
Go back through the story to realize what, in fact, happened. Paul cast a demon out of a girl who never asked him to or desired his help. He was arrested by those around the girl who saw him render her of no use to them by his actions on the grounds of causing problems. Read what is, in fact, contained in the book there and stop trying to play the victim card here. There was no mention of his belief or Jesus Christ of Israel or the fact that he was a Jew as the reason for his prosecution and imprisonment.

Stop being DISHONEST!! That's NOT what they were being punished for! It says it clearly what they were being punished for: For ADVOCATING (PREACHING!!!)

QuinQ:
➜Stop being DISHONEST!! That's NOT what they were being punished for! It says it clearly what they were being punished for: For ADVOCATING (PREACHING!!!)

They were advocating unlawful customs. If the law is clear that an idea is unlawful, advocating that idea is against the law and hence punishable by the law.

Imagine the unlawful act was preaching on the streets where the law clearly says, "No preaching allowed." If a man ignored the signs and went on to preach anyways, and was arrested for clearly violating legal code, do you conclude that the man was being persecuted as well?

Kobojunkie:
They were punished for breaking the law— unlawful act. Na you post am, and na you come dey call me dishonest for asserting exactly what is stated... how come?

Being a Christian was an unlawful act, talkless of preaching it!! That's the meaning of Persecution: being punished for being a Christian because being a Christian was AGAINST THE LAW!!!

QuinQ:
➜Being a Christian was an unlawful act, talkless of preaching it!! That's the meaning of Persecution: being punished for being a Christian because being a Christian was AGAINST THE LAW!!!

Wrong! Again, Paul was not persecuted; the verse you quoted clearly stated that he was arrested for violating legal code and was punished for it.

Also, if you consider the fact that before 70 AD, Nero was accused of unjustly accusing the Jews of the time of crimes, then you realize that the whole idea of Christianity being criminalized in Rome was probably not true during the time before the eventual destruction of Jerusalem and Judah. The supposed criminalization came much, much later, probably towards the end of the second century in Rome.

Kobojunkie:
Wrong! Again, Paul was not persecuted; the verse you quoted clearly stated that he was arrested for violating legal code and was punished for it.

Also, if you consider the fact that before 70 AD, Nero was accused of unjustly accusing the Jews of the time of crimes, then you realize that the whole idea of Christianity being criminalized in Rome was probably not true during the time before the eventual destruction of Jerusalem and Judah. The supposed criminalization came much, much later, probably towards the end of the second century in Rome.

I am trying my best not to label you as dense.
You see it written in the Bible in black and white!
They could have accused Paul concerning the girl. THEY DIDN'T!! Instead they accused him of PREACHING about Christianity!! How far is that from Christianity being illegal?? Jeez!!

Kobojunkie:
They were advocating unlawful customs. If the law is clear that an idea is unlawful, advocating that idea is against the law and hence punishable by the law.

Imagine the unlawful act was preaching on the streets where the law clearly says, "No preaching allowed." If a man ignored the signs and went on to preach anyways, and was arrested for clearly violating legal code, do you conclude that the man was being persecuted as well?

Oga, I really think I'm wasting my time because you're unteachable!
Persecution means harassing someone for their beliefs or fior advocating those beliefs.
Removing the spirit from the girl was NOT a crime. That's why they didn't accuse them of that!
They insread accused them of preaching Christianity which was a crime.
If they were not preaching Christianity there would have been nothing to charge them with!
Their crime was advocating an alien, disruptive theology!

Kobojunkie:
Wrong! Again, Paul was not persecuted; the verse you quoted clearly stated that he was arrested for violating legal code and was punished for it.

Also, if you consider the fact that before 70 AD, Nero was accused of unjustly accusing the Jews of the time of crimes, then you realize that the whole idea of Christianity being criminalized in Rome was probably not true during the time before the eventual destruction of Jerusalem and Judah. The supposed criminalization came much, much later, probably towards the end of the second century in Rome.

You keep writing this nonsense when it's right there in your Bible that their crime was Christianity! Even Jesus himself was accused of trying to supplant Caesar by declaring himself king of the Jews. It was simply ILLEGAL from the beginning to advocate Christianity because it runs counter to accepted Roman practices!!

QuinQ:
➜I am trying my best not to label you as dense. You see it written in the Bible in black and white!
They could have accused Paul concerning the girl. THEY DIDN'T!! Instead they accused him of PREACHING about Christianity!! How far is that from Christianity being illegal?? Jeez!!

Read the story and stick to what is in fact stated.

16 One day we were going to the place for prayer, and a servant girl met us. She had a spirit in her that gave her the power to tell what would happen in the future. By doing this she earned a lot of money for the men who owned her.
17 She started following Paul and the rest of us around. She kept shouting, “These men are servants of the Most High God! They are telling you how you can be saved!”
18 She continued doing this for many days. This bothered Paul, so he turned and said to the spirit, “By the power of Jesus Christ, I command you to come out of her!” Immediately, the spirit came out.
19 When the men who owned the servant girl saw this, they realized that they could no longer use her to make money. So they grabbed Paul and Silas and dragged them to the public square to meet with the authorities.
20 They brought Paul and Silas before the Roman officials and said, “These men are Jews, and they are making trouble in our city.
21 They are telling people to do things that are not right for us as Romans to do.”
22 The whole crowd turned against Paul and Silas. The officials tore the clothes off both men and ordered that they be beaten with rods.
23 They were beaten severely and thrown into jail. The officials told the jailer, “Guard them very carefully!”
24 When the jailer heard this special order, he put Paul and Silas far inside the jail and bound their feet between large blocks of wood. - Acts 16 vs 16-24

What Paul and Silas did was arrested by the men who had lost their slave girl. They accused Paul and Silas of teaching ideas that were unlawful for Romans to do. Clearly, it was not the supposed preaching but the content of what they said that brought about the flogging. So, as long as the content was unlawful, I don't see how it can be construed as persecution by anyone except one is dead set on making an issue of this.

11 We left Troas in a ship and sailed to the island of Samothrace. The next day, we sailed to the city of Neapolis.
12 Then we went to Philippi, a Roman colony and the leading city in that part of Macedonia. - Acts 16 vs 11-12

Another thing to note is that in the verses above, Paul and Silas are said to have arrived in the area only days before and may not have been previously aware of the unlawfulness of disemminating those particular details hence the reason.

QuinQ:
➜You keep writing this nonsense when it's right there in your Bible that their crime was Christianity!
➜ Even Jesus himself was accused of trying to supplant Caesar by declaring himself king of the Jews. It was simply ILLEGAL from the beginning to advocate Christianity because it runs counter to accepted Roman practices!!

You should know by now to stop trying to force your ideas between the lines of Scripture. It does not work with me.

2. But Jesus Christ never referred to Himself as the King of the Jews, though. Stop with the incessant attempts to include your delusions in the stories already!

QuinQ:
➜Oga, I really think I'm wasting my time because you're unreachable! Persecution means harassing someone for their beliefs or fior advocating those beliefs. Removing the spirit from the girl was NOT a crime. That's why they didn't accuse them of that! They insread accused them of preaching Christianity which was a crime. If they were not preaching Christianity there would have been nothing to charge them with! Their crime was advocating an alien, disruptive theology!

Is it that you are operating under some delusion that there was religious freedom or tolerance in the Roman Empire or something at the time? There were laws in place to regulate the beliefs of the people, that much is made clear in the passage. You are told that what Paul did was considered unlawful —against the law of the land — yet you continue to blindly argue that it was persecution of some sort. 🙄🙄🙄

Kobojunkie:
Read the story and stick to what is in fact stated.
What Paul and Silas did was arrested by the men who had lost their slave girl. They accused Paul and Silas of teaching ideas that were unlawful for Romans to do. Clearly, it was not the supposed preaching but the content of what they said that brought about the flogging. So, as long as the content was unlawful, I don't see how it can be construed as persecution by anyone except one is dead set on making an issue of this.
Another thing to note is that in the verses above, Paul and Silas are said to have arrived in the area only days before and may not have been previously aware of the unlawfulness of disemminating those particular details hence the reason.

Oga you're really dense. Ok, define persecution for us. Were Christians not being punished for breaking the law (practicing Christianity). Does the fact it is against the law now make it no longer persecution?? You ok at all?

Kobojunkie:
You should know by now to stop trying to force your ideas between the lines of Scripture. It does not work with me.

2. But Jesus Christ never referred to Himself as the King of the Jews, though. Stop with the incessant attempts to include your delusions in the stories already!
Is it that you are operating under some delusion that there was religious freedom or tolerance in the Roman Empire or something at the time? There were laws in place to regulate the beliefs of the people, that much is made clear in the passage. You are told that what Paul did was considered unlawful —against the law of the land — yet you continue to blindly argue that it was persecution of some sort. 🙄🙄🙄

That's exactly the point: they were PERSECUTING Christians for their religious beliefs (which were against the Law)!

The main charge against Christ was that He was king of the Jews and that's what Pilate asked him ("Are you you king of the Jews?)

QuinQ:
➜Oga you're really dense. Ok, define persecution for us. Were Christians not being punished for breaking the law (practicing Christianity). Does the fact it is against the law now make it no longer persecution?? You ok at all?

I recall asking you a question earlier, which you conveniently refused to answer.

Imagine the unlawful act was preaching on the streets where the law clearly says, "No preaching allowed." If a man ignored the signs and went on to preach anyway, and was arrested for clearly violating legal code, do you conclude that the man was being persecuted as well?

This is really simple!

QuinQ:
➜That's exactly the point: they were PERSECUTING Christians for their religious beliefs (which were against the Law)!

There was no such thing as persecution of the Christians by the Romans for their religious beliefs at the time of Paul.