₦airaland Forum

ifenes:
Religion made one very powerful promise: suffer or obey today, enjoy your reward after death. The interesting part is that once you die, you cannot return to tell the rest of us whether the promise was genuine. This is genius 😂

ifenes:
Religion made one very powerful promise: suffer or obey today, enjoy your reward after death. The interesting part is that once you die, you cannot return to tell the rest of us whether the promise was genuine. This is genius 😂

ifenes:
Religion made one very powerful promise: suffer or obey today, enjoy your reward after death. The interesting part is that once you die, you cannot return to tell the rest of us whether the promise was genuine. This is genius 😂

Steep:
Jesus is the only person who has died and resurrected as he promised, removing every doubt of the reality of heaven.

Lucifyre:
Absolutely no one has died and resurrected, all there is are numerous claims about people doing so across diff cultures without a shred of evidence to the claims to make it factual. Basically your evidence for heaven is not even evidence.

Steep:
Go and find about Jesus resurrection.

MaxInDHouse:
Heaven is not the reward for being virtuous rather what God promised is a better world when all evildoers are wiped out. Psalms 37:7-11
Proverbs 2:20-22
Jesus lived in heaven so he is not just another human like us that's why his death was temporary as he needs to return home after his earthly mission. John 14:1-3
So if anyone tells you he or she has been to heaven know that it's not possible because only spirit beings lives there that is why Jesus became a spirit after his resurrection so as to go back to heaven! 1Corinthans 15:45

sonmvayina:
He ate and drank with them after the so called resurrection. And he even told Thomas to put his hand in his wounds....that does not sound like a spiritual body....

MaxInDHouse:
You don't believe in the Bible so stop deceiving yourself.

Are angels spirits or humans?
If they are spirits how did they eat with Abraham?

Lucifyre:
He didn't "resurrect". People - who can't even get their story straight - claiming it, doesn't make it factual. End of story.

Steep:
The diverse narration of the story of christ resurrection actually proves its reliability.

ifenes:
Religion made one very powerful promise: suffer or obey today, enjoy your reward after death. The interesting part is that once you die, you cannot return to tell the rest of us whether the promise was genuine. This is genius 😂

Lucifyre:
Give us another joke.

Steep:
Go and learn about eye witness testimony. The different account of the book of the gospel fit what an eye witness testimony account is.

Lucifyre:
If only you had taken your own advice you'd have known that none, absolutely none of the gospels are eye witness testimony, neither are there any contemporary accounts. Besides eye witness testimony is the most unreliable and weakest form of evidence. Take ur own advice.

Lucifyre:
If only you had taken your own advice you'd have known that none, absolutely none of the gospels are eye witness testimony, neither are there any contemporary accounts. Besides eye witness testimony is the most unreliable and weakest form of evidence. Take ur own advice.

Steep:
ywhat evidence do you have to say that absolutely none of the gospels are eye witness testimony?
The writings of the four books of the gospel gives evidence that it was written by people who were eye witnesses themselves or who at least knew and interacted with the eye witness.

Eye witness testimony is one of the highest evidence accepted by the court.

MaxInDHouse:
Funny enough there is no case in which three different eyewitnesses narrate things exactly the same way.
What real investigators do care about is when they pick up clues from different point/angle to get the real story.
Ọmọ go and learn from police or detectives they don't believe in storylines where three people claiming eyewitness say exactly the same thing it will lead to suspicion of conspiracy!🥱

Steep:
ywhat evidence do you have to say that absolutely none of the gospels are eye witness testimony?

Steep:
The writings of the four books of the gospel gives evidence that it was written by people who were eye witnesses themselves or who at least knew and interacted with the eye witness.

Eye witness testimony is one of the highest evidence accepted by the court.

Lucifyre:
Lol This one is talking upside down left. Crash out and strawman as much as you want, it doesn't change the simple fact the gospels are not eye witness accounts.

MaxInDHouse:
There has never ever been any eyewitness accounts where two or three people say exactly the same thing.
Their stories may end in the same way but narratives will differ!

Lucifyre:
When you're done makjng your strawman you'd list the eyewitnesses for us.😄

MaxInDHouse:
You're simply joking!🥱

Lucifyre:
Said it. 😄 Mention the so called witnesses nau. Story.

Lucifyre:
The fact that you have no evidence that any of the claimants wrote it for one. The fact that none of the writers identify themselves in the texts. The fact that the supposed writers were illiterate peasants in a time period when the literacy rate was less than 1%.

The fact the supposed writers spoke Aramaic and not sophisticated Koine greek which the texts were written in. The fact that none of the earliest manuscripts of the texts have any named authors on them. The fact none of the texts were written in 1st person and all in 3rd person. The fact the texts themselves don't even claim to be eye witness testimony.

The fact the texts were written at least 4 decades after the supposed event and get basic facts about the time period wrong and this hasn't even scratched the surface. Virtually all study bibles even admit it that they're anonymous as seen in the SS taken from the New Oxford Annotated Study Bible. This is basic stuff in scholarship.

So it wouldn't be difficult for you to show us said evidence. It wouldn't be difficult for you to show us how illiterate peasants somehow wrote texts decades after the fact, not in their own language but in a sophisticated form of a different language. Obviously not. You can as well show us evidence of a court of law convicting on eye witness testimony alone.

MaxInDHouse:
You rejected the eyewitnesses but you believe stories they tell you about your own ancestors whom you never knew nor anyone who was an eyewitness of how your ancestors lived their lives.
Are you not just joking?🥱

Steep:
what kind of evidence are you seeking for? The four books of the gospel are themselves historical records and many historians and scholars have certified it to be so. Paul was a very learned man, Luke was a doctor, there were people withing the Christian community who could read and write, according to church tradition John mark wrote for Peter.

koin greek was the official language at that time. Most of it was written in third person, Do you know about reported speech?

you don't know basic stuff in scholarship.

four decades is well withing the lifetime of the Apostles. The gospels are not anonymous, the gospels have always being known to be an account by the designated church leaders by the church.



you make zero sense, you submission is riddled with contradiction while demanding for evidence you don't know about.