₦airaland Forum

DoctorAlien:
A statement that is contradictory to "Judas bought the field" is "Judas did not buy the field"

The chief priests bought the field, but it was Judas who funded the buying. Thus, Judas can be said to have bought the field.

Thanks brother.

The man has intentionally refused to grasp simple grammatical Concord.

felixomor:
Wait, i dont want to derail this thread.

But let me just answer your question from simple common sense, without even opening the bible.

Lets assume your paraphrasing of the bible is correct:

Supposing Judas bought the land in January and the priest that you are tAlking about, bought the land later in June,

Please with your common sense,
Is it still a contradiction to say "they both bought the land"?

I suggest u should open your bible because you are talking complete trash:

In the first account, he gave the money to the priests who used it to buy a burial place for strangers. While in the second account, the money that was already used by the priests was used by Judas to buy a land where he fell to his death...

You obviously are not even familiar with the story. So shameful

randomperson:
I suggest u should open your bible because you are talking complete trash:

In the first account, he gave the money to the priests who used it to buy a burial place for strangers. While in the second account, the money that was already used by the priests was used by Judas to buy a land where he fell to his death...

You obviously are not even familiar with the story. So shameful

You dont even read what you are replying.
I clearly specifically told you "from common sense"

DoctorAlien has already told u again, what a contradiction is.
And he told u what a contradiction to "Judas bought the land" would have been.

You can only keep pretending.
Done on that.

KingEbukasBlog:
There is no such thing as the 'Christian God' . If you meant to ask for the proof that the Christian's concept of God is true , then I'd say scrutiny. Christian theism fulfills every logical expectation of what God should be like .

@bolded
What should God be like?

DoctorAlien:
A statement that is contradictory to "Judas bought the field" is "Judas did not buy the field"

The chief priests bought the field, but it was Judas who funded the buying. Thus, Judas can be said to have bought the field.

U guys are obviously not familiar with the story..
In the first account, Judas had no intention to buy any land, he merely returned the money they gave him. In the second he acquired the land himself and died on the land. So "Judas did not buy the field."
Even the creation story has two accounts. The bible is nothing more than badly written fiction

DoctorAlien:
A statement that is contradictory to "Judas bought the field" is "Judas did not buy the field"

The chief priests bought the field, but it was Judas who funded the buying. Thus, Judas can be said to have bought the field.

Nice one sir!!

felixomor:
You dont even read what you are replying.
I clearly specifically told you "from common sense"

DoctorAlien has already told u again, what a contradiction is.
And he told u what a contradiction to "Judas bought the land" would have been.

You can only keep pretending.
Done on that.

Judas did not by the land, the priests did. At least in the first account... Therefore, contradiction!

Your acrobatics is intriguing tho

randomperson:
Judas did not by the land, the priests did. At least in the first account... Therefore, contradiction!

Your acrobatics is intriguing tho

Suit yourself Mehn.
The truth is looking at u.

randomperson:
U guys are obviously not familiar with the story..
In the first account, Judas had no intention to buy any land, he merely returned the money they gave him. In the second he acquired the land himself and died on the land. So "Judas did not buy the field."
Even the creation story has two accounts. The bible is nothing more than badly written fiction

Oga, if Judas did not get the money across to the chief priests, would the land have been bought?

I expected you to ask yourself this question.

If your answer to the question is "no", then I don't know what else you're saying, because it is obvious to every thinking being that the mere act of funding the purchase qualifies Judas to be labelled as the buyer.

DoctorAlien:
Oga, if Judas did not get the money across to the chief priests, would the land have been bought?

I expected you to ask yourself this question.

If your answer to the question is "no", then I don't know what else you're saying, because it is obvious to every thinking being that the mere act of funding of the purchase qualifies Judas to be labelled as the buyer.

He is not here to learn(if thats the right word to use) but to argue endlessly. Its very obvious.

DoctorAlien:
Oga, if Judas did not get the money across to the chief priests, would the land have been bought?

I expected you to ask yourself this question.

If your answer to the question is "no", then I don't know what else you're saying, because it is obvious to every thinking being that the mere act of funding of the purchase qualifies Judas to be labelled as the buyer.

Judas didn't fund the purchase... Judas already relinquished ownership of the money by throwing it back to the priests. The priests used their money to buy a land... The second account clearly states that " Judas BOUGHT "...
For him to have bought there must have been an intention to buy. If I throw money at someone and the person goes to buy hard drugs. Can it be said that I bought the drugs?


BTW, the statement: I was at ibadan is not only contradicted by " I wasn't at Ibadan''. If I say , "I was at Lagos", it's also a contradiction because I can't be at two places at the same time

randomperson:
Judas didn't fund the purchase... Judas already relinquished ownership of the money by throwing it back to the priests. The priests used their money to buy a land... The second account clearly states that " Judas BOUGHT "...
For him to have bought there must have been an intention to buy. If I throw money at someone and the person goes to buy hard drugs. Can it be said that I bought the drugs?

BTW, the statement: I was at ibadan is not only contradicted by " I wasn't at Ibadan''. If I say , "I was at Lagos", it's also a contradiction because I can't be at two places at the same time

Assuming he did not bring the money, would the land have been bought?

If I give a friend $100 and he uses it to buy a phone for me from Aliexpress: who bought the phone?

The last paragraph of your post reveals your puerile sense of logic. You need to read.

DoctorAlien:
Assuming he did not bring the money, would the land have been bought?

If I give a friend $100 and he uses it to buy a phone[b] for me[/b] from Aliexpress: who bought the phone?

They didn't buy the land for him! Don't you have access to a bible

randomperson:
They didn't buy the land for him! Don't you have access to a bible

He needs not claim ownership of the land before he is recognized as the buyer. It can be said he bought the land for the chief priests, just like I can give the phone which my friend bought with my $100 to another friend. Okay?

DoctorAlien:
Assuming he did not bring the money, would the land have been bought?

If I give a friend $100 and he uses it to buy a phone for me from Aliexpress: who bought the phone?

The last paragraph of your post reveals your puerile sense of logic. You need to read.

Didn't see the last part of your comment earlier . There's something called affirmative defenses in law. It means disproving a fact by proving another fact. The illustration I gave is an example. It's called alibi...
Apparently, you're the one who needs to read more

DoctorAlien:
He needs not claim ownership of the land before he is recognized as the buyer. It can be said he bought the land for the chief priests, just like I can give the phone which my friend bought with my $100 to another friend. Okay?

If you GAVE $100 to a friend to use as he wishes and he buys a phone. Can you collect the phone from him? No because it's not your own!!
BTW the question is not about ownership but about who bought the phone

randomperson:
If you GAVE $100 to a friend to use as he wishes and he buys a phone. Can you collect the phone from him? No because it's not your own!!

Please stop embarrassing yourself here na . What kind of shallow responses are these na . How far you na . Its not by force to comment . Accept the beating you have received and leave abeg

KingEbukasBlog:
Please stop embarrassing yourself here na . What kind of shallow responses are these na . How far you na . Its not by force to comment . Accept the beating you have received and leave abeg

Abeg shift!! This particular tactic is old and as ineffective as ever... But nice try tho'

randomperson:
If you GAVE $100 to a friend to use as he wishes and he buys a phone. Can you collect the phone from him? No because it's not your own!!

We are looking at the fact that if Judas did not provide the funds, the land would not have been bought.

Judas bought the land(for the chief priests maybe) because he funded the purchase!

I've not read it yet but I know it will be a blockbuster going by title. Make I first like your post before reading.

DoctorAlien:
We are looking at the fact that if Judas did not provide the funds, the land would not have been bought.

Judas bought the land(for the chief priests maybe) because he funded the purchase!

Judas didn't BUY the land. The chief priest did. It was the priests decision to buy the land, the actual purchase was carried out by the priests

Judas Iscariot merely threw the money on the ground... They didn't even have to take it.
Or are you saying, if I throw morning on the ground and a person takes and uses it to buy a gun, that means I bought the gun

KingEbukasBlog:
Please stop embarrassing yourself here na . What kind of shallow responses are these na . How far you na . Its not by force to comment . Accept the beating you have received and leave abeg

LoL.

I said it! This is a technical knockout to those unorganized and unconstitutional group of individuals.

randomperson:
Judas didn't BUY the land. The chief priest did. It was the priests decision to buy the land, the actual purchase was carried out by the priests

Judas Iscariot merely threw the money on the ground... They didn't even have to take it.
Or are you saying, if I throw morning on the ground and a person takes and uses it to buy a gun, that means I bought the gun

@ bolded.
I can see how u have to add to the bible to buttress the lie, you tell yourself.

randomperson:
Judas didn't BUY the land. The chief priest did. It was the priests decision to buy the land, the actual purchase was carried out by the priests

Judas Iscariot merely threw the money on the ground... They didn't even have to take it.
Or are you saying, if I throw morning on the ground and a person takes and uses it to buy a gun, that means I bought the gun

Let me just play along with you.

The chief priests could have screamed to Judas as was leaving "what do you want us to do with this money?" He could have replied "anything." In other words, "use the money I gave you to buy anything, including land."

Therefore, Judas bought the land for the chief priests.

felixomor:
@ bolded.
I can see how u have to add to the bible to buttress the lie, you tell yourself.

[b]6 The chief priests picked up the coins and said, “This is blood money, and it is against our Law to put it in the Temple treasury.” 7 After reaching an agreement about it, they used the money to buy Potter's Field, as a cemetery for foreigners. [/b]8 That is why that field is called “Field of Blood” to this very day.

Read your bible, you won't hear. Its Apostle Suleiman you will be defending all over nairaland.

And Am not a Christian so I don't need to add to the bible. The bible is wack enough on its own

randomperson:

[b]6 The chief priests picked up the coins and said, “This is blood money, and it is against our Law to put it in the Temple treasury.” 7 After reaching an agreement about it, they used the money to buy Potter's Field, as a cemetery for foreigners. [/b]8 That is why that field is called “Field of Blood” to this very day.

Read your bible, you won't hear. Its Apostle Suleiman you will be defending all over nairaland.

And Am not a Christian so I don't need to add to the bible. The bible is wack enough on its own

Just look at yourself.

Unfortunately, is this not all DoctorAlien has been telling you?
You were simply trying to derail the thread endlessly....

Three people have told u on this thread, what I have always told you.
You have a reading problem.

DoctorAlien:
Let me just play along with you.

The chief priests could have screamed to Judas as was leaving "what do you want us to do with this money?" He could have replied "anything." In other words, "use the money I gave you to buy anything, including land."

Therefore, Judas bought the land for the chief priests.

Lol... This is funny.
If Judas said, use the money to buy anything. How does that mean he bought the land for them? If you gimme money to use to do anything, is the money still yours? Of course not

felixomor:
Just look at yourself.

Unfortunately, is this not all DoctorAlien has been telling you?
You were simply trying to derail the thread endlessly....

Three people have told u on this thread, what I have always told you.
You have a reading problem.

Guy, you don quickly change direction. I thought you were saying it's not the priests' decision?

randomperson:
Lol... This is funny.
If Judas said, use the money to buy anything. How does that mean he bought the land for them? If you gimme money to use to do anything, is the money still yours? Of course not

Next?

randomperson:
Guy, you don quickly change direction. I thought you were saying it's not the priests' decision?

Of course, your first argument was to imply that the priests brought the money.
That is the rhetoric u were trying to push.

felixomor:
Of course, your first argument was to imply that the priests brought the money.
That is the rhetoric u were trying to push.

No... I merely said it was the priests' decision. Why cant u just admit u misunderstood me? It happens to everyone