₦airaland Forum

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.”

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!!

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"!

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"!

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.

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.

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:
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!)

Kobojunkie:
Again, the stories of persecution that took place in Rome were not against the original Israelite movement started by Jesus Christ of Israel, but rather against the non-Israelite-controlled religious movements— there were different factions to them too— that had resulted from the attempted hijacking of the original movement. Basically, the original movement in Jerusalem comprised only Israelites. Some Romans saw this and began creating narratives to insert themselves as part of that original movement. They took on the name Christians, a term originally meant as a derogatory term against the original disciples, and their movement became referred to as Christianity.

Over time, this new group of people— Christians—built up their base and power and became somewhat of a political movement, and there was lots of infighting with groups attacking each other and labeling those who didn't share their ideas heretics. The Roman Empire sought to put them in check, and this resulted in the stories of persecution and killings of Christians we read of today. However, their political power continued to grow, leading to Constantine eventually signing the Edict of Milan and Apollo subsequently making it the official religion of Rome years later.

😅 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!

Kobojunkie:
1. Jesus Christ of Israel NEVER said, implied, or insinuated that He came to save mankind. There is no record in Scripture of this ever happening!

2. Wrong! First, there are no 10 lost tribes of Israel. Second, the Lost sheep are not historically those exiled but rather those scattered by God of Israel Himself as explained by Him in the following chapter- Ezekiel 34 vs 1 - 31.

3. Could you please, more specifically, point out the passage from which you obtain this reasoning so I can better respond to your concern?

4. A subset of the Jews or the Israelites who existed during His time, or what do you mean?

5. Since Jesus Christ interacted with Jews — descendants of Judah and Benjamin — along with the Levites and also the Samaritans — descendants of Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manasseh— it is erroneous to claim that Jesus Christ only interacted with those of the Jewish subset of Israel. Also, Google is not Scripture.

6. He lived 33 years does not imply that it took Him all 33 years to teach the Gospel, though. If you read the Gospels, you will find that His mission to disseminate the Gospel instead began approximately 3.5 years before His death, during which time He gathered to Himself His disciples and began teaching the Gospel to them. So, again, where do you get this idea that the Gospel as revealed is INCOMPLETE, and what makes you think that then gives you the freedom to add whatever ideas you see fit?

7. This never happened since Jesus Christ of Israel restricted Himself solely to that which was allowed by His Father, meaning He could not have done what you claim, which would have been against His own Father, whose Covenant it was that He came to fulfill.

STOP saying what Christ never said!!!!
You can say what is not in the Bible, that's it!!

This is John 4. Note the bolded

13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal .”...
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

Kobojunkie:
. Here's an excerpt from WorldHistory.Org to help you with that.

2. The answer to your question is in your previous comment. You claimed Constantine's mother was a Christian, did you not? Roman citizens had been adopting and even dying in the name of the new religion, and its power and sway among the aristocrats had become great.

3. I think it is instead that you are too stuck in the box that is your religious beliefs, and unwilling to step beyond it still.

4. I am afraid that is not history but rather your church's spin on History. The Romans fought to control the Jewish nation of Judah but found that the religion of the time kept getting in their way. And the religion in question isn't Christianity but Judaism, the same one that Jesus Christ of Israel disavowed by the way. That religion — not the Jesus Christ of Israel movement, mind you— is what ignited the match, which led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That is what is recorded in History. The other uprisings that took place after that were also linked to Judaism, not Jesus Christ of Israel.

@bolded,
Judah stopped being a nation almost 600 years before Christ so you're really mixed up.
You have to realize there are ancient artifacts and scraps of ancient writings that have nothing to do with Rome that authenticate these things

Kobojunkie:
. But all of this here has nothing to do with the original Israelite movement that existed before the destruction of Jerusalem and then Judah, though. Constantine was a non-Israelite, and so was his mother.

2. The infighting that took place among the non-Israelite fathers of your religion of Christianity, which you have today, the same ones responsible for hijacking the original Israelite movement for their benefit, has nothing to do with Israel or what Jesus Christ of Israel established.

The importance of the mention is to show that after the destruction of Jerusalem, the narrative shifted abruptly from a movement of only Israelites to one that was solely controlled by non-Israelites— all of your so-called church fathers are non-Israelites —, a suspicious shift given that Jesus Christ of Israel warned His followers never to give that which is Holy — the Gospel— to the non-Israelites suggesting them incapable of handling that which is holy.

Instead of confusing yourself, answer a simple question:
If there was no persecution and Rome was from the onset out to hijack Christianity WHY would Constantine issue the Edict of Milan of 313 decriminalizing Christianity??

Kobojunkie:
What Jesus Christ of Israel instead said was that He was sent only to the Lost Sheep of Israel. How did you arrive at Him being sent only to some of them?

2. But Jesus Christ of Israel(not of Jews alone) didn't need to say "every Jew". Additionally, the Davidic Covenant, which brought about His coming, a Covenant made by His Father, YHWH, already made clear to the people those to whom He, the Messiah and forever King, would be sent. So, He didn't need to posit His statements with "only jews" as you expected Him to have had to do for your sake.

3. Jesus Christ of Israel as the Word of God — Gospel —to those whom His Father, YHWH, sent Him to. If, according to you, 99% of the Gospel of Jesus Christ of Israel is missing, how did you arrive at this number? And where do you intend to get that missing 99% from? Or maybe I should ask why you keep pretending to have knowledge of the content of the missing parts of the Gospel? Just curious!

4. There is no record of Jesus Christ of Israel ever saying any such. So, where did you get this claim from?

4.) You are the one claiming what he NEVER said, NOT me. He obviously severally implied that salvation, initially for Jews, would be thrown open to all believers - which was exactly what subsequently happened!

2.) But he only interacted with Jews. The "lost sheep" of Israel are historically the ten lost tribes out of which only the Samaritans were left. But you saw what he said to the Samaritan woman. But then he also told her that a time would come when it would no longer be by being a Jew, but by worshipping God in spirit and in truth!

1. He was obviously refering to a subset not a whole. Read Mathew 30 again.
Also Google meaning of lost tribes of Israel. Jesus only interacted with JEWS

3. 99% is obviously a figure of speech. But for someone who lived 33 years it is definitely more than that. Jesus clearly implied salvation would subsequently be thrown open to all believers, and that's exactly what happened

Kobojunkie:
The Romans had a habit of hijacking the beliefs and gods of their captors for their own purpose. To maintain full control over their captive nations, they needed control over the religious narratives and traditions of the people.. They did it to the Greeks and they did it to the Jews as well.

2. We all know what happened. The people were no longer enamored by the old gods and needed new, more powerful ones, and the next best thing was the Jewish craze.

3. From history, we know their god-king went as far as to pretend he had become a son of the God of the Jews to retain the attention of the people. We see that happening to this day with politicians aligning themselves with belief systems to gain or maintain relevance.

4. It would only appear all of a sudden to someone not aware of the history of the Romans.

5. Every historical figure? Not true!

So how come they didn't let Zeus or some other god supplant Jupiter and their god-emperor?
They destroyed Judea completely and dispersed the people. Why would they be suddenly adopting their religion?
So you see, you don't make sense because u are simply wrong.
What simply happened was that Rome wisely tried to stamp out Christianity as recorded in history and the Bible. But in trying to destroy it, they ignited it more.
What you are saying is an insult to the martyrs

Kobojunkie:
In regards to the claims regarding the original disciples of Jesus Christ, those are fantastical stories cobbled together by the Romans -non-Israelites—for their selfish purposes. There is no evidence that any of the original disciples— all of them Israelites — survived or lived past the year 70 AD.

Ok, Constantine decriminalizing Christianity was also fantastical stories cobbled up. So was his mother already being a devout Christian and the battle of the bridge. All cobbled up!
What has the fact they were persecuted have to do with living past 70 AD

LordReed:
Dude you are the one who doesn't understand. None of this matters to the point that Jesus was legendised. Trying to find some unique aspect of the development of the religion will not negate that.

And non of it matters to the point that his disciples were willing to be tortured and die for a person you said they themselves legendised.

Besides, every historical figure is legendised

Kobojunkie:
. This is false! The Romans did not destroy but rather sought to hijack the movement started by Jesus Christ of Israel in Jerusalem of Judah for their own political and material benefit throughout the empire.

The result of the attempted Hijack is the religion of Christianity, which you have even today. Yes, this is what the Romans did after the destruction of Jerusalem, the killing and exiling of the remnants of Judah to foreign lands, and eventually the erasure of the land of Judah itself, all mostly between 70 AD and 140 AD. There is no record that any of the original disciples survived the destruction, lived past the year 70 AD, or visited Rome, but the Romans came up with tales of some supposedly serving and going on to pass the baton to them — the dogs, aka non-Israelites— supposedly unaware that Jesus Christ of Israel specifically warned His Followers against doing exactly that.

And why would they want to hijack Christianity?? What suddenly happened to their own gods that saw them from victory to victory. What happened to their god-emperor that they worshipped? All of a sudden they wanted to hijack a religion that taught he was no god at all but a condemned lowly sinner needing salvation, and that all their gods were useless!

Kobojunkie:
Stop lying! Jesus Christ of Israel NEVER said He came to save mankind! 🙄🙄🙄

2. Stop posting religious gobbledegook as relevant!

Also, none of the verses you quote support any of what you claim, particularly since Jesus Christ of Israel already established that He was sent only to the Lost sheep of Israel....It would then follow that WHOEVER would refer to those of the lost Sheep of Israel to whom His Father sent Him. The scope of His relevance was established by His Father as the Lost sheep of Israel. So, every statement He made was to them and for them. That is simple sense from everything contained in the Gospels.

The same Jesus Christ of Israel went on to warn His Followers not to give that which is Holy to the dogs — Non-Israelites — implying their inability to handle it.

See how you're not making any sense. So he was sent to SOME of the Lost Sheep of Israel not all??
Also, you don't think Jesus would say exactly that, if that was what he meant. You don't think he knew how to say "every Jew" instead of "everyone"??

Besides, SUBSEQUENT EVENTS made it clear what he meant.
99% of what Christ said is NOT in the Bible. He made it clear salvation would be thrown open to all believers in him!

LordReed:
Did his followers get to inherit his riches or were they used for the religion? You still have no point.

You don't understand, Krishna did everything he wanted to do. He did not try to start a religion and "failed" then after his death somehow his few deserting disciples came back and resurrected the religion. That doesn't happen and has never happened except in Christianity. Once the original person with the "annointing" dies the organization disappears unless it was already somewhat established by the time of his death

LordReed:
He didn't start a religion but one came up about him so you have no point please.

Ok, Google if Krishna started Hinduism. Also, Krishna lived a full life and left riches; nobody died for him to be recognized as the incarnation of a god.
This is like asking me what religion the Daly Lama left behind

LordReed:
Which organised religion did Krishna leave behind at his death?

Krishna did not start any religion. He's worshipped as the 8th incarnation of a Hindu god. Plus, unlike Christ, he was a king on earth, well-established

Brandiebird:
To get what they could out of him. That a romance scam.

That's how it starts then they end up falling for him for real

Nazgul:
They'll marry him so they can escape the hardship in Nigeria and join him in Europe. Once they get over there, they'll make his life a living hell.

Not necessarily. She doesn't even have to follow him abroad as long as he takes care of business

allen113:
19 years abroad and you dey come back with Ghana must go bag. Make the man no provoke me ooh.

That one aside I hope he at least built a house in Nigeria and his family is not living as tenants sha.

poshestmina:
Wetin you go hustle 19 years? Better come back as an Arab prince .

Na Ghana-must -go the man carry come back so?🤕🤕🤕

At least he came back. If it were you I'm sure you’ll never be able to come back

KingAzubuike:
Make we talk true, all these people wey dey stay this long abroad without coming home are simply broke. They simply don't have enough to come home.

Voila!
At least this man finally made it home. And if it weren't for this lady that wouldn't have been happening

Brandiebird:
65 years old (M) 25 years old (F) and Lagos confirms it all. Those exceptions to the rule don't count. This old man is in danger unless his family follow him to Lagos and find out for themselves. Either way it's going to be a love scam.

I beg to differ. Quite a few 25-year-olds in Nigeria will gladly marry him FOR REAL

LordReed:
Enjoyed what finer things? Someone who walked everywhere instead of using a horse? Someone who had to gouge out a fish to pay the tax? Someone who preached for people to leave all behind to follow him?

You are the one who has to explain anything you are arguing for. You can't ask me to explain your position for you.

Why does a religion need to follow the same process as any other for the people of that religion to believe in its ideals? Is there a religion template that was laid down to say all religions must be that way?

What has the 45,000 denominations of Christianity got to do with people dying for its ideals? Or how does 45,000 denominations prove that Jesus was not legendised?

What I mean is, ALL were started and guided by a founder who stayed alive until they were somewhat established, only Christianiy. If you know any denomination or religion that wasn't let's have it.

I don't see how leaving an organised group and possibly a building where they regularly met runs counter to being ascetic.

AngelahFlo:
Christians call Him the Son of God. Jashub, Zaheertyler, achorladey, Maxindhouse

I just started this thread in Romance section: "Is this man being scammed?":
https://www.nairaland.com/8434719/he-being-scammed#135502582

LordReed:
Why would a rather ascetic preacher leave anything behind? Those were some of the purported ideals, to have nothing. If he had died contrary to his ideals then he would be considered a failure in the eyes of his followers. He died exactly like he supposedly predicted so what is the failure?

He enjoyed finer things just as much as the next guy. JohnTB was the ascetic. Remember Matthew 11:19 "The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.". Besides, what has that to do with leaving behind an established group and a building where they met regularly.
Also, there are some 45,000 denominations of Christianity, then other religions, can you name one that went through a similar process?

Do you think he's possibly being scammed?

It started a year ago. My uncle (65+, married) met a young girl (20-25) on Tiktok, started chatting and fall in love… Since then he sent a lot of money to her for numerous reason. She said she wants to come to our country (Europe) and asked for money for visa. Of course, she didn’t get visa.. Now my uncle is divorcing from his wife and wants to move to Lagos to marry that girl. He doesn’t listen to anyone, doesn’t beleive that it is a scam. My family is afraid that he will be robbed, tortured or murdered there. How can we stop him? Any advice? Thank you!

Before you answer also read this:

You know what's wild? An alcoholic disabled line chef I worked with said he'd married a woman from a small African country and he was just trying to save money for her to immigrate. We live in a rural community where there are people who have never been on a plane or outside 500 miles of home. So we all thought he'd been scammed. This went on for two years. Then...she showed up. She's real. He's legit happy (not drinking anymore) and they just had a kid. It was the weirdest thing.

And this:

My ugly-ass uncle got a mail order bride from some poor Eastern European country and 25 years later they are legit happily in love. She’s super cool and pretty good looking too. He hit the jackpot.

And this:

I was travelling through Uganda last year and met a fat annoying American guy celebrating his honeymoon with an attractive younger local girl he’d met online. He came over to meet her for the first time, proposed at the airport and they got married a week later. I also met another local girl who was desperately trying to tie down some old British guy she’d met online but he was too scared to come over because “Uganda is full of cannibals” lol. She called and put him on speaker and asked me to tell him I was a white person in Uganda and nobody had tried to eat me. It’s a way out, I guess.

LordReed:
How did he die a failure? He told them he was going to come back so death was not the end. Why would they be ashamed when he promised them authority and retribution on those who were ashamed of him?

Have you ever heard of Krishna?

He died a shameful death (crucifixion was considered such) and we know at least one,Peter, denied knowing him three times.
What is your definition of failure. He had nothing and left nothing. No money, no connections, not even a church building or home where they could meet. Like I said, you can’t mention another instance in human history where this happened and the movement survived

LordReed:
What does established cause mean?

So what if suicide bombers are dying for an established religion? You are the one making out like as if dying for a cause means it is true.

Nope. I said specifically the Jesus phenomenon - whereby the founder died a total "failure" without establishing anything at all, and even his closest disciples ashamed to be associated with him. That should have been the end of the movement and always is

LordReed:
What has never happened? People dying for their ideals?

LoLz. You ever hear of the Crusades? What of the Spanish Inquisition? Or the wars that were fought in England because of the differing Christian beliefs? Or the conflict in Northern Ireland between Catholics and Protestants?

These were all ESTABLISHED causes!
Mention an instance where the founder was killed without having established anything at all, infact with his closest friends refusing to be associated with him.
I added this to the post:
** Suicide bombers are dying for an established religion and also undergoing on-going brainwashing and indoctrination. The only reason Christianity spread is because they tried to suppress it. Nothing is as powerful and emotionally destructive as watching a totally innocent man killed

LordReed:
These are all church traditions, they don't really know how they died. Besides dying for something doesn't indicate the truth of it or do you think all those suicide bombers are dying for something true? The fact is they are all dying for ideals they believe in.

One ideal that would drive to death is something Jesus purportedly told them that he would not reward them if they didn't spread his message Mark 8:38. If they believed that Jesus was coming back to rule and would reward them with positions of authority then it stands to reason they would preach his message even under the threat of death. Same way suicide bombers believe they will get a reward.

But this has NEVER happened any other time in human history. If that were the case it would have happened a few times.
Think of how many wars Mohammed had to wage to spread Islam. Now imagine he was killed before he ran to Medina. What do you think would have happened? No other time in human history did the Jesus phenomenon occure, and they did it without fighting any war!

** Suicide bombers are dying for an established religion and also undergoing on-going brainwashing and indoctrination. The only reason Christianity spread is because they tried to suppress it. Nothing is as powerful and emotionally destructive as watching a totally innocent man killed