₦airaland Forum

Now, this is the funniest thing I've read so far today.

Tinubu

FriendChoice:
So before Buhari and Rufai southern Kaduna is peaceful? Alright way not make Saraki Kaduna state governor on Nairaland. Look at this hypocrite lost sheeps.

The way forward is the establishment of ranches to which you and some of your governors opposed because someone you hate is on the throne. Not because of any valid reason but hate for a northern, a Muslim or Buhari himself.

Either grazing reserves are establish or the problem continues.

SMH

lwtmb

the man wasn't has foolish as the fools that buried him with the money.

zionmade:
Now u call me olodo i will start from there. First of dnt u see how educationally miserable u are wen u bend down like a woman to urinate? And u wash ur Rubbish with water from one dirty kettle
Cant u see how senseless u are believing dat d devil sleeps in ur nose at night, of course why won't d devil sleep there wen all u dream about iss to follow d footsteps of a paedophile whose only miracle which he boasted of is his ability to sleep with all his wives in one night.
All ur desire is go to ur Xvideo shooting center called paradise and get ur own supernatural erecction and start performing wonders on virgins. I mean u re really an idiot to be a muslim.

Hmmmmmm

zionmade:
Bros why will u be d one asking all d questions. D simple one i asked u re running away from it just like a typical muslim who can stand and answer questions on wat he believes. Now dis was supposed to be a two challenge not one way. I will answer every single question u put up only wen u answer d simplest ones i give u.
U know wen Muslims start asking all d useless questions just give dem one simple question and they wont defend it because d quran is so ridiculous i mean if d lies there were well constructed it will be beta but its just as if an psychopath wrote d whole thing
I am defending my Bible defend ur quran or forget it

Open a new thread on that and i will address your questions. This thread is for my own questions and you are expected to address them. Don't let us derail.

zionmade:
Now let me answer u. Luke 23:50-51
And behold there was a man named Joseph A COUNSELLOR and he was a good man and a just.
51 THE SAME HAD NOT CONSENTED TO THE COUNSEL AND DEED OF THEM.
dats all

Olodo, you still don't get it. Are you willing to lie now that Luke didn't copy from Mark?

Mark was before Luke. apparently Luke copied the story of Joseph of Arithmatea from Mark . And so in other to make him look real and make him the good guy among the Sanhendrin, Luke embellished and Polish him by calling him a good man and Just. Something Mark never did.

Anybody with sense will see that Luke polished him after he must have read what Mark said about him on how he buried Jesus. Whereas Mark had shot himself in the foot when he said the WHOLE OF SANHENDRIN had condemned him to death. So a wise man will notice that Luke was trying to correct the mistake Mark made in Mark 14:55-65.

zionmade:
Good i wanted u to land there.
D gospels were not written by Matthew nor Mark nor Luke

Good you acknowledge this. If what we have as the gospels today were not written by Matthew, mark and luke, then whose gospel are we reading and how reliable are they that what we have in them are really gospel of Jesus?

Take note also that all these gospel were not written until many years after Jesus. This only goes to show that they are not reliable whatsoever.

It's not the gospel by Jesus neither wasn't by Matthew and co, but rather it's the gospel by ghost, yet you want me to put my trust in it?

now leave John out of it for now.

Why? It was written almost 100 years after Jesus. How is it different from others?

It was clearly written in d bible THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK OR LUKE OR MATTHEW.

How can we be so sure that it was indeed according to them??

The terms used in these writings were clearly for the third person angle. I.e d writer was not also a player.
Matthew was the account of Matthew. Now Matthew was present and they all gave their accounts. Bible scholars have it that these accounts were written in piece in piece (meaning bits by bits) by other disciples of Jesus and some came in oral forms. These were the things compiled at Ad 70 or thereabout. The account according to Matthew is tentamount to the biography of Jesus as narrated by Matthew and not actually written by him.

Fine. You should answer the question i asked up there.

He If u think dats why u call d bible corrupt den be ready to research on the author of Adams and eve in which islam stands on. I mean moses was born more dan 300yrs after it happened

I see another attempt to derail.

w on the issue of paul in 1st corr 15:4 said himself "according to d scriptures ref psalm 2:7 and hosea 6:2

Okay.

But in verse 5-8 he didn't say according to scriptures rather a reference was made to the accounts of mtt mark and luke which were written in the books of mtt, mark and luke. Meaning at dat time these accounts were delivered to him orally by luke(who himself went with paul in almost all his missionary journies). And there were other disciples who communed with him like peter and James. About Paul not mentioning d woman said at d tomb or d tomb to itself, paul never narrated exquisitely wat the happened during d death and resurrection

Fair enough. However, he mentioned those that was buried but forgot to mention by who and where. He also mentioned that he (Jesus) appeared to Cephas and to James, which i suppose are not really relevant since he's not giving an exquisite account as you wanted us to believe. Whereas a sane man will expect him to briefly mention the important accounts like the the person that buried him and not simply say he was buried. He was expected to mention the empty tomb and the women that he appeared to first, since they are more important in other accounts narrated by other gospels than both James and Cephas in this scenario. He didn't. Obviously he didn't mention these important ceases because there was nothing like that in the early Christian believe if the resurrection. They were later additions concocted to make the whole cork and bull story real.

unlike d accounts of Mtt mark and co. So there is nothing like pauli account of Jesus death and resurrection as i said before paul himself was not a witness. D purpose of 1corr 15:1-11 was not to narrate d death and resurrection of Jesus rather its a subject of the salvation through death and resurrection

He was summarizing it. And i believe you were taught in school that whenever you are told to summarize something, you are to point out the important message in that passage. Here Paul left out the important scenario and was mentioning the unimportant ones. I don't blame him. He was writing what was in circulation at that time before some other anonymous people came to embellish and add sauce to the story to make the whole thing look real.

See how am tackling ur questions but u re running away from one simple question i asked. Dat is how islam is. U are not even proud to tell ua how mohammad told u guys dat God used a machinery

You are trying to derail and I'm not ready to give in for that.

And btw, you are yet to answer my 1, 3 and 4th question. Kindly see to them as well.

zionmade:
Now on sahendrin matter or dat of d council ur gave a wrong bible verse. I know its in d bible but bring up d accurate verse of scripture den i will address it. As u can see clearly ur writings are copy and paste

Mark 14:55-65New International Version (NIV)

55 The chief priests and the WHOLE SANHENDRIN were looking for evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death, but they did not find any. 56 Many testified falsely against him, but their statements did not agree.

57 Then some stood up and gave this false testimony against him: 58 “We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with human hands and in three days will build another, not made with hands.’” 59 Yet even then their testimony did not agree.

60 Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” 61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.

Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”

62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked.

64 “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?” They ALL condemned him as worthy of death.

As you can see, THE WHOLE SANHENDRIN ie. ALL OF THEM condemned him to death.

According to this same Mark15:43
Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body.

Whereas this unknown person, Joseph, was one of the people who had called for Jesus’s death just the night before he was crucified. Isn't this an obvious inconsistency in an attempt to invent the burial and the empty tomb of Jesus?

Anybody with sense will see this.

zionmade:
Bros stop copying and pasting bring out ur points one after d other

I've made my points on both the first and second page of this thread but since you are shying away from it, i had to bring it down for you to address. Copy and paste or not, address it.

On the issue of 1st corr 15:3 paul didnt give an exhaustive list of those who saw Christ.

What list was he then giving? Partial list

And it is boldly written in verse 4 "according to the scriptures" in reference of d account of luke, Matthew and john(if u open a reference bible u will see it)

Good that you acknowledge this as well. If he was indeed giving the list according to the gospel of Luke Matthew and john, how then did he miss mentioning the women among those that saw Jesus, despite the fact that those women saw him first according to those gospel?

How come he missed mentioning the empty tomb despite the fact that those gospel he was allegedly referencing made mention of it?

The accounts of Paul on resurrection is our earliest source of knowing what happened, owing to the fact it was written twenty to thirty years after Jesus’s death. Scholars typically dates Mark, the first Gospel, to be written probably around 65-70 ce; Matthew and Luke were written about fifteen to twenty years after that, say, 80-85 ce; and John was written last, around 90-95 ce. What is significant here is the time gap involved.

Now our earliest account of the resurrection made no mention of the women and the empty tomb, if really Paul received the story of the women and the empty tomb from those that narrated it to him, how come he missed it in all his letters?

This points to only one thing; that the stories of Jesus’s resurrection were indeed being expanded, modified, and possibly even invented.

This, i want you to disprove.

showing u wat i said before dat paul himself was not a physical witness.

No one says he was a physical witness of the event, but from what he got before writing his letters, there's no story of women and empty tomb, they are all later expansion, modification and invention of the story by the anonymous author that wrote the gospels.

Paul referenced to his encounter with Jesus on his way to damascua (acts 9:4) to and not after his resurrection.

Okay.

Pls always use a reference bible anytime u want to find ur Fault. As at d time paul wrote dat epistle he was d last person dat encountered Jesus. If am clear on this bring up ur next question

No, you are not done. Address my refutation and answer my 1, 3 and 4th question.

Kenshinmunac:
Na WA o. Na only worwor local girls you fit get as okada rider o. No girl go use ear hear this thing. Except no be naija, I no blame them, myself won't even allow any of my sisters to be friends with okada rider talk less of dating.

..

Make them just dash the guy 40years

zionmade:
Now u re trying to piss me off by ur shut up and go elsewhere

I'm only saying you should go elsewhere if you cannot address the topic of the thread, if you can, then stay and address it.

broda am not going elsewhere Stand up for dat rubbish mohammad taught u to believe

Good you are staying. Now start by answering these questions: After resurrection where did Jesus ask the disciples to meet him, Galilee or Jerusalem?

is Paul really a witness to the resurrection?

Did Jesus receive a decent burial?

Was he buried in the tomb indeed?

Paul was alive wen Jesus walked ond face of d earth but he was a professor aka pharisee at dat time.Yes he was there during dat period.

Okay.

No he was not a disciple of Jesus and was not a worthy physical witness. But after he encountered Jesus, he also communed with the disciples who expounded to him the ministry of Jesus and through d work of d Holyspirit he had a full understanding of Jesus mission

Now, the more reason why i talk about Paul on the first page is to show that the resurrection story is a lie that was edited and rebranded over time. Here again: according to 1 Cor. 15:3-8 Paul seems to be giving an exhaustive account of the people to whom Jesus appeared after being raised. The reason for thinking this is that after listing all the others who saw Jesus, Paul indicates that he was the “last of all.” This is frequently understood, rightly I think, to mean that he is giving the fullest list he can. But then the list is striking indeed, in no small measure because Paul doesn’t mention any women. In the Gospels it is women who discover the empty tomb, and in two of the Gospels—Matthew and John—it is women who first see Jesus alive afterward. But Paul never says anything about anyone discovering an empty tomb, and he doesn’t mention any resurrection appearances to women —either here or in any other passage of his writings.

Paul being the earliest source that talk about the resurrection story said nothing about the women that first discovered the tomb nor did it mention the EMPTY TOMB, what does that tells you? To further complicate matters he indicates that he did not devise the statements himself but that he “received” it from others. Whereas our earliest Gospel, (Mark) narrates the discovery of an empty tomb without discussing any of the appearances like Paul had done. This further shows that, the empty tomb and the appearances of Jesus after his death—probably originated independently of one another and were put together as a single tradition only later—for example, in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke . If this is the case, then the stories of Jesus’s resurrection were indeed being expanded, embellished, modified, and possibly even invented in the long process of their being told and retold over the years.

Jesus was buried in a tomb owned by Joseph of arimanthea and he didnt have a decent burial because his disciples were scattered and scampered to hiding in fear.

I will have to repeat myself again here:

Joseph’s identification as a respected member of the Sanhedrin should immediately raise questions. Mark himself said that at Jesus’s trial, which took place the previous evening, the “whole council” of the Sanhedrin (not just some or most of them—but all of them) tried to find evidence “against Jesus to put him to death” (14:55). At the end of this trial, because of Jesus’s statement that he was the Son of God (14:62), “they all condemned him as deserving death” (14:64). In other words, according to Mark, this unknown person, Joseph, was one of the people who had called for Jesus’s death just the night before he was crucified. Why, after Jesus is dead, is he suddenly risking himself (as implied by the fact that he had to gather up his courage) and seeking to do an act of mercy by arranging for a decent burial for Jesus’s corpse? Mark gives us no clue. My hunch is that the trial narrative and the burial narrative come from different sets of traditions inherited by Mark. Or did Mark simply invent one of the two traditions himself and overlook the apparent discrepancy?

In any event, a burial by Joseph is clearly a historical problem in light of other passages just within the New Testament. I pointed out earlier that Paul shows no evidence of knowing anything about a Joseph of Arimathea or Jesus’s burial by a “respected member of the council.” This datum was not included in the very early creed that Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5, and if the author of that creed had known such a thing, he surely would have included it, since without naming the person who buried Jesus, as we have seen, he created an imbalance with the second portion of the creed where he does name the person to whom Jesus appeared (Cephas). Thus, this early creed knows nothing about Joseph. And Paul also betrays no knowledge of him.

Moreover, another tradition of Jesus’s burial says nothing about Joseph of Arimathea. As I pointed out earlier, the book of Acts was written by the same person who wrote the Gospel of Luke. When writing Luke, this unknown author (we obviously call him Luke, but we don’t know who he really was) used a number of earlier written and oral sources for his stories, as he himself indicates. Scholars today are convinced that one of his sources was the Gospel of Mark, and so Luke includes the story of Joseph of Arimathea in his version of Jesus’s death and resurrection. When Luke wrote his second volume, the book of Acts, he had yet other sources available to him. Acts is not about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus but about the spread of the Christian church throughout the Roman empire afterward. About one- fourth of the book of Acts consists of speeches made by its main characters, mainly Peter and Paul—speeches, for example, to convert people to believe in Jesus or to instruct those who already believe.

That tomb was guarded by the roman soldiers (jews have never disputed this fact even though they are against Christianity). D jews made it clear that if d body of Jesus escaped dat tomb it would be a disaster.

On this^, below is one of old posts.

The author of Matthew on the other hand adds drama to the minimalistic yarn inherited from Mark , notably a "first appearance" of the resurrected Jesus.

Matthew begins by introducing tomb guards – unknown to Mark , or anyone else for that matter. The guards, in fact, will get more attention than the resurrection itself.
Matthew introduces an earthquake: Matthew 28.2.

Notice that Matthew solves one riddle left by Mark by having the angel move the stone.

Matthew wants something more compelling than the testimony of an angel, so he intrudes an appearance of Jesus himself into the path of the running women. But Matthew has no new dialogue; his Jesus merely repeats words already spoken by the angel in Mark. The women say nothing but "clasp the feet" of the risen saviour: "Suddenly Jesus met them. "Greetings," he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshipped him."
Now that Jesus gives "evidence" of his own resurrection, and the same instruction to "go to Galilee", the role of the angel in mark has become redundant and the text reads oddly!

While these dramatic events are in progress the enigmatic guards, more seriously frightened than the women (!) " shake and become like dead men." Matthew turns his attention back to these traumatized wimps, using them as a ploy to start a so-called "rumour" that Christian's have found useful ever since – the "stolen body" straw man:

Matthew 28.11-15 " While the women were on their way,some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. When the chief priests had met with the elders and DEVISED A PLAN, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, telling them, "You are to say, 'His disciples came during the night and stole him away [size=13pt] WHILE WE WERE ASLEEP [/size] .' If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble." So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day ." –

This^ entire episode is directed at the objection that if the body wasn't in the tomb then an obvious explanation would be that somebody had removed it. The guards and the "sealing of the sepulchre" are intended to silence this objection.

Why did the guards have to be made "as dead men"? Surely extra witnesses to the momentous event would have been useful? Precisely because the story is a fabrication. If it had really happened the testimony of a squad of temple guards,not followers of Jesus, would have started a chain of events that just did not happen.

As a "real event" the passage is beset with problems. [u] How on earth did the comatose guards know "everything that had happened"? How could they admit to being asleep yet be certain that the disciples had stolen the body? Even more difficult to explain is how is the author of Matthew could himself possibly know of the dastardly plan hatched by the chief priests and elders? [/b]

meanwhile I'm still coming back to the tomb story by weekend as we still have a long way to go on this thread.

D very site of dat tomb is disputed in UN dat it belongs to palestine nation.

Pfttt

zionmade:
Now if i go to dat thread i might turn it into war because there might be armature minds who may insult me or my Jesus and trust me no muslim will like to know wat i think about mohammad. Expect me in d thread by evening. And back to dis. WHAT DO U BELIEVE

What do i believe as how? I should be asking you:

After resurrection where did Jesus ask the disciples to meet him, Galilee or Jerusalem?

is Paul really a witness to the resurrection?

Did Jesus receive a decent burial?

Was he buried in the tomb indeed?

These are questions you ought to be answering, but because you are a coward that have no balls, you are hell bent on derailing.

I'm sorry, i will have to ignore you if yet you refuse to address the above questions.

Thank you.

zionmade:
Now u call it cork and bull story. Its a lie abi. I put d story there as a litmus test and u gave me d answer i expected. In Islam u re subjected to believing something and anything outside dat is a lie. Dat is why u re indoctrinated into dat doctrine right from d enfanthood. Why cant u counter wat i said without calling it a lie. And how do u know its a lie d same way u know d bible was corrupted.

What if i tell you that my little that almost fell from 2 storey building hanged in the air after I shouted La ilaha illallah Muhammadur Rasulullah ? That shows the efficacy of the name of Allah.

Islam never believes in d death and resurrection of Jesus and

And since you believe it, prove it historically by Starting from the letters of paul, is Paul really a witness? Then go to the points i have raised so far including the glaring contradiction i mentioned on the first page of this thread. Then tell us how Jesus had a decent burial and how he was indeed buried in a tomb.

If it's too hard for you to do, is it still hard for you to shut up and find somewhere else to go?

u re still scared of telling me d nonsense u believe dat Jesus was impersonated and killed all by d work of allah? Dnt be scared tell me d bullshit lies u believe let me tackle it. If u tell me wat dnt believe also tell me wat u believe and it will be complete.
According to ur Islam version d gospel Jesus preached was not documented but by inspiration According to islamic scholars d gospel was read from a manuscript which sometimes were from psalms written by ur dauda or from Isaiah whom ur religion failed to recognize because he clearly prophesied on the life and death of Jesus. Now d law moses got was written by God himself on a stone. Judaism and Christianity believes dis but ur version of islam rejects all u re trying to tell me is there is no other written documentary apart from quran. Bro even sultan of sokoto will disown u

Sigh

zionmade:
not I have also read d post very well. Where empiree was trying to tell us wen Matthew mark and d others we're written. the thread was not an intellectual write up unlike dis one. How will u ask me if Jesus read d bible? Of course not. But d few times he taught in d synagogue he read from a scroll. Which contains d torah. Now d bible was written years after Jesus was dead and it was a compilation of manuscripts from fragments of scrolls here and there. D book of luke and acts were written by luke but was compiled into one book around ad 70. Now d bible has mistakes during d translation stage(and not compilation stage) d reason being dat a hebrew word can have up to 5 english meaning.

Go to that thread and refute him. This thread is for another thing which you are cowardly shying away from.

raumdeuter:
Wenger is also unique, He needs players who are born losers, mental midgets, Players with no drive and desire in life aside to be mediocre. Not bottom of the class and not top either, players who will equalize against Bournemouth and spend the next week taking selfies. Players who on one day you will think they are absolutely world class and for the next 6 days be wondering how they became footballers. Players like Walcott, Giroud Ramsey.

Hahahaha this guy done finish our life.

Thunder will fire you, i guarantee it

eightsin:
And you refused? Please link up asap karoall41@yahoo.com

Bwahaha

Thank God for them. This is a blessing indeed.

His forehead like Olumo Rock

SolexxBarry:
So the only movie role he could act was that that involves kissing my crush

Of all actresses, Toyin is your crush

zionmade:
Why i prefer face to face? Yes its because i have an ulterior motive. There is a level of communication dat omly christians at a high level use. I dnt need to say a word but i will address ur spirit and dat is all. I almost got a school in d north into riot wen i used on a muslim girl tormented by evil spirit. I was about to issue d last word before my christian colleague shouted stop it. Even d imam in d school had to tell me to step away because he knew dat d devil was about to come out. My brother there is a higher level of communication. D same one Jesus used on paul dat turned paul from killing christians to becoming d most revered Christian. Its only done face to face. O

Save this cork and bull story for your fellow gullible christard.
I will pass.

Godstraight:
lol thank god for your life oh,only fools still support buhari.

I no talk that one o

zionmade:
I believe we are using intellectual terms here so please dnt use some terms like silly, crap or nonsense. When i want to be civil in my interaction i do that strictly and when i want to be d other way round i also ensure i over do it.

I don't think those words are insult. Trying to force on me what i didn't say or believe is indeed silly and nonsense.

Now i sat down to learn islam from an hausa educated muslim (he taught me) i also listen to messages from imams from his phone. Now if u re a yoruba muslim den i know where u are coming from. Mixing up ur educative imagination into islam just to make ur belief logical is unaccepted by islam itself.

Another crappy nonsense that has nothing to do with the thread.

Now the quran referenced d bible just like new testament referenced the torah. If dats a lie tell me its torah alone den i will stand on torah on clear u. But for u to tell me to leave torah and bible and address ur issue which no problem problem matter who wrote it gathered d information from me the bible are the den u re contradicting ur premise

The Quran referenced the gospel according to Jesus and not according to Matthew, John, Luke, mark and so on. Again, let's discuss that here https://www.nairaland.com/2172133/question-did-jesus-read-bible#down

I know why u dnt want me to go d bible way because u know urself dat wen i start dissecting d life death and resurrection of Jesus it will be an overwhelming evidence of d lies of d quran and mohammad. Dat is why islam itself termed it corrupt.

Oh please start and stop these empty boasting. Start from the letters of paul, is Paul really a witness? Then go to the points i have raised so far including the glaring contradiction i mentioned on the first page of this thread. Then tell us how Jesus had a decent burial and how he was indeed buried in a tomb.

Start now and stop derailing.

Den my question it, where was d life of Jesus as believed by mohammad documented?

This is totally different from the topic of this thread. Open a thread and we will address it after you must have addressed this current discussion.

zionmade:
I have not started facing ur questions directly because i wont bother myself doing dat if u have an atheist view rather than an islam view of the bible.

What is an atheist and the Islamic view of the Bible? Do Muslims believe in the Christian Bible? It's like you are confused than i had thought.

It will be furtile.

What will be futile? That you can't refute the points raised so far on the thread? And even saying the Muslims view of the Bible, do Muslims believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus?

I enjky meeting atheist one on one because as i said before i can communicate to someone without opening my mouth. That is d highest form of communication.
If u re a true muslim den tell me where exactly u believe that islam took its stand from in relation to the torah or the gospel. So i can mount my base there.

Let's discuss that here https://www.nairaland.com/2172133/question-did-jesus-read-bible#down and not this thread please. You are derailing this already.

That is because my analysis of events stems from the information from the bible, analogy from artifacts and historical reviews of the Jews themselves who were not even Christians

And are my own analysis so far outside the Bible

zionmade:
You claimed to be a muslim what u copied and pasted up there was from an atheist view.

What do you mean from an atheist view? So are you now saying, anyone that is skeptic of the Bible is an atheist? And atheist or whatever view or not, are you finding it hard to address? If yes, simply say you can't and stop this merry go round. If no, then start addressing the points instead of cowardly derailing the whole thread.

A true muslim never says that the whole bible is unreliable

Do you now have the apparatus to determine a true Muslim?

because the bible consists of torah and the gospel. And torah is a major foundation in Islam. D same torah that the jews who are not Christians use is the old testament in the bible. So d way am looking at u u are an atheist who covers up with being a muslim.

If you want to discuss this, kindly come here instead of trying to detail this.

Omudia11:
I thought you were a Buhari supporter....no?

Yes, I was once deluded, but now I'm a progressive and not a Buhari supporter.

Uteghe:
If Kanu is denied bail by the Fed High court,he can get bail at Lawn tennis court. Court is court.

Very true indeed

Dr Muhammadu Buhari

OLAADEGBU:
Good job for those examples given but was King Saul beheaded?

I like your style.

You ask your question — questions you have no answer to. You then wait for people to give their different opinions, and when you are done seeing different opinions, you then go to gotquestion.com where you initially copied the question from, to copy your answers directly and then paste it here. When will you ever use your own head to ask and answer questions and stop this copying and pasting for once?

zionmade:
Ok just tell me where i would make reference to while addressing d op. Where exactly do u want me to pick my points from if not d bible.

You are not to make any reference, you are to prove all the lies have been pointing out in the Bible wrong by telling us out it should really have been. Start from this thread how and really why the gospels are not problematic and how i have been lying to deceive the Christians and Muslims since that what you believe I'm doing here. Then come down to this thread from the first page and prove all the lies have been lying wrong. Prove to us that Jesus received a decent burial indeed and that he was buried in a tomb indeed. Just get ready to read me because I'm not done yet.

If i was talking face to face with u den i wont even reference d bible because i have better ways of communication of which u wont even know wen am done wit u.

What better ways do you have in real life that you don't have here? It's like you have an agenda hence the reason why you want the discussion to be out of nairaland.

Back to d point point out d books of d bible u think are not corrupted so i will stand on those ones and tackle ur ignorance