₦airaland Forum

Lucifyre:
You mean the typo riddled dross below😅. Not my fault you can't write properly or know the difference between is and if.🤷🏾

that's typo, u said u went back and still didnt understand after correcting the typo. that's your business not mine.

Since adeniyi65 and his advocate Lucifyre failed to answer my question, I will provide the answer.
Where did the abolitionist receive the inspiration to end slavery- THE BIBLE

The bible makes it clear SLAVE TRADE is evil and rightfully condemned it.


APOSTLE PAUL BANNED SLAVE TRADERS FROM THE CHURCH.

1 Timothy 1
9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

THE BOOK OF REVELATION REVEALS SLAVE TRADERS ARE BOUND FOR HELL.
Revelation 18
When the kings of the earth who committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. 10 Terrified at her torment, they will stand far off and cry:

“‘Woe! Woe to you, great city,
you mighty city of Babylon!
In one hour your doom has come!’

11 “The merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over her because no one buys their cargoes anymore— 12 cargoes of gold, silver, precious stones and pearls; fine linen, purple, silk and scarlet cloth; every sort of citron wood, and articles of every kind made of ivory, costly wood, bronze, iron and marble; 13 cargoes of cinnamon and spice, of incense, myrrh and frankincense, of wine and olive oil, of fine flour and wheat; cattle and sheep; horses and carriages; and human beings sold as slaves.

GOD INSTRUCTED TO PUT DEATH ANY SLAVE KIDNAPPER OR WHOEVER FORCEFULLY ENSLAVE SOMEONE.
Exodus 21
16 “Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.

From the above its pretty clear the whole atlantic slave trade and the transaharan slave trade was evil IN THE EYES OF GOD and all those who partook in it are bound for hell.
100% of slaves taken out of Africa were kidnapped, forcefully enslaved, beaten to submission and traded in open market as cargoes.

BIBLE CONDEMNED IT AND MAKES IT CLEAR ABOVE IS NOT A CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. THE ABOLITIONIST WERE THUS RIGHT TO USE THE BIBLE TO JUSTIFY THE END TO SLAVE TRADE.

adeniyi and Lucifyre, this is the answer u fail to provide.

Now that we know enforced slavery is wrong, what about voluntary slavery- people who choose to be slaves. This is where the issue of bondservant comes in. I will explain later, time to go to work.

Lucifyre:
You've boxed him into a corner and he's got no answer so he's strawmanning and tangenting hard away from the question, see how he swerved same question i asked. Dude is apologetic to slavery as is his bible, see his disgusting response about slaves unable to think for themselves. Was hoping the numerous typos made me misunderstand, but nope.

U better go back n read my post. If U have comprehension issues, that's your business.

adeniyi65:
Note: your argument knows NO direction again as you have refused to accept that you have been hit hard. Where in the Bible verses did God against slavery as clear as he did on other mere sins? You kept running around no answer.

Guy rest, U just running around like headless chicken. I'm not the one the one that brought the argument. You are the one that claimed God condoned slavery in the bible.
I countered with 2 simple questions just to expose the fallacy, contradiction and lack of sound judgment in your argument.


The lesson here is if U are to present an argument, it must be logically sound, historically objective and there must be no self contradiction within the argument.
Unfortunately your argument falls apart when tested with with my question.
That's the problem U don't want to admit.
I'm not here to present an alternative argument (other Christians are already doing that). I CAME HERE TO TEST YOUR ARGUMENT AND IT FAILED WOEFULLY.
YOUR ARGUMENT MAKES NO SENSE; AND IF U ARE A SINCERE PERSON U WILL ADMIT TO ABOVE BUT WE ALL KNOW U ARE NOT HERE FOR THE TRUTH

My 2 questions remained the same just like I initially asked. It has not changed.
If U can provide answer- clear and concise...I will appreciate.
I have not only asked U but other people here who seem to swallow your gullible claim.
Pls no beating around the bush.

Lucifyre:
One, its not like there's any objective bible recognised univocally by those who read it, different religions and different denominations have different varied accepted texts even though a lot of the texts are mutual between religions and denominations.

Two, i don't know if i'll call it fraud but yes you could say its fraud but if they didn't do it how accepting of the bible would the slaves be if they could read that the book says they could be beaten to within an inch of their life as long as they don't die, considering the inhumane trauma they were already passing through, so they found a way to make them accept it i guess.

We are both saying the same thing.
Yank off the pages of the bible u don't like and push an agenda with the rest.
Is that not what adeniyi was trying to do here until he started convulsing on the 2 questions I asked him and couldn't go any further.
He came here and started yarping bible condone slavery conveniently ignoring passages that clearly condemns it including a whole book in the bible dedicated to emancipation of slaves.

Dishonest people abound on both sides of every argument.

Since some think slaves are not worth to decide for themselves if slavery is wrong or not if they read the whole bible.
So I guess some dishonest creatures choose to decide for them.

adeniyi65:
My brother. You can help us with the verses that influenced them if you don't want to hear that NT says 'we are all equal before him but slaves must still be submissive to their slave masters'

Guy rest. U lost this one badly. U were seriously unprepared, and there are serious deficiency in knowledge issues.
Go and pick another topic in the bible and let's discuss.

The problem is U guys rarely come across sound theological Christians. Otherwise all the trash in your brain would have been cleared.

Only 2 questions and the car begin to have knock out problems. U couldn't answer them convincingly.

I keep saying it, THE DAY I LOSE A DEBATE ON ANY CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY IS THE DAY I STOP FOLLOWING THE BIBLE.

adeniyi65:
pens down. nothing to say again from here. You can't be a Christian than what the Bible say. The part sensored away condones slavery. Don't run around a circle that lead to nowhere.

What is this one talking about.
Imagine a pastor preaching from a bible with half of its pages removed.

The abolitionists that moved against slavery, did their own bible have any pages torn off.
Did they yank off any pages from their own bible b4 preaching against slavery.
So how come they read the whole bible yet concluded slavery was wrong.

adeniyi65:
a religious fraud to keep the barbaric of slavery away from the reach of slaves and give them "God loves all and slaves should obey their masters" so that they can remain submissive without rebellion to their masters.

I agree with U 100%.
What the slave masters did definitely wasn't Christianity. It was religious fraud.

No Christian will mutilate the bible and them preach from a bible that has only half it's pages intact.
No true Christian will yank off half of the bible pages and then preach from the remaining half.

Slaves masters were not Christians. QED.

jaephoenix:
Well, like you said we are not interested in your opinion nor that of Lincoln.
Please show us in the Bible where it tells people to abolish slavery or where it states that slavery is bad.
The Bible explicitly said murder, lying, covetousness etc are all sins, even made them into commandments, but it omits the fatcs that slavery was a sin, despite the facts is was very common.

THE OPINION OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE HE ENDED SLAVERY IN AMERICA. HE DECLARED THE PROCLAMATION OF EMANCIPATION WHICH CRIMINALISE SLAVERY AND MADE IT ILLEGAL TO TRADE IN SLAVES.

IF U THINK I SHOULD IGNORE THE OPINION OF SUCH INDIVIDUAL AND FOLLOW YOURS, THEN SOMETHING MUST BE WRONG WITH YOUR BRAIN.

WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT MOTIVATED ABRAHAM LINCOLN TO END SLAVERY EVEN IF IT MEANT GOING TO WAR. WHAT BOOK INSPIRED HIM TO FIGHT AGAINST SLAVERY TO THE END.

WE NEED TO KNOW. DONT TELL ME OTHERWISE.

Lucifyre:
Well said, case in point 👇🏾

By giving them a different bible right?
A bible that omitted more than half of the bible pages.
That doesn't look like Christianity to me, that's religious fraud.

jaephoenix:
1. Abolitionists ended slavery DESPITE THE TEACHINGS IN THE BIBLE SINCE NOWHERE WAS IT WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE THAT SLAVING IS A SIN. Slavery was ended despite the bible
2. The same bible is what they are reading. The Bible is replete with copious amount of passages encouraging slavery from the OT to NT

If U are not ready to answer my question, pls don't quote me.
I'm not interested in your whataboutism

1. Give me the names of the abolitionists who fought for the global termination of slave trade.
What is their religion, what is the source of their inspiration. What book Gabe them the motivation to end the slave trade.
Start with the Quakers.

2. If bible condoned slavery, why did the slave masters omitted more than half of the bible b4 giving it to slaves to read.
Why didn't they read from the same bible since the book condoned slave trade.

If U are not ready to answer my question, pls don't quote me.

adeniyi65:
I still remain a Truth seeker and if I'm to see anything truthful correlative with the history of the past or that can be useful for the future, I have no hidden agenda than to accept it with open hands. I'm not dogmatic on holding tight to opinion when it has been proven wrong. I'm just a problem solver.





Back to the conversation. Majority of European inhabitants are Christians. So it's understandable if every abolitionist that shows up there practice Christianity. Significant numbers of inhabitants in middle East practice Islam. So it's clearly understandable if their abolitionists are Muslims because abolition of slavery came in different time at different part of the world. So is other part of Asia who neither practice Islam nor Christianity. Such is inhabitants of China who are Buddhists excluding British colony of India.





Therefore to answer that the religion of the abolitionists is the major tool that influence abolitionism is false, that verdict should be absolutely seen as weak. It's because, if Bible influenced abolitionists of Christian settlements/nations, what influenced the abolitionist of Islamic settlement/nations. What influenced the abolitionists of Buddhism settlement/nations.




I believe if you are sincerely with your discussion as well, you should be able to analyze the above paragraph for justification that, human across all settlements were the ones who reasoned that the horrible use of fellow men like them in slavery should stop, which happened to them at different time.



I will like to add this to that answer. In history of Africa slavery. There is an African settlement which forbidded slavery even before abolitionism took place. They hate it with all passion. To avoid raid into their settlement, they builded tick solid wall around their settlement, neither did they partake in slave trade within their settlement. Slave raiders still abduct their people when they go outside the wall to farm. For that reason, residents of the settlement still builded second enclosure wall to cover their farm making two round circle wall shielding the people while one shielded their farm. This people knew nothing about Christianity as at then. Should we now say Christianity is what influenced them when they don't know or practice it? It's clearly their reasoning. Reasoning to distance themselves from barbaric act even when God is indifferent to slavery far away Israel. what
Religionists believe is that we need a kind of holy book to guide us because we are of flesh and to show us right from wrong. I believe animals that don't have human reasoning capability should be the one to need a guide book to know right from wrong(I don't mean to be rude) human are naturally endowed with intelligence that can create problems for their own advantage and solve problems (either man made or natural disaster) to their own advantage as well.



I think there is no need of mentioning names of abolitionists of Christian settlements again with that clear explanation.but to prove you are right at where you said slaves are not allowed to read. Yes that's how it is. I have come across the book of notable American and British abolitionist like Booker T. Washington. Fredrick Douglas and Olaudah Equiano(that tells you I have been a long reader on slavery). They all claimed that not reading Bible is prohibited alone but all slaves were prohibited from learning how to read and write for they know that literacy opens way for the seeking of knowledge, and the seeking of knowledge can make the slaves rebellious against them one day which actually happened eventually.

U are so ashamed of the truth U now writing long epistles to rationalize your deceptive opinion.
Yoruba will say ' Too much talk generates abundance of lies.
Truth is simple, concise and straightforward.
The inability to answer my questions with few sentence shows U hiding something and not being sincere.
U are not a truth seeker.

U have been trapped and now looking for lies to escape your ignorant opinion U brought here.
You even redefined the definition of abolitionists in order to dig your neck deeper into the sand.
This is what U wrote about abolitionist earlier on this thread.
Thank the abolitionist who helped stopped slavery, who knows wether today you might be in sugarcane farm in the Caribbean working helplessly without wage but crumbs of cheese

So how did someone in Africa who erected sticks to evade being captured and sold into slavery ended slavery in Carribbean.
People who were hiding from being victims of slavery have suddenly become abolitionist according to adeniyi.
FYI, ancient Benin kingdom didn't participate in the Atlantic slave trade and banned slave trade business within their domain, does that make them abolitionist?

All of a sudden U forcing me to accept that Christian by name and Christian by practice is the same.
Are missionaries to Africa same as the colonialist to Africa.
Mr man, give me the names of abolitionists and what motivated them to believe slavery is wrong.
Let me give U a name and research on it...The Quakers.
That U are John Thomas doesn't mean U live your life to reflect the biblical origin of the name.
FYI, the islamic world didn't abolish slavery on their own free will, they were forced to do so by western countries or when it became impractical to continue. Officially, Islamic world criminalise slavery in the 1960s, until then U could buy a slave in Arab open market.

Master taught their favourite slaves to read and write. Some slaves could read and write to some extent. Your claim of slaves didnt learn to read or write at all is a lie.
Masters need cheap labour for book keeping and keeping simple stocks of farm items. Favourite slaves were taught basic numbers and grammars.
Now those slaves were given a different bible to read out to their fellow slaves on Sundays. The question is why?


FINALLY I'M GLAD U MENTIONED ABRAHAM LINCOLN AS AN ABORTIONIST.
ABRAHAM SAID HE WAS CONVINCED HE WAS FIGHTING A JUST WAR BECAUSE OF THE MOTIVATION TO END SLAVERY.
HE SAID THIS CONVICTION CAME UPON HIM WHEN HE READ THE BIBLE AND LEARNT ALL MEN WERE CREATED EQUALLY IRRESPECTIVE OF RACE.

SO IF BIBLE CONDONED SLAVERY, HOW COME ABOLITIONISTS WERE MOTIVATED BY THE SAME BIBLE TO END SLAVERY.
IF THE BIBLE CONDONED SLAVERY, HOW COME SLAVE MASTERS GAVE A DIFFERENT BIBLE TO SLAVES.

pls help me makes sense of the above contradiction.

NOETHNICITY:
Now you take this conversation to uncharted territory.

Now you claim Jesus too is God!

Did he die on the cross?
If yes, can God die?

Jesus died in the cross because he has a true human nature.
His death was real, he wasn't pretending.
If Jesus was a divine being without a human nature, then his death would have been unreal.
Stories of his anguish on the night of passion is evidence he has a true human nature.

Now answer my question

DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR A SOLDIER TO SHED HIS INNOCENT BLOOD IN THE BATTLE FIELD JUST SO U AND YOUR FAMILY MAY LIVE.
SOLDIERS NEVER CAUSE WARS, ITS THE POLITICIANS AND SELFISH ARISTOCRATS. YET ITS THE YOUNG SOLDIER THAT SHED HIS BLOOD ON THE BATTLEFIELD.
NOW USING YOUR OWN ANALOGY OF CHRIST DYING FOR HUMANITY NOT MAKING SENSE...
IS IT RIGHT FOR A INNOCENT YOUNG SOLDIER TO LOSE HIS LIFE AND SHED HIS BLOOD SO THAT U MAY CONTINUE TO LIVE

Topman7:
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/c1/19/36/c119362632b0e48f249cc0987ab2310b.jpg

Now it's high time we debunk this Jesus-Horus connection myth once and for all.
Now I'm not here to throw tantrums but to dispel whatever misconceptions or ignorance U may have about Christian historicity.

Now show me where Christianity copied from Horus or ancient Egyptian myth and we will analyse that claim.
U bring evidence and I will bring mine. No insult, let's be civil.

Topman7:
Now here is the twist.

The 'Jesus' invention came about afte the ROMANS invaded their region - Israel and the Levant, and were oppressing the people for centuries.

They were awaiting a messiah that would save them from the Roman oppressors.

To curb this rebellion and discontent, the Romans started claimig that theiMessiah had AREADY arrive 100 years earlier, and that his mamew was ''JESUS''.

''Jesus'' told his people in the Roman-invented 'New Testamnent' to ''GIVE UNTO CAESAR WHAT IS CAESAR'S''.

Told them to ''TURN THE OTHER CHEEK'' if somebody slaps them etc.

In other words ''JESUS'' was invented by the Romans to PACIFY YOUR ANCESTORS BACK THEN.

That is why we have the information that the Israelites NEVER accepted ''Jesus'', and even till today, those who took over their history after they had fled into inner Africa - the white Kazarians, who became 'Jews' by conversion (not by blood) followed the tradition of REJECTING 'Jesus'', the Roman invention.

TILL TODAY.

NOW BECAUSE YOU WERE INVADED BY THE BRITISH EMPIRE (IE THE RECONSTRUCTED ROMAN EMPIRE) A CENTURY AGO, they came again with their 'JESUS', story, and because they wiped out your historical knowledge and trashed it as ''barbaric, savage'' etc, YOU now ACCEPTED ''JESUS''.

And they are so so happy that they GOT YOU at last.

Ok so if the Romans invented Jesus Christ and Christianity. Why were they throwing Christians to Lions in the first 300 yrs of the religion.

adeniyi65:
People's instinct, wise thinkers thought of the need to end it because it's barbaric. There's no Bible verse that inspires slave abolition, instead, NT only advises slaves to submit to their slave masters. Bible only favors White supremacists that refused to stop slavery in America after Abraham Lincoln proclamation abolishing slavery. They have series of references not to stop it


Your number 2 question is not clear.the Bible in the market is not restrict for either slave masters alone or the slaves alone. Anyone can choose his choice translation. But I will explain a little thing here. Instinct and way of reasoning is different in all men. So in the slavery years, this made some read bible and appreciate its softness on slavery while others reasoned and frown at it. Those Christians who frown at slavery out of their reasoning for a just world for every man are the ones who will find verses on God's love for all to seek for equality against slavery while set asiding the pro slavery aspect of the Bible just as today Christians choose tithe from OT and abandon those that don't go with their system.

With due respect. I am not interested in your opinion.
My questions are based on facts and I want factual response not opinionated ones.

Tell me the names of the abolitionists. I want their names, who are they, what do they believe in. What book inspired them to fight against slavery.
Except U are here with other sinister or impure motives, and not truth seeker....U would answer my questions with sincerity.

Your response to number 2 shows U need to do some reading on slavery.
So U think a slave will go to open market and buy a bible? From who, who will sell a book to a slave. In case U don't know, it's a crime for a slave to read except approved by his masters.
Slaves read the bible given to them by their Masters.

So why did slave Masters give a different bible to their slaves if the book approved of slavery.


Since U mentioned Abraham Lincoln, let me share with U what he thinks of the bible.

NOETHNICITY:
Clever and dodgy
You cleverly dodged what I said about Jesus lamenting bitterly on the cross and accusing god of abandoning him.
Does this statement sound in anyway like a man who wanted to die?

He clearly also stated ‘not my will, but thy will’.

How much more clearer would a person be ?

I dodged nothing...this is my answer

In the moment of agony, it's normal to express sigh of distress- that shows Jesus has a real human nature, he's not a superhuman. He felt pain and anguish- his suffering was real and not made up, he wasn't pretending.

If Jesus had gone to the cross smiling and laffing, I will never believe he had a human nature. My conclusion will be he is God pretending to be a human.
But the fact the he actually suffered and felt pain showed he understands our pain and suffering so I can trust him to guide me during my own journey here on earth.

Now answer my question.

DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR A SOLDIER TO SHED HIS INNOCENT BLOOD IN THE BATTLE FIELD JUST SO U AND YOUR FAMILY MAY LIVE.
SOLDIERS NEVER CAUSE WARS, ITS THE POLITICIANS AND SELFISH ARISTOCRATS. YET ITS THE YOUNG SOLDIER THAT SHED HIS BLOOD ON THE BATTLEFIELD.
NOW USING YOUR OWN ANALOGY OF CHRIST DEATH FOR HUMANITY NOT MAKING SENSE...
IS IT RIGHT FOR A INNOCENT YOUNG SOLDIER TO LOSE HIS LIFE AND SHED HIS BLOOD SO THAT U MAY CONTINUE TO LIVE.

if U don't have an answer, U may call your friends to help out.

NOETHNICITY:
The bolded is the assertion of who exactly?
I know it’s not God!
I know it’s not Jesus!

Then who?

Jesus at the point of death didn’t sound like a willing object of sacrifice!
He cried out loud! My God My god, why has thou forsaken me?

Is this how someone who came to sacrifice his life would sounds?

In the run up to him being incarcerated, with his head to the ground, he said to God ‘NOT MY WILL BUT THY WILL’.

This is Jesus speaking here....
I'm shocked U don't even know the words of Jesus yet U claim Christianity is wrong.

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
John 15.13
For the son of man is here to not to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many
Mark 10.45

This shows he knew the assignment and was READY for it.
In the moment of agony, it's normal to express sighs of distress- that's why Jesus is a real human nature, he's not a superhuman. He felt pain and anguish- his suffering was real and not made up, he wasn't pretending.

NOETHNICITY:
Regarding the soldiers who die in battle, ask them if they love to die if they had a choice? They get paid monthly salaries and other benefits as soldiers

This is the most ridiculous statement. So because they get paid it's ok for them to shed their blood so U can live?
How much money are they being paid that can redeem their souls once it's gone.
Pls don't ever repeat this again, it's an insult to every single soldier who died in battle and the family they left behind.

Saying soldiers don't love to die shows your understanding of reality is very shallow.
People volunteer and travel to war zone to fight enemies- whether they get killed or not is irrelevant.
In some society, it's an honour to die in battle for a cause U believe in, coming away from a lost battle is considered shame and being a coward.
The only Japanese to have survived the titanic was called a coward back home and shunned. People told him he should have died on that ship.

Again I ask U...
Is it right for a soldier to shed his blood on the battle field so U may live.

It's just so ridiculous it how doesn't make sense to u for Jesus to shed his blood for U to live BUT, it's perfectly ok for a soldier to shed his blood for U so that U may continue to live.

Above is what we call cognitive dissonance. Your Brain giving 2 contradictory answers to same scenario.

adeniyi65:
Thank the abolitionist who helped stopped slavery, who knows wether today you might be in sugarcane farm in the Caribbean working helplessly without wage but crumbs of cheese to your mouth and scourge at your back.

Let me ask 2 simple questions. If U don't know, do some research.


1. U admitted abolitionist ended slavery. Who are they? What religion do they follow? What gave them the inspiration to end slavery? Which book convinced them that slavery is wrong?

2. If U claim the Europeans used the bible to justify enslavement of black people. Why did the slave masters give a different bible to the slaves.
How come the bible used by slaves is different from that of the master.
Since bible condone slavery, why didn't both slave and his master read from the same bible.
How come slaves in that era had a different bible.

NOETHNICITY:
So many contradictory passages. In some passages you will not be punished for the sins of the father, while some other passages say something different.
The most ridiculous assertion of them all is the notion that God needs the blood of an innocent man (who obviously didn’t want to be killed, that’s why he told God that ‘not my will, but thy will. And on the cross he accused God of abandoning him.) before He can wipe off our sins so that ‘God remembers it no more’.

These fallacies are the very reasons Christianity is dwindling. For example, the population of Christians in the UK is now less than half of the population of the people.

U refused to answer any of my questions
I will add a third
Is it right for soldiers to die on the war front that U may live.
Is it right for innocent soldiers to shed their innocent blood in battle so that millions may continue to live
Is it right for a mother to die for her child may live.
Is it right for an innocent woman to give up her life so that her child may live.

Your problem is you don't know what's called self sacrifice.
What Jesus did for humanity is called self sacrifice.

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
John 15.13
For the son of man is here to not to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many
Mark 10.45

Your finite mind is too inconsequential to decide for God his principles and standard.
What U can do is to judge whatever standard U set for God against your own life.

That's why I want U to answer this question?
Is it right for an innocent soldier to die for U so that U may continue to live.

Your gibberish on numerical strength of Christianity is irrelevant here. Truth is not based on numbers but validity and factual evidence.
And that's what we doing here.

NOETHNICITY:
When I say ‘where’ it came from I meant where it came to us.
It is a well documented fact that colonialist Europe spread Christianity across the world to other parts of Europe, Africa and the Americas and South America, and even Asia.

LOADS OF IGNORANCE FROM BEGINNING TO THE END. BUT I DONT KNOW WHETHER TO BLAME U OR BLAME THE CHURCH. SOME CHURCHES ARE TRYING sha but the problem lies with people like U that never attended bible study.

First U claim Europe spread Christianity. So....
The crux is where did it originate from? God can use anyone to spread his word. He made that clear in his scriptures.
Today we all virtually living in an eurocentric civilisation but most if not all of their concept including science was borrowed. None originated from them.
Mathematics, chemistry, science, human rights were all borrowed from other civilisation, none came from Europe.
Today, technology is moving to China. China is far far ahead of Europe when it comes to innovation that originated from Europe itself.
In the future, will it make sense for China to claim innovation belongs to them?
Guy I get am before no be property, overtaking is allowed.

NOETHNICITY:
Regarding atonement by blood, it is the most senseless concept ever devised by any religion in history.

Atonement by blood is virtually the oldest concept of forgiveness ever known to man. Every ancient religious civilisation practiced it including African traditional religion. People sacrifice blood of animals to appease deity- a common practice that's as old as time itself.
So U obviously don't know what U talking about.

NOETHNICITY:
Does it mean that God CANNOT forgive without BLOOD?
What kind of a god(at this point I have to switch to small g for god) needs human blood to be able to forgive? Is that god a vampire god?

Now Let's start with Leviticus 17.11
For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.
What do U understand by above?
Then read Isaiah 53..

Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,
What do U understand by above passage. What is the message.
Now tell me how ancient Jews interpreted Isaiah 53.
Do ancient Jews believe a Man is coming to die for their sins as stated in Isaiah 53
U may want to read about someone called Messiah ben Joseph.

Note- Those verses I quoted were written at a time no one on earth was called a Christian.

NOETHNICITY:
Also, what kind of a god imposes or transfers a sin committed by one person to another person?
Why should I be held accountable for sins committed Adam or my great grandfather?
Isn’t God supposed to be a JUST and Forgiving God?

God is not only just and forgiving but ALSO FAIR. Otherwise, satan and the demons should have the right to call on God for forgiveness and he must forgive them and bring them back to heaven.
So the question to U is if God can forgive just by asking, why can't satan or any of the demons call on God and ask for forgiveness. Or U think Satan likes the idea of damnation in hell.

NOETHNICITY:
How can He claim to be JUST if He holds me guilty for the very sins committed by Adam?

Another ignorant statement. Nobody holds U accountable for the sin of Adam, U are only accountable for your own sin.
If we are held accountable and condemned for sin of Adam, how come we believe babies will get a free pass to heaven?

NOETHNICITY:
As ordinary as I am, I easily forgive people who offend me without batting an eyelid.
Why can’t the Christian be better than me?

Most ignorant statement of all.
Go and learn the difference between forgiveness, remission and atonement.
No rational human can achieve atonement maybe except little kids. That's why Jesus said to enter heaven u have to be like little kids.
Human forgives sin and maybe remission but atonement is impossible. Humans will forever remember that evil that was done to them and will definitely adjust their behaviour to prevent future occurrence- once beaten twice shy.
That's what Jesus came to do- ATONEMENT, he wiped off our sin so that God remembers it no more.

NOETHNICITY:
Didn’t God say in Ezekiel that the son shall not be held responsible for the sins of the father. Neither shall the father be responsible for the sins of son?

This is the most misinterpreted passage in the bible.
No son is responsible the sin of his ancestors but the iniquity of the fathers can be demanded on the son if he persisted in same evil
This is in the 10 commandments

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation[b] of those who hate me[/b], 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

God will never punish U for the sin of your fathers, everyone will bear his own punishment. But if U continue in the evil deeds of your fathers, God will visit the punishment of your fathers on you.
If in doubt, ask ancient Israelites and Jews.

NOETHNICITY:
Claiming we are all stained by the sins of Adam is to say the least a childish contradiction on the part of proponents of this concept

Also, how come no prophet before Jesus ever said that there will have to be the coming of one who come to die for the sins of Adam

This is one of the reasons I jakpa from Christianity

Yes Isaiah spoke about it. Isaiah confirmed someone is coming who will die for the sin of the world.
Once again tell me about the man in Isaiah 53 who will bear iniquity the people.

Finally, I've been asking this question from Muslims, black Jews, agnostic and even atheist.
Nobody has been able to answer the question?
If God can forgive just by asking, why did he tell the Israelites to slaughter animals and use the blood to atone for their sins.
Why didn't he just tell them to ask and he will forgive.
Why did he tell them to build a big temple and use the blood of animals slaughtered on the altar as remission of sin.

So I hope U will disappoint me.

floss:
Your imaginary devil Abi which other one… that’s what your business centre owners (pastors) use to keep you captive and you end up doing their bidding

People have the right to believe in imaginary sky daddy. Let them be.
U that don't believe, I don't see how your life is in anyway better than those who choose to believe in the sky daddy.
Atheist are very pathetic people...they reject God then they build their whole existence talking about the God they don't believe.
Cho cho cho....God this, God that. Yet they dont in him.

Sha be grateful U live in a society embedded in Christian values that ensures and protect your right to choose as a fundamental human right. That's why U can boldly claim U are atheist and openly express it without any fear.

Millions living in Muslim dominated society do not have don't luxury. Coming out to say Allah is an imaginary sky daddy is as good as committing suicide.
U will be killed instantly.

So if anything be grateful to Christianity and the opportunity it offers u to express your thoughts without any fear in a tolerant and open society.

NOETHNICITY:
Christianity is dieing in the west where it came from at a rate never seen before.

It is dieing because it has no truth.

It cannot stand the text of time since It cannot stand any serious scrutiny.

If you are someone who cannot believe dogmatically you can’t be a Christian

The Bible is riddled with errors and Interpolations (human adding and removing from it).

The core creed( that Jesus died for your sins) lacks any logical reasoning when properly dissected.

Many more reasons why the religion is dieing.

Churches are being converted either to clubs, hotels and in some cases mosque.

Dunamis should go and try to resuscitate Christianity in Europe

I see say the thing dey pain U. Pele.
U people will be the one saying Pastors should take the gospel to hostile and non-wealthy region of the
world. Now they have done that U are crying and wailing.
Dont worry about the west, the revival is coming to them.
We will teach them them true gospel not the one riddled with white supremacy that couldn't stand the test of time as U rightly mentioned.
Besides Christianity is not from the west. Only ignorant folks say such.
Christianity was well established when dark Europe was still pagan.

As regards atonement by blood, it makes perfect sense. Arguing otherwise is ignorance and poor understanding of theology.
If U want free lessons, I can offer U.

AntiChristian:
This is contextual and cultural! The warriors are strong males. And they killed all their families, took possession of their belongings and destroyed their homes! The only people spared are girls who are virgins! Assuming they spared males then the interpretation may change.

There's no other way virgin girls are used except to serve their masters! If the master is female then they may help her. And the help may extend to helping them sleep with their husband. For example Sarah vs Hagar! Rachel and Leah vs Bilhah and Zilphar!


1 Peter 2:18 "Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh."

Ephesians 6:5-9 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Do your work willingly, as though you were serving the Lord, not men. Know that whatever good anyone does, he will receive the same back from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free. And masters, do the same to them. Stop threatening them, for you know that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him."

All your gaslighting about slavery makes no sense.
The highlighted is the appropriate response your blind eye fail to see.
Both masters and slaves are both the same b4 GOD- servants.
This masters should remember this and treat their slaves fairly.
U don't maltreat your slaves or use them for your own selfish desires.

It's amazing U have a problem with a man sleeping with his slave girl when the biggest culprit is muhammed.
Muhammed slept with the slave girl of his wife Zainab without his wife's permission or even the slave permission.
He was caught having sex with the slave on his wife's bed, he was so ashamed he promised to abstain from sex for 30 days and begged Zainab not to tell other wives.

AntiChristian:
This is contextual and cultural! The warriors are strong males. And they killed all their families, took possession of their belongings and destroyed their homes! The only people spared are girls who are virgins! Assuming they spared males then the interpretation may change.

There's no other way virgin girls are used except to serve their masters! If the master is female then they may help her. And the help may extend to helping them sleep with their husband. For example Sarah vs Hagar! Rachel and Leah vs Bilhah and Zilphar!


1 Peter 2:18 "Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh."

Ephesians 6:5-9 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Do your work willingly, as though you were serving the Lord, not men. Know that whatever good anyone does, he will receive the same back from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free. And masters, do the same to them. Stop threatening them, for you know that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him."

They already explained to U why virgin girls were spared. So I dont know why U sounding like a cracked cd
There's no way to know if a boy is a virgin or not. Sexual immorality abound amongst the cannanites including sodomy with young boys.

The point I'm making here is sparing a young woman for yourself doesn't mean having sex with her.
God gave very stringent rules for the Israelites if they choose to marry one of their captives women.
She has to become a wife before any sexual encounter.
That passage didn't mention anything about marriage. It couldn't be talking about keeping the women for sex!!!
It's talking about something else.

AntiChristian:
When the booties and animals was spared for the warriors what does it mean? It means they took possession of it, made use of it and also benefited from it.

So how do they spared the girls for themselves? I remember Sarah, Leah and Rachel bringing their slaves for their husband to procreate when they couldn't procreate at that time!

So in what way can a person be spared for their captors?
Are U saying the only way a captured person can be a possession is by having sex with them?
This your thinking doesn't make sense if U have actually read the bible and not cherry pick because I can show U in the bible ways young girls captured in war can be of possession apart from sex.

AntiChristian:
Was sex ever mentioned in the Bible directly?

Anyways to answer your question! No, sex was not mentioned!

What was mentioned was to spare the young girls for themselves!

So to U what does that statement mean to U?
Spare the young girls for yourselves....why do U take it to mean have sex with the girls.
If the bible didn't say such why are pushing words into God's mouth...words he never said.

AntiChristian:
The Bible does not specify any age for a woman to marry. Women are married without age restriction and this is the cultural law in the Bible. For example in Numbers 31, verse 17 and 18 states that all men (babies, young and old) were to be killed. In contrast, all non-virgin women are to be spared. The emphasis is on VIRGINITY i.e. hymen! So women with hymen are spared! The virgins are to be kept for the warriors as shown in bold below.

Numbers 31:17-18:
"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man intimately. But keep alive for yourselves all the young girls who have not known a man intimately."

It can be deduced that there's nothing wrong in keeping those young girls for the warriors!

So we should agree that all the babies, and toddlers and young girls were among the 32,000 young girls spared for the warriors!

So what were they spared for?

Marriage or sex slave?

Numbers 31:18 mentions young girls, girls, women children while the Amplified Bible mentions marriage!



So why are Christians today against the culture well approved by YAHWEH in the Bible?

As seen in Numbers 31, women children (as used by KJV) can be married! And 32,000 of them were married off.

And 32 was given as tribute to Yahweh!

Sirtee15

Show me anywhere in the passage that states you can have sex with the young girls.

AntiChristian:
What do we mean by ancient Jewish authoritative text?

Jewish religious books.

If I bring evidence of trinity concept from Jewish religious books, will U accept and stop disturbing our ears with your trinity ignorance.

Kingsempires:
wetin you want tell am again an traditionalist him be ooo!!

That's why I dont want to waste my time.
I want him to commit b4 I bring show him the evidence.

Qasim6:
No problem. We know that's what you believe. We know that's what John gospel says, we just don't know where the writer get that from.

Tanakh, Oral torah(Talmud, Mishnah).

Ok now let me show U where the John got it from.

Ever heard of Targum?

Qasim6:
See who is talking about corroborating religious claims with non religious evidence here. I'm glad you know it's something akin to a blind faith without that corroboration.

So tell us what contemporary evidence of Muhammed existence do we have? Even your hadiths were written 200 yrs after his death so they can't be called contemporary and their high possiblity of legendary embellishment to make Muhammed what he's not.

Qasim6:
Which of your gospels is not apocryphal? Or because some people canonised 4 that suit whatever their agenda was out of all the gospels that were flying around in the 1st and 2nd century
-that automatically make that 4 non-apocryphal?
-That automatically make the information in others null and void?
-That automatically make all the information in the canonised Gospels 100% true?

Calm down, books written late in 2nd century claiming to have been written by James or Thomas cannot be true. These disciples were long dead.
It's just common sense. That makes those gospel book instant apocryphal. The content in the books were unheard of until late 2nd century.

Qasim6:
I'm not sure you guys realize how lame it is when you guys make this nonsense claim that Prophet Muhammad copied from here and there to make up the text of the Qur'an. What you are telling us is that he must have had a very big hidden library that no one knew of except him, and he must have been able to read and understand in at least these languages: Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Egyptian hieroglyphs(a lost language at the time). Yet what we know about him and what his companions knew is that he couldn't even read or write in his native language.

This is is the problem when U don't respond to my rebuttal. I dealt with these 2ce in my previous debate with U.
But U didn't respond and u bringing the the same argument here again. That's why I said debating with U is very stressful.

How can U claim Muhammed wasn't aware of bible stories when everyone around him knew the stories.
When he started his ministry, the people told him to his face that they are familiar with his recitation stories, they have heard it b4 and are tales of the ancient people of the past. They even told him they could come up with something similar if they want to. All these are in your Qur'an.
Bible stories are not new to the people of ancient Arabia, so how come it's new to Muhammed?

How come everyone knew the bible stories except Muhammed? How come everyone in Arabia peninsula are familiar with bible stories except Muhammed.
Muhammed can't read but he could hear!!!

Where was Muhammed when everyone was hearing about the bible stories?

That's the mystery I want U to help me solve.

Qasim6:
You are making this claim of prophet Muhammad copying from somewhere and you are reading the synoptic gospels that are side by side in your scripture and yet you can't smell a rat about them copying from each other.
Christianity hypocrisy is out of this world, it is something forged in hell.

If anything, the gospel writers never lied they heard it from God. That's the issue with the Muhammed and his Qur'an.
As far as am concerned I rather prefer someone that copied from contemporary books written close to lifetime of Christ than Muhammed that copied from gospels written 200 yrs after Christ.

Qasim6:
Why exactly do you want to worship the shin of Allah?

because Allah is ONE AND HAS NO PARTS ACCORDING TO MUSLIMS.
IF ALLAH IS ONE, WHY CANT I WORSHIP HIS SHIN.