₦airaland Forum

There are things that people that want to accuse apostle paul dont really understand.

Apostle paul was only explaining the reality about the christ ransom and its implication to christian worship,

the new way to follow to get to God Yahweh.

the truth is, there were those that were determined to see that the message about the christ should stop, and this were Jews that killed the christ also.

Since they killed the christ they did not want any that teach about the christ to go on teaching, and this problem were not only about paul but all of the other apostles also.

Apostles paul was telling what the living and the way of christians will be as regarding christ sacrifice.

Christ himself had said "i am giving you a new commandment that you have love among yourself " the law of the christ is love.

Paul said With christ ransom there was no longer a need for animal sacrifice as was done in the temple in Jerusalem because the law that was giving was to keep the nation of Israel clean and seperat from EVERY other nation as they await the arrival of the messaiah.

So, in other words, the law was a tutor(teacher) leading the Nation of Israel in holiness to christ, and the christ was to die a sacrificiall death for all of mankind, the prophesy had said.

So, paul said that the death of christ has opened up the way for people of all nation to draw close to the almighty God and not just the Jews.

But the jews that had kill the christ said that this is not acceptable and kept following paul to where ever he travelled to and kept contradicting what he was saying.

This jews and some other jews that said that they are christians keep teaching that the people of the nation that want to be christians should be circumciss and also keep the law of moses that had served it purpose of leading the Jews to the christ,

apostle paul had to stand and say that christians are NOT to follow the law requirment but this haters of christ will not accept that and will go to the other apostle that had commissioned paul and accused him falsely that he was teaching a new thing.

Paul explained the OT and it prophesy as it concerned the christ how christian dont need the law of moses anymore and it customs and it sacrifice requirment and also very deep things that even the other apostle did not fully understood, just as peter pointed out at 2peter 3:15.

that paul had written according to the wisdom that was given him. 2peter 3:15,16 by christ.

peter that Jesus said that the spirit of God help him and was the leading apostle said so.

If someone was to say that the witness of peter to paul was wrong that person should better checked out the spirit that is leading him. 2cor 4:4 and Ephesians 2:2,3.

Paul quoted the OT and opened up the essence of christianity and quoted words of the messaiah, he explained the prophesies in the OT as they relate to christ.

If someone does not even know what was written in the OT how will he be able to understand what paul was saying?

frosbel: https://www.21stcr.org/assests/images/Trinity-AM.jpg

Recently, I had a woman tell me the following: “To be a Christian is to be a Trinitarian. To deny the Trinity is to deny Christianity.” I question the validity of this statement when nowhere in my Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, does it state this.

This is an age old debate – whether God is one God (the Heavenly Father) which is called “Unitarianism” or He is a triple God in one (triune) - a three-person “who” in one “what” Godhead (called the Trinity).

Those who profess the Trinity doctrine basically adhere to believing that either you accept by faith this doctrine, or you’re not even a Christian. They believe it’s the litmus test for Christianity: accept by faith that Jesus is God, that he is “Deity,” or you’re not a Christian. I find that rather harsh, wouldn’t you say, when the Scriptures, and even God, does not require this to be saved?

Romans 10:9 tells us “That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you shall be saved.” Wouldn’t that have been an awesome time to have put in the Trinity requirement? Romans 10:9 states that Jesus didn’t raise himself from the dead. God raised Jesus and brought him back to life! To believe in the Trinity, you would have to believe that the man-part of Jesus died, but the God-part of Jesus did NOT die, because we all know that Scripture says that God cannot die, that he alone has immortality. With just one verse, we can open up a can of worms for the Trinitarians that is hard for them to explain and still make logical sense.

In Luke 10, a certain lawyer asked Jesus, “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?” (which would be asking the same thing – how can I be saved from the second death – the lake of fire, and instead receive eternal life?). Jesus answered him with a question – “What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” and he answered, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” And Jesus said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this and you will live.”

The requirement to believe in the Trinity in order to be saved and considered a Christian, is blatantly missing from the Scriptures, over and over again, although Jesus is given many opportunities to bring it up and explain it. The Apostle Paul has to deal with issues about Jews not requiring Gentiles to live by the law, (i.e. circumcision, what foods to eat, etc.) yet, does not have to explain to the Jewish people that God is no longer one God, like they thought, but revealed to him now, that God is three who’s in one what.

The Scriptures are amazingly silent on this debate, that would surely have taken place, had the Jewish-Christian apostles been preaching Jesus, “the second person of the Godhead.” It is amazing to me that today’s Christians do not seem to be bothered by this, and basically use a few “proof texts” to attempt to prove their doctrine, when those same Scriptures could also be used to defend that Jesus is who he said he was – the Messiah, who was exalted to the Right hand of God.

Yet so many people cling tenaciously to the Trinity and defend it with such a defensive, pit-bull attitude. I can't help wondering why. Why is this such a big deal to them, despite their doubts, despite the inability to completely understand or explain this doctrine that has so many issues with Scripture? Why do they want to believe in it? Because most want to continue believing in this, despite nagging doubts or unanswered questions that nibble on their consciences, if they allow it.

Source

^^^

the reason most still hold on to the trinity even though the bible does not teach it is because they want to "belong"

1. Own a church/under christiandom

2. To be able to remain in their church.

3. To keep their position in the church.

4. They want to keep their salary coming.

5. They dont want to be pesecuted.

6. They dont want their "church" to reject them.

7. They cant just imagine that they have been wrong all this while.

8. They want God to understand that they are honest even though the trinity teaching is wrong.

9. They cant stand to believe that all this churches can be wrong(forgetting it is the narrow gate that lead to life)

10. They just cant change their life style now(comfort zone). Etc etc.

frosbel: The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the mind of God as God’s plan for the redemption of man. A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge.


Another example


Revelation 13:8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast -- all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world. (NIV)

1 Peter 1:18-20 For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. (NIV)

just as there are many god and many lords, but there is to us one God and one lord.

Yes, jesus christ existed in heaven with his Father as the first born of all creation.

Why then are there man gods?

Spirit beings are like gods to human. Fallen angels.

"But to us there is but one God the father out of whom all things are"
the almighty God Yahweh.

So, if demons are qualify to be called "gods" how much more the first born of all creation!

Isaiah 9:6

Delafruita: perhaps you dont understand what purgatory and limbo mean.besides why is purgatory always criticized while limbo is hardly spoken about?anyone that thinks purgatory sounds weird probably hasnt heard of limbo

thanks men.

obadiah777: SO MUCH RUBBISH. YOU MUST BE DRUNK TO HAVE WRITTEN THIS RUBBISH OMUTI OSHI . YOU DO KNOW IT IS A RIGHTEOUS THING TO RECOMPENSE THOSE THAT TROUBLE YOU ? 2 CORINTHIANS 1 VS 6. LOL. I GOT YOU BACK

^^^^
lol
i never thought i will be laughing this much.

Hahaha.

Its seems as though he is laughing at other people misfortune.

Pls, tell him to answer the question.

Is drinking of strong drink a sin?

nakash: I know the die hard apologists of the muslim section Islamic cult always come here so I am sure we can trade a few blows on this section. Reason. They think they are doing the Ummah a favour by sanitizing the most vile man ever born actions.

islam is very irrational to me.

Not when there prophet wil not let a nine year old child to be.

I HAVE TO RUN ALONG NOW, I WILL ATTEND TO THE THREAD LATTER.
PEACE ALL.

obadiah777: WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE APOCRYPHA ? DO YOU READ IT ? BARUCH HAS A BOOK IN THE APOCRYPHA AS DO SIRACH, MACCABEES, SUSANNA, ESDRAS ETC. THIS IS TOTALLY UNRELATED TO THE TOPIC. JUST WANT TO FIND OUT YOUR OPINION ON THE APOCRYPHA

GUY, EVEN IF YOU ASK MKMYERS45 TO WRITE A BOOK THERE WILL BE SOMETHING GOOD IN IT.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INSPIRED SCRIPTURES HERE THAT THE THREAD RUNS FROM GENESIS TO REVELATION WITHOUT CONTRADICTIONS.

THOSE DONT FOLLOW WITH ALL THEIR CONTRADICTIONS.

YOU CAN SEE THE DANGER THAT CATHOLICS STAND FOR ON THIS THREAD, WITH SOME OF THE QUESTIONS YOU WILL KNOW WHY THEY ARE VERY GOOD IN MAKING ATHEIST.

italo: And mind you, if you use the writings of Paul, Mark and Luke, who were not among the 12, why don't you use the gospel of Barnabas.

COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER.

IF YOU REJECT PAUL THEN NT IS FINISHED.

DO YOU WANT TO REJECT PAUL NOW?

WHY NOT READ THE BOOK OF ACTS OF THE APOSTLES AND GET THE FULL DETAIL,

ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE ACCOUNT (MARK/LUKE) OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST WAS WRONG? (HISTORY)

GO FIND OUT THOSE THAT DID THE TEACHING IN THE NT, PETER, JAMES,JOHN.

LUKE SAID HE INVESTIGATED ALL THINGS THOROUGHLY.


IMAGINE THE LENGHT YOU WILL GO TO BRING DOWN THE BIBLE.
LOL.

YOU ARE DOING WHAT YOU GUYS DO BEST.

EVEN LUKE WAS A TRAVELING COMPANION OF PAUL, HE ALSO WROTE THE HISTORY OF THE ACCOUNT IN ACTS.

THAT BARUCH WROTE THE ACCOUNT/HISTORY OF JEREMIAH DID NOT QUALIFIED HIM TO HAVE HIS OWN BOOK. BUT WHAT HE COPIED WAS THE WORDS OF JEREMIAH,JUST LIKE LUKE IN THE BOOK OF ACTS. DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEY WERE INSPIRED TO WRITE LIKE DID PETER, JAMES AND JOHN?

IF YOU COOL DOWN AND GO THROUGH THE BOOK OF ACTS YOU WILL KNOW WHO IS WHO AND WHO

italo: So how do you know that the books of "Mark" and "Luke" were written by Mark and Luke, since the names of the authors are nowhere mentioned in those gospels?

Answer: the Catholic Church told you so.

MY FRIEND, AM NOT HERE SAYING THAT ALL 100% OF WHAT RCC HAD DONE ARE BAD.

THERE IS NO WAY THAT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE DONE SOMETHING GOOD.

IF YOU SAY THEY DID THAT I AM NOT HERE TO ARGUE ON THAT.

HOWEVER, THE CHRISTIANS THAT RECEIVED THAT WRITING WILL HAVE KNOWN THE WRITER.

chukwudi44: You just proved you know absolutely nothing about the socio-political setting of the early church.please go and study before comming here to spew rubish.

Latin and greek were widespread and were more or less generally spoken throughout the world.It would be ridiculous to say the catholic church were hiding the scriptures by keeping them in these languages.don't forget even the apostles did not translate

friend it is you that needs to go get the facts.

NT WAS WRITTEN IN GREEK.

ANOTHER NAME FOR NT IS CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES QED.

mkmyers45: Wrong...Parts like the Torah were already established but they was nothing called the old testament (many books in it now were either unknown or absent) because the new testament was yet to be written...

Peace

ERROR

the records of the genaelogy by tribes was in display in there temple in Jerusalem and that was a possible souce of that record in matthew and luke gospel, when the temple was distroyed in 70 ce by the Roman they also destroyed this record, but again the scriptures had already been copied and the christians that escapt earlier by obeying jesus commands and arears that christianity had reached also had copies. coupled with the facts that their were proselyte jews living outside of jerusalem.

jesus christ also quoted from the psalms.

the apostles also quoted from the psalms and other books contain in the OT.

OT was already in existance by 1ce.

mkmyers45: He was a prophet and he was holy and walked with God...one of the most holiest men in the bible so?

So all bible books must have been written by apostle eh?

YOU MISS THE POINT.

OT was already in existance/completed and with the jews befor christ and his apostles walked the earth.

christianity started with JESUS CHRIST AND TO HIS APOSTLES IN 1CE.

The NT is an exclussive of the apostles of christ QED.

and this was not difficult to know/identified their writings cus they were around to verify them.

chukwudi44: When the RCC did not translate the bible why wasn't it done by the people you referred to as the "early christians".

Even would you also say the apostles were also conspiring to hide the truth by failing to translate the scriptures.

The fact remains that greek and latin were the main global languages in the world then and virtually everyone who can read and write were conversant with both languages.

the common language in use in the first century ce was greek, and the original NT WAS WRITTEN IN GREEK.
PEACE

mkmyers45: Mr Buzugee how many bottles of shekpe today? Abeg where did we get the word we exegate everyday?

is obadiah777 buzugee

but he is not doing badly though

obadiah777: of course not. can you bring out something clean from something so unclean JOB 14 VS 4 ?

hahaha,

good kwession

chukwudi44: @truthislight

The other gospels like gospel of thomas,gospel of mary,gospel of marcion e.t.c has long being in existence. Why do you stick to the roman catholic
canon?even the book of enoch,jubilees preceded the xtian faith yet they did not make it to the catholic canon why don't you go ahead to use it in your worship

my friend,

the NT scriptures are writtings of the apostles.

very simple,

or, cant you get this simple fact?

mkmyers45: No need to type in capital blocks...its offensive

Let me ask you something: Who are those first century christians? How could first century christians have accessed books like esther? What of book of Enoch,Gospel of Thomas,Gospel of Jesus's history? I hope you know most biblical records were in letter form?

And



So you agree that they did alter the bible yes? Thats cool then...

Peace

those people you mention are they christ apostles?

you just dont get it do you?

Pastor AIO: Truthislight, Why don't you use the Book of Enoch to 'study/build your faith'?

IS HE AN APOSTLE?

mkmyers45: And you kind sir know nothing more than a conspiracy-mongering,hate-filled man who likes nothing better than opening threads and running up and down em

Leave the CC alone...when you have something genuine then bring it up for discussion...

Little wonder you abandoned your thread for long.

Peace

HMMM! WANDERS SHALL NEVER END.

I HAVE NOT SEEN YOU EXTEND PEACE TO SOMEONE BEFORE!

italo: How about answering the simple questions put to you, liar?

WHO IS THE LIAR HERE SELF?

HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN YOUR HISTORY?

WE JUST DONT WANT TO USE WIKI TO DEFEND THE OBVIOUSE AS YOU CAN SEE, THE BIBLE ON ITS OWN CONTAIN INTERNAL HAMONY THAT CAN DEFEND ITSELF.

frosbel: There was an old saying , the catholic church 'canonised' the bible in Latin, contradicted it, disobeyed it, refused to have it translated from Latin into any other Language, prevented the masses from seeing it or owning a copy , hunted down those that dared to take them on, killed some, burnt not a few and tortured countless numbers.

Anyway the bible was eventually translated into many languages and so the catholic church was exposed , lost it's grip on the massses, the rest is history.

THANKS BROOO

mkmyers45: You are being inconsiderate and trying to wiggle your way out of these and i will let it be but i got one word for you 'If you can't prove it shut it'

TO YOU NO PROOF' BUT TO A NONPARTISANT READER WHO KNOWS?

MacDaddy01: Since you agree that they canonised the bible that you use why would any other church have the right to question the catholcs?

THE WORD "CANONIZATION" IS PREGNANT.

DID YOU NOT SAY ARRANGE/NUMBERED?

MacDaddy01: We all know that the bible/scriptures were not arranged or numbered originally. Who cannonized the bible, frosbel and truhtislight?

MacDaddy01: Frosbel and Truthislight can not answer the questions because they would expose thier lies against the catholic church. The catholic church might be brutal and oppressive but they cnonized the bible.


It is a sin to lie according to the bible, Frosbel. Tell the truth

CANONIZATION IS A BAIT THAT THEY DISH OUT TO YOU AND USE IT TO CLAIM OWNERSHIP.

ASK THEM TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEY HAVE IN MIND WHEN THEY SAY CANONIZATION YOU WILL SEE THEM ADD SALT, PEPE/SPICES.

I SAID THAT THEY ONLY PUT A STAMP ON WHAT WAS ALREADY IN EXISTANCE.

SHOULD THAT NOT BE ENOUGH CREDIT FOR AN HONEST PERSON? NO. THEY WANT US TO BELIEF THE LIE THAT GOD'S WORD IS A GIFT TO US FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, ONCE THEY SELL THIS LIE TO YOU THEN THEY WILL DESTROY YOUR FAITH.

HOW CAN THEY CLAIM THAT THE BIBLE WAS THEIR OWN WHEN AS FAR BACK AS THE FIRST CENTURY THERE WAS CHRISTIANITY IN PLACES AS FAR AS ETHIOPIA IN AFRICA AND OTHER NATION/?

WHAT WERE THIS CHRISTIANS USING TO STUDY/BUILD THEIR FAITH/

HOW WAS IT POSSIBLE TO DETECT THAT THERE WAS ALTERATIONS IN THE SCRIPTURES IF THERE WHERE NO OTHER BOOK OF THE SCRIPTURES?


WHEN THE APOSTLE PAUL WENT TO THESSALONICA THE BROTHERS THERE WELCOMED HIM AND AKNOWLEDGE THAT THE WORDS FROM THE APOSTLES WERE THE WORDS OF GOD.
IF THE BELIEVERS THEN ACCEPTED THE WORDS OF THE APOSTLES AS THE WORDS OF GOD THEN HOW DO YOU IMAGINE THEY WOULD HAVE KEPT THOSE WRITINGS? 1THESSALONINS 2;13

WOULD THEY HAVE TO WAIT TILL 300YEARS LATER TO BE GIVEN GODS WORD? NO

chukwudi44: Please expatiate on this claim.Who preserved it? What year were they preserved? How was the RCC not involved Kindly provide answers to these questions with scriptural or historical proof

DONT MISDIRECT THE TOPIC.

YOU CLAIM TO HAVE GIVING US THE BIBLE.

THAT CLAIM IS THE BONE OF CONTENTION HERE.

Rich4god: Who preserved it, and how did it end up in the hands of the catholic church?

YOU CAN HARDLY CALL ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS PRESERVED!

BUT FOR THE OWNER OF THE BOOK PROVIDING OLDER MANUSCRIPTS FOR RESTORATION RCC WOULD HAVE DISTORTED GOD'S WORD.

mkmyers45: Where are these preserved scriptures today?

YOU CAN BELIEVE WHATEVER YOU LIKE, IT IS A FREE WORLD.
PEACE

Rich4god: Basically all of the catholic doctrines are from the bible. Do you mind telling me which of the doctrine that is not from the bible, and i will look it up for you.

SORRY MATE.

YOU HAVE THE BIBLE, DO THAT ON YOUR OWN, IF YOU CANT THEN, SO BE IT.
PEACE

MacDaddy01: We all know that the bible/scriptures were not arranged or numbered originally. Who cannonized the bible, frosbel and truhtislight?

IF THE CLAIMED WAS THAT THEY "ARRANGE AND NUMBERED THE BIBLE" WE WILL NOT BE HERE TALKING/ARGUING.

NO HONEST PERSON WILL NUMBER A BOOK THAT WAS WRITTEN BY ANOTHER PERSON AND LETTER COME FORWARD TO CLAIM OWNERSHIP.

NOW YOU SEEM TO BE UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

FOR YOU, YOUR CONSCIENCE IS CLEAR ON THIS ISSUE THAT IS WHY YOU USED THE CHOICE OF WORDS ABOVE, ARRANGE/NUMBERED.

SO, GOING BY THE WORDS ABOVE I HAVE NO ARGUMENT WITH YOU.

CAUSE I HAD EARLIER SAID THAT THEY ONLY PUT A STAMP ON WHAT WAS ALREADY IN EXISTANCE. QED

cyrexx: i thought it was just me.

do you know that some of Paul's esoteric/gnostic teachings clearly contradict what Jesus teaches, such that theologians organise Jesus vs Paul discussions.

if anybody like Paul can write something and convince humans that its god's word, you can never imagine the length at which humans will go to defend and justify that word even in the face of glaring absurdities and contradictions.

human mind is so creative. whats more, we created our imaginary gods in our image in our minds to explain the complexities of our world. so what else do we expect from these god believers.

^^^^^

"if anybody like Paul can write something and convince humans that its god's word, you can never imagine the length at which humans will go to defend and justify that word even in the face of glaring absurdities and contradictions".


^^^^^
this statements are your own personal opinion and is not universal.
the truth is that paul did not contradict the scriptures, most of pauls words are a direct quote from OT OR ARE PROPHECIES THAT HE SIMPLY EXPLAINED OR DIRECT WORDS OF JESUS.

if you think otherwise please feel free to show us how and were he contradicted the scriptures.

PEACE

BARRISTERS: “Question: What is an NGO and how does it relate to the UN?
Answer: [size=14pt]NGOs have no status and are not part of the UN.”

''are not part of the UN''[/size] Myjoe says UN was lying, 'he said NGO'S are affiliates'

meaning of 'affiliate' merriam-Websters dictionary.

af·fil·i·ate /əˈfɪliˌeɪt/ verb
af·fil·i·ates; af·fil·i·at·ed; af·fil·i·at·ing
[+ obj] : to closely connect (something or yourself) with or to something (such as a program or organization) as a member or partner

Myjoe said they are 'affiliate' meaning 'being' closely connected or 'as a member' according to the dictionary.

meaning that myjoe wants recycling of answers! all he needs to know are available on these tread, so one more fact again ;


Answer: [size=14pt]NGOs have no status and are not part of the UN.[/size]”

oga Myjoe, read it over and over again,before you comment, pls dont tell me why im celebrating these up there, because you will come with explanation that will not hold a water! you can start putting them together oya now!

what a furious child!