₦airaland Forum

Nimshi: - I laugh a laugh of derision.

- Why're you in a fir because I use the lowercase for your favourite deity? Ok, no worries, I'll start using the uppercase. I don't think your god/God cares though. If he's that petty, then he's got to be quite small.

- You "allowed" your wife to join JWs? So she couldn't have joined the religion without your permission, eh? You're presenting yourself as one fo the problems. It's no problem wiping the floor with men like you.

- If your wife is already a JW, you'd better hurry to join; they'll need you; you're already a worthy drone. Or soon,she won't be allowed to say 'Amen' when you pray if you don't join in. As noted, you're already an active JW drone.

- And, this your time-wasting activity of gaining more insight into the activities of three posters is funny, really. I laugh again. You must have a lot of time on your hands; that's not a problem; but a grown man as yourself, with children and a wife, applying discoveries on an Internet board? Lol. Well done.

- As for the Catholics: they've proved to be better than you JWs in their response to paedophilia; you JWs need to learn something from the Catholic church.

- And, since you've inserted H into the conversation: you JWs did support Hitler when your leaders thougth it would offer an advantage. That's a documented fact: documented from your Watchtower literature. Any more?

.

.

How old are you?

What kind of argument was that?

Maximus85: Mr. We are not saying we are the most righteous. But come to think of it, Jesus, John, Paul and other men of God in the days of old were also accused of misleading people. The world is under the influence of the wicked one (satan) so we can't expect people to want to hear the truth about satan and his present system of things. And again, when you are pressed don't insult people, because we are trained to teach with self control and deep reapect. Jesus christ and his disciples preached the good news of God's kingdom from house to house, door to door, and in the whole world we the JW seems to be the ones taking this assignment primary. Remember the bible said that the road to salvation is very tiny but the path to destruction is very large and wide. Give it a thought. Why are we the JWs so different? Do you know that Jesus has more than 12 disciples when he was on earth? There were 70 other disciples. We take our time to study the Bible before going out to preach. Satan is not resting, he is doing his best to make sure that our preaching assignment is not succcessful. Little wonder why some people will not listen.
Even among us the JWs, we have some people that has allowed satan to use them and if you know this much about JWs and you don't know how we dis fellowship wrong doers, then I find it hard to acknowledge your un-bias stand in this issue.
All you are portraying is pure hatred for the JWs. Well....we don't mind, in fact we are expecting more. None of Gods kingdom preacher were treated well. Jesus was killed, stephen was stoned to death, John the baptizer was beheaded,some were imprisoned, some were even burnt alive. We are prepared for all these. You may continue, Paul was Saul, he hated christians until he encountered the truth. God help us all. Take it.... We are worshiping God and not satan.

guy, which question are you answering here?

Please,

reduce it to when there is a question for you to answer.

There have been misrepesentation from you on this thread.

And you have not been able to handle certain issues here.

I dont wish to see you as not being a JW.
Peace

Maximus85: Mr. We are not saying we are the most righteous. But come to think of it, Jesus, John, Paul and other men of God in the days of old were also accused of misleading people. The world is under the influence of the wicked one (satan) so we can't expect people to want to hear the truth about satan and his present system of things. And again, when you are pressed don't insult people, because we are trained to teach with self control and deep reapect. Jesus christ and his disciples preached the good news of God's kingdom from house to house, door to door, and in the whole world we the JW seems to be the ones taking this assignment primary. Remember the bible said that the road to salvation is very tiny but the path to destruction is very large and wide. Give it a thought. Why are we the JWs so different? Do you know that Jesus has more than 12 disciples when he was on earth? There were 70 other disciples. We take our time to study the Bible before going out to preach. Satan is not resting, he is doing his best to make sure that our preaching assignment is not succcessful. Little wonder why some people will not listen.
Even among us the JWs, we have some people that has allowed satan to use them and if you know this much about JWs and you don't know how we dis fellowship wrong doers, then I find it hard to acknowledge your un-bias stand in this issue.
All you are portraying is pure hatred for the JWs. Well....we don't mind, in fact we are expecting more. None of Gods kingdom preacher were treated well. Jesus was killed, stephen was stoned to death, John the baptizer was beheaded,some were imprisoned, some were even burnt alive. We are prepared for all these. You may continue, Paul was Saul, he hated christians until he encountered the truth. God help us all. Take it.... We are worshiping God and not satan.

guy, which question are you answering here?

Please,

reduce it to when there is a question for you to answer.

There have been misrepesentation from you on this thread.

And you have not been able to handle certain issues here.

I dont wish to see you as not being a JW.
Peace

Dp

Nimshi: BARRISTERS,

you're a joke.

Who cares if you're a JW or not?

You're an embarrassment to the human species.

But you may have a childlike sense of humour, eh; I don't know of Ola & MyJoe, but I'm trilled to be part of that Trinity ;-)

But you, you have your head firmly implanted in your rectum: your front end and rear are a duality unto yourself; congratulations (I must not go wash my fingers after typing that). . .

I have noticed MyJoe - whom I have fiercely disagreed with on this thread - is a very patient human; and even MyJoe says you're irredeemable, it's time to wipe the floor with you.

When your elders find you're having these conversations on the Internet, you'll be hurled into the backroom and thoroughly chastised, after which you will 'repent' in ashes and shame. Really, do you think you're free? You're not. but that's your choice; the problem is that you mislead people. And you have rather poor reasoning skills.

And, your manner of cut/paste with others' words tell you've learned very well from your WT masters.

Well done. Your masters will reward you ;-)

.

^^^^

CRAP, big time fraud stars, fraud stars you are.

After all the lies Tou have been posting you still shamelessly come to post.

If not that this is a net forum people like you dont stand up where someone like barrister is speaking cus you are dirty.

Light and darkness dont dwell together.

You are darkness.

CRAP.

BARRISTERS: @Myjoe

sho! good boy, im enjoying your write-up now,at least you are coming out of your shell more real now, it allows me to have full knowledge of who you are.

My problem with you here is that you were so sure that the church had paid out millions of dollars! see a confirmative sentence you used below;



only to come out with a tag less than a million below (788,000D) twisting what you earlier said that they have paid out millions by using the word 'believed to run into millions''why cant you use the word the way it sounds later but you choose to exegerate,figure below is less than a million sir,

was watchtower indicted in this particular matter? do they admit? was an elder involved? was there duplication of same case in that suit?
my own reseach up there was that of catholic priests,
Also, it was mentioned that undisclosed amount, which shows that it does not surport your claim of paying millions, 788,000D,is less! watchtower never paid millions and that is a fact!!! you said i ommited it, but could not fix 'undisclosed' you saw there after your seach!!!you see your life?

now that you have denied this below, go to page 5 of the other tread! see where you said it again!




so are you ready now! because there is more i ve got to engage you and the trio with. confirm first!

ant they good liar/deceitful people that cannot stand in the truth like their master satan cus the truth is not in him and when he speaks the lie he does so cus he is at a dis addvantagiose position.

This is same myjoe that said he never made statement of deconverting any body.

So dirty.

A dirty set of individuals, how can they be one of JW?

MyJoe: Thank you. It is not usually proper to descend and join the likes of Barristers. But I think it was necessary to call him out earlier on his shocking manipulation of facts.


Ok, you have shown that you have crase and I see you are determined to sustain a campaign of lies against me. Obviously, you don't know what you are doing to your reputation in this section. But if you still have hopes of being taken seriously, please demonstrate (1) that I am angry (2) that I ever said anything about converting or "de-converting" you or any other person on this forum. For anyone reading, I have never entertained the notion of converting or "de-converting" Barristers, any member of the JW, or any member of any religion or faith group and I have never expressed such around here. But since Barristers claims I wrote something in a thread, he should be able to find the thread and the post and reclaim some credibility.

**Edited.**

what then is you interest on JW thread?

You are found on almost all JW thread.

Your comrade "true2god" said he wants to help Barrister not becomes one of JW.

He asked him to clear his interest if he still wishes to become a JW.

Are you and true2god and nimshi and oladegbu not doing the same thing?

Are you the one that now decides who should be taken seriously on a public forum?

Or it is your desperation that made you make such stupid statement?

What statment or what has his utterances on this thread to do with that?

In real life i wander the kind of person you are, so manipulative.

Sickening!

MyJoe: I see you don’t have the common sense or maturity to leave the other thread to continue with its relative sanity but would import it here. You have never shown any maturity, anyway – boasting that “I knocked off OLAADEGBU on Trinity” and so on. And so you will have to bring the marriage story here to, hopefully, tar me. I don’t need to deny your misrepresentations. I will post the link to the discussion for anyone to read the thread and make up their minds. Here is it.

It is not the first time your blind rage is leading you to tell direct lies in this thread, so I should not bother asking you where I indicated interest in pursuing a discussion and then “faded in oblivion” from the “Bible discussion.” You are yet to substantiate your claim that I was shy to disclose anything about my religious views after I challenged you to. It doesn’t matter to me what you think of me on an anonymous forum. Really, it doesn’t matter. Outside of here, I doubt it would. Yes, it’s an anonymous forum. While my core beliefs are known to those who have cared to read or know, I will leave those who have elected to sweat over the matter and break their beaks crooning about it to keep at it. We now know your religious affiliation, your sexual orientation and your profession, and that you are married and have kids who are well behaved. In your opinion, I have not declared any of these. Maybe when you get to number 10, by which time you would have revealed your name, family tree and blood group, we will know you are serious. The way your anger is currently out of control, I guess anything should be expected from you.

The story of the only Witness paedo case I have personally witnessed was not told for you (the one your blind rage has driven you to say I was likely living with the person and quickly added that I had “not denied” something that had not been alleged, all after previously saying it was a made up story). I specifically told it to show that when cases of paedophilia are clearly established, the church takes action. It was not meant to praise the church as you have hastily or deviously concluded. It takes nothing away from the two issues of disclosure and the two-witness rule.

I paid keen attention reading the portion where you talked about your “private investigation”. You went talking about “privileges” which no one has said anything about. I was sincerely hoping to read from you that the church now makes disclosures to all the PARENTS in any parish (called congregation) where there is someone with a history of paedophilia so I would clap for them for finally having the courage to change the policy and do the right thing. I just read the Wiki article on the matter, the one you have been lifting portions of and giving your large print treatment, and I think good progress has been made since I last read up on this matter. I like the bit that the offender can’t go out preaching in the house to house without being chaperoned – for what that is worth. But the issue of disclosure remains – your clever employment of the empty phrase “would be declared to appropriate people necessary” does not blind anyone.

You know of a case where elders called the police themselves after offenders refused to make a report? Share it. I have read stories where elders clearly manipulated victims into keeping things hushed up. That sounds like the Nigerian case of the child that got missing at an expressway church (not JW). Fairly common behaviour among religious folk, I guess. While such parents and guardians should be blamed for letting themselves fall for it and while most of the victim stories I have reviewed are mostly a failure of parenting in my opinion, a church’s policy can go a long way in improving things or making them bad.

It’s a shame you didn’t reveal any policy of disclosure to parents. The current policy is that parents are not informed there is a paedophile in their midst, while the paedo himself is asked to place certain limits on himself. Read your Wiki article again. Then read some more. This exchange is fruitless, and you are better left to wallow in your rage and exult in your fool’s paradise. In your imagination and according to your church’s doctrine, you are more moral than me because you are a Witness. Stale gist. I expect you to read this post, ignore facts, and come back with conjectures and invectives. I believe those reading us read further and get the facts beyond your excessive efforts to muddy the issue. I have already exposed your hypocrisy in manipulating facts and dragging the RC church, the JW’s favourite object of pillory, into a thread about the JW.

where did you expose him?

Is that your intent here?

So, you finally have an intention afteral?

I thought you are here to state the facts as they are as you always claim and not that you have an interest?

You are a very good liar/deceitful person even on the other thread you lied severally.

Right now you are here grumbling.

MyJoe: I am responding to your earlier posts primarily because of the portion you asked me to substantiate my allegations that your church has made payouts since that concerns the veracity or otherwise of my claims, and hence my integrity. The rest of your post is mostly screaming invectives in two languages and making allegations directed at my person rather than the issue, allegations you somehow believe will stick just because you make them even without building any premise for them.

I have consistently declined to post links or copy and paste in this thread even when people demanded BBC and CNN and you will not stampede me into doing anything. Your church has not denied that it has made payouts – it has admitted that much in conventions in the US as I stated earlier. You believe that’s a lie? You will believe what you like. This matter is public knowledge. The matter of payouts believed to run into millions made to 16 victims is stated in the same Wiki article you yourself have already invested with credibility by lifting from it. As is a case involving $788,000 or so. Yet you have desperately turned around to accuse me of “forcing lies” about what you are not aware of on you in stating that you know about payouts.

There have been payouts which your selective use of facts has kept you too hamstrung to admit. There have been other court cases involving payouts – your attempt to pass off the eleven cases involving only elders as eleven cases involving the whole church notwithstanding. Anyone interested in the above can copy and paste your link to JW and child abuse cases in the previous page. My primary reason for getting involved with you in this thread and pooh-poohing your post was because you skipped all these, picked the one case where the Witnesses were awarded money and contrasted that against a truckload of material against the RC even though they are in no way a subject of discussion in thread and even though there is also a lot of material against the JW on the matter online. I don’t need to engage the issue to do this. If I was engaging the issue I would match you in copying and pasting truckloads of info. I had only one point – that since both churches have been accused in the matter and have paid out money, one does not have a moral high ground over the other. Anyone who follows that link of yours will establish this fact. Further reading will help them further. So I have accomplished my aim of calling you out on your egregious posts. It doesn’t matter what you spout in your blind rage and I have not even asked anyone to take anything from me. I have invited them to make their own findings, hear from the critics, the victims and their families, the media and the Witness’ spokespersons and make up their minds, as this thread hardly does justice to the subject of child abuse among the Witnesses.

Show me where I have praised your church to the valleys, much less the high heavens. Saying that they don’t ordinarily condone things like child abuse is a statement of fact, nothing more. I have no reason to praise or defame your church – I explained that to your one of your comrades earlier. Do you know what truth and objectivity is? If I said a particular highway robber has a policy of not attacking pregnant women, am I saying he is a good person or just stating a fact? If a notorious street brawler rescues a child from a burning house, should we ignore it because he is ordinarily not a nice person?

But truth and objectivity are things you are clearly incapable of comprehending, hence your belief that everyone must spout his affiliation or ideology and defend it at the expense of truth. That is why you would interpret my statement of fact concerning the Catholic Church’s decent act of owning up for its misdeeds as saying that they are necessarily decent. You remind me of a friend who was accused of being “stingy” for “mising” paper even after she had explained that she was only concerned about the trees. Her accuser, like you, lacked higher thinking and simply had no concept of environmental sustainability. Yeah, another story for you to attack and bend out of shape.

you are subtle/cunningly deceitful.

JW pay compensation

What then is the use of the people being disfellowship?

You are here trying to still pass out that lies.

People like you will attend a religion/church that will tolerate your excesses and not because of your love for God.

Yes, that is true, cus on a thread on this forum you said just that:
"that you cannot relate with the notion of love for God" though you can understan love of neighbour.

The thread was "matian anti thesis, love your neighbour as your self"

since you dont have love/fear of God it means that you cannot bend your ideas or lifestyle to what God wants,
so, your worship of God can only be at a place/church that suite you/your life style.

The catholics comes handy to you in this regard but not the JW.

But if i may ask,
man and God who is suppose to bend to the other?

Well, your answer to this question will serve as a judgement to you since God searches the heart of all men.

MyJoe: You should be embarrassed at that ^^^. How can you be so dishonest as to cut a portion I said I have no desire to engage an issue and paste and link it with an unrelated portion from another thread? You sound so hysterical, you deserve some pity, as you lash out like a wounded beast in one of them dragon movies. I certainly would not like to be your wife and kids when you are angry.

Do you rub your brain cells together, at all? Let’s say I am the “mouthpiece” of the Catholics as you have now decided to croon, again, does that automatically mean I am wrong and you are right? If I was their spokesman, which I am not, I doubt I have been an embarrassment for them as you have been for the JW with your incoherent arguments! You keep repeating that I was arguing alone, does that make you right? So no one is challenging you. A lot of nonsense gets spewed around here. Sometimes people can’t be bothered to challenge you – it doesn’t mean you are right. Besides, you speak for a closed group that most people know nothing about its inner workings and so they usually don’t know how to respond to you guys. Again, that doesn’t mean you are right. The way to get people to take you seriously is to calm down and engage the issues. Not when you scream "contaminated reasoning" without showing the particulars for the statement by picking up a single argument of mine and deconstructing it.

That I am not engaging the substantive issue of child abuse by trying to convince anyone about it does not mean I will not respond to your direct lies and misrepresentations, either of MyJoe or the issue at hand.

Barrister is not an emberasment to the JW.

Infact he has been very,very,very usefull in helping to expose the lies you guys are spooting out.

See you! You have resorted to sychological battle.

You will never change cus a leopad never changes it spots.

Sorry for you then.

MyJoe: So this is your reading of the exchange. That I am a typical Nigerian who has refused to be convinced that the Witnesses don’t support child abuse in spite of copious evidence brought forth. Well, we do know that reading and comprehension aren’t your strong points.

come, myjoe will you leave my friend alone?

He came here to help people get answers then you and your guys showed up making his work difficult. Lol.

Dp

true2god: I initially assumed that u were learned but i was completely wrong. Just exposin ur leve of stupidity to the whole wide world over the internet. I gav u a hint of wat an average Jw knows as a guide and u ended up writin garbage without any sense of decency.
An adult is meant to be analytical in reasonin but u r not. Anyway i belive u r just tryin to save face owing ignorance in spiritual matters. If u r a serios person u could hav wisely responded to my last post and act like a responsible person and not like an agbero.

So, this is the sort of study u r undergoing. What a shame! I tot u r an 'intelligence officer' but a crook. Well may God have mercy on ur soul.

yes you are right, an adult should be reasonable enough to think befor writing that JW fixed day and hour of the end.

But no, you did not think logically befor lying at such level.
Then, are you an adult or an irresponsible kid that comes hear to west our time with lies?

true2god: I dnt think u a familiar with e-learning otherwise u would have known that the world hav moved beyond classroom studies. My simple request remains that u shuld xplain to the whole world, via this medium, hw Jw arrived at 1914, or r u not sure of wat u r sayin, or not competent enof to handle this type of question. If u r sure of wat u r saying i ask again: expplain, in ur own term, hw Jw arrived at 1914, dats all.

Let me giv u an hint if u dnt knw hw to start.
1. Go through the book of daniel on the 'seventieth week' of the gentiles. Find out the through year, via secular history like encyclopedia brittanica, the actual year the babylonians invaded jerusalem.
2. Study the book of matthew on christ prediction of the destruction of the jewish holiest of holies by the roman empire.
3. And study medevial history on the conquest of Jerusalem on AD 72.
Use this hints, and do ur mathematics again, on which u rely on to arrive at years, on issue that are purely spiritual matters.

Since u guys try to use human wisdom to determine the years God have purpose in his infinite wisdom to determine the course of human history, do the calculation and research for ursef and arrive at 1914.

And u if cant do personal research to arrive at ur official 1914 stp goin frm house to house teachin pple wat u dnt knw and cant convincingly defend. That amount to lie and deceit. Ok?

you dont even know what you are saying,

infact am Westing my precious time with you here.

JW proof this date by the hour to all that are interested, but since you are so lazy you wish only for elearning you want me to west my time here to proof a very simple thing that you dont know and cant learn cus of your laziness.

Just imagine the rot you pened down there.

West of time.

Evil Brain: It's funny to see Christians deceiving themselves about something that is obvious. You all believe that your religion is more civilized than others. So when confronted with a clear biblical reference to human sacrifice, you tell yourselves that "the girl didn't die". This is what the oyinmbos call cognitive dissonance.

Of course the girl died, her father offered her as a burnt offering! A human sacrifice! A virgin sacrifice! To the god of Isreal!

And the god of Israel did nothing to stop this travesty. In fact he was happy enough to have it included in the "divinely inspired" Book of Judges (with no don't roast your daughters disclaimer afterwards) as an example to parents for all time.

Clearly, your god is not that different from those of the Amalekites, and the Assyrians, and the Jebusites, and the Mayans.

you are describing yourself.

The evidence of proof rest on you the accuser.

So, stop your self deceit.

mazaje: And this is written in which part of the story?. . .

she was used for babecue was written in which part of the scriptures?

When samuel was offered to Yahweh was he use for babecue?

So why conclude that she was babecue?

The levi that were dedicated to Yahweh were they babecued?

You guys are ascribing doctrine that are not our beliefs to us, i and Ijawkid.

You know that there are differences in the understanding of the scriptures in christianity.

But you may know this or you may not know this, meanwhile you feel it is right to impose others beliefs on us.

I have stated my understanding of the bible, any that says mine is not his should come and defend his with you.

Like i had said earlier,

1. i dont stand for trinity/belief in trinity

2. Some people will go to heaven while some will live here on earth forever. Matthew 5:3,5. Psalm 37:9-11 and Vers 29 etc etc.

3. I know of holy spirit and not holy ghost.
Some translation used holy ghost while others uses holy spirit.
but the translation i use makes use of the word holy spirit meaning God power/active force, the holy spirit. Not a person.

From my standpoint i dont have any much to defend on this thread.

Any that says my stand is wrong as a christian should come and defend his belief since it is not mine.

Peace

PhysicsQED: Of course.



Right. But I only introduced the issue of nothingness to point out that if there was only nothingness, there would be no need for time and no reason to assume that there was time.



Okay. Here's the real problem.

You assert that it must necessarily "pre-exist" before expansion for whatever reason, but you don't say anything about this period of time over which it "pre-exists" or what the singularity is doing while "pre-existing" prior to expansion.

Even if I accept that there was ever a period of time during which this point was not expanding (which I don't because I prefer the opposite assumption), I find it strange that you're willing to posit that there was such a specific period of time when there is no particular reason to make that assumption and when you seem unwilling to state how long this period of time would be.



I don't see how the issue of "what" it was arises. I mean I've already explained that you're in THAT thing right now so I don't see how there's a question of "what" it was that expanded.



Well, no.

I mean, in your imagination, did it just "pop" into existence, sit around for a while, and then gain spatial extent (expand) later?

But let's assume for the sake of argument, that it was just sitting around for a while before expanding even though there is no more reason to go with that assumption than with the assumption that it was never was.

Let's then ask, what if it was sitting around for about 10^-9999999999^-99999999999^-999999999^-99999999^-9999999. . .^-999999 femtoseconds or better yet, a duration of time many times shorter than that before expanding. What would be the effective difference between it sitting around in stasis for that period of time and it never sitting around in stasis at all? None.



You've decided to separate time from the the object itself so that there is some kind of external absolute Newtonian timeline in which it is operating. This particular mental/cognitive abstraction you've introduced is basically just an assumption. It was a popular assumption in the past, but it's a relic now.

This "timeline" for its existence is predicated on the idea of time existing "prior to" the thing (the singularity) existing, which is an assumption that I don't have any particular reason to support. As I said in the other thread, time can only be measured in relation to some thing. Otherwise it is meaningless.



Well, I really don't see why you're certain about this, but it's getting boring repeating the same stuff over again, so I'll just leave you with your belief in this. I'm not even 100% certain of what current science holds, but I thought it would be better to at least explain how it's different from what you sometimes misrepresent it as in order to argue against it.

You seem to be a die hard proponent of the old "time precedes existence" assumption for whatever reason, and I can't seem to convince you otherwise, so obviously we're never going to agree and we're probably just wasting each other's time.

deepsight layed down his reasons fine and good/logically befor his brandy bottle took him off to your zone of timelessness.

But for you, physicQED, you are just here expressing your reservations/not agreeing but failed to put forth a good argument like deepsight did.

In an argument of this sort your refusal to accept is not an argument.

Refusal to accept does not make the beautiful argument of deepsight a no argument.

Refusal to accept his argument does not invalidate deepsight beautiful presentation.

@deepsight

you deserved the brandy after a job well done.

Peace

wiegraf: It's been hypothesized that the young are better at math and similar activities than the older not just because they more easily create new connections in their brain, but also because older people have more memories to contend with and more worries (family etc) to distract them. Not to mention in settings like concentration camps, incarcerated scientists deliver at a better pace because they have less distractions. Of course your brain needs blood to function as well. Looking at all this it's easy to see how distractions and blood loss to the john would impact productivity.

kiss this.

D P

Ubenedictus: i still cant find the quote that said or implied that 'JESUS AND ADAM ARE EQUal". I believe Jesus was truly human and the bible says and i also believe that 'the fulness of d divinity dwelt in him bodily' as my bible say. Can u show me where d bible also said d fulnes of divinity dwelt in adam Can u show me?? Can u show me where d bible say d world was created thru adam?? Can u show me where the bible say adam is the stamp of the fathers hypostasis?? I ask again where did you get the idea that adam is equal to Jesus?? That idea is a lie.

did you really red through and did not find out where that said that Jesus is the last Adam?

So, the bible must suit your opinion?

Ayomivic: Goliath was an enemy of nation ( Israel ) he died in war.
Are you a soldier? If you are, that is another case.

are you a soldier wanting to kill sinners God wants to repent or you are helping them to repent?

When last did you go out to preach to people as a soldier of God?

Hmmm!

The pit you are digging for yourself to fall in is very deep.

frosbel: So simple and yet so complex for some of us .

When people wrest scripture out of context to support a fallacy , you know that what they need is divine revelation.

Thanks for your contributions .

am happy for you and nodostic.
Peace.

Ihedinobi: I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you retracting your statement that some parts or part of the verse I presented needs changing? Please be clear.

my friend, my bible use judgement for the unrighteose that will be resurrected at John 5:29

while some bible use damnation in that same John 5:29.

I only said that to see if you view it from the angle that judgement comes befor damning.

Yes they will be damned after they have been judged.

Not taking note of this may cause one not to see the big picture and conclude that they are coming out to straight damnation. No

Roman 6:23 shows that the dead that are coming out have already payed for the wages of Adamic sin = death

Roman 6:7 shows that those that qualifies to be resurrected are freed from the sin they commited befor they died, since they had died.

It is the same with baptism.

Going into the water on coming out one former sin will no longer be counted against him.

So, those that had died on being resurrected is on a clean slate and will be judge base on what they will do withing the 1000yrs judgement day aim at preparing people for perfection befor christ will hand over all things back to his father 1corinthians 15:24

peace

Ihedinobi: @truthislight

yeah, let me say again. You have not answered my questions about your declarations about Dan 12:2. Being the Bible expert is not proving an easy job today, is it?

Daniel 12:2 = John 5:28,29 and base on this 2timothy 4:1 leading to this = Rev20:15 and Rev21:8

the dead that come back to life on refusing to make use of the opportunity presented them will undergo everlasting rejection by God. No coming back to life = second death = lake of fire.

Ihedinobi: @truthislight

hehehehehehehe.... You accuse me of arrogance on other threads for daring to interpret Scriptures and here you are interpreting away and, as always deciding who is in error and who is not. Very little surprise that only those who agree with you are the ones free of error. Just like with nearly everyone else venturing opinions on this thread. Real funny.

@all

I've got a question for those who define everlasting life as perpetual existence and eternal destruction or second death as cessation of existence. It's this

What did Jesus mean by "this is eternal life: [it means] to know (to perceive, recognize, become acquainted with, and understand) You, the only true and real God, and [likewise] to know Him, Jesus [as the] Christ (the Anointed One, the Messiah), Whom You have sent" in John 17:3 AMP?

Ejoor, abeg, biko, s'il vous plait, please, keep your answers simple and unambiguous.

John 17:3 and 2timothy 2:3,4 are saying the same things.

That taking in the knowledge of God and christ qualifies one for eternal life.

True Knowledge of God's word that set men free like the one Cyrexx and Frosbel/Ijawkid are giving hear that is consistent with God's word from GENESIS to revelation qualifies one for eternal life.

Peace

Ihedinobi: Sorry, I still don't see the word you meant when you said, "the word should be judgment". And I expected you to go on to tell me why it should be so.

i mean that the reason why the unrighteions will resurrected at the first place is for judgement. Acts 17:31, acts 10:42 and 2timoth 4:1 =
the living and the death will be judge

so, the reason for the resurrection of the unrighteose is for them to be judge.
And revelation 20 is a chapter that explain the judgement day. And Rev 20:12 shows that very clearly.

This judgement is for unrighteose also cus there are people that have died without hearing about christ and as such no basis to sentence them, they will be given opportunity to decide and call on christ as to be saved and rewarded with eveslasting life if they do.

A day set by God for this judgement is the usual DAY of God = 1000 years Rev 20:1to3. Shows that Satan will be in prison withing this period of judgement and this is = judgement acts 17:31. 2timothy 4:1.

Justice demand that all human that have ever lived and died without hearing the message about the christ be given same opportunity like ours.

Even our great grand parent that had NEVER heard about christ will all come out.

After the 1000years satan will be release again. Rev 20:7,8.

ijawkid: The way u hell fire adherents view God is exactly the way the nigerian legal system can be viewed.....

In nigeria as we know when u steal public funds that run into billions u go scot free....infact u are celebrated and even given the space to steal more.....the penalty is never commensurate to the corrupt action carried out by the politician.....

But when some1 on the street steals bread or one's cell phone,that poor thief is burnt to death........

What do I mean??

If adam,eve and satan the originators of the human ""wahala"" would face the penalty of everlasting death,why shuld we the offsprings of our 1st parents burn continously,for all eternity in a furnace or where ever it is fire burns (I just don't actually know when hell fire was created and also the venue)...........??

Is that justice??

See let me tell y'all.....

It is either one gains everlasting life or dies without d hope of ressurection....

The opposite of everlasting life is total death....

No 2 ways about it

additionally,

can literal fire burn a spirit creature like satan and demons?

Can "death" be burnt in fire?
Is it a person does it exist as an entity? No

Death is an abstract descripton of the condition that a living thing undergoes when it is no longer alife.

But again death and hides will be thrown into the lake of fire. Revelation 20:14

If this fire will burn immeterial things (satan and death) why then will it also be use for material human if it is literal fire?

Those two, satan and death cannot burn in literal fire.
So the fire there is a symbol of permanent removal or everlasting destruction

Meaning that there will be no more death revelation 21:4

Ihedinobi: That there are two deaths, one greater than the other and the greater one is called the Lake of Fire? That's my simple understanding of that verse in isolation.

error.

"This means"

that is fire means something the second death.

And we know that in the second death there is no resurection.

Fire therefor is use to signify a death without resurrection in the bible.

So, even those that dies befor the end, at the end and will die after the resurrection that will not be resurrected are signified with fire to show that they dont have another oportunity to come back to life.

Eg, the religious pharisees of Jesus day that deliberately rejected Jesus and had him kill are said to be cast into Gehena or can not escape Gehena.

Gehena is a refuse dump outside of Jerusalem and the refuse was constantly burnt with FIRE.

The reference of that fire shows that Jesus meant that they will not be resurrected by him when the rest of the dead will hear his voice and come out.

Also, those that God will personally kill in the end of this system of things, since they will not be resurrected the reference to fire there shows that there dead is without resurrection. 2peter 3:10

same with the second death revelation 20:12-15 = everlasting death = fire.

This is to show the difference between a death that is complete destruction and a death that God is still planing to bring back to life.

(Some translation change the word Gehena that Jesus used to described the religious leaders of his day.

Ihedinobi: I'm sorry, what word do you mean? And why should it change, if you please?

John 5:28,29 is what revelation is explaining.

Read revelation 20:4

so, all the dead that will be resurrected some will be for judgement

also, why resurect them if they were alife some where?

Afteral according to you the soul is immortal.

So, if they were not alife some were and needed resurrection why will there dying a scorn time as in the second death now mean that they are some were if they were no where in the first death.

The truth is, unlike the first dead that all will come back to life this second dead there is no coming back and to show the difference the bible consistently use fire to show or depict a death that there will be no resurrection back.

So, death means a state of non existance
ecclesiates 9:5,6,10

Ihedinobi: Abeg o, sorry I hadn't seen them as points to address. I thought you provided them as supports for your position. My approach to your position was to show that it lacked sufficiency. If it did, then the Scriptures used to support it were misused.



Well, if an Eternal Being says "destruction" to me, even though I know what the word means to me, I can't help wondering if my meaning and His are the same. Then when I see things like "the smoke of their torment rose up...forever and ever", I get pretty sure that His concept of destruction and mine differ, at least by eternity.

since you did not understand what fire means how will you understand what the smoke means.

Sodom and Gomorah is still burning up to this day i suppose?

The smoke is use for emphasis that there dead is for ever and ever.

Meaning that there dead there will never be a resurectionn.

frosbel: Maccabees is not recognised as divinely inspired scripture.

Heaven is God's throne and no one has ascended their except Christ.

"No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--the Son of Man." - John 3:13

There is no such place called the hell of the damned , there is a place called Hades or Sheol which is simply the grave.




This is a Parable not a true story.

Jesus Christ rose from the dead and the Jews did not believe that they will be punished in the lake of fire for rejecting the saviour. This is the whole essence. "He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'"

additionally, the pareble shows a change or conditin for those that follows christ and those that refused.