₦airaland Forum

Why is Pastor Adeboye in a hurry to comply with that regulation? Why are meetings not held first at CAN and PFN levels to deliberate on the matter? Does Adeboye want all Church leaders to follow suit? Doesn't he know the implications? Something is wrong somewhere.

When God called a man for his work, he has a reason. How can a carnal organization now wants to compel him to handover to someone who is not the choice of God? It is satanic attempt to kill the Church. I wonder what Adeboye is thinking, because I know him very well, as a very intelligent man. I was a senior pastor in RCCG for many years before now, so I know him well.

Although many Church leaders see Pastor Adeboye as a model, but this time.around it is not going to be so.

.

jumpandpas:
My take is that any politician that have been in active politics for 20 years should resign from politics.

Buhari has been in government for how many years now. With his age what is he still doing in government?

The Christian Leaders should not succumb to laws orchestrated by forces of darkness through the government. Bible history makes us to know that governments of nations were always used in attempts to truncate God's will. If God's servants before us were succumbing to their laws, their would be no worship of God today.

Although the Bible enjoins us to submit to government authority but not when their intention is to stop the work of God. The new law limiting Church leaders to 20 years in service is anti-God. It is God who calls people to His service and replaces them at His own time, mostly at death. When did Nigerian government become God who replaces his servants?

I'm so sure that any law that opposes islam in Nigeria cannot stay. Many attempts have been made by the National Assembly to eradicate child marriage, which were thrown off.

Therefore, Christians should not rush into obeying government laws from the pit of hell to truncate the Gospel.

Rilwayne001:
Week minded ko, year minded ni. Olodo oshi

Trash !!!

How much of French can you speak like her?

TheBossLadyK:
yes ooooo...... you know every church have one ore two verse in the Bible to back up their faith shuoooooo.....

Where is the Bible verse that approves nudity?

Islamic aganda shall fail in Jesus Mighty Name.

I'm not surprised, the Devil had been raising war against the Church from ages past but Glory be to God, the Church has been marching on.

Jesus said "the gates of hell shall not prevail against his Church (Mat. 16;18).

Nigerian government is biased and an Antichrist. Although I don't support men of God living extravagant life as it is not in Jesus' teachings, nothing concerns the government on Church finances. They mentioned mosque only to appear unbiased, nothing is happening there. It is like when they banned preaching in buses and they mentioned muslims, where did they find muslims preaching in buses, what do they have to tell the audience? The target is against Christianity.

plappville:
Back from ban...

They keep moving interesting threads to the Islamic section where one has to accept allah before commenting. Rubbish

Such confession is of no effect.

Muslims, se oro pesi je ni ?

Narrated Anas: The Prophet set out for Khaibar and reached it at night. He used not to attack if he reached the people at night, till the day broke. So, when the day dawned, the Jews came out with their bags and spades. When they saw the Prophet; they said, "Muhammad and his army!" The Prophet said, Allahu--Akbar! (Allah is Greater) and Khaibar is ruined, for whenever we approach a nation (i.e. enemy to fight) then it will be a miserable morning for those who have been warned."
Sahih Bukhari 4:52:195

One must note that if the word "Allah" meant "God", why then would he be telling the Jews of Khaibar (who supposedly worship the same God - Yahweh) that Islam's Allah is greater?

When Yahweh had been God to the Jews for ages, what was the religion of the Arabs at that time?

Plappvillemoi:
OP, truthman2012 is here. You can't deceive the week minded..

Weldone sister !!!



God bless you.

Read the history of the Church and the Gentiles here:

http://www.gty.org/resources/study-guides/40-5122/salvation-reaches-out

Abdulgaffar22:
Question one: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world, then why did peter tell Cornelius and his households that it is still unlawful for the Jews to visit the gentiles (Acts 10:28), many years after Jesus’ ascension to heaven? Was peter not aware of the Jesus’ new command of preaching to all the nations?
Question two: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world, then why did other apostles have to criticize Peter and become astonished when they heard that some Gentiles had received the word of God through the hand of Peter (Acts 11: 1-3, 18)? This incident took place many years after Jesus’ departure.
Question three: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world, then why did Peter have to justify his preaching to those gentiles using his vision to convince the other apostles instead of simply reminding them about the new command of preaching to all the nations (Acts 11: 4-18)?
Question four: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world, then why did James still address his epistle to twelve tribes of Israel only i:e the Jews, and not to the gentiles (James 1:1)?
Question five: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world, then why did Peter also address his epistle only to the exiles of dispersion (i.e. the Jews) scattered throughout certain provinces and not to the gentiles (1 Peter 1:1).
Question six: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world, why would these apostles be judging only the twelve tribes of Israel in the new world and not judging the Gentiles(Matthew19:28)?
Question seven: if the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the gospel to all the nations of the world, why did Peter and his associates still agree to limit their ministry to the people of circumcision i.e. the Jews; leaving the work of Christianizing the gentiles only to Paul and his followers (Galatians 2:7-9, Acts 15:2, 4, 12, Acts 21:17-19)?
Question eight: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the gospel to all nations of the world, why was it that, after the book of Acts, all the letters specifically addressed to the gentiles were written by Paul and not by the original apostles of Jesus (Romans 1:1, 1stCorinthians 1:1, 2nd Corinthians 1:1, Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1, Philippians 1:1, Colossians 1:1, etc.).
Question nine: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world, why did Paul repeatedly speak as if he was the only one authorized to preach the Gospel to the gentiles(Galatians 2:8, Romans 15:15-18, Romans 11:13, 1st Timothy 2:7, Acts 9:15, 2nd Timothy 1:11, Ephesians 3:.
Question ten: If the apostles were later instructed by Jesus in Matthew 28:19 to preach the Gospel to all the nations of the world, why did disciples who were under the authority of the apostles still preach the gospel to none except the Jews even after the persecution that followed the killing of Stephen(Acts 11:19)? Of course, the killing of Stephen took place after Jesus ascension to heaven (Acts 7: 55-58).
All the questions asked above are enough to prove that Jesus and his apostles were only commanded to preach to the Jews (i:e the Israelites) and the new command of preaching to all the nations of the world in Matthew 28:19 is a forgery. After Jesus ascension to heaven, Jesus’ apostles understood the command of not preaching to the gentiles so well that even under intense persecution, they refused to leave Jerusalem (Acts 8:1). In fact, those disciples under the authority of the Jesus’ apostles who were forced to leave Jerusalem preached the gospel message to none except the Jews (Acts 11:19) and the Hellenists (Acts 11:20).Hellenists are the Greek-speaking Jews living in Greece. King James Version of the Bible called them Grecians (Acts 11:20 KJV) and New international version called them Greeks (Acts 11:20 NIV). But International standard version of the Bible reveal their true identity by calling them Hellenistic Jews (Acts 11:20 ISV). Ellicott and John-gill’s commentaries on this very verse (Acts 11:20) also confirm that these people were most likely to be Jews. You can Google search for parallel verses of Acts 11:20 on the internet to confirm all these facts. All the incidents mentioned in the questions asked above took place after Jesus has ascended to heaven. They all point to the fact that the apostles knew nothing about the new command of preaching to all the nations of the world in Matthew 28:19. The preaching of Peter to Cornelius and his households was an exception and one-time event. Peter’s initial response to those gentiles was rejection (Acts 10:25-28). We have no record that Peter evangelized another gentile. One incident does not constitute a ministry. In the book of Acts, we read plainly of Paul’s travels through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece and Italy. But the movements of the original apostles, who walked, talked, prayed, ate and slept with Jesus are nowhere to be found. When Paul and his followers preached the gospel at Rome, where were Peter and other apostles? This proves beyond any reasonable doubt that Matthew 28:19 and other similar verses like it; where the original apostles were supposedly commanded by Jesus to preach the gospel to all the nations of the world are not authentic but later inserted into the text of the New Testament. In fact, if it was already in the divine plan that ‘the command of not preaching to the gentiles’ in Matthew 10:5-6 would later be cancelled and replaced by new command of preaching to all the nations as spuriously stated in Matthew 28:19, then Jesus statement directed to that Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:24 should have been: “IT IS NOT YET TIME FOR THE GENTILES” or something similar in meaning rather than “I WAS NOT SENT EXCEPT TO THE LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL”. Besides, the fact that Jesus later answered that Canaanite woman(Matthew 15:28) help us to know that there was no any strong reason preventing Jesus from attending to her in the first instance other than the fact that Jesus and his apostles were sent only to the Israelites.(i:e the Jews).The spreading of Christianity throughout the world of Gentiles was majorly due to the activities of Paul and his followers (Galatians 2:7-9, Romans 15:16, Ephesians 3:1-, and not by the chosen apostles of Jesus who spent most of their life time in Jerusalem. This is the reason why many unbiased Bible scholars confessed that the real founder of Christianity is Paul. Therefore, it is no longer a great surprise when we read in the Bible that the word “Christian” was first invented in Antioch by Paul and his associates (Acts 11:26) and not in Jerusalem by the original Jesus’ apostles

The Bible references you copied and pasted are too many for anybody to respond to. It is easy to copy and paste. If I were you, I would have gone through them and brought out relevant ones.

But one of the Disciples John wrote:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
(John 3:16)

3) Acts 13:48‑‑"And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord;and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." God had already determined who would be redeemed.

4) Acts 15:14‑‑"Symeon [Peter] hath declared how God first did visit the nations, to take out of them a people for His name."

5) John 10:16‑‑Jesus said, And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold; them also I must bring

Auki:
Reconcile with Mathew 15: 24 and 24:14

But he (Jesus) answered, "I wasn't sent to anyone but the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Yes, you need to be taught in the Bible.

There is the dispensation of the Jews and dispensation of the Gentiles. As at the time Jesus made that statement , it was the time of the Jews. In fact, Jesus never went to the Gentiles but at almost the end of his ministry on earth, he commissioned his disciples to go to the Gentiles, hence the Gospel was to be preached to the WHOLE WORLD.

Jesus said:

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Mat. 28:19).

And again he said:

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations,
and then the end will come (Mathew 24:14).

Sunymoore:
For science bro

What does science say about the dead.coming back to life?

What does science say about amputees getting their hands to normalcy?

Auki:
How do we deal with.

Where is the Original Gospel?

How do we deal with contradictions and obvious insertion in the Bible?

How many book should we accept as part of the Bible?

How do we deal with immoral teaching like incest or God wrestling with Jacob, Trinity and other weird stories in the Bible?

And the Gospel should have specifically forewarned Mankind about Islam, Muhammad (peace be on him) since God is the knower of past, present and future

Irrelevant talks.

How else do you want to be warned. You had been told by Jesus that only the Gospel is acceptable to God and only it should be preached till end of the world (Mat. 24:14). Then, which God sent Muhammad to bring islam?

Where did the Bible enjoin us to commit incest? Muhammad committed incest by marrying Zynab, the wife of his adopted son. Zynab had blood relationship with Muhammad.

Everything you alleged is an error in.the Bible was committed by man, unlike the quran you claim that it came from Allah but full of contradictions and absurdities. Can God make such mistakes. Do you want me to expose them? Nowhere did the true God speak directly in the Bible and discovered to be an error.

aminusanti:
that's what u xpect from a person that bliv man to be God
i knw one day u ll surely run out of ideas on backing ur man worship
Below is another miracle from a pastor in brazil, go grab ur own holy liquid from him

We worship man and get God's attention through miracles but muslims worship Allah without anything to show for it. No wonder they behead and throw bumbs to draw people's attention to islam. Hummmm !!!!

casttlebarbz:
believe this at your own peril. .only God has the power to give and take life

Jesus said:

Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.(John 14:12)

Jesus had dismissed the Quran and Islam with this singular Biblical verse:

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations,
and then the end will come (Mathew 24:14).

It is the Gospel of Jesus that God expects to be preached in the WHOLE WORLD till the end of the world. Islam is not from God.

Sunymoore:
I don't need pastor to raise a dead man.. I just need a pastor to grow an amputated leg or hand

Why na?

Who says there is no miracle?

''Rev. Fr. Chiedozie Modestus Chilaka, prays for a dead man that was about to be buried and the God of resurrection brought the man back to life. Just as God brought back Lazarus to life. God said " I will make haste to perform the words of my Prophet " This Miracle took place at Iheala.

This year! you will not bury any member of your family. This year! nobody will say sorry to you, in the mighty name of Jesus Christ. This year any gathering in your house, in your compound, will not be for condolence. It will be for celebration, in the mighty name of Jesus Christ. Right now, this very moment the God of resurrection that brought this MAN back to life is giving life to anything that is dead in your life. My God is giving life to your marriage, that business that is dead, receive life in the mighty name of Jesus Christ. That hopeless conditions, I speak life into you. Just as the family of this man is thanking God, you will be the next to testify in the Mighty name of Jesus Christ. If you pray this prayer with me, type Amen and claim your Miracle.

https://gossip.naij.com/887097-nigerian-pastor-prays-dead-man-buried-happened-see-photos.html

Emusan:
Whereas Nairaland Atheists who acquired their Ph. D certificate in various area of science through University of Google, Toronto still claiming there is no God.

Haroun13:
Except by Allah's permission.


Yet he (Muhammad, peace be upon him) lived for 3-4yrs after eating the poison, whereas the other companion, Bishr died immediately. THAT CAN ONLY HAPPEN BY DIVINE INTERVENTION


OK.


OK.


You are right, just like Yahweh promised Jesus (answered his prayers) to save him from crucifixion but failed. So, you should realize now that Yahweh is not God, God cannot be that weak.
What is the point of the above statement? To show you that anyone can make rules also.


Please do your research very well.


OK.


If you've been following, you'll realize that it's only a privilege accorded to Messengers of God.



That's your business.


That's like saying that Adam was not in a position to know the names of what was asked by God, because the Angels were not aware.


From my previous post, the message was in form of a verse, therefore, it is possible that Jibrail conveyed the verse, not knowing the meaning, because Allah had not given him knowledge of it.


From the above, it's obvious that he couldn't have known.
But, let's assume for a second that he did, that doesn't change anything. Drawing a similitude on a lower level, it's like saying that because the doctor has confirmed that your mother will die, and your mother has knowledge of it, then you shouldn't pray for her and even assure her that she will be well, or healed.



Again, that's your business


[b]Allah gives his servant knowledge of whatever He wills.[/b]Your statement is like asking how Adam knew the names of what was presented before him, when he wasn't told by an Angel. Like I said, Allah informs his servant of whatever he wills.
But even if Jibrail was the one Allah sent to give Muhammad (peace be upon him) the message, it still doesn't change anything, because, like I said, he (Jibrail) conveying the message doesn't mean he understands the meaning of it.
Again, drawing a similitude on a much lower level, it's just like you being sent on an errand, to pass and envelope to someone. You do not know what it contains, but the sender and receiver most definitely have knowledge of it.

Salaam.

The sum total of your post.is that Muhammad knew allaah's revelations better than Jubril who brought them. How reasonable? Hummmm !!!

We are told in islam that Jubril was coming to rehearse the quran with Muhammad to avoid him making mistakes, but you are here saying Jubril didn't know the meaning of the message he was carrying. How reasonable?

You are yet to say anything about why Muhammad wasn't praying for anyone for healing, not even for his jihadists who were dying of poison.

For your information, there were many prophecies about Jesus coming and dying. God of the Bible does not change his prophecies like Allah.was changing his revelations calling the change the better ones (Quran 2:106).

plappville:
I tire ooo. Muslim's in France even collect Christmas allowances. Yet they dont celebrate it. Why don't they reject it if they really love Muhammed and want to practice the quran to its letters.

I don't think France knows what it's doing. How can they be feeding their enemies and tomorrow they will shout they are under islamic attack. I don't pity them though.

NinjaX:
Here you go again. I only quoted that verse to point out your lie. Anybody, a muslim, could have done that. Again, I strongly condemn inhuman acts in the bible and koran. But since you believe Elisha and God did no wrong since bible says so, then the muslims are also right because koran says so.



Is it bible that is stable? Lol. You can never win this battle. If islam dies, christian goes down with it as both are kept alive by same delusion, violence and blind faith.

To me, I wonder the point of your talk. You don't believe in Christianity and islam as an atheist but yet you believe what is said in their Books is true. Where do you stand? I don't expect atheists to talk on Biblical or Quranic issues as they don't believe the contents are true and real.

Another thing I noticed is that atheists get angry whenever islam is opposed, why? It is because they are under the same Deity (Satan). Satan that is responsible for atheists not believing in God is also responsible for muslims believing in a false God. They have something in common, hence they are having soft spot one for another. It is a spiritual connection, which might not be consciously known to them.

Haroun13

I most definitely said that Jibrail is not Allah, because he is not, but I never said his words shouldn't be taken seriously. Rather, what I implied is that Angel Jibrail (peace be upon him) can not heal anyone. He can certainly pray as he did, but it is ultimately Allah Almighty that decides what takes place and what not.

Muhammad could not heal anyone, Gabriel could not heal anyone, Allah could not heal anyone, even his jihadists who ate poison, but they could take lives, na wa o !!! You should believe now that allaah is not God. God cannot be that weak. You know what, I haven't heard of Muhammad praying for anybody as a prophet, not even for his jihadists who ate poison. Did the jihadists also choose to go to heaven?

Volume 005, Book 059, Hadith Number 713.
Narrated By Ibn Abbas : 'Umar bin Al-Khattab used to let Ibn Abbas sit beside him, so 'AbdurRahman bin 'Auf said to 'Umar, "We have sons similar to him." 'Umar replied, "(I respect him) because of his status that you know." 'Umar then asked Ibn 'Abbas about the meaning of this Holy Verse: "When comes the help of Allah and the conquest of Mecca..." (110.1)
Ibn 'Abbas replied, "That indicated the death of Allah's Apostle which Allah informed him of." 'Umar said, "I do not understand of it except what you understand."
This means that the prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) was informed of his death, but whether Angel Jibrail knew or not, I do not know. But one thing that is certain is that the Angels do not know, except what Allah has permitted them to know, as shown in the garden when Adam named that which the Angels couldn't name

This is not credible. Firstly, the speaker in that hadith was not in a position to know that Allah had informed Muhammad of his death, even Jubril as an angel didn't know. Secondly, Muhammad was said to be receiving messages from Jubril and not directly from allah. Then, from who did Muhammad receive the message of his death when Jubril didn't know? If Jubril had known Muhammad was going to die, he would not pray for him and promise allah would heal him.


“

Allah has given a slave the choice between immortality in this world for as long as Allah wills, or meeting his Lord, and he has chosen to meet his Lord.” [Mishkat al-Masabih, 2/546]
This is what he said at the end of his life. Abu Bakr wept, and the people were surprised that Abu Bakr wept at these words. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was the one who was given the choice, and Abu Bakr knew the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) better than any of the people.

This must be false. How did Muhammad know "Allah has given a slave the choice between immortality in this world for as long as Allah wills, or meeting his Lord, and he has chosen to meet his Lord.” [Mishkat al-Masabih, 2/546]" when Jubril didn't tell him so? Did he have other sources of revelations other than Jubril?

johnydon22:
https://www.nairaland.com/3558220/pastor-destroyed-fetish-items-anambra

Anambra is also in the Eastern Nigeria.

johnydon22:
I saw a thread on the front page on how Christian Youths after months of prayers and what not invaded a supposedly Evil forest, cut down trees and all while believing this trees are the stumbling blocks of their progress
https://www.nairaland.com/3461069/evil-forests-destroyed-aboh-mbaise

The most interesting part of the whole story is that 'The Chief Priest' in charge of this forest fled as it was portrayed in the story suggesting that this was someone else's place of worship that got raided and destroyed by a Mob of Christians.

This is nothing short of terrorism.

A similar event took place in my town years ago when a mob of Christian Youths under the chant of clearing the community from evil to ensure progress attacked old men and women in the community who practised the African traditional religion as causes for their problems.

Objects depicting their beliefs were seen as evidence of their crime, angry youths metting out unjust amd cruel treatment on others for having relics of their own beliefs and practices in their homes while in an ironic and hypocritic sense had rosaries, scapulars, medals of saints and bibles around their necks or in their hands.

The heat of the event culminated in the death of one old man left in the cold harmattan breeze of a typical igbo tropical rain forest [My town], if this is not terrorism i wonder what else it is.

Accusing others of being evil sorely because they practise a religion consonant to yours.

Let us for one moment pause and imagine the scenerio from a different angle, what if the story above was

"Parish Priest fleds as traditional Youths destroy Church"

Let us be entirely honest with ourselves, most reactions on that thread would have taken a different tilt of "Persecution, tribulations, suffering for Christ, persecution for Christ, terrorism, evil"

When Christians persecute and terrorize others it is seen as a war against evil, these other religions or cults are tagged labels like "Evil hindrance to our progress" etc but when others treat Christians the same way it is called persecution and terrorism.

This is the height of hypocrisy.

Why do these Christians feel it is their divine right to attack and destroy other people's places of worship, relics of belief but cry foul when they are being met with similar treatment?

why is that Christians shout "Persecution" even when it is clear they are the ones persecuting others of a minority class?

Why is it that Christians always feel justified to terrorize others and hypocritically portray this act of terrorism in a good light?

On what moral ground do they condemn "Islamic terrorists"?

There is something i have noticed Pravelent across Christiandom, they all have a nasty case of 'Victims mindset' Syndrome. They believe so strongly in their hearts that they are being persecuted, they always see themselves as the victims of persecution even when they are the majority persecuting others.

We all have freedom of belief and practises as stipulated by our constitution, however this freedom of belief and practise in no way means you are allowed to force others to live by your beliefs or encroach into the beliefs and practises of others - that will be encroaching into other people's rights and by virtue of violent attacks nothing less than full blown terrorism.

But the appropriate Nigerian authorities are silent on these subtle acts of terrorism while Christians hypocritically complain of the 'favoured' treatment given to muslims in the northern part of the country forgetting that even they themselves enjoy the same biased, unfair priviledges.

If all would be honest with themselves, the real victims here are the religions of the minority class more so The African Traditional religion.

You are basically seen as an outsider in this country if you are neither Christian or Muslim, automatically regarded evil and is looked upon with suspicion and contempt.

I still remember as a boy deep in the slums of Enugu Ugbo-oghe in abakpa, the whole street flared up one day over an old man's preaching - he was obviously of a Judaic sect, openly preached that Jesus is not God, that only Yahweh is, he went on to accuse the Christians of false god worship and all hell was let loose that day.

He was attacked by a mob of angry youths, beaten mercilessly and dumped beside Abakpa river [Mmiri ocha] to the gleeful approval of the women and the children of which i was part of chanting to their praise wishing we were grown enough to take part in defending our religion from something as trivial as a simple verbal attack.

In crusade grounds sects and religions like Eckankar, Ogboni, Olumba Olumba, Amoc are usually met with fervent shouts of holy ghost fire because they are always portrayed in a very evil light of which i was surprised to find out quite the opposite as i grew up, these were innocent religions of their own with no less ridiculous beliefs as i had.

But attacking other God(s) and beliefs constitutes a major part of both Christian evangelism and sermons - The hypocrisy has never been too obvious.

Early morning evangelism with blasting microphones always accusing others of worshipping false Gods, nobody bats an eyelid, if the reverse is the case hell breaks loose.

These sort of examples are quite common in many corners of the south, a hypocritic attack on other people's faith while clamoring for yours to be exempted from attacks.

I am perturbed not only because of these acts of terrorism but because of the unparalleled hypocrisy it is buttered with even from the media, the lust for world domination has always ensured that Abrahamism remain very aggresive towards other beliefs.

An Igbo adage says "Let the Kite perch and the eagle Perch, the one that says the others should not perch, may it loose it's wings"

These intolerance and acts of terrorism against others and their practises must be addressed, we should all lend our voice and not be silent in the face of evil and unjust acts.

People should learn that just as you seek the right to exercise your franchise, you should not also seek the right to prevent others from exercising theirs, Freedom of religion does not mean freedom to force it down other people's throat or terrorize them.

As the bible portrayed, Jesus fought and preached against the hypocrisy of the Pharisee, those acclaimed to be following his footsteps ended up becoming the worst Hypocrites the world has even known.

People must understand, Just as you have your beliefs, others have theirs. Just as you have your own sacred place of worship others also have theirs they consider sacred. Just as you have your practises and rituals others have theirs, others have their own ideas of what God is just as you have yours.

So if you expct any respect for your beliefs, God, place of worship or practises, you must first learn to accord that to others.

This can only happen in your area, probably due to lack of civilisation and good knowledge of.Christianity.

Such is not found on national or global dimension. It is peculiar and restricted to your area.

Besides, Jesus didn't instruct his followers to do so. There were idolaters in his days but he never went to them to fight. He was only rebuking his own people who claimed were in the service of God.

NinjaX:
truthmans2012



It's relevant in every sense in relation to your comment. You are saying whatever bible endorses is right. So I can equally state that muslims are right in their killings as koran also endorses the killings.

Cheap lie. Read the below:

Never forget that only the true believers will enter paradise, the place of rewards And Paradise will be brought up close to the righteous, not far away: "This is what you were promised. It is for every careful penitent: those who fear the All Merciful in the Unseen and come with a contrite heart. Enter it in peace. This is the Day of Timeless Eternity." (Surah Qaf: 31-34)



Would you kill me if I provoked you?



I'm less concerned with what he called himself. Appellations can mean many things. I'm more concerned with what he did. Whether he called himself prophet, lion, singer, terrorist does not matter in the least. Name has no influence on the character of people. All I know is that he was a murderer, so was Elisha.



I'm no muslim, sire. Isn't it ironic that I who frowns at irrational acts in the bible lacks conscience but you who 's more than willing to display your loyalty to an ancient text there by supporting its evil acts has a working conscience? Lolz.

You believe in Muhammad's islam, justify his deed and quote his Quran and you said you are no muslim? What an irony.

Your defence amazes me. Muhammad claimed he was a terrorist and you said it doesn't matter. I leave you to your opinion, after all, you can only take a horse to the river you can't force it to drink water.

Before I leave you, let it be known to you that the quran is unstable. Qur'an 3:185, 19:68-72, say muslims will go to hellfire before a few of them will be rescued.

NinjaX

In same vein, allah would not tolerate opposition to Islam so anyone who rejects Islam has his/herself to blame. It's there in the koran

How is this relevant to what I said? So, everybody must accept islam to take them to hell that islam promised? Never.

WTF? You say provoked? And killing was the only better way to vent his anger? Blood of Jesus! This is the point where I should logoff off NL and weep for the mindless puppets religion breeds.

Yes, he was provoked. He could vent his anger anyhow, after all they first provoked him.

Moreover, where's your evidence that Muhammad killed people without provocation? Couldn't it be that the people he slaughtered offended him or his God one way or the other?

Muhammad confirmed he was a terrorist

Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'

He was going about terrorizing innocent people.

Incorrect statement. I see it's God who moves from door to door spreading the gospel and disturbing the quiet with loud speakers. There's a thread about a battered boy on Front Page as we speak, they claim he is a witch. Who did the beating? It's God, sure that, and of course bible said we are small gods.

Disturbing the quiet coming from a muslim? You have no conscience. Who are those who wake people at 5am with loudspeakers? Hummm! Muslims and their hypocrisy.