₦airaland Forum

[quote author=Auki post=65988647]If you met your parent straying from the path, will you still join them

the most intelligent question to ask is if my my own part is also not a straying part, for me to say they are wrong , i am right . i must have critically analyzed the two to arrived at a reasonable conclusion that indeed they are straying. i will not just say the part they thread is on a straying root because my new religion said so .

God has given faculty of hearing, seeing and reasoning

sure and this is what the idols followers like me use in deducing the method of worshiping GOD.

He sent sign, prophet and book to also guide you

This is true, just like he sent prophet songo, prophet ogun, prophet orunmila and the rest likewise he sent orunmila with the holy codded instruction IFA to also guide me.

Do you think all this favors are just for a mere play. You are entirely responsible for your deeds so are your parent.

NO, this is why i sees reasons giving acknowledgment to the nature he created and sense them as the grace and favor he has done for me . i do not want to be an ungrateful person. yes my deed are mine and that of my parent. and likewise you too. any problem with the choice of my life.

In the story of Abraham, there is a pattern for those who want to please their Lord.

in the words of orunmila, there is a pattern for those who want to reach enlightenment.

budaatum:
We have had numerous discussions on here for a reasonable individual to assume that [G]od implies a specific god. To then qualify it with a "monotheistic" perspective implies further specificity. And then there is the history of the op who has always argued for his own specific god, and not the gods in general! Believe me when I claim that we are being nice when we do not accuse op of meaning Elohim, Yahweh, specifically, when he says, 'God'.

butterfl1on can you answer this....

budaatum:
So, a specific "God", right, and not "gods", in general.

In effect, when he says, "Country" he means a specific country, but is just not specifying which one?

How very dishonest of him to load his question in such a way!

i am sure he is trying to address the concept of GOD through monotheistic view. i am sure if he is a pantheist that said lest talk about God, seeun will not have come with such mono focus view . A christian will always argue from the concept of monotheism perceptive, so any other idea of GOD that fall within this perspective is welcome. unless he specifically use bible as the bone of his argument. then the arguer can then depicts his rebuttal on the character of yahweh or Jesus accordingly. but so far the debate is open, the focus here is on the monotheistic GOD. butterfl1on can you begin.

Seun:
Talking about God without specifying the God you’re talking about is not really meaningful.

“Let’s talk about the Country. Remember we are not talking about Nigeria, Israel or Saudi Arabia. Just the Country.”

Not really meaningful.

you should have note he is talking about monotheistic GOD. what if i paraphrase your statement like this. lets talk about Asia we are not talking about the other continent like Europe , Africa or Australia. just the Asia continent .

At times we should learn to be open minded.

butterflylion:
Vaxx I know you are not an atheist but I need you to come and review this thread and probably make your own input.

Perhaps you can make some sense in all I have said since the atheists here are stuck because I did not give them their "selective" God for them to chew on.

ok bro . let me go over the thread.

MUSLIM WHY DO YOU THINK YOU ARE RIGHT?

MrMystrO:
Hey

Thanks for dropping by

To be honest, i really like the idea of Spinoza GOD , at least well philosophically posited than atheism(my opinion) and somehow agree with my paganism faith apart that we still believes all creature springs up from a source that is self independent and unique in kind but the creature he created including every other element which are plant , water , trees and the rest(but known and yet unknown) of the universe has an internal soul force.

well, i believe it is true that all human beings are connected to the material world, science made us know that we are product of element called matter and the same elements that make up the human body are all taken or present in other things of nature.i also absolutely agree, but lets look it this way , When a person eats and grows he assimilates his food intake into his body, he literally is what he eats(we are what we eat)my concept though. But i believe there is much more to a human being than the SPINOZA idea . There is the spirit as well and all of the embedded powers of reasons, wonder and imagination that we human beings have as well. Each of us think our own thoughts, has our own beliefs, reflects on our own experiences as well, fears, hopes and dreams. All these somehow makes us difference individual.i will like to understand the position of pantheism on this concept? why are we unique in kind despite being a product of the same material world?

MuttleyLaff:
Aside bible, the testimony of another witness(es) supporting a matter, is valued and appreciated by court of law
but hey, be my guest, if you prefer hard ball and dark debate

it seems your knowledge of theology has over crowded other discipline you should be at breast with , in court proceedings, there is what is term as best evidence rule, it is a legal principle that holds that an original copy of a document as superior evidence. The rule specifies that secondary evidence, such as a copy or facsimile, will be not admissible if an original document exists and can be obtained. in this case , the original document exist and it is obtainable from the book of john chapter 3 VS 16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_evidence_ruleis

Please dont pick up a straw man
and let it be the last time you pull a straw-man stunt like this.
Who has talked about about trinity here?
Or who has talked about whether whoever that wrote John was a trinitarian?
Please

.

Do you get it NO, but wait, you will soon see how it buttress my point, i hope you will not be inputting your assumptions in your below response.

What?!

like you are shock to behold the reality i show up as evidence

Are you familiar with the below statement:
He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel

It is called the Protoevangelium (i.e. derived from "proto" meaning "first" and euangelion meaning "gospel" or "good news)

even when i gave a rule, do not pool a hoax statement to cover one hoax statement, you still eventually ended up with another strawmen from the bible, in case you afraid to quote it, i will quote it for you GENESIS 3 VS 15. i do not see how this verse correlate with john 3 vs 16, do you want to apply proto-evangelion to john 3 vs 16 when no credible christian theology has been able to do exegeses on how it correllect with the serpent story. you try hard but it is strawmen analogy.

Unless you're in denial, you know the implication of that statement.

what statement, the argument on ground is john 3 vs 16. not genesis 3 vs 15. why are trying to stay without focused.even for the sake of argument, we agree that genesis is the first gospel or the proto of the four gospels, it still does not in away support or influence john 3 vs 16. i will expecting a reliable reference on this part and not your usual assumptions.

That statement is not only a reference to the idea of a Messiah
but doubles up, also as, the first Messianic prophecy

That statement is the genesis of salvation history with fulfillment in Jesus Christ that the opening sentence of this thread and John 3:16 is all about.

that statement does not in anyway correlate with john 3 vs 16, the proto evangeliun of john 3 vs 16 is not in the bible. prove me wrong ?

God knew how things would turn out, and waited patiently for 4000 years, from the day that prophecy was made, before it came to pass or got fulfilled

your assumptions as usual, feel free if it will make you comfortable, the verse of john 3 vs 16 is well explained, it shows the that yhwh himself do not know what the future hold and he simply cover that gap as a sign of warning for those who will be not believe in his ''unique'' son Jesus Christ

It correlates,
because the One who sent and the Sent are One

no it does not tally, you are speaking with two side of the mouth

If I dont do it that way, you wouldnt have dots to join, to see the picture

but you have not bring in any dots yet

Yes it does

No sir.

and "begotten" has hence earlier been explained

yes, maybe that is the mistake the current version of kings james bible notice when they removed the word begotten to make it spell like this. FOR GOD SO LOVE THE WORLD THAT HE SENT HIS ONLY SON instead of the begotten son WHICH CORRELATE WITH ANIMAL BEHAVIOR. they must have realized the damaged that statement has done to Christianity .

I know I can rely on you to make this a labour of love explanation
No, GOD doesnt need to descend to earth before He pass His message
but He needed to descend to earth in order to actualise or make a reality of the Protoevangelium

I

i will have love to show you fallacies that comes with proto- evangelion , but it does not in any way tally to the topic of discussion. it is the villa or house where Catholicism hide but it is founded on faulty foundation.

t is not an opinion, not my opinion
but is a fact, that God is Omnipresent
I dont think, instead I do know that,

then if you agree with this , why do you not see reasons with the hoax of john 3 vs 16

God is Omnipresent

i also hold this to be true, but john 3 vs 16 in anyway do not support it

Repeating myself, God simultaneously can be in more than one place at a time (i.e. God can be in Heaven and on earth, at the same time)

sure an omini present GOD should be able to do so, but the john 3 vs 16 depict an omni absent GOD

Ah the blood
I spot you going to make this blood thing hard work here

If someone like you, that flirts with the idea of having some knowledge of blood/DNA,
doesnt know why an "innocent blood" is needed or demanded for the ransoms of sins of human beings since animal blood is not enough
then its now apparent its just a semblance you have
and you havent completely connected the dots, to see the full picture

That "innocent blood" is God, sacrificially giving Himself up, for the ransoms of sins of human.

The perpetual animal blood is not enough nor does it permanently solve the issue at hand,
which is sin committed from the beginning and original sin

do you notice the tautology in your statement, let me rephrase it for you , an innocent GOD kills himself , sacrifice to himself and consider that as a ransom for the sins committed by his creator. how much of an error.

I like how you diversify
at least you now call it "your assumption" instead of "your opinion"

you are using both , i must apply where both fit

I'll tell you what the message of John 3:16 is about

It is a message declaring God's love for all "mankind" which moved him to send His Son...
(i.e. that God loves the world...)

[/quote]No, this is what it depict and i am going to analyse it one by one. using your proto- evangelium concept. since you hold it in a high esteem

FOR GOD SO LOVE THE WORLD- this is not true, why? he will not have destroy it earlier

THAT HE GAVE HIS BEGOTTEN SON-No yhwh already had a beloved male children

THAT WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM SHALL NOT PERISH- meaning the soul of non believer shall suffer eternal damnation. ''perish''

BUT HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE- that will mean the dead believer are presently living with GOD. any evidence on that?

in conclusion, it is just a sales pitch of hope and hope do not necessarily mean it going to be true.

"Second
what type of Father sends his son into harms way?
A father doesn't put his son in harm's way
but he takes the harm and pain off his son so his son doesn't have to suffer"
- © vaxx

What then, did you mean by:
"... He takes the harm and pain off his son so his son doesn't have to suffer"
It is your pseudo logic, I was replaying back to you

i expect you to see your faulty but sadly you could not pinch the tent.

The "harm", the "pain" and "suffer" were all prophesised
It was a bitter pill, and no one else came forward to take and swallow it except for God himself

lol, so god turning to human is not exempted, i except the usual flimsy excuse , but you forgotten so quick god turnning to human do not mean he will loose his supernatural power, he was able to do wonder that is not common to human. what stop this human god or god human to apply his supernatural power from stopping the pains, harm, suffering?

God is infinite and non spatial
so let's settle instead for, we are dealing with physical projection
God, became God, the Father, after physically projecting Himself to earth as God, the Son, whom Jesus Christ is

this is degresing or should i call it post shifting,how does it sound to you, let me repeat what you wrote . yhwh, become yhwh, the father after turning to human in the flesh of his subordinate the son whom Jesus Christ is. and behold you were able to hold sense in it?.

It means what it says on the tin
The Greek world is "kosmos" and in the context it was used, "the inhabitants of the world" best describes its meaning

stop commanding the language you have no authority upon. it becoming a common issue on your part, or else i will be force to slide your words better than you can ever imagine.

Well, sorry to burst your bubble
You need to understand it in the original composition language and not as an English speaker

so what is the essense of translation, this is the part of the muslim too whenever the verses are query, they hide on the context of you cannot speak Arabic. is yhwh the god of Greek only? well i guess that is why bible keep on revising to meet the standard and most comfortable language even if it does not tally with the original word.

And no, begotten, in this context, has nothing to do with animal characteristics

lol i am reading it out of context... the escape word. we already settle on it . it is rotted from the greek word which literally means ” (μονογενῆ / monogenē), this “mono” (one / only) + “gene” (generation) is also used as the suffix God gave His unique or one of a kind Son which you even mistakenly buttress with abraham analogy.(it is taken from greek dictionary).

John 3:16, originally was written in Greek

i know it is not written in yoruba

The uniqueness of Isaac, originally was wriiten in Hebrew, so the Greek "monogene" was not used

then that will mean the Greek writer of the Gospel of John did not understand the Hebrew text, he surely had the LXX which clearly again states “οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ θεοῦ”. i will give you this as a take away assignment to solve.

The birth of Isaac is unique, one of a kind and as promised.
The birth of Jesus as well, equally is unique, one of a kind and as promised too

but common thing about them is that they are both from woman. what separate them is this, there is consensus agreement that isaac is full human while there is no general agreement if Jesus is the same as human god or god human or simply human

The birth of Jesus is unique and one of a kind,
because God, became God, the Father, after physically projecting Himself to earth, as God, the Son, whom Jesus Christ is

you are repeating the over flogged logic... anyway i have done justice to it above

You're mistaking, if you think I shot myself in the foot with the Abraham analogy
Forget about morphology, that's a red herring
I only brought in Isaac because it has a slight similarity with "begotten" that you have misunderstood and misinterpreted

i except to hear this from you , a silent statement to say i am wrong. well , i listen better.

Let's just say
and accept that, there are rules, processess, laws and principles laid down by God that even He respects and abides by

lol, so yhwh plays by his own rules and process that he set for himself, ( that is so discipline of yhwh)but this not a good rebuttal at all.so immunity did not cover his authorship. imagine i set myself a rules to kill myself for myself for the sake of what myself create. what sort of game is that?even in soccer the immunity of kicking ball with both hand and legs is given to the kepper while the players can only play with their legs.

Well it looks like you have a dim view of God then
What were you expecting God do?

i expect yhwh to save the world with his supernatural statement , just like he say, let there be light and it was.

Would you esteem it to be godlike enough of God
if God had plucked out a magic wand, waved it,
then saying abracadabra and everything suddenly turned hunky-dory?

but this magic wand was plug out in the beginning, let there be light and it was. are you not reading your bible

Just store the "gibberish" into memory.
Sooner or later, all the info will come together and you'll make sense of them all.

No, unless it make sense. i do no store tautology

As you want it

ok

People die once, and after that they are judged
There is no injustice with God

with eternal enjoyment and eternal damnation ''perish'' for the sinners i agree with this one according to the bible

Nothing and no one takes God by surprise
however everything and everyone are part of God's great eternal plan

this does not agree with john 3 vs 16

God is solving a problem
and humans happen to be part of the solution package
Two for the price of one

so this problem is not solved in the beginning, when i said yhwh DOES NOT KNOW THE FUTURE YOU SAID NO. HAVE YOU SEEN YOU JUST SUPPORT IT. so yhwh was not able to solve the problem earlier.

I am only countering blow by blow, section by section, each, out of order comments, you made
I will space them, more out, then
but you too, dont post lengthy write-ups that will require long responses

thanks for the long episode with Zero impact, i will expect you to do better next time. i see it is not easy making wrong look right. it take a lot of brain gymnastic. i will be expecting another epistle.

ameri9ja:
There is nothing to elicidate. It is self-explanatory.
THE BIBLE IS A BOOK. CHRISTIANITY IS GUIDED BY SPIRIT.

God bless you with this statement.

Evolution of Christianity contribute to the abolition of slavery, but the concept of slavery is clearly imprinted in the bible which majority of the Christians do not follow no more

Geeman23:
Kudos to vaxx.Oudaa a gbewa oh.

please I would like you to comment on the practice of ogun".(black power).how do our fathers get the revelations of leaves and animals that could work supernatural wonders.

Ase. honestly, this is a very tough question and i do not want to give a half truth answer, i promise to get back to you as soon i can get a satisfactory answer. e ma je ka gbagbe orisun wa o

Olumaeme:
There's no devil anywhere, the devils are human beings themselves.
There's a creature called Satan or devil..

If you are good, you are God, if your ways are bad, you are the devil.

Don't be cajoled, the biblical stories is too vague..

God created an angel that later turns to be the devil, the Bible states that God knows what will happen in thousands of years, which means he knows that the angel he's creating will become the devil, then why did he create him?

I LOVE YOUR PHILOSOPHICAL POINT OF VIEW

danvon:
So according to you sending yourself and leaving your house and servants alone is the best solution

so GOD IS NOT OMNIPRESENT AGAIN

danvon:
How many times do I have to read it God sent his begotten son which is the same thing as sending a big part of himself, so your point is strange

read it yourself, if your father sent you an errant, does it equal to sending himself or a big part of him self? i will like to see your strange logic here

danvon:
I didn't ask if your son is you, I asked if he isn't a part of you?

read my op again

danvon:
Op your logic is strange isn't your son a part of you?

no my son is a different entity from me

[quote author=MuttleyLaff post=65942432]

The serious problem I observed, shown in this post, is, the certain quasi-knowledgeability that knows nothing
Furthermore, it is insulting to someone's intelligence, asking that contributors not quote biblical reference to support submitted posts

lets, see how you will apply your pseudo intellectual you hold in high esteem on the below rebuttal, me, asking commentators not to go ahead to quote biblical verse further is to safe them fro quoting another hoax verses from the bible, we are presently dealing with one, if the need to address another verse then we can go ahead. we cannot be using one hoax to rob another hoax that will cause more intelligence point made earlier useless, so to afford the normal back and fourth argument, it is better we stay out of the dark debate.

Though Jesus was God

Assumption 1 which contradict the topic of discussion, there was clear separation. THAT HE GAVE HIS BEGOTTEN SON do not sound as if it is the same person talking to himself, in fact whoever wrote the entire that verse Whoever wrote John was not a trinitarian, It is a suggestion on the writer’s part that God does not choose to know the future. because if indeed, he will have know how the game will play, Jesus was restored to cover that gap. If God knew how that would come out, it would make the act of allowing it to happen into a cheap parlor trick, a sham. No, only if God did not know how things would turn out could one say God gave anything. so in the essence god did not give anything earlier according to the writer suggestion.

He did not think of equality with God, as something to cling to.
Instead, He gave up his divine privileges;
He took the humble position of a servant
and was born as a human being.

Assumption 2, all these your pseudo opinion does not correlate with the message the verse intend to pass,we are dealing with the topic, the verse clearly indicate Jesus was sent BY GOD to the world to save souls from perishing, whatever you are imputing now does not in any way correlate with the verse. as i said earlier i will prefer we focus on the topic. lets address the verse . instead of shifting around. i know you are finding it difficult to do.

And so God appeared on earth, in human form, as Jesus Christ, His Son can send Himself, did send Himself to earth, in the form of Jesus Christ
God simultaneously can be in more than one place at a time (i.e. God can be in Heaven and on earth, at the same time)
Note Jesus didnt correct people that addressed Him, when saying: "My Lord, My God"

ASSUMPTION 3 ,you do not do better, still repeating the same earlier warning i gave... anyway if that will make you better. THIS IS IS not the message john 3 vs 16 intend to pass. as it clearly stated.

Christ is the visible image of the invisible God
What other logical way, effective, reasonable, legal and conventional means, did you expect God to send Himself to earth?

christ is the begotten son of GOD that is what john 3 vs 16 stated. must GOD descend to earth before he pass his message, this your opinion here suggest god is not omnipresent. what do you think?

God was not and never was in harm's way, He couldnt handle
Its often said, if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself
Something to be done right is exactly what it's all about and so what God did.
This is a matter of the classsic DIY

this is your opinion, an innocent blood is demanded for the ransoms of sins of human since animal blood is not enough. john 3 vs 16 clearly indicate that the only way to escape ''perish'' is to believe in GOD SON(JESUS CHRIST)

God looked for someone who could build walls
or stand in the breach in His presence on behalf of the world so that it won't be destroyed, but He found no one
so God is lumbered with, doing a classic Do-It-Yourself by sending Himself

THIS IS NOT THE MESSAGE OF JOHN 3 VS 16. IT IS AGAIN YOUR ASSUMPTION

I am sure you're joking that:u"harm and pain was taken off Jesus so Jesus doesn't have to suffer"

Do you get your pseudo logic here, harm and pain was taken off GOD SO THAT GOD WILL NOT HAVE TO SUFFER.

This will explain what the bible said and/or is saying
The word translated as "begotten", is the greek word "monogene"
"monogene", means, one and only or one of a kind

So we are dealing with morphology now, and not the grammatical sentence, good . i will like you suggest the Greek word that best describe the world better, at least it could make us understand the context clearly. but as it stands, an English speaker like me find it as it is begotten and the word begotten in English grammar means possession and it largely attribute to animal characteristics

"monogene", is a combination of the root words:
"mono" (one or only) and "genos" (of a class or kind)
hence "begotten", in the context, or "monogene" means "the only of its kind"

i am still awaiting the better usage of English grammar that will better position that word in he context of the verse.

It occurred also, when similarly used over Isaac,
where and when Isaac was referred to, as only son, even when Abraham already had an older son, Ishmael
Isaac was unique, was one and only or one of a kind son
Unique in the sense that, an impotent man and menopaused woman had a child, the promised son, Isaac (i.e. child in a class of its own)

good point raised there.... but if am to go by your your pseudo analysis here, you will realized you just shot yourself in the foot, are you not the one claiming jesus was god and how come it is unique and one of its kind the time or you mean GOD SEND HIS UNIQUE SON using the isaac and abraham analogy

Again, "begotten" in that context isn’t about procreation or some fantasied sexual intercourse

Facepalm. SMH. Tsk tsk tsk.

do not be in an hurry, i think you shot yourself on the foot with this abraham analogy. you could have stick with the morphology

Very good question
The need, is for one "silver bullet"
and not million(s) of "silver bullet"
When Jesus, before bowing His head and giving up His spirit said: "It is finished"
The "It is finished" means "now accomplished"
It signifies a sense of finality, the effect of which continues into the present
The task and/or mission is accomplished, hence, there is no need for a million of Jesus Christ

if i am to go by your logic here, i will conclude that the supposed ruler of the universe, who could not think any better way to forgive his creations, than send himself in human form to act as a human sacrifice is incompetent. Just so those creations can get into heaven to worship this insecure deity for eternity. I find this God to be lacking in anything godlike.

Jesus, is the last Adam, and second man
The first man Adam became a living soul
Whereas, Jesus, the last Adam, became a life-giving spirit

The first man, is of the earth, earthy;
the second man, is from heaven.

this is gibberish . i do not hold sense out of it

Your emasculating wish is granted

you do no do any better except from that of the morphology ..

Right.
Now there you have it.
"scholarly reply" without quoting biblical reference to support as you wished

LOL the philosophical point of that verse stand out to be poor, do you know what i deduce from it . it is if you believe in God, then everlasting life is real but If you don’t, even more terrible things await you. Not much of a choice. this is clearly weak of theology. sorry what you present so far are pseudo intellectual concept , i expect you do better than this in your next reply. and please try and add space to your write up, i found it a bit cracky .

bumb

debaj10:
Lol
d ancestors wey dey kill twins, believe in ogbanje, com tell u sey dem dey fly for sky, abi?
abeg, nor take laf kii me yer o!

minwyl, how Jesus take b white man?!
r u a olodo?

if Jesus was alive today, i am sure he will have own an Israel citizenship and he will have required visa to visit Nigeria, if you think you are the same. in fact country like Iran AND Saudi Arabia may denied him access to the country because he is from Israel their staunch enemy.(meaning, Jesus do not belong to every one).

Beside, may Jesus forgive Mary slessor for her false assumption that all the tribe within the nation called Nigeria kills twins, may she be forgiven, she has forgotten how the western Europe allegedly accused old women as witches, how they were burnt, tortured or hanged. she has forgotten that barbaric character is a fabric on all races, it is civilization that tear it off, even kalabari the only tribe that kills twins will have stop it by now assuming Mary slessor do not stop it . No complete laid back culture, every culture evolve. our mystical believes is beneficial, there are lessons to learn from it.

i will not attack Christianity, though you just attack my faith .

CuteMadridista:
actually you started that post with "All books are divinely inspired"

is a metaphorical statement, do not take it literately, anybody can claim is book is divinely inspired. that is just the cuss of the matter.it is just a position man found for himself to make whatever he does unique and perfect and does not in anyway mean the person is right or wrong

CuteMadridista:
So, you're saying its Not Even Wrong?

yes cannot be scientifically verified . how do you verified divinity through scientific glass ?

CuteMadridista:
My point was that your explanation of what makes something divinely inspired set the bar for it so low that it becomes meaningless. Heck, you even said Shakespeare books were divinely inspired so the onus is not on me to prove your thread is not divinely inspired but on you to prove any of the threads in romance section is NOT divinely inspired!

lol, the point i am trying to make is nothing written by human come from external source, it is the same human who make it so, and he is also who said it is divine, so shakespare can as well claim he is divinely inspired, so no one can debunked it. he is free to go and that is the position of the bible.

joudini:
You forgot the one where a clown pathetically proclaimed that the fight against a muderous religious sect is a fight against the north.

lol

[quote author=wirinet post=65922454]

Arian of Nicomedia depended on written materials from history to compile his biography of Alexander the great. The Greek society was highly literate and so there were numerous documentary evidence of all their kings. Arian of Nicomedia stated that he relied on[b] documents from those close to Alexander especially Ptolemy I Soter who was speculated to be a half brother to Alexander the great. For you to write a biography of someone who lived half a millenia in the past, you cannot rely on hearsay but on research materials from the academia.[/b] It was just unfortunate that all the earlier materials were lost. Conquerors of new lands in the past destroy libraries and other historical relics in an to attempt to wipe out legacies of previous rulers. Even ISIS and Taiwan still does that today.
Jesus story on the other hand is purely hearsay, even the bible admitted that much in Luke 1 - 3;

you are not speaking the truth here, all the written material put down by those who were close to Alexander the great were all lost, have you forgotten so soon that that you even said the great library got destroy, so how reliable are the left over evidence, surely it must be from oral report which is the same thing as hearsay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_the_Library_of_Alexandria. in this link i put forward it is clearly started all evidence concerning people close to Alexander had been lost in writing.

There were no written documentary evidence of Jesus before the gospels. There were no physical evidence such as bust, coins, inscriptions or anything pertaining to Jesus. Jesus's activities were confined to a very limited and small location, judea, Galilee and it's surroundings. Although he was said to have fled to Egypt with his parents immediately after birth, there is also no documentary evidence of that.

this is similar to like saying , there were no writing evidence of Alexander before the destruction of the library, i can prove it , because the library lost all information but i can strikingly tell you there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, the only evidence we have is Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus live or not. so the idea of Jesus personhood is recent and it was spearhead by atheist not the jews. in fact all historian of antiquity accept that Jesus live.

If you accept that Alexander the great reigned in those countries, how come you question that he had influence in those same countries? I do not understand. Are you questioning Alexander's conquests of Persia, Egypt and India?

if you are truly a student of history, apart from just internet reader, you will have realized that Persia that stretch from south Asia to the present Libya, you will note that Alexander is far from great from the Persian eye, A true student of history will have discover that the Persians had twice before been defeated by the Greeks during two ill-fated invasions of Greece, by Darius the Great in 490BC and then his son, Xerxes, in 480BC and not the conquer of Alexander that brought them to their knell. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18803290

Why not show us links to these archaeological discoveries so we can see if these are authentic or fake to promote certain beliefs. Fake "archaeological discoveries" are very common on the net.

from Luke Johnson of Emory university and http://www.divinity.cam.ac.uk/directory/simon-gathercole from the university of Cambridge, hardly can this prestigious university celebrate fake news, it is next to impossible .

Archaeological evidence concerning Pilate’s name and title bears evidence of Pilate and not Jesus. Why is it hard to obtain Archaeological evidence bearing the inscription of Jesus name and title? story writers tend to infuse names of famous peoples and places in their stories to make it more believeable. That homer used actual places and personalities in his illiad does not mean all the mythical characters were real.

This is not always true, there are many history out there that they are factual as it is, and if i am going to go by your logic here we could easily use the same excuse to debunked the evidence put forward by the Alexander historians writer, beside visit this links to read more about the scholarly report on archaeological evidence https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/28/turin-shroud-tv-pope-francis that is less bias and more accurate.

Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem and most Christian tourist sites were sited by Helena, mother of Emperor Constantine, she even sited the holy ground where moses saw the burning bush

.it is obvious you are debating the evidence that was not rejected in antiquity, all evidence against the existence of Jesus was just recent and those not in any way accurate, in fact it is silly to be too sure of the non existence of Jesus, giving all evidence at deck that state otherwise, even among the atheist brethren, there is acceptance of Jesus evidence, you have another option to attack Christianity, but saying Jesus did not exist is similar to like saying Alexander do not exist. Josephus ,Pliny and Tacitus had nothing to gain from promoting the existence of Jesus, they themselves are not christian, and report written about Jesus did not speak well of Christianity.

GoldNiagara:
90 per cent of the 65 per cent mad Nigerians are people from the land of the rising sun.

what of the remaining 10 percent

FarahAideed:
How can a man who clearly knows he is no smart enough to be president still want to get reelected ? Is Buhari not mad ni

haaa, no be me talk am

old thread but so hilarious

cutemadridrista, you can pose the question here, i say my thread is divinely inspired, can you prove that it is not.

coputa:
yes I have been to both countries,what is fantastic there

if you cannot see anything fantastic there. there is no need to go forth on any argument? i will find it difficult to convince you... stay bless bro

coputa:
When they say Nigeria is the giant of Africa,it's not a mockery but the bitter truth.No country in the west Africa sub region has the economic fire power that Nigeria has,whenever Nigeria sneezes in these countries they shivers.Our manpower exports to these countries is one of the propelling force to their existence,not to mention Nigeria financial assistance to them.
Nigeria will continue to play the big brotherly role bestowed on her by Nature

have you been to ivory coast? or better still Ghana.?

there is nothing like money rituals(ogun owo or kudi magani