neoapocalypse:



What dafuq is this idiót saying? You make absolutely no sense at all. This will be my last reply to you tinhead

M0ron, you want me to type in hieroglyphics?

absolutism:
I call you on this thread to face with your 'foes' and mention all you stand for and against. Be dialectal so we can make a discussion. Not a fight or an argument. maybe you'll not disappoint me

Wassap my Negro,
Go ahead, make my day

CharlyG1:
Please where is Vooks? Anyone knows where he is?

Analice? Anyone?

It would be nice to hear from him soon.

Hi, I'm back
Thank you brethren

neoapocalypse:



Idiota! who you and your God don epp?
bloody hypocrite

Another serial m0ron. You been bleating about how Africa needs deliverance from 'religion no superstition'. Now that you are delivered from the same, how better are you than the next Negro?

OLAADEGBU:


An habitual sinner is a person who is not yet truly born again. He is a person who lives a lifestyle of sin using the promises of God as a license to sin.

And what is a 'lifestyle of sin'?
A quick test:
1. When did you last sin?
2. In what did you sin?
3. Before that last sin, when last did you commit it?
4. Are you a habitual sinner or living a lifestyle of the sin you mentioned in #2?
5. If no to #4, give a practical example of a habitual sinner of the sin you mentioned in #2
6. What is the DIFFERENCE between the example you gave in #5 and yourself?
7. Substantiate #6 with scriptures

OLAADEGBU:


Thanks but no thanks for the information.

Educate yourself on the difference between calvinism and arminianism in the thread below.

https://www.nairaland.com/2549450/calvinism-vs-arminianism-whose-view

If I had time and you had a better IQ, I'd school,you in these -isms

CharlyG1:
I had a funny dream sometime last month, about 3 weeks ago.

Satan had a bride, a wife. They both had this ugly looks like their faces had gone through a grinder machine. They actually looked like demons but at the same time a person could tell that they had once been beautiful.


Satan was in my bedroom and he was telling me that from Sept 11 1998 to Nov 11 end of the 21st century, big men will fall.
He said if you used to blow(make good money) and you said it was because of the King(God), you will fall. This was the time period for people who used to acknowledge God in their success to begin to fall if they did not stop acknowledging God.. Meaning that if they didn't acknowledge him (satan), they would fall. Satan said lots of other things too which I cannot remember.


As he was talking and holding his wife, an angel dressed in white appeared all of a sudden.


I asked the angel who he was. And the angel replied with a smile on his face "What do you think? I am the angel that comes at this hour".


I remember the time was exactly 7am on my clock.


This so called angel brought a cake with him. He showed me the cake. There was an image of a woman like a bride dressed in purple on the cake. The angel cut out some cake and started eating. He gave me some to eat and told me to give some to my family too, my parents and relatives.



Then I saw my family and friends all around me.. Satan was in a corner with his bride, petting his bride. He kept on saying so many things to me, telling me secrets. His words were so appealing and sounded so honest to me that I actually believed him in this dream.


When I woke up, I immediately cancelled this dream. I understood what satan was trying to do.



I am saying this now for some of us to understand the tricks of Satan.
He is trying to indoctrinate us. Trying to make us believe things that are not true. He's trying to introduce to us the doctrine of demons. He will be very convincing and he would deceive many people too, even the very elect if possible (Matthew chapt. 24 vs 24).


Satan is a trickster and he is very convincing in his lies. No wonder he is called the father of liars.

Yes, it is possible that in the year 2100 people will openly worship satan and things will be very unimaginable in this period of time (if Jesus has not come yet).. There would be lots of demon worship and the world will forget about Jesus and turn to Satan.
The 22nd century may as well mark the period of the coming of Jesus Christ (rapture).. But no one knows for sure when Jesus will come. And no one should believe a word that comes from the mouth of the devil for he is a liar and when he lies, it is to mislead a person into doing what opposes God.


The bride dressed in purple is the same woman in the book of Revelation Chapter 17. She is the bride of satan.


Satan loves to imitate God in His perfection. God has a Trinity, satan has his own too. Jesus has a bride (the church), the avenue for fellowship in Christ. Satan has his own bride too (the mother of harlots Rev 17), the avenue for perverted sex and sexual immoralities to mislead man from the way of God.



Eating the cake (the woman in purple image) depicts being indoctrinated into Satanic gospel and being one with Satan and his demons. It's more like selling yourself to him. All kinds of sinful perversions will follow after this..
I will explain this clearly with details some other time.


The time 7am is actually a prophetic symbol of something happening in God's perfect timing (God's perfect plan).
You see how satan tweaks this dream and makes it look valid, like it's from God?
Satan is a liar, a perfect one.


He has tried to indoctrinate me several times but by God's grace I'm still standing.
He has come to my dreams to tell me that I won't get what God has promised me.
He has threatened me, mocked me and he has visited me to torment me physically. Even with all these, God has proved Himself strong in my life.
Funny enough,when he came like an angel to indoctrinate me and it didn't work, he turned hostile and started attacking me.


Don't be deceived people. If you are weak now, don't blame God. Move on. Continue to trust in God. Do not let Satan get hold of your faith.

If you are facing difficulties and challenges, be strong, don't let satan win this fight. Trust God, strive on, push on, pray, read God's word you'll find strength there.

Do not be depressed. Depression creates room for demons to speak into your mind.

I came into the thread not very strong in mind and heart, but something about this thread reignites my spirit man, God is here. And after reading your comments here, I felt my spirit receive strength immediately.

God is standing closely to you. You only need to open your eyes and reach Him with outstretched arms.


God bless you all.

Thank you brother CharlyG1,
All I may add is , even when circumstances around you don't make sense, please be found faithful in Christ

KingEbukasBlog:


That's one hell of sabbatical you took !

Thank you sir, got really busy in real life and had to shelf my reel life, but I'm fine by the grace of God.

neoapocalypse:



Hahahaha, you're such a retard, you really need to read deeply about the very religions you're trying to protect.

And by the way , I'm an atheist. Fvcking m0r0n.

Now that you are an atheist, what re your personal accomplishments over theists? Idiot. Atheism is as old as man so brandishing it as a sign of accomplishment is quite infantile. Show me your works fool

MrPresident1:


Hey vooks, where U been?

Negro atheists are greedy people lusting after the mark of cain. Cain is greedy, he has amassed the wealth of the world to himself by aligning himself with satan. Theism is hardwired into an average Negro's brain, default settings, any deviation is an aberration, unnatural, abnormal, freakish, and ungodly.

My broda, I'm around, just got bushier lately and I went off the grid

Ayomikun37:
I thought you've died...

Keep 'thoughting'

Ayomikun37:
You're a terrible idiot... Opening threads like this shows how mischievous you are. Worthless sanctimonious charlatan. You have the temerity, the gall, the audacity, the bumptiousness, the arrogance to call atheists "empty windbags", even though you're not any better.

Bro, atheists are not empty windbags; they're full of something called HOT AIR.

neoapocalypse:




Hahahaha , very ironic but you just described the Negro theist. The very religions you practice are all western religions , next time don't throw shiite if you're covered in it already.

Another m0ron,
Let's assume you are into Negro religions. How better are you than a Christian? Buffoon

frank317:
I have given my best in my work place, contributed my qota tonmake the business grow. I have shown my siblings and friends the best love I can. I have visited sick loved ones and encouraged them in times of despair. I also give to beggers when touched by their conditions according to what I can give. I have tried talking to people like u out of mental slavery.

Common vooks you should be wiser than this. What were u thinking when u opened this thread?

My negro,
None of any of your 'accomplishments' is exceptional; you sound like another negro in this backwater continent. Question was and is, EXACTLY how are your better as an atheist than say a Satanist? ZERO.

Militant atheists keep on hallucinating about how religion and especially Christianity had kept humanity especially the Negro down. If there is any truth in this claim, then atheism should be the solution or the key to solutions bedeviling Motherland. But lo and behold, atheists are no better, they are just bitter at what they are not

sonOfLucifer:

Truth can not be blasphemed. Truth fears no criticism. The light need not beg darkness to shine. Is thy faith on solid shores? Or sinking sand?

Wassup my nigga

CharlyG1:
My sincere apology goes out to everyone who sent me mails and messages. I'm very sorry for the late response I gave you. And if I'm still yet to respond to you, I surely will do so.

The last few weeks had been quite jam packed for me. But now I'm going to be devoting some quality time on the thread.

I welcome everyone of you just joining us. May God increase you in wisdom and strength as you participate.

Thanks to everyone that has been here contributing.. Analice my dear friend . Where is vooks?


This coming week is going to be real hot by the special grace of God. I will be sharing some things revealed to me by God


I want to encourage us here to stand strong in Jesus Christ. I know some of us may be facing financial challenges and spiritual ones as well.
But just know that God has made a way for you. And very soon it will come to limelight in Jesus Name.. Amen

God bless you all.

Dear CHARLYG1,
Been quite busy but I'm back. I'll try and catch up on the thread

OLAADEGBU:


Is that so?

Negro, ignorance is expensive

OLAADEGBU:


Are you an habitual sinner? Do you continue to live a sinful lifestyle?

Who is a 'habitual sinner'? Define

MoneypassGod:
Guy u need to take a chill pill, its a free world and every man is entitled to his or her path to follow. Dont let religion use u and create unnecessary enemity btw u and ur fellows.

It's a simple request....Atheists, here are your 15 minutes of fame......take it away

CoolUsername:


I will find a good time to begin, take your time to type replies because proper citation is highly recommended.

Wednesday or Thursday....you have an entire Easter to google. I'm busy with family

CoolUsername:


Good answers! Let's hope that you practice what you preach.

A single topic, a single thread, no trolling, no deviation. Make specific claims, support them. Make my day Negro

CoolUsername:


Before we do that there are two questions I'll like to ask:

1. Are you a young or old earth creationist?

Young

2. If anything, what can change your mind about evolution?

A single shred of evidence for the same

Now that you are not shackled by medieval mythologies and your 280 IQ brain operate at 120% capacity, could you please share your PERSONAL CONTRIBUTION to humanity over and above theists?

Show me your works!
[size=1pt] As will be soon clear, Negro atheists are just empty windbags regurgitating Western philosophies that stroke their goes, give them highs but leave them as empty with nothing to show for their imitation. No books, no new thought...just New Age bullshiet, Andromeda and Nibiru tripe and overused cliches [/size]


PS
Antitheistic rants on NL is not contribution by any stretch of hallucination and nor is imagining that you are a 'thinker'

asalimpo:
.

Learn to quote other posts or don't do it at all

[size=1pt]

CoolUsername:


You have failed both in the humour and making-a-point department.



Dating is a sham? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
I dunno what to say to you, but for the sake of others.
[url=study.com/academy/lesson/radioactive-dating-methods-uses-and-limits-of-radioactive-decay-as-a-dating-tool.html]HOW RADIOMETRIC DATING WORKS[/url]



If you know how embryonic formation relates to genetics, you'll see the connection. But I doubt that you'll look at it with an open mind so...



O rly?

Because the experiment that I cited actually involved a beneficial additive mutation in e.coli. Did you not do your damn research?



More obfuscating ignorance from your end again. Sir, it is rather poor etiquette to read the source I cited, the Lenski experiment is a very good example of evolution in action, so to come here and shout 'bring the evidence forward' is poor form on your part.

[/size]
These topics are quite wide. Pick any topic of your choice, invite me and I will make mince meat of the few neurons that make up your brain

CoolUsername:




And how does this disprove the point? Your fact (apart from making you look smart) doesn't disprove that all animals share a common ancestor. You neglected to mention that the bat is also mammal just like the horse, the fact that they branched from a common ancestor is not in disproved. Read a real book on this subject.

The fact that you call tumors facts and demand they be disproved reminds me m0rons abound on NL. Read a book on homology

This is another poorly though out response. There are absolutely no dinosaur fossils after the cretaceous period or mammalian fossils in, say the devonian period. Why is fossil dating suddenly an exception when the dating methods give accurate readings for known objects?

Dating is a sham. It is circular reasoning per excellence.
One example will suffice; Mungo Woman in Australia. I'm not here to mother you so look it up

Once again, you've shot yourself in the foot, this only serves as an argument AGAINST intelligent design, or whatever goalpost-shifting intellectual standpoint that you're arguing from, because why would a designer have foetuses go through these stages (that only stand as evidence to exclude said designer from the equation)?

Don't be a m0ron. The point is embryo homology means NOTHING, or rather the conclusions drawn therefrom are arbitrary.

Another falsehood from history deniers such as yourself, what exactly drives an adaptation? Isn't it a series of inherited genetic traits that were favoured by natural selection? Wasn't that the case in the Lenski Experiment? Or was it FSM's Noodly Appendage?

There is enough genetic variety in any organism to manifest these differences. The information is ALREADY there.

can ask you the same question but I already know the answer to that (you're the same guy who can't even think of a better alternative scientific model but yet tries an fails to disprove evolution with falsehood). I'm only responding to your post for the sake of others that you may have misinformed.

I don't need to disprove a claim, I only need to critique its evidence for which there is none. I may for instance claim that there are Giants on Uranus. You only need me to prove it. You don't prove a negative. Brush up your logic son

asalimpo:

And God judges by motives.

Really?
Does this apply to beastiality? Are there some valid motives behind beastiality?

Murder is usually premeditated and with selfish interest (please dont start debating what 'selfish interest' means)
Suicides however, are usually pressed beyond measure - they driven by despair, shame,
temporary insanity, hopelessness, some pride, some times physical pain. They want out of a hellish situation.
While they're alive, they're in torment.

One wise man said there is nothing new under the sun. The question of suicide has been debated for probably centuries, and I'm very familiar with just about every objection you may throw.
This idea of probabilities is not helping you. 'Usually' bla de bla.
So I asked you a simple question; do motives for suicide and murder EVER overlap?

Not everybody has the backbone for torment and pressure. Some have fickle backbone so when the storm of life hits, without intervention of some sorts, they could take their lives in one rash second
because of the anguish of their heart.
It is in this light that i wonder if they'll end up in hell.

The same can be said of murder. To help you with context, do you think the person who assists the tormented and pressured person end his life guilty of murder?

What about the mother who when the 'storms of life hit' their 'fickle' backbone caves in and they smash their newborn to escape pressure and torment say of motherhood and the 'anguish of their heart' at their new status?

The point is and remains, any rational you may imagine for suicide has already been finely beaten by countless brains before you. Besides this, any emotional appeal you may use to justify suicide can easily be employed of other acts you would never entertain such as murder. In short, there is nothing unique with suicide motives, or at the very least, you are incapable of articulating the uniqueness of suicide to warrant countenancing giving it a pass of some sort

johnydon22:


Which is why you should teach children to be nice not threaten them into conformity.

Teach your children to be good to people because the world deserves goodness, that good is good to happen and because they should believe that there is good in the world and aspire to be good.

Not threaten them with fire in order to coerce them to submit to your idea of morality.

I have no problem with adults teaching the young ones, in fact my post supports and encourages it. My problem comes from threatening them. It instills psychological trauma and prison in their minds of which i know too well.

Teach them what they need to know not threaten them or instill fear to ensure submission.

This is another thinly veiled antitheistic rant.
The best you can do to your kid is to share your values to them

There is nothing like 'good because the world deserves good', teach them right and wrong and consequences of both.

But as I always remind atheists,and most are quite moral in fact better at morality than theists, they lack any logical basis for their morality ultimate meaning and purpose.



It took several young lives lost in a river and nearly mine before I learnt the dangers of drowning. If mentioning consequences of bad 'instills psychological trauma and prisons their minds', consult your nearest armchair sophist

promisechuks:

Leave the guy!

He WILL NEVER answer you!

It only takes the holy spirit to convict you that THERE IS NOTHiNG GOOD IN YOUR FLESH, even when you don't commit sin. And it is that conviction of your sinful flesh that makes you believe in christ to be saved.

Very true

Gombs:


I will quote you this once, as i am not trying to convince you, but make viewers see how myopic your bible knowledge is... this is not a vulgarity session, you, my friend have a very minute bible knowledge.

Mighty glad you have outgrown m0ronic gifs. But I doubt you can help yourself for long

In Numbers 12:1, Moses' wife became the apparent reason for Miriam and Aaron's rebellion against Moses.

Numbers 12:1 Miriam and Aaron began to talk against Moses because of his Cushite wife, for he had married a Cushite. (NIV)

All true,but where is the second marriage?

you for some reasons beyond biblical truths claims they are same woman, that she is a Cushite dwelling in Midian. You went further to claim that the father was A CUSHITE who became a chief in Midian, your reasons being that Joseph et al did same in foreign lands. I did not want to drag it further with you, as your bible knowledge is slimier than a needle's tip, i held my peace.

Not 'some reasons', if the wife is Ethiopian, so is the father. I merely pointed at the plausibility of a Cushite being a leader in Midian contrary to your asinine assertion that his leadership in Midian militates against him being a Cushite

To make one last move to edify you, let me point this out. The bible called Zipporah's father a Priest of Midian, and his ancestry is traced to Midian, Abraham's son. He was a full blooded Midianite. HE WAS NOT A MIGRANT. I have already showed you that your Cushite Midianicans theory is complete baloney.

Where is 'his ancestry traced to Midian'? Let's separate hallucinations from facts

Moses married this midianite, had kids even before he went to set Israel free from Egypt, along with Aaron.

He married Zippy during his one 40 years of exile

Aaron must have met his sister-in-law, and so must have Miriam.

Bros, Zipporah and her two boys were brought to Moses in the wilderness well after they had left Egypt. This means that even if you were right, they met Zippy exactly at the same time as Moses; in the wilderness.

Therefore, the Cushite lady in the book of Numbers could not have been Zipporah...for there would be no need for the anger towards the lady he married especially before the law.

Don't be a m0ron. Even at this point of their murmuring, there was no Law yet against marrying non-Hebrews. But it was generally thus as seen by Abraham intervention in Isaac's marriage. They basically kept it 'within the family'.
What you are doing is wondering why they never murmured earlier. One plausible reason is that Zippy had just joined Moses with her father in the wilderness

And, if this reference was to Zipporah, whether in regards to her skin color or ethnicity, it is somewhat remarkable that Aaron and Miriam's displeasure would begin so late. They certainly would have lots of time to have expressed it previously on the Exodus.

Again you are assuming they knew of Zippy all along and conveniently forgetting Zippy and her dad had just met them in the wilderness

Moses married a midianite before the law, and after the law, he wasn't supposed to marry outside the law.

There was no Law at this point against marrying non-Hebrews, if there were please show it.
Secondly, their grievance was malicious and baseless. If God had at this point banned intermarriage And Moses intermarried, why would He be wroth for these servants who were zealous for His word? Recall God commended and rewarded Joshua for his zeal for the Law

That was Aaron's and Miriam's anger, that he not only broke the law, but married outside the covenant. Miriam and Aaron may not have liked that Moses was initially married to a Midianite but they would have understood the extenuating circumstances that led to that union (it happened before the law). Now, here goes Moses marrying outside of the Israelites again!

More nonsense. Which Law did he violate? Quote it and prove it was in place before this imagined incidence. Note, nowhere in Numbers tell you Moses remarried. They just took occasion to murmur against a HISTORICAL marriage and not a new one.

As Zipporah is never again mentioned (chronologically) in the text, it is quite logical to assume Moses' Midianite wife had died and Moses had now, shortly after, married another woman who was Cushite.

But this 'quite logical' is as dumb as it can get for is the Ethiopian wife mentioned after this? Does it mean she died immediately after this?
This is the problem with using Google to copy paste junk and hope that you will look clever. You look more stupid. Think through whatever Oyaks belches enforce regurgitating it here

God's subsequent vindication of Moses, in the face of Miriam and Aaron's displeasure, implies that Moses had done no wrong in the circumstances leading to their actions. As can be seen throughout the Old Testament, God is normally quite willing to call out leaders for the wrong actions, either directly or through those around them. Zipporah's death can be reasonably assumed.

But if there was already a law against intermarriage, why would Moses be vindicated for bypassing millions of Israeli galz and marrying a non-Hebrew?

Remember in the midst of their journey, as they were at an "encampment" (KJV says "inn", God struck Moses with a very serious illness for failing to circumcise his son (likely the younger one Eliezer). It appears that he was so sick that he was unable to do it himself, so Zipporah did it.

Bro drop those psychedelic mushrooms. This was not in the 'midst of the journey', it was BEFORE Moses got back to Egypt from Midian, from the burning bush, before the plagues, before Exodus, before splitting the Red Sea!

Her words that followed to Moses were "Surely you are a husband of blood to me!" (Ex 4:25). Most believe that she was opposed to infant circumcision (as were her Midianite people), so Moses did not perform the circumcision in order to please her. However, when she saw that God would take her husband's life for failing to do so, she did it herself, but the ritual disgusted her, thus her words to Moses.

This is baseless speculation but most importantly, it was BEFORE Moses got back to Egypt from Midian

After this event, we see Moses meeting up with Aaron and heading for Egypt (Ex 4:27-31). We do not hear about Zipporah and the two boys again until (Ex 18:1-7).

In (Ex 18:1-7) we see that Jethro is going to go visit Moses, taking with him Zipporah "after he had sent her back" (Ex 18:2). So, clearly, Moses had sent her away to Jethro at some point. Verses 1-7 tell us about this visit of Jethro, and the reunion of Zipporah and the two sons with Moses.

Because there is no mention of Zipporah and the boys after the circumcision until the reunion, nearly everyone agrees that they likely returned to Jethro right after that event. [/b]Therefore, the time for their return was right before Moses went to Egypt.

Which means Zippy never met neither Aaron not Miriam!
Blowing off both your hooves

In all, it is clear Zipporah and the Cushite were two different people!

How?

[b]Miriam and Aaron were angry he married outside the law, God vindicated him because, he should have paid dearly for breaking the law, but for the record, the Law only banned Israelites from taking wives of "those who live in the land," namely the peoples/nations who were under God's judgment in the land of Canaan (Exodus 34:15-16; cf. Genesis 15:16). Moses therefore did no wrong in taking a subsequent wife who was a Cushite.

Amateur theologian,
Exodus forbade covenants with Caananites. Midian was not Canaan and not was Cush.
Let me paste the entire verse for you.
Exodus 34:11-16 (ESV)
Observe what I command you this day. Behold, I will drive out before you the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. 12 Take care, lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land to which you go, lest it become a snare in your midst. 13 You shall tear down their altars and break their pillars and cut down their Asherim 14 (for you shall worship no other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God), 15 lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and when they LovePeddler after their gods and sacrifice to their gods and you are invited, you eat of his sacrifice, 16 and you take of their daughters for your sons, and their daughters LovePeddler after their gods and make your sons LovePeddler after their gods.

The 'land' in question is Canaan. So there would have been no occasion for Aaron and Miriam to get mad. Secondly as I told you, if Moses breached or apparently breached any Law, God ought to have corrected their overzealousness instead of punishing them for attempting to obey Him. Thirdly, I'm still waiting for the record of Moses REMARRYING.

Once gain, the grievance against Moses was 100% unfounded. This you got right, but not because of Exodus 34, but rather because God had used Moses to wrought wonders despite marrying Zippy the Cushite/Midianite yet it grieved Aaron and Miriam. When Zippy was reunited with Moses by his father in the wilderness, God was indifferent to her. Why would they seize that to murmur against Moses' leadership?

It is quote probable that Miriam was annoyed by Jethro's system of delegation and she projected this on his daughter hence the sudden wrath

Where is it recorded that Moses remarried?

1 Corinthians 15:32 (KJV)
If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die.

Beloved,
Look at this verse closely.
First, Paul is correcting the Corinthians' error of believing there is no resurrection. To this end he poses a series of rhetorical questions meant to drive the point home. The point is, most of what Christians do and the risks they take are meaningless if all there is to life is this life.

In this particular verse, he wonders what value it adds 'fighting beasts' at Ephesus if there is no resurrection. Obviously whatever Paul means here, it includes some serious risk on his life as well as sacrifice.

But the question is, what does he mean that he fought with beasts at Ephesus?
Beasts are (wild)animals but Ephesus is a city and we know animals are displaced by human settlement. There certainly were no wild animals roaming in the city of Ephesus, at least not any that is recorded.

Some think the beasts were wicked men who persecuted Christianity. But again, Paul never fought back. It is hard to imagine Paul fighting physically with men whereas Acts present him as one fully meek.

My opinion is that of all his ministry tours, Ephesus is where Paul experienced the most intense and unrelenting spiritual warfare. It is my humble belief that what he is describing here as beasts are demonic entities, and fighting them is spiritual warfare. Maybe this is what inspired him in his epistle to Ephesus to dedicate some portions of it to spiritual warfare;

[b]Ephesians 6:11-20 (KJV)
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. 13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; 15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. 17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: 18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; 19 And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel, 20 For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.[/b]

Good night saints of the most high

promisechuks,
Ever wondered why Pharisees and Legalists are super scared of this simple question, 'do you sin?'?

The reason is simple;
They spend a better part of their waking life condemning others for not embracing legalism as themselves but they have never thought out the implication of their beliefs.
Possible answers to the question
1. The radicalized jihadi Legalist will tell you they are sinless

2. The rational double-minded Legalist will tell you they are hairbreadth away from sinlessness...with a few prayers, carefulness, crucifying the flesh they should be there. This is hopefully by their deathbed some 80 years from now.

3. The confused Legalist will tell you that they sin occasionally. OCCASIONALLY here means, 'way too less than those filthy wicked sinners out there heading to hell. Those are CONTINUING in sin but the Legalist is just an occasional sinner. In fact they are not sinners as such, just that they sin occasionally

4. The semi-baked Legalist will tell you that they do sin, but they sin unconsciously, NEVER deliberately, and as such, their sins are way more forgive able that the vile sinners out there who sin deliberately. He is closely related to #3

When you look at #2-#4, there is sin in the Legalist's life. The Legalist embarks on an impossible task of diminishing this sin, rounding it off to the nearest nothing. To help them along, they MAGNIFY the the sins of others.

Another thing is that while the Legalist threatens everyone with eternal damnation, they are not any better assured of their eternity; Christ may sneak on them just after they sin and before they repent! Some to cope with this frightening possibility of missing heaven theorize that somewhat before Jesus lands, He will quickly and spontaneously quicken all believers of all sins, give them some time to repent, hold them sinless for a few more moments, and then before those moments lapse, He will quickly fish them before they are again tainted with sin!

Others theorize that these 'minor and infrequent' sins won't determine their eternity; it is the 'major sins' that matter. The problem is the distinction between 'minor and infrequent' sins and 'major and frequent' sins is arbitrary.

The jihadi radicalized Legalist is delusional;they live in a bubble. How do they know they are sinless? When did they become sinless? How long did they take since getting saved to become sinless? Is that the fastest? What happens to those who die after getting saved and before attaining sinlessness? And will Jesus find all sinless? If Sinlessness takes time t from salvation to be attained, what happens to those who get saved inside rapture and t, will they be raptured seeing they were never given enough time to attain sinlessness?

The rational Legalist ought to tell you whether he is saved now that he is yet to attain sinlessness or he will be saved once he attains it

The confused Legalist ought to define occasional what frequency of a sin makes it occasional and habitual? Once in a week, month, year?

The semi-baked Legalist is a pathetic liar. Pray tell me what one sin he did unconsciously that is without knowing it?



As such, you can see why the question of sin in the Legalists is a scary one. They will avoid it at all cost because it condemns them!

Cc Muafrika2,Scholar8200