Would you refer me to where I said it happens in the USA? Your penchant for misinterpretation and misrepresentation is too annoying.
I only asked you to bring proof that no one can decide to take the place of another in judgement in the US.
Yes because it duplicated exactly the substitute role Jesus played for us. Did the Bible not call Jesus our substitute?
You're the one who fail to easily grasp what I say or perhaps it is a deliberate attempt to obscure the truth.
In law, there's what is called Substitutionary punishment. Go and find out about that. It happens when someone decides to take the place of another who is to be sentenced.
1Peter 3:18
"For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God."
I have shown you previously that Christ did it voluntarily. It is permissable in law, though very rare. Man cannot pay for his sins, so Jesus gave Himself for us. If man can pay for his sins, Jesus wouldn't need to do so. It's God's prerogative of mercy to allow Jesus take our place so that we can escape unavoidable eternal damnation. The human race was doomed for lack of inability. Jesus voluntarily came to our rescue.
If you still don't understand what I've said, I do not know he else I can explain it. This is the whole Scripture.
This doesn't hold in the physical constitutional law, read the US constitution why are you asking me? Don't you have google or can't you query?
I am well aware of the spiritual perspective of divine substitution but your initial logic was flawed that's why I brought this up!
The Jews using earthly logic will disagree!
You can't die for my sins and let's test this out why not go to those on death row and plead that you want to die in their stead!
How ignorant you are!
Penal substitution only applies to spiritual law no where in physical constitutional law is it applied! It defeats ethics.
It's either you didn't go to school or your education was a waste. If every Nigerian man is a scum, then, you're a scum. Interestingly I'm not really Nigerian. I'll agree you are a scum!
That statement was an Hyperbole! It does not mean everything in reality but for emphasis only.
You are a fool!
Are all Nigeria men scum?
Every one knows this statement is a fallacy
When I exaggerate I put this (exaggeration) beside to make my meaning clear!
I don't say man doesn't die and then spin off and say it was an hyperbole!
That defeats the accuracy in your statements, without precision then you are no different from a liar!
You just keep committing the fallacy of dicto simpliciter!
It's either you didn't go to school or your education was a waste. If every Nigerian man is a scum, then, you're a scum. Interestingly I'm not really Nigerian. I'll agree you are a scum!
That statement was an Hyperbole! It does not mean everything in reality but for emphasis only.
This type of fallacy can be misleading and oversimplifies complex issues!
That's my problem with you!
You make universal claims without considering exceptions or counterexamples!!!
My dear, stop being confused as far as this discussion is concerned.
My stand about man's immortality has been on the pre-separation period of man. Who doesn't know that man invited death after separation from God
I said God created man to be immortal. Please own up to what you said. You refuted that claim further shot yourself in the foot by saying God's fellowship with man was the reason why man had eternal life. How then does man die? Assuming man didn't separate from God, would he still die even with God fellowshiping with him?
You've seen the error in your posts but you are refusing to it it.
If you read my exegesis on this topic you would have noted my analogy: The U.S. Air force created warplanes to be flown but whether they are flown constantly it's another matter and no plane flies without fuel hence as long there is fuel to power it theoretically it can fly forever but of it's own inherent nature can it fly forever?
Nope!!!!
That's my point
Your oversimplification is very misleading
Saying Man is created immortal when the obvious contrary is visible!
Something that is created immortal should still stay immortal!
If you had rather said that man was created for the purpose of immortality in the presence of God that's better; which is confirmed in the scripture by the existence of death when man deviates from the Lord!
You started your f00lishness and stupidity as DaddyCoool, then Gabrielshow24, now Tetraozonaitera
God of the Torah did not mate with Mary to produce Himself and then offer Himself on the cross to Himself as a sacrifice. You are a very stupid scammer using the virgin birth scam to scam the gullible ones.
Since your god of your invented Jesus christ can mate with Mary to produce himself, then your God of your Jesus christ was the one that sent Mohammed yet you don't want to accept Mohammed as the massager of your God of Jesus christ. This shows how f00lish your are.
You ran away from this before. Here is it again for you:
The Jews know very well that your invented Jesus christ is not their Messiah God will send because the Jews know and understand the Old Testament or their Torah very well. Same way Christians are saying Mohammed is not a prophet from the God of their Jesus christ because the Christians know and understand their New Testament very well.
1. Muslims are saying Jews and Christians are not following the prophet of Allah who to them is the true God of Abraham.
2. Christians are saying Jews and Muslims are not following Jesus christ and the God of Jesus who to them is the true God of Abraham.
3. Jews are saying Christians and Muslims are not following their God who is the true God of Abraham.
This is because Christianity and Islam came after and they were invented as political tools to control the people till today.
Never knew I had so many monikers on NL. I thought I only have this one.
Mr. YouTube conspiracy LOONIE don't drag Jews and Muslims into it.
The questions are whether Christ of the NT could have been invented by Rome, and whether the moon-landing could have been faked.
The answer is that only conspiracy KUKUS like you believe such.
All you have to do is, keep asking FUNDAMENTAL questions like I taught you, while keeping far away from YouTube!
(My man actually said Russia couldn't tell if US had man on the moon or not. Wow!
Russia that beat US into space. Nothing loonies won't come up with!)
But that is in the context of what God says about men and angels in heaven. The Bible depicts angels as servants while depicting men as sitting on thrones
This is misleading cause even in the scriptures it was written that Angels will help in the reaping of the world. The parable of Jesus enhances the image of Angels sorting between Good and bad Fishes, the self same bible addresses them as sons not servants but just as the way a son is subject to his Father hence they are subject to God and likewise ministering spirits(because God sent them)!
In fact who isn't(oversimplification)?
From the very scriptures Jesus addresses us as "unprofitable servants" and at a later time " he called us sons", "brethren" and "friends" etc
Even fallen Angels address themselves as Princes!
Understanding is key!!!
. I do not say that men would rule over angels while angels would be serving men. I never drew that inference.
You didn't have to; your statement implied it!
If I say igbos will be servants and Yorubas will be rulers? What do you think am implying?
Just telling the place where God put both men and angels in heaven.
Do not think that I do not know how to abuse too. If you think you have the monopoly of abusing people, calling them foolish, stupid and again telling me "you're filled with folly", I'll deal with you accordingly from henceforth.
If you present yourself as a human, you be treated as one. If you believe like a goat, you'll be treated like a goat.
If you think my statement implied what I didn't say, you're responsible for your own interpretation.
Yorubas will be rulers, Igbos would be servant would mean different things to many people. A ruler of a people can still be inferior to the servants of a high King.
I was not talking about inferiority or superiority. My emphasis was on roles. Just to make you see the value God placed on man. You're the one who turned it to a superiority matter.
If you think my statement implied what I didn't say, you're responsible for your own interpretation.
Yorubas will be rulers, Igbos would be servant would mean different things to many people.
A ruler of a people can still be inferior to the servants of a high King.
Your initial analogy didn't take this into ! This is why I condemn your oversimplification!!!
You reduce complex issues to simple absolute statements without thought!
I was not talking about inferiority or superiority. My emphasis was on roles. Just to make you see the value God placed on man. You're the one who turned it to a superiority matter
This will not help you have no plausible deniability!
If you read my exegesis on this topic you would have noted my analogy: The U.S. Air force created warplanes to be flown but whether they are flown constantly it's another matter and no plane flies without fuel hence as long there is fuel to power it theoretically it can fly forever but of it's own inherent nature can it fly forever?
Nope!!!!
That's my point
Your oversimplification is very misleading
Saying Man is created immortal when the obvious contrary is visible!
Something that is created immortal should still stay immortal!
If you had rather said that man was created for the purpose of immortality in the presence of God that's better; which is confirmed in the scripture by the existence of death when man deviates from the Lord!
Go and study!
You don't have proper understanding
Thus your mental gymnastic cannot work on me okay?
By your US plane analogy, you are itting that man was actually created immortal but that immortality was dependent on his fellowship with God. You're now telling me that I oversimplified things. Meanwhile you denied the immortality of man and highly berated me for it.
So,you now know that man was actually immortal but pride would not allow you it your errors. In your arrogance you keep insulting and calling names that were actually more befitting for yourself.
I have asked you 5 questions that you couldn't answer because you saw how each question makes you look. Now, this question about immortality in relation to fellowship is being answered using mental gymnastics as a result of pride and insincerity.
3 More questions for you.
If God's Presence gives life to man, and God keeps visiting man, it means God does not want man to die. This is further accentuated by the tree of life which Good additionally gave man as food in the garden. Clearly, God does not want man to die!
Question:
1. If God does not want man to die, why did he create him a dying man according to your logic? Or do you think God really wants a dying man and yet kept visiting him and also gave him a tree of life?
2. If God created the man a dying man even though He wanted him to live forever, does that not mean that God created him so because God had no power to make him an eternal being? It means though God wanted an eternal man but since He had no power to create an eternal man, He had to create a dying man. Is that not your logic?
3. If God has the power to create an immortal man, and He decided to create a dying man, of what benefit would the death of that man be to God to have created him so? Please tell me why God would create a man to die when He has the power to create an eternal man? Why exactly did God put death in the man while He was creating the man?
It seems you don't even understand that death is a spirit. There's a spirit called the spirit of death which found its way into man through the fruit that man ate in disobedience.
How did you know my statement didn't take this into ?
Did I directly say men are superior to angels in heaven? Why didn't I say that directly if I didn't put such a sensitive implication as this into ? Was that not your own private interpretation?
Thus your mental gymnastic cannot work on me okay?
By your US plane analogy, you are itting that man was actually created immortal
You don't think deeply was that the only message I was ing across!
"As long as there is fuel theoretically Planes could fly forever". Your problem is that you are using bundle theory attributing immortality to the man not taking into the the vast examples of death which came as a result of lack of fellowship with God!
THE U.S. made Advanced aircrafts for use for a very long time that's why they spend billions of dollars maintaining them!
But it doesn't mean that the Aircraft of their own nature(substance) are immortal.
If the maintenance were discontinued what becomes of the planes(scrap metal)!!!
but that immortality was dependent on his fellowship with God. You're now telling me that I oversimplified things. Meanwhile you denied the immortality of man
from all my write up what did I berate you for? Your choice of words it is very misleading!
1) saying Man doesn't die he translates - someone will easily conclude that death is entailed in translation and as a logical fact he dies
2) saying Man is created immortal when the contrary is obvious!
Hence you see that the immortality, life is subject to fellowshipping with God those that will eat of the tree of life in Revelations were sons of God!!!(Fellowshipped)
This is the point of my message. You oversimplify things; making absolute statements
and highly berated me for it.
So,you now know that man was actually immortal but pride would not allow you it your errors. In your arrogance you keep insulting and calling names that were actually more befitting for yourself.
I have asked you 5 questions that you couldn't answer
🤔every question you asked I provided answer to go and properly read my write ups
because you saw how each question makes you look. Now, this question about immortality in relation to fellowship is being answered using mental gymnastics as a result of pride and insincerity.
3 More questions for you.
If God's Presence gives life to man, and God keeps visiting man, it means God does not want man to die
Do you think you have struck Gold with this question? Is it not evident in the bible that God wants man to live? What type of question is this? Can't wisdom not tell you that God dying for man provided a means of life for him?
. This is further accentuated by the tree of life which Good additionally gave man as food in the garden. Clearly, God does not want man to die!
Question:
1. If God does not want man to die, why did he create him a dying man according to your logic?
Guy, you have problems with understanding.
You made an unequivocal statement that Man was created immortal - this statement in fact is misleading and it is an oversimplification of other factors!
The immortality you so claim man to be is dependent UPON RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD which your original statement failed to take cognizance to
The scripture point to the Lord sanctifying us for redemption not we ourselves!
Or do you think God really wants a dying man and yet kept visiting him and also gave him a tree of life?
2. If God created the man a dying man even though He wanted him to live forever, does that not mean that God created him so because God had no power to make him an eternal being? It means though God wanted an eternal man but since He had no power to create an eternal man, He had to create a dying man. Is that not your logic?
The bible says everything He made was Good. It didn't say of the inherent nature of it being eternal but it alludes to the fact that God preserves and maintains life hence from this view nothing within itself is immortal!
God is the source and origin of life as long as a branch is part of the tree it gains sustenance from the root!!!
Once again Understanding is key!!!
I have explained all these in my previous write up
3. If God has the power to create an immortal man, and He decided to create a dying man, of what benefit would the death of that man be to God to have created him so? Please tell me why God would create a man to die when He has the power to create an eternal man? Why exactly did God put death in the man while He was creating the man?
It seems you don't even understand that death is a spirit.
Save me the gaffe, does my previous write ups suggest I don't know of it?
Your absurd initial statement is my bone of contention- without proper understanding your statement is very misleading!!!
There's a spirit called the spirit of death which found its way into man through the fruit that man ate in disobedience.
Please answer my 3 questions above if you can.
It shows you focus on the superficial!
I said "inherent of it self, is it immortal"!
You saying Man is immortal is oversimplification.
Everyone knows that vessels of the Temple are used in the temple and as along as they within the temple they are sacred!
I think you don't understand the consequences of your statement.
You saying something was created immortal then it should stay immortal irrespective but this not true of man
And I have never seen where people call temporary marker permanent!
if indeed the ink was permanent within the temporary then after exposure to cleaning it would not be subject to removal!
but the permanent even though you try to clean it still persists!
That's the point!!!
How did you know my statement didn't take this into ?
Did I directly say men are superior to angels in heaven? Why didn't I say that directly if I didn't put such a sensitive implication as this into ? Was that not your own private interpretation?
If you had truly taking them into s then you would have made room for those exceptions which you did not!
You are fond of making "absolute statements"
blandly without proper thought!
My problem is regarding the little ones those without proper understanding will be mislead by this!!!
"IT WAS AFTER YOU ADDED; IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A RULER IN A PLACE TO NOT BE OF THE SAME VALUE AS A SERVANT IN ANOTHER PLACE"
When your initial statement was absolute and comprehensive
"ANGELS ARE SERVANTS IN HEAVEN, MAN IS A RULER IN HEAVEN "
hope this shows the errors in your ways!
And you rectify it before you mislead others with this type of statements. Let your statement be clear
Jesus when asked said " Give unto caesar what belongs to caesar and unto God what belongs to God"!
It seems like a logical proposition but if you consider the effects of the tree of Life as mentioned in the bible which grants immortality. Then if truly they had eaten of it then they would be no need for modern medicine!
And Christ would have had no need to die.
Which means if your proposition is to be valid then the tree doesn't grant immortality at all!! but rather more like a supplement that aids you for meantime(temporal ) hence the tree they ate falls short of the description of the tree that grants eternal life as a consequence it would be fair to state the "tree was no different from the present trees we have now, which only sustain life" which now implies that if it sustains life and doesn't grant life then why would God have need to block them from eating?
This was my reply to you as regards your flawed logic!!!
Then I also realized you try to avoid coming to with your flawed analogy of enlightenment(saying they were enlightened and yet were deceived)
And how is my 'life in blood'? cause without any of the fluids, you die. So the flood wasn't to start afresh, my bad. It was according to you "God's display of anger" Oh so like an impatient narcissistic little child throwing a tantrum afterall. He supposedly gave them freewill and then was pissed off with what they did with it?! lol! Despite knowing the end from the beginning. That was part of the master plan right. Funny your subconscious agrees with me, with you referring to your god as it cause that's the most fitting description. 😁 What's even more funny is comparing a human to a supposed divine being where the human is supposedly inferior in order to justify shortcomings of said being. That's what i call... em what's the word again 'Pathetic'. As for the examples you requested of his word being nullified, they're actually so many its funny but i expect mental gymnastics as usual. How many of the commandments God gave in the Tanakh, do you follow?! If that's not nullification, i don't know what is.
Are you trying to win an argument or understand the point of a conversation?
If you had truly taking them into s then you would have made room for those exceptions which you did not!
You are fond of making "absolute statements"
blandly without proper thought!
My problem is regarding the little ones those without proper understanding will be mislead by this!!!
"IT WAS AFTER YOU ADDED; IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A RULER IN A PLACE TO NOT BE OF THE SAME VALUE AS A SERVANT IN ANOTHER PLACE"
When your initial statement was absolute and comprehensive
"ANGELS ARE SERVANTS IN HEAVEN, MAN IS A RULER IN HEAVEN "
hope this shows the errors in your ways!
And you rectify it before you mislead others with this type of statements. Let your statement be clear
Jesus when asked said " Give unto caesar what belongs to caesar and unto God what belongs to God"!
Okay, I'll see to that in the future.
I can't make absolute statements saying man has authority or rulership over angels because the Bible never said so. I was only concerned about what God said about man versus what God said about angels and using it to draw inferences that God has placed man in a very high place in His reckoning. Whether man would rule over angels or angels would rule over men or that both would be of equal ranks in heaven was not my focus. I was not talking in of superiority or inferiority. Just declaring the Word about man and angels as the are in the Scriptures.
It shows you focus on the superficial!
I said "inherent of it self, is it immortal"!
You saying Man is immortal is oversimplification.
Everyone knows that vessels of the Temple are used in the temple and as along as they within the temple they are sacred!
I think you don't understand the consequences of your statement.
You saying something was created immortal then it should stay immortal irrespective but this not true of man
And I have never seen where people call temporary marker permanent!
if indeed the ink was permanent within the temporary then after exposure to cleaning it would not be subject to removal!
but the permanent even though you try to clean it still persists!
That's the point!!!
From all your statements, you make me believe you're trying to hide from the truth. You already know it.
I have asked you 8 questions to which you provided no answer. You only talked. The talks didn't address the questions at all. But at least, the questions did a lot of work on your initial thinking. What you previously called folly is now called oversimplification. That's a paradigm shift, and I'm happy about that.
When you understand that man's body is suitable for life on earth only, you would understand the depth of man's immortality. All men who have died are actually still alive in another world. If man dies, then he should cease existing completely but why can't man completely cease to exist? Because he cannot. He was not created to.
Anything that would live on earth would need earthly bodies. Satan is alive today but he moves about as an invisible spirit because he doesn't have an earthly body to live on earth. Hence, he remains a spirit. If Satan can have an earthly body, he'll be very glad to live physically on earth. Do demos not possess people in order to use their bodies for expressions?
To clearly understand what I'm saying. Man only sheds off the earthly body at death. He's still alive but can no longer dwell on earth. He dwells elsewhere. Hence, there's immortality in man. However, because of the fall, he can no longer practice his immortality on earth, he practices it elsewhere. He just puts off the mortal body and moves elsewhere to live.
God didn't create man to shed off his earthly body. God wanted man to live forever as we can see from all indications, and because God has the power to create him so, He did that exactly.
Death is a curse perpetuated by a spirit called the spirit of death. It only operates on this earthly plane.
The forbidden fruit converted terrestrial immortality to mortality. That's the death God warned Adam of.
It is a fallacy to say that if they're created terrestrially immortal they must remain immortal no matter what happens.
That logic is defeated by the opposite of that statement - by that statement, we can also say "If they're created terrestrially mortal, they must remain mortal no matter what happens". If that's the case, why did God stop them from eating the fruit of life? Because He doesn't want them to eat and live forever. That means by eating the fruit of life, they would not remain mortal. And using your logic, they're not created mortal. If they were mortal, then eating the forbidden fruit should not alter their mortality. No matter what happens, they should remain mortal.
Can you now see the flaw in that reasoning?
Summarized:
If they were created immortal, they must remain immortal no matter what happens. This translates to, 'if they were created mortal, they must remain mortal no matter what happens.' But by eating the fruit of life, they won't remain mortal. Hence, they were not created mortal, otherwise they would remain mortal even if they ate the fruit of life. Just as you expected them to remain immortal if they were created immortal even though they ate the fruit of death.
From all your statements, you make me believe you're trying to hide from the truth. You already know it.
I have asked you 8 questions to which you provided no answer. You only talked. The talks didn't address the questions at all. But at least, the questions did a lot of work on your initial thinking. What you previously called folly is now called oversimplification. That's a paradigm shift, and I'm happy about that.
When you understand that man's body is suitable for life on earth only, you would understand the depth of man's immortality. All men who have died are actually still alive in another world
is there empirical proof to this?
Without the basis of spirituality that statement is hocum!
. If man dies, then he should cease existing completely but why can't man completely cease to exist?
you are mistaken. You mix up physical existence with spiritual existence!
If you die now don't you cease to exist?
Because he cannot. He was not created to.
Anything that would live on earth would need earthly bodies. Satan is alive today but he moves about as an invisible spirit because he doesn't have an earthly body to live on earth. Hence, he remains a spirit. If Satan can have an earthly body, he'll be very glad to live physically on earth. Do demos not possess people in order to use their bodies for expressions?
To clearly understand what I'm saying. Man only sheds off the earthly body at death. He's still alive but can no longer dwell on earth. He dwells elsewhere. Hence, there's immortality in man.
ah, you call the spirit within man ? Immortality, that's another fallacy!
However, because of the fall, he can no longer practice his immortality on earth
, he practices it elsewhere. He just puts off the mortal body and moves elsewhere to live.
which means he is not immortal!
This is why I said your statements are misleading you just narrowed down to say that the spirit within man is what you meant by immortality and even that is farfetched!
God didn't create man to shed off his earthly body. God wanted man to live forever as we can see from all indications, and because God has the power to create him so, He did that exactly.
Death is a curse perpetuated by a spirit called the spirit of death. It only operates on this earthly plane.
The forbidden fruit converted terrestrial immortality to mortality. That's the death God warned Adam of.
It is a fallacy to say that if they're created terrestrially immortal they must remain immortal no matter what happens.
Your initial sentiment didn't put "terrestrial" there you generalized it as " mmortality" but I knew quite well what you meant but I wanted to show you the flaw in oversimplification and potholes in your thought patterns.
That is the definition of immortality; inherent substantial immortality and man was not made immortal. In the same vein I can say that the inherent genomes within man do not allow him to fly but with wisdom he had been able fly using planes, jets etc.
The examples you gave all buttress the underlying fact that man is not immortal!
But the spirit made him to be in his presence and as a consequence he becomes immortal because in the presence of God there is everlasting life!
That logic is defeated by the opposite of that statement - by that statement, we can also say "If they're created terrestrially mortal, they must remain mortal no matter what happens".
If that's the case, why did God stop them from eating the fruit of life? Because He doesn't want them to eat and live forever. That means by eating the fruit of life, they would not remain mortal. And using your logic, they're not created mortal.
not at all infact you buttress my point more!
When you create something as a variable then it's easier to change but rather when you create as an axiom then it's harder to change!
Hence the fact whereby they were made mortal means that they can attain immortality, the mortality now becomes a variable or mutable state unlike immortality that is not mutable!
It's just like you saying something is absolute zero no matter what happens it will always be zero that why there are used to or depict when absolutism is used!
That's why there are constants in the universe!
Hence immortality is the absolute reference or origin by which mortality can be measured!
If they were mortal, then eating the forbidden fruit should not alter their mortality. No matter what happens, they should remain mortal.
are they not still mortal?
Don't people die everyday?
Can you now see the flaw in that reasoning?
Summarized:
If they were created immortal, they must remain immortal no matter what happens. This translates to, 'if they were created mortal, they must remain mortal no matter what happens.' But by eating the fruit of life, they won't remain mortal. Hence, they were not created mortal, otherwise they would remain mortal even if they ate the fruit of life. Just as you expected them to remain immortal if they were created immortal even though they ate the fruit of death
.
[b]
calling it fruit of death is also misleading God said tree of knowledge of good and evil not death but you don't need to lecture me. I understand what you intend to .
There are things in this world that are axioms or preferably absolutes they do not have a lower full and they can only whole.
Truth is one of them! There is no half-truth so also is immortality! Perfection! etc
There are varying forms of mortality!
At least we have those that lived 100years some 20 etc but you saying that something was made immortal contradicts your original statement; even now so your new write up has preferred to use "spirit of man" to buttress your immortality ideology!
Even that is subject to debate as it can be shown from Jesus saying "fear he that can kill the body and the soul" hence once again I stand with my point
"NOTHING INHERENT OF ITSELF IS IMMORTAL!"
"IN THE PRESENCE OF GOD THERE IS EVERLASTING LIFE!"
"ANYTHING NOT ED TO GOD IS NOT IMMORTAL"
[/b]
God is life eternal(immortality) he created man in his own image to partake of his spirit as long as men partake of this they are eternal(and do not die which we can see from genesis that they lived in the garden for an undisclosed amount of years and which is also confirmed in revelation) but when they left did they live forever? Nope
Even the spirits you mentioned are awaiting judgement and those that are with God will live and the rest death!
Which means the spirit of man you made mention of is not immortal of its own nature
Your write up doesn't take into the agency of Choice!
It doesn't matter the care and finesse put into a Tesla cyber truck when the driver sends it to the lagoon.
Or don't you see how "beautiful" destruction is when human agency comes into play?
As long as there is free will there would be errors and problems and that's why God prepared from the beginning the "lamb of sacrifice" a lot will say "I want to find my own way but that self same way could lead them under the bridge"
God's not against your choice, you will use your hands to choose either life or death.
And how does that change anything i said, practically makes no difference. Besides what choice? Or you mean the illusion of choice?! Oh you mean the free will a supposed omnipotent and omniscient being who could see the end from the beginning gave his creations and was pissed off and taken aback at what they did with it, after declaring em perfect and then decided to punish and wipe em out for using said freewill, that freewill?! lol, what a joke.
Mythical stories with ludicrous plot holes written by primitive and limited minds with very little knowledge of how the world works ergo the numerous plotholes, nothing more.
Look how long you and you fellow 'christain' been arguing over whose interpretation is correct, its funny and you guys expect to be taken seriously when you can't even agree what it is your book says. Nah... Show me 2 christains who agree on the interpretation of the bible from cover to cover and you'd have found a miracle. I rather enjoy watching the delusional joke from the sidelines.
You are a very very f00lish scammer using the invented scam of the virgin birth to scam the gullible ones.
To show how senseless and stu'pid you are that if the woman you have paid her dowry tells you the baby of the god of your village is in her belly, and you can not even touch her for the nine months the baby will be in her belly, you will accept such nonsense to be true.
Never knew I had so many monikers on NL. I thought I only have this one.
Mr. YouTube conspiracy LOONIE don't drag Jews and Muslims into it.
The questions are whether Christ of the NT could have been invented by Rome, and whether the moon-landing could have been faked.
The answer is that only conspiracy KUKUS like you believe such.
All you have to do is, keep asking FUNDAMENTAL questions like I taught you, while keeping far away from YouTube!
(My man actually said Russia couldn't tell if US had man on the moon or not. Wow!
Russia that beat US into space. Nothing loonies won't come up with!)
He makes a good point why do you believe that Moses splitted the red sea? Where some scientists believe it was the "Sea of Reeds"?
Also why do you believe that God rained down brimstones from Sodom and Gomorrah? Where that can be easily explained as a volcanic eruption? - at it was in the case of Pompeii
Why do you believe this things that look far fetched? Like for instance pillar of salt, pillar of Fire, pillar of cloud.
So you believe in the Power of God but you render that power impotent when it comes to the virgin birth?
If in nature it is prevalent in komodo dragons?
But you prefer to believe an old man substituted stick for Iron!
What I am practically saying is you are Stupid.
A great fool to believe that there is a God but you find it hard that that same God is powerful enough to make someone pregnant without having an intercourse .
Why then is He God if that simple act is impossible for Him?
Omo, you are a GREAT FOOL!
PERIOD!
The foolish atheist is smarter than you. At least, he doesn't kukuma believe there is a God. So, not believing in a God performing such a miracle wont be strange.
But here you are, you believe in the God of Torah like you said, but you find it hard to believe the same God of Torah can make a virgin pregnant. When the same God in Torah asked; "Is there anything too hard for me to do?"
YOU ARE A FOOL
A VERY BIG FOOL. Answering you is baseless. You are not smart.
I thought you were sane and open to logic but now I can see that you are not logical at all!
You stray away from points; when confronted you become defensive.
It is so clear that history does not deny the existence of Jesus. It's believed he existed; confirmed by major religions of the world!
MindHacker9009:
You are a very very f00lish scammer using the invented scam of the virgin birth to scam the gullible ones.
To show how senseless and stu'pid you are that if the woman you have paid her dowry tells you the baby of the god of you village is in her belly, and you can not even touch her for the nine months the baby will be in her belly, you will accept such nonsense to be true.
MindHacker9009:
You are a very very f00lish scammer using the invented scam of the virgin birth to scam the gullible ones.
To show how senseless and stu'pid you are that if the woman you have paid her dowry tells you the baby of the god of you village is in her belly, and you can not even touch her for the nine months the baby will be in her belly, you will accept such nonsense to be true.
Conspiracy mumụ see below.
I see you're no longer dragging moon landing - you now see it could NOT have been faked, just as the last thing a sane Rome would invent is a person that says that all the gods they've been worshipping were trash!
You are the big fake news mumu, that even if it was today the New Testament was written to say a virgin in your village got conceived by the god of your village, you will say it's true so that you can use it to scam the gullible ones.
DaddyCoool:
Conspiracy mumụ see below.
I see you're no longer dragging moon landing - you now see it could NOT have been faked, just as the last thing a sane Rome would invent is a person that says that all the gods they've been worshipping were trash!
You are the big fake news mumu, that even if it was today the New Testament was written to say a virgin in your village got conceived by the god of your village, you will say it's true so that you can use it to scam the gullible ones.
The fake scamming spirit that cannot write down anything but can mate with a virgin, scammers like you are using to scam the gullible ones.
YouTube mumụ, you're the one full of scams, which is why you mention scamming on every post.
Why is it so hard for you to believe that God implanted a seed into a woman?? He can also implant it into a man. He doesn't for the same reason He didn't just drop Christ from the sky as a fully grown man!
YouTube mumụ, you're the one full of scams, which is why you mention scamming on every post.
Why is it so hard for you to believe that God implanted a seed into a woman?? He can also implant it into a man. He doesn't for the same reason He didn't just drop Christ from the sky as a fully grown man!
Primitive mumu scammer using the invented Jesus christ to scam the gullible ones. Your mumu brain does not like YouTube because it exposing many scams like that of your invented Jesus christ and the fake moon landing.
Primitive mumu scammer using the invented Jesus christ to scam the gullible ones. Your mumu brain does not like YouTube because it exposing many scams like that of your invented Jesus christ and the fake moon landing.
It says: MindHacker9009 is a total conspiracy kuku.
He is an idiot who believes Russians couldn't tell if US went to the moon, and that Rome created someone who said all gods they had been worshiping were trash!
He is also a pedophile and his mother is a whoré!
Never knew I had so many monikers on NL. I thought I only have this one.
Mr. YouTube conspiracy LOONIE don't drag Jews and Muslims into it.
The questions are whether Christ of the NT could have been invented by Rome, and whether the moon-landing could have been faked.
The answer is that only conspiracy KUKUS like you believe such.
All you have to do is, keep asking FUNDAMENTAL questions like I taught you, while keeping far away from YouTube!
(My man actually said Russia couldn't tell if US had man on the moon or not. Wow!
Russia that beat US into space. Nothing loonies won't come up with!)
Rome actually invented jesus and for good measure, No man has ever been on the moon. The moon is a luminous object not the rock as painted by NaSa. Even Buzz Adrian itted they never went there...they have even told you through there cartoon that it was faked. See family guy and American dad.
See Richard price video...he does a great deal of justice to the topic..
You have been displaying your f00lishless now you are showing that you are not normal.
You need to know that any riffraff like you posting a video on YouTube is of no importance on YouTube.
Watch this YouTube video to know who real people on YouTude are and not a riffraff like you living a shithole. Have you ever published an academic journal, I know you don't even know what an academic journal is.
DaddyCoool is a total kuku and a F00LISH SCAMMER.
The same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is an idiot who believes Russians couldn tell if US went to the moon, and that Rome could not create someone who did not want to offend the Romans!
The same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is also a pedophile and will be caught soon and will be set ablaze by an angry mob and the mother of the same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is a whoré![/quote]
It says: DaddyCoool is a total kuku and a F00LISH SCAMMER.
The same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is an idiot who believes Russians couldn tell if US went to the moon, and that Rome could not create someone who did not want to offend the Romans!
The same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is also a pedophile and will be caught soon and will be set ablaze by an angry mob and the mother of the same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is a whoré!
MindHacker9009:
You have been displaying your f00lishless now you are showing that you are not normal.
You need to know that any riffraff like you posting a video on YouTube is of no importance on YouTube.
Watch this YouTube video to know who real people on YouTude are and not a riffraff like you living a shithole. Have you ever published an academic journal, I know you don't even know what an academic journal is.
DaddyCoool is a total kuku and a F00LISH SCAMMER.
The same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is an idiot who believes Russians couldn tell if US went to the moon, and that Rome could not create someone who did not want to offend the Romans!
The same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is also a pedophile and will be caught soon and will be set ablaze by an angry mob and the mother of the same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is a whoré!
It says: DaddyCoool is a total kuku and a F00LISH SCAMMER.
The same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is an idiot who believes Russians couldn tell if US went to the moon, and that Rome could not create someone who did not want to offend the Romans!
The same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is also a pedophile and will be caught soon and will be set ablaze by an angry mob and the mother of the same person using these monikers DaddyCoool, Gabrielshow24 and Tetraozonaitera is a whoré!
😂🤣😂🤣😂
Here's your video again. It's on YouTube forever just like other STUPID YouTube videos you cite!😅
