Amujale:


The Abrahamic religions peddles a false representation of history.

According to real history, Christianity is a false and malicious concept that was manufactured by first century Romans.

The Abrahamic religions are malicious Arabian fundamentalist and Eurocentric ideologies whose main function is to make people believe in their lies.

The Abrahamic religions peddle a false narrative that attempts to basterdise real history.

Forget and bin all those false ideologies of the Abrahamic religions and concentrate our focus on real history, African history.

Maximus69:




Pointless comment!

Are you of the opinion that the so called Catholic miracle is real or not?

Period!

Maximus69:




Pointless comment!

Are you of the opinion that the so called Catholic miracle is real or not?

Period!

brocab:
You are doing a lot of writing for someone who doesn't believe-already you have come up with this-people believe what they choose to believe, you need to talk to someone who is interested, because I am not interested in mockers like you..

brocab:
{Hebrews 13:8} Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever...
But do you actually believe in the scriptures "JW-don't you believe that miracles happen everyday?

Amujale:


Both Jesus and Christianity was created by olden days Romans.

As in, Christianity was created by liars and fakers.

The Jesus character was invented by liars and fakers.

Concentrate your focus on making our world a better place, something both Jesus and Christianity has failed woefully.

Given that neither Christianity nor Islam is meant to favour Africans, why are we still followimg these false concepts?

Maximus69:


Walahi Talahi you're just dribbling yourself!

The question again ~ is the miracle real or not?

brocab:
What more can I say to you JW I give my answer and still you refuse to accept it..

Maximus69:


I didn't get your answer!

Is the miracle REAL or FAKE?
What biblical proof do you have to back up your answer?

brocab:
This is my answer-meaning'' 'The only thing wrong with this story-is-the fact they had camera's everywhere, if God was really in this picture, and this man was really crippled-one would think this man would be glorifying and praising God, but sadly, he is not" in this picture only the priest receives the glory from men.
{Matthew 4:4} "Man don't live by bread alone-but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the Lord.....
So [color=red]my answer is no, I don't believe God was even in this picture, let alone heal this man...[/color]

brocab:
If nothing is working for you, then you need to find something that is working for you.
And besides believing is a better place to be, firstly I am not African, secondly my country is the land full of milk and honey, when my country was discovered they called it the land of the Holy Spirit..
If you believe you are so great in history, then look up the "Spear of destiny-and history will tell you Jesus did exist..

brocab:
...the "Spear of destiny-and history will tell you Jesus did exist.

brocab:
If nothing is working for you, then you need to find something that is working for you.
And besides believing is a better place to be, firstly I am not African, secondly my country is the land full of milk and honey, when my country was discovered they called it the land of the Holy Spirit..
If you believe you are so great in history, then look up the "Spear of destiny-and history will tell you Jesus did exist..

Maximus69:


Now i get your answer as "NO", but what's the correlation between the quotation 'Luke 4:3-4' and the event?

Amujale:


Forget and bin all that Hellenistic mumbojumbo and concentrate focus on real history.

Let's all conce trate our focus on things that are real and true. i.e history.

Lets's stop sourcing from the fakery inside of Abrahamic text and instead source from real history.

It isnt much to ask of us, STOP sourcing from liars and fakers and instead choose to source from real history.


Manufactured history created by liars and fakers ❌

Real history ✅

brocab:
We read in {Luke 4:2} that He was tempted by the devil for forty days, I suppose who's authority was this man 'healed by? Satan also comes in as the angel of light

brocab:

Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the one to come.…

Amujale:



Christianity an Islam are both aftermaths of foreign aggressive invasions.

That is to say, Christianity does not favour Africa.

Islam does not favour Africa.

Christianity and Islam are never to be taken seriously, they are the mere after math of an aggressive occupation.

Christianity is a false concept that was manufactured by the Romans in the fourth century.

The Christianity is a massive charade.

Amujale:



Christianity an Islam are both aftermaths of foreign aggressive invasions.

That is to say, Christianity does not favour Africa.

Islam does not favour Africa.

Christianity and Islam are never to be taken seriously, they are the mere after math of an aggressive occupation.

Christianity is a false concept that was manufactured by the Romans in the fourth century.

The Christianity is a massive charade.

Maximus69:


Wonders shall never end!

So you agree that Satan also do pretend as an angel of light!

Please upon which criteria do you now justify the angel of light?

brocab:
Is not JW's also known as a false cult as well..

brocab:
I agree that Satan came to the JW's as the angel of light, and no-one other then a JW would disagree!!

Amujale:



Christianity an Islam are both aftermaths of foreign aggressive invasions.

That is to say, Christianity does not favour Africa.

Islam does not favour Africa.

Christianity and Islam are never to be taken seriously, they are the mere after math of an aggressive occupation.

Christianity is a false concept that was manufactured by the Romans in the fourth century.

The Christianity is a massive charade.

brocab:
Question: "Is there an argument for the existence of God?"

Answer: The question of whether there is a conclusive argument for the existence of God has been debated throughout history, with exceedingly intelligent people taking both sides of the dispute. In recent times, arguments against the possibility of God’s existence have taken on a militant spirit that accuses anyone daring to believe in God as being delusional and irrational. Karl Marx asserted that anyone believing in God must have a mental disorder that caused invalid thinking. The psychiatrist Sigmund Freud wrote that a person who believed in a Creator God was delusional and only held those beliefs due to a “wish-fulfillment” factor that produced what Freud considered to be an unjustifiable position. The philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche bluntly said that faith equates to not wanting to know what is true. The voices of these three figures from history (along with others) are simply now parroted by a new generation of atheists who claim that a belief in God is intellectually unwarranted.

Is this truly the case? Is belief in God a rationally unacceptable position to hold? Is there a logical and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Outside of referencing the Bible, can a case for the existence of God be made that refutes the positions of both the old and new atheists and gives sufficient warrant for believing in a Creator? The answer is, yes, it can. Moreover, in demonstrating the validity of an argument for the existence of God, the case for atheism is shown to be intellectually weak.

An argument for the existence of God — something rather than nothing

To make an argument for the existence of God, we must start by asking the right questions. We begin with the most basic metaphysical question: “Why do we have something rather than nothing at all?” This is the basic question of existence—why are we here; why is the earth here; why is the universe here rather than nothing? Commenting on this point, one theologian has said, “In one sense man does not ask the question about God, his very existence raises the question about God.”

In considering this question, there are four possible answers to why we have something rather than nothing at all:

1. Reality is an illusion.
2. Reality is/was self-created.
3. Reality is self-existent (eternal).
4. Reality was created by something that is self-existent.

So, which is the most plausible solution? Let’s begin with reality being simply an illusion, which is what a number of Eastern religions believe. This option was ruled out centuries ago by the philosopher Rene Descartes who is famous for the statement, “I think, therefore I am.” Descartes, a mathematician, argued that if he is thinking, then he must “be.” In other words, “I think, therefore I am not an illusion.” Illusions require something experiencing the illusion, and moreover, you cannot doubt the existence of yourself without proving your existence; it is a self-defeating argument. So the possibility of reality being an illusion is eliminated.

Next is the option of reality being self-created. When we study philosophy, we learn of “analytically false” statements, which means they are false by definition. The possibility of reality being self-created is one of those types of statements for the simple reason that something cannot be prior to itself. If you created yourself, then you must have existed prior to you creating yourself, but that simply cannot be. In evolution this is sometimes referred to as “spontaneous generation” —something coming from nothing—a position that few, if any, reasonable people hold to anymore simply because you cannot get something from nothing. Even the atheist David Hume said, “I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that anything might arise without a cause.” Since something cannot come from nothing, the alternative of reality being self-created is ruled out.

Now we are left with only two choices—an eternal reality or reality being created by something that is eternal: an eternal universe or an eternal Creator. The 18th-century theologian Jonathan Edwards summed up this crossroads:

• Something exists.
• Nothing cannot create something.
• Therefore, a necessary and eternal “something” exists.

Notice that we must go back to an eternal “something.” The atheist who derides the believer in God for believing in an eternal Creator must turn around and embrace an eternal universe; it is the only other door he can choose. But the question now is, where does the evidence lead? Does the evidence point to matter before mind or mind before matter?

To date, all key scientific and philosophical evidence points away from an eternal universe and toward an eternal Creator. From a scientific standpoint, honest scientists admit the universe had a beginning, and whatever has a beginning is not eternal. In other words, whatever has a beginning has a cause, and if the universe had a beginning, it had a cause. The fact that the universe had a beginning is underscored by evidence such as the second law of thermodynamics, the radiation echo of the big bang discovered in the early 1900s, the fact that the universe is expanding and can be traced back to a singular beginning, and Einstein’s theory of relativity. All prove the universe is not eternal.

Further, the laws that surround causation speak against the universe being the ultimate cause of all we know for this simple fact: an effect must resemble its cause. This being true, no atheist can explain how an impersonal, purposeless, meaningless, and amoral universe accidentally created beings (us) who are full of personality and obsessed with purpose, meaning, and morals. Such a thing, from a causation standpoint, completely refutes the idea of a natural universe birthing everything that exists. So in the end, the concept of an eternal universe is eliminated.

Philosopher J. S. Mill (not a Christian) summed up where we have now come to: “It is self-evident that only Mind can create mind.” The only rational and reasonable conclusion is that an eternal Creator is the one who is responsible for reality as we know it. Or to put it in a logical set of statements:

• Something exists.
• You do not get something from nothing.
• Therefore a necessary and eternal “something” exists.
• The only two options are an eternal universe and an eternal Creator.
• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.
• Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.

Former atheist Lee Strobel, who arrived at this end result many years ago, has commented, “Essentially, I realized that to stay an atheist, I would have to believe that nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; and non-reason produces reason. Those leaps of faith were simply too big for me to take, especially in light of the affirmative case for God’s existence … In other words, in my assessment the Christian worldview accounted for the totality of the evidence much better than the atheistic worldview.”

An argument for the existence of God — knowing the Creator

But the next question we must tackle is this: if an eternal Creator exists (and we have shown that He does), what kind of Creator is He? Can we infer things about Him from what He created? In other words, can we understand the cause by its effects? The answer to this is yes, we can, with the following characteristics being surmised:

• He must be supernatural in nature (as He created time and space).
• He must be powerful (exceedingly).
• He must be eternal (self-existent).
• He must be omnipresent (He created space and is not limited by it).
• He must be timeless and changeless (He created time).
• He must be immaterial because He transcends space/physical.
• He must be personal (the impersonal cannot create personality).
• He must be infinite and singular as you cannot have two infinites.
• He must be diverse yet have unity as unity and diversity exist in nature.
• He must be intelligent (supremely). Only cognitive being can produce cognitive being.
• He must be purposeful as He deliberately created everything.
• He must be moral (no moral law can be had without a giver).
• He must be caring (or no moral laws would have been given).

These things being true, we now ask if any religion in the world describes such a Creator. The answer to this is yes: the God of the Bible fits this profile perfectly. He is supernatural (Genesis 1:1), powerful (Jeremiah 32:17), eternal (Psalm 90:2), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7), timeless/changeless (Malachi 3:6), immaterial (John 5:24), personal (Genesis 3:9), necessary (Colossians 1:17), infinite/singular (Jeremiah 23:24, Deuteronomy 6:4), diverse yet with unity (Matthew 28:19), intelligent (Psalm 147:4-5), purposeful (Jeremiah 29:11), moral (Daniel 9:14), and caring (1 Peter 5:6-7).

An argument for the existence of God — the flaws of atheism

One last subject to address on the matter of God’s existence is the matter of how justifiable the atheist’s position actually is. Since the atheist asserts the believer’s position is unsound, it is only reasonable to turn the question around and aim it squarely back at him. The first thing to understand is that the claim the atheist makes—“no god,” which is what “atheist” means—is an untenable position to hold from a philosophical standpoint. As legal scholar and philosopher Mortimer Adler says, “An affirmative existential proposition can be proved, but a negative existential proposition—one that denies the existence of something—cannot be proved.” For example, someone may claim that a red eagle exists and someone else may assert that red eagles do not exist. The former only needs to find a single red eagle to prove his assertion. But the latter must comb the entire universe and literally be in every place at once to ensure he has not missed a red eagle somewhere and at some time, which is impossible to do. This is why intellectually honest atheists will admit they cannot prove God does not exist.

Next, it is important to understand the issue that surrounds the seriousness of truth claims that are made and the amount of evidence required to warrant certain conclusions. For example, if someone puts two containers of lemonade in front of you and says that one may be more tart than the other, since the consequences of getting the more tart drink would not be serious, you would not require a large amount of evidence in order to make your choice. However, if to one cup the host added sweetener but to the other he introduced rat poison, then you would want to have quite a bit of evidence before you made your choice.

This is where a person sits when deciding between atheism and belief in God. Since belief in atheism could possibly result in irreparable and eternal consequences, it would seem that the atheist should be mandated to produce weighty and overriding evidence to support his position, but he cannot. Atheism simply cannot meet the test for evidence for the seriousness of the charge it makes. Instead, the atheist and those whom he convinces of his position slide into eternity with their fingers crossed and hope they do not find the unpleasant truth that eternity does indeed exist. As Mortimer Adler says, “More consequences for life and action follow from the affirmation or denial of God than from any other basic question.”
....

Amujale:


God is real.

Christianity is a massive charade.Jesus is fake.

Amujale:


God is real.

Jesus is fake.

Another way of putting this is that:

Sango is a real God.

Jesus is a fake god.

Osun is a real Goddess.

Serapis is a fake god.

Are you getting the gist now.


Christianity is a massive charade.

The Abrahamic religions exist as the result of a combination of deceit, deception and various other dodgy activities.

Maximus69:


Wonders shall never end!

So you agree that Satan also do pretend as an angel of light!

Please upon which criteria do you now justify the angel of light?

brocab:
I do believe Satan came to the Watchtower as the spirit of light! I also believe the Watchtower is full of dead mans bones, your literature is full of murder that brings destruction to the innocent men women and children.
{Matthew 23:13-15} “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in. {The Watchtower teaches, 144000 will enter in}
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense make long prayers. Therefore you will receive greater condemnation. {Door to door harassment 'ring a bell}
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel land and sea to win one proselyte, and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.

Maximus69:


That's where your so called BELIEF start and end!

(1)The 144,000 appears in any version of the Bible you can lay your hands upon and it's evident that since there is a distinction between the two groups (144,000 and the great crowd) that's going to inherit God's Kingdom, the Watchtower has given their own interpretation and reason why certain number stands out in the same Kingdom!
So it's you and your cohorts who need a better explanation to counter the interpretation of the Watchtower, failure to provide a more reasonable and fitting interpretation means you're the ones shutting up the door to that Kingdom against yourselves!

(2) Ironic indeed, you couldn't even reason well while quoting the scriptures yourself! It's not the Watchtower or a member of JW that's quoting that scripture but you yourself. When everyone knows for sure that Jehovah's Witnesses won't even pray at all with none Witnesses and their prayers are the SHORTEST compared to your folks who do practice LONG PRAYERS! So use your brains my dear not just typing gibberish with your hands!

(3)Jehovah's Witnesses move from country to county, city to city, town to town, house to house and door to door. This is what Jesus himself commissioned and his Apostles are doing the same thing! Matthew 28:19-20, Act 1:8, 20:20
So what you supposed to find out is the reason why Jesus said Pharisees are making proselytes subjects of destruction!
Well remember the FRUIT of God's holy spirit!
Any organization that's producing it is QUALIFIED to gather people for everlasting life, because that is just what Jesus taught before surrendering his life for all those who are able to put on this new personality.
So if you find any religion producing the FRUIT, whatever name they call themselves don't mind, just be rest assured that they belongs to Jesus.

Jesus said "it's impossible for a bad tree to produce fine FRUIT just as it's impossible for a good tree to produce rotten FRUIT" Matthew 7:15-20

If they're not for Jesus, they can never produce the FRUIT that only God's spirit can produce!
For your information those religious groups you're so much eager to defend have made you a subject of destruction as you're attributing the fine works of God's holy spirit to Satan.
So for your own good STOP SINNING AGAINST GOD'S HOLY SPIRIT! Matthew 12:32

brocab:
And after all this hog wash you expect me to read doesn't mean anything to the believer, matter of fact you are not teaching me anything.. The spirit in you is your own-if you were filled with the Holy Spirit you would speak the truth-you would know the scriptures-but unfortunately you don't. You are a lair and a deceiver..

Maximus69:


It's up to you and your conscience!