Pastor AIO: Mircea Eliade defines myth as follows: "Myth is a story about a creation of some kind or another, generally placed in time immemorial, the faboulos time of the beginnings. Myth is a sacred history, a narrative structure telling a sacred event or a scred happening. Myth may also be defined as a story about creation in general." (See also, "Aspects of Myth" and "Le mythe de l'eternel retour"


http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ahy.bFYSfHIYTNNK5yhM9BAjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20060924070337AAVbrYU

WE have gone past THE NEED for your defination of myth

we have laid our hands on a better proof from controversial cardinal pell

this time around, it is not that the the story may be true or not, but pell said that THERE WAS NO LITERAL ADAM AND EVE AT ALL! he said they are terms;A word or phrase used to describe a thing or to express a concept,

see that in his link below,


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Pell

on

Adam and Eve

"Asked by an Australian journalist in 2012 whether there had ever been a Garden of Eden scenario with an "actual" Adam and Eve,

Pell said in quote:

"Adam and Eve are terms – what do they mean: life and earth. It’s like every man. That’s a beautiful, sophisticated, mythological account. It’s not science but it’s there to tell us two or three things. First of all that God created the world and the universe. Secondly, that the key to the whole of universe, the really significant thing, are humans and, thirdly, it is a very sophisticated mythology to try to explain the evil and suffering in the world".

calculating a day for thousand years dont apply in this again, what a shame on clueless so called man of God

BERNIMOORE:

WE have gone past THE NEED for your defination of myth

You and who are we? lol

I quite agree with him that the story is not literal. And yes I agree that a snake did not talk to eve.

If you don't understand what he means by myth and how a myth could yet be True, and be speaking of truths then you need to go back to the definition of myth.

Furthermore the elements that make up the whole Adam and Eve eating the fruit story is found with varying interpretations in the iconography of all the surrounding peoples from Ancient Greece to Mesopotamia.

@ Bernimoore,

In truth, I think you need a grammar teacher.

[quote author=italo]

<<You're very funny. If you believe Adam could have died 1000years later when God said he died "that day," what is the difference between your thinking on this matter and that of the Cardinal who believes that the earth could be billions of years old.>>

the cardinal is not talking about the earth's age, but that the account of adam and eve is a myth. meaning that adam and eve are not a historical figure that existed thousands of years ago. in short he seems to believe in evolution according to the interview.

the differences are;

a) that i believe that the account is a historical fact, but the cardinal doubts it. in other words, i believe that they were our progenitors.

b) that life started thousands of years ago, but the cardinal doesnt agree.

that some part cannot be interpreted literally makes it a spiritual book, not that the stories are not facts. and not that all its accounts are myth.

<<It seems like you are one of those "christians" who just like to condemn anything 'catholic.'>>

any religion that wants to discredit my divine heritage, the bible is looking for my criticism. of course you wont close your mouth when you see something you value being discredited. will you?

<<You havent still told me which parts are literally true and which arent, papa wey sabi everything.>>

papa wey no sabi anything, the discussion is centered on adam and eve as a myth or a historical fact not ur meaningless list.

asking me to provide such is unreasonable and hilarious. so i should write a whole list for you president jonathan?

How does my providing that affect the subject under discussion?

Pastor AIO:

You and who are we? lol

I quite agree with him that the story is not literal. And yes I agree that a snake did not talk to eve.

If you don't understand what he means by myth and how a myth could yet be True, and be speaking of truths then you need to go back to the definition of myth.

Furthermore the elements that make up the whole Adam and Eve eating the fruit story is found with varying interpretations in the iconography of all the surrounding peoples from Ancient Greece to Mesopotamia.

Good! , i hate when people are beating about the bush like italo who was forcing timing concortions that he had prepared on the issue.

pls spare me the myth explanations you may have, you have admitted what i needed, and have further join issues with the cardinal in fighting the holy scripture!

bolded above is the real thing

:

I quite agree with him that the story is not literal. And yes I agree that a snake did not talk to eve.

i want to state categorically clear here that the only basis shared by christ followers of which i agreed is the holy scripture

the cardinal teach what is not found in the holy scriptures simple! or did bible not explain itself very clear that Adam was literal? or did holy scriptures teach a so called elements that form a term and not literal adam?

see unconfirmed and unholy interpretations you are relying on;

Furthermore the elements that make up the whole Adam and Eve eating the fruit story is found with varying interpretations in the iconography of all the surrounding peoples from Ancient Greece to Mesopotamia.

was bible not clear that adam was literal, God moulded adam personally,and breath the breathe of life into his literal noserills, and adam became a living soul (literal)(genesis 1)

further adam gave birth to cain and abel and other chilren not named as the inspiration to the writer could reveal.

can you also give us element that form cain and abel?

And yes I agree that a snake did not talk to eve

when i said that the cardinal was fighting the holy scripture, and that he is unworthy to be representing christ, im i not right?

cardinal pell is unworthy pls, lets see the qualification of christ overseers that he is guilty of;


Titus 1:7-13

7[size=14pt]Since an overseer manages God’s household[/b]he must be blameless[/size]—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. 8 Rather, he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined.[/size] 9[size=14pt] He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.[/size]

cardinal pell should have "[b]hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it"

ah, shame on pell!

[quote author=JMAN05][/quote]

even if anybody could come out to criticise the holy scripture, should it be someone paid for representing christ?

mumu cardinal , the catholics had lost it, as noted earlier, they are forming unholy alliance with people who already know their intention as PROSTITUTES AS THE BIBLE DESCRIBE THEM(people without a single shame)

now i understand what jesus warned about better;‘the abomination that causes desolation’standing where it does not belong'—let the reader understand

mark 13:14-23

14 [size=14pt]“When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’[a] standing where it[b] does not belong—let the reader understand—[/size]then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 15 Let no one on the housetop go down or enter the house to take anything out. 16 Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. 17 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 18 Pray that this will not take place in winter, 19 because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again.

20[size=14pt] “If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them. [/size]21 At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘Look, there he is!’ do not believe it. 22[size=14pt] For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 23 So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.[/size]


there is no other way to prove that cardinal pell who does not believe in the holy scripture and openly fight it is 'part of the abomination' standing where it ough not to be that is; representing christ people in Gods house'

bible prophecies must come to pass

let the reader understand

JMAN05:

the cardinal is not talking about the earth's age, but that the account of adam and eve is a myth. meaning that adam and eve are not a historical figure that existed thousands of years ago. in short he seems to believe in evolution according to the interview.

the differences are;

a) that i believe that the account is a historical fact, but the cardinal doubts it. in other words, i believe that they were our progenitors.

b) that life started thousands of years ago, but the cardinal doesnt agree.

that some part cannot be interpreted literally makes it a spiritual book, not that the stories are not facts. and not that all its accounts are myth.

The Cardinal said nothing contrary to what you wrote here.

What you need is perhaps a kindergarten diction that defines "myth" to toddlers and adults of low IQ.

JMAN05:
papa wey no sabi anything, the discussion is centered on adam and eve as a myth or a historical fact not ur meaningless list.

asking me to provide such is unreasonable and hilarious. so i should write a whole list for you president jonathan?

How does my providing that affect the subject under discussion?

You said some parts of Genesis are not to be taking literally. How are we sure the creation story is not part of the non-literal part?

[quote author=italo]

<<The Cardinal said nothing contrary to what you wrote here.

What you need is perhaps a kindergarten diction that defines "myth" to toddlers and adults of low IQ.>>

I think it is you who is being unreasonable and exposing your low IQ of not understanding little grammar.

go and watch the video on youtube if you dont understand what a myth is poor brain. the cardinal was clear on the video that his mama and his papa came through evolution. and he never interpreted adam and eve as a historic figure.

he was even asked if it is possible for an atheist to inherit heaven, he said "certainly".

because you heard he is a cardinal, you guys are here arguing like blind men. go and watch it yourself.

<<You said some parts of Genesis are not to be taking literally. How are we sure the creation story is not part of the non-literal part?>>

because other bible writers and even Jesus recognized them as historical figures.

JMAN05:
I think it is you who is being unreasonable and exposing your low IQ of not understanding little grammar.

go and watch the video on youtube if you dont understand what a myth is poor brain. the cardinal was clear on the video that his mama and his papa came through evolution. and he never interpreted adam and eve as a historic figure.

he was even asked if it is possible for an atheist to inherit heaven, he said "certainly".

because you heard he is a cardinal, you guys are here arguing like blind men. go and watch it yourself

Ah...see Jero o...

Of course an Atheist can possibly go to heaven. If he doesnt know Christ through no fault of his but lives a good life.

That is Catholic teaching.

JMAN05:
because other bible writers and even Jesus recognized them as historical figures.

Jero! Jero!! How many times did I call you?

So you think "non-literal" means "non-existent."



My dear, stop disgracing yourself.

Go get a children's dictionary.

[quote author=italo]

<<Ah...see Jero o... >>

what is jero?

<<Of course an Atheist can possibly go to heaven. If he doesnt know Christ through no fault of his but lives a good life. >>

he never said through no fault of his, but because he has an inquiry mind.

<<That is Catholic teaching.>>

ok, i thought it was bible's.

<<Jero! Jero!! How many times did I call you?>>

who is jero?

<<So you think "non-literal" means "non-existent.">>

he didnt just say non literal but a myth with an allegoric meaning not to be seen as literal cos his people came through evolution.

<<My dear, stop disgracing yourself.

Go get a children's dictionary.>>

ok. please get one and check the meaning of evolution.

italo: My friend, you will be well advised to read more and type less.

I'm not keen on a entering a focusless shouting match with one who doesn't know half of what he is talking about.

This thread is about the cardinal and his comments and so far no one has been able to prove that he said anything that contradicts any part of the 2000year old Catholic teaching.

Beloved, if there is a great virture you lack, its how to be sincere with yourself in ur inward man, shalom.

Rossikk:

Why? Because they use their BRAINS unlike a TOAD like you?

Even today, the oyibos that introduced you to the bible are still using their brains to decipher what is what in it. What is plausible and what isn't. What is true and what isn't.

But our CLUELESS, STUPI.D DUMMIES in Nigeria screaming ''Jesus'' still regard the book as if God himself directly came down to earth and penned it. No questions asked. Stup.id, brainwashed moro.ns.

The way u talk tells me you don't hav indwelling of holy spirit.

waldigit :


Beloved, if there is a great virture you lack, its how to be sincere with yourself in ur inward man, shalom.

How? How am I not sincere with my "inward man." Please show your "beloved"...that I might not go to hell...

italo:

How? How am I not sincere with my "inward man." Please show your "beloved"...that I might not go to hell...

you are not sincere to come out like this catholic die-hard supporter came out to say below;

Pastor AIO:


I quite agree with him that the story is not literal. And yes I agree that a snake did not talk to eve.

rather you were forcing endless dictionary meanings and timing 'a day for a thousand yrs' to butress your point, you are NOT SINCERE.

all that said i dont need stories again after pastor AIO hit the nail on the head above which you were dancing azonto-around

next,

do you agree with cardinal pell and pastor AIO that

the holy scripture story of Adam and eve in a garden is not literal?. and that a snake did not talk to eve.

can we have your answwer?

Go get a grammar teacher.

omobarBlog: (Yahoo News) In comments that may shock some staunch Catholics, Cardinal George Pell has described the biblical story of Adam and Eve as a myth.
He appeared alongside renowned evolutionary biologist and atheist, Professor Richard Dawkins, on the ABC’s Q&A program last night.
Cardinal Pell said the existence of Adam and Eve was not a matter of science but rather a mythological account.
“It’s a very sophisticated mythology to try to explain the evil and the suffering in the world,” he said.
“It’s a religious story told for religious purposes.”
According to Genesis, God created Adam and Eve as the first man and woman and all people are descended from them.
Cardinal Pell’s explosive comments came after he was questioned about evolution.
He said it was impossible to say when there was a first human.
It is widely accepted in the scientific community that life on Earth has evolved over about four billion years
source:http://omobar..com/2013/08/catholic-cardinal-says-adam-and-eve.html

actually he may say genesis 1 is a religious myth, though stories d work of God is outline, d bible isn't a science book, it is d relationship of man with God.
But catholic theology afirms that adam and eve, (whatever their real names were) were historical figures, to some extent i'm a bit suprised.

Evil Brain:

To be fair to the Catholics, they've been far less willing to contradict science than the Pentecostals. Pope John-Paul actually endorsed the theory of evolution back in the day and acknowledged the big bang theory. There are Catholic priests making serious contributions in many fields of science and the church doesn't seem to be discouraging them.

I guess they must have learnt their lesson from the time they made complete föõls of themselves claiming the sun goes round the earth and forcing Gallileo to agree with them on pain of death.

actually catholics have always made headway in science, the fathers and grand fathers of many branches of science are usually catholics and most times priests and bishop.
Faith doesn't repulse science.

[quote author=Heatblast][/quote] so you didn't think catholic priests study quantum physics? Hehehe

Evil Brain:

You can't even lie in a sensible manner. So Galileo hadn't conclusively proven that the earth moves round the sun abi?

The facts of what happened are well established. Stop trying to rewrite history to make your religion look less silly.

If the Christians had any interest in finding the truth, they would have built their own telescopes and investigated his findings. Instead they arrested him, threatened him with torture, found him guilty of heresy, banned his books and kept him under house arrest for the rest of his life. If he hadn't pretended to agree with their stůpïd, bible based delusion that the earth was the centre of the universe, they would have burnt him alive.

Anybody who thinks contains any useful information about how the world works is a mõrön. Plain and simple.

actually italo is right, at the time of galileo, galileo's thesis was consider a hypothesis, it wasn't yet proven, galileos original thesis had to be modified since much parts didn't hold.
It would interest you to note that the works of galileo in question were simply and advancement of another mans thesis.
Do a research on d topic in question.

Evil Brain:

Right the Catholic church is the victim of persecution. The same Catholic church that was torturing and burning people alive left, right and centre for over a thousand years until they finally lost political power. The same church that single handedly caused the dark ages in Europe. The same church whose religious intolerance has virtually wiped out traditional religions in Europe, Africa and South America. The same church that commissioned the crusades. The same Catholic church that sanctioned the brutal sacking of Constantinople, a Christian city whose only crime was being a member of the eastern orthodox church. The same Catholic church that mistreated European Jews for centuries and forced those in Italy to live in ghettos. The same church that supported Hitler and Mussolini during WW2.

Catholics are victims of persecution, that's why their priests can råpe children for decades without fear of prosecution and still retire with full pensions even when they are identified by multiple victims. That's why governments around the world refuse to investigate their shady financial dealings, or prosecute them like the international child molestation ring they are. That's why their former pope is being allowed to end his days outside of prison despite conclusive proof that he was the head of the conspiracy to cover up child abuse and protect pëdõphile priests. Those poor Catholics. Who is going to save them from all the persecution?!




lol

you have very little knowledge of the topics you dabbled into. Ignorance is a disease!

Pastor AIO: The only people that I know that are ready to kill you for suggesting that the story of Adam and Eve is a myth are the Pentecostals and Evangelicals. I believe that everybody else understands it for what it is and tries to glean the truth that the story is trying to communicate.

It is the same with the Gospels. Some people will start to attack you if you say that the Gospels are not strictly History. But the fact is that ALL of the gospels, Matthew Mark Luke and John cannot be historically true because they contradict each other. Was Jesus silent when he was carrying the cross or did he speak? He can't have done both at the same time. one gospel has him speaking, another has him silent. What did Jesus say on the cross? What did he say to the thieves on the cross?
Each gospel writer has a theological point that he is trying to make (I shudder to use the word Agenda, lol). If you discard seeking the theological point and merely see it as a recording of history then you must be prepared to dance some complicated backflips and logic suspension. And you will miss great spiritual insights.

It is obvious that the first and second chapters of Genesis are two different myths joined together. It was obvious to those who wrote it. If they were claiming to write history I'm sure they would have made more effort to make the myths into one singe narrative.

this is a good one, the bible is not a history book, it contain both myths, allegory, symbol...history, all of these trying to talk about the relationship between man and God. The aim of genesis 1and2 it to show that God creates and sustians creation and the problem of evil. It is a may to a large extent be mythical account of religious truth.
I don't know why people can't understand that.

Ubenedictus: actually he may say genesis 1 is a religious myth, though stories d work of God is outline, d bible isn't a science book, it is d relationship of man with God.
But catholic theology afirms that adam and eve, (whatever their real names were) were historical figures, to some extent i'm a bit suprised.

you are suprised so do i, even more surprised at the cardinal proclamation alongsides atheists and co..! now, my brother catholic theology was against what sacred scripture teaches, true or false?

the bible was very clear that adam was the first man:



#that God actually breath the breathe of life into his noserills

#and that Adam became a living soul

#he gave Adam a companion Eve

#that eve actually gave birth to cain, Abel and others

#cain killed abel

#and so on.....

#the account was VIVID!

Ubenedictus: actually italo is right, at the time of galileo, galileo's thesis was consider a hypothesis, it wasn't yet proven

Except that Galileo built a telescope which he used to observe the planet Jupiter and its moons and prove (as far as it was possible back then) that the earth was not the centre of the solar system. The church made no attempt to disprove his findings or proffer a better theory. They just imprisoned him and told him he was going to be tortured and killed unless he recanted. Go and read a little before you post nonsense.

galileos original thesis had to be modified since much parts didn't hold.

Of course they had to be modified, he made his observations in 1610!!! Do you really expect him to have discovered the final answer to life, the universe and everything in 1610?!? You religious people say the daftest things sometimes.

FYI no scientific theory needs to be 100% accurate. Newton's wasn't, Einstein's isn't. All a theory needs is to be closer to the truth than what it's replacing. Galileo's was far better than the bronze age bullshiat the church was promoting at the time.

It would interest you to note that the works of galileo in question were simply and advancement of another mans thesis.

No sh;t Sherlock!

Do a research on d topic in question.

Maybe you should take your own advice?

Ubenedictus: you have very little knowledge of the topics you dabbled into. Ignorance is a disease!

On the matter of the church's other crimes against humanity over the millenia, maybe you should drop the silly ad hominems and prove me wrong.

I already know you can't, but I'd like to see you try just for the lols.



Edit: I added a link since I know you are stubborn and you love to argue blindly

Evil Brain:

Except that Galileo built a telescope which he used to observe the planet Jupiter and its moons and prove (as far as it was possible back then) that the earth was not the centre of the solar system. The church made no attempt to disprove his findings or proffer a better theory. They just imprisoneThus Galileo did not prove the theory by the Aristotelian d him and told him he was going to be tortured and killed unless he recanted. Go and read a little before you post nonsense.

So, immediately he built the telescope and observed Jupiter, the Church just threw him in prison. Haba! Say something reasonable. Is that the result of your research?
You must have read that from "PM News."

Evil Brain:
Of course they had to be modified, he made his observations in 1610!!! Do you really expect him to have discovered the final answer to life, the universe and everything in 1610?!? You religious people say the daftest things sometimes.

FYI no scientific theory needs to be 100% accurate. Newton's wasn't, Einstein's isn't. All a theory needs is to be closer to the truth than what it's replacing. Galileo's was far better than the bronze age bullshiat the church was promoting at the time.

Galileo was propagating his idea as truth...and wanted the Church to change the way it interpreted scripture based on a theory he never proved according to the Aristotelian standards of science in his day. In his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina and other documents, Galileo claimed that the Copernican theory had the "sensible demonstrations" needed according to Aristotelian science, but most knew that such demonstrations were not yet forthcoming. Most astronomers in that day were not convinced of the great distance of the stars that the Copernican theory required to account for the absence of observable parallax shifts. This is one of the main reasons why the respected astronomer Tycho Brahe refused to adopt Copernicus fully. Galileo could have safely proposed heliocentricity as a theory or a method to more simply account for the planets’ motions. His problem arose when he stopped proposing it as a scientific theory and began proclaiming it as truth, though there was no conclusive proof of it at the time. Even so, Galileo would not have been in so much trouble if he had chosen to stay within the realm of science and out of the realm of theology. But, despite his friends’ warnings, he insisted on moving the debate onto theological grounds. 

It is a good thing that the Church did not rush to embrace Galileo’s views, because it turned out that his ideas were not entirely correct, either. Galileo believed that the sun was not just the fixed center of the solar system but the fixed center of the universe. We now know that the sun is not the center of the universe and that it does move—it simply orbits the center of the galaxy rather than the earth. As more recent science has shown, both Galileo and his opponents were partly right and partly wrong. Galileo was right in asserting the mobility of the earth and wrong in asserting the immobility of the sun. His opponents were right in asserting the mobility of the sun and wrong in asserting the immobility of the earth. Had the Catholic Church rushed to endorse Galileo’s views—and there were many in the Church who were quite favorable to them—the Church would have embraced what modern science has disproved. 

Evil Brain:
On the matter of the church's other crimes against humanity over the millenia, maybe you should drop the silly ad hominems and prove me wrong.

You are the accuser. It is you who needs to prove yourself right.

italo:


The Catholic Church has never been against the idea of evolution. It is not against Catholic teaching.

SPECIAL INVITATION OF HEBREW ISREALITE BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF WEST AFRICA ON NAIRALAND

This is to use this opportunity to Thank YAH /GOD Almighty our Heavenly Father our Creator and Creator of Heaven and Earth for the great work of trying to WAKEUP our AFRICAN HEBREW ISRAELITE to know about our biblical forgot or lost Identity and forgot or lost Heritage which was prophecy in the bible that Israelite will loose their Identity and Heritage and our forgot/ lost IDENTITY / HERITAGE / which is to KEEP YAH/GOD LAW and FAITH in CHRIST/YESHUA

Please let come together and be of encouragement to each other because it can be very lonely on this journey of KEEPING YAH/GOD COMMANDMENT as HEBREW ISRAELITE because not many of Africa Hebrew Israelite are interested to WAKEUP to accept that we are the Biblical Hebrew Israelite of the Bible.

Please as African Hebrew Israelite Brothers and Sisters our coming together will help us to help each other like d early church in d Book of ACT OF APOSTLE because no one was hungry or lack among them because they are share what they have together and we can also work together as a team to WAKEUP our other AFRICA HEBREW ISRAELITE Brother and Sister that are still asleep through prayer and also feeding d poor.

Please our coming together will also help us to learn from each other biblical our forgot biblical Identity and Heritage and please I beg us not let our differences of in our believe put us away from each other because we are all searching biblical truth that we lost/forgot and we need each other.

Please I will like to suggest if we can FORM A WHATSAPP / SKYPE GROUP so that we can use it to KEEP THE SABBATH / FEAST WORSHIP/ FELLOWSHIP TOGETHER and share biblical scripture to keep Yah/God Command and Faith in Christ Yeshua.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Please our POWER is in KEEPING YAH/GOD LAW and FAITH in CHRIST/YESHUA blc according to d scripture in d book Revelation 2:14 about Balaam because Balaam was unable to curse Ancient Hebrew Israelite our forefather in wilderness until BALAAM REVEAL THEY MAKE THEM BREAK YAY/GOD COMMANDMENT IN TORAH and this is why AFRICAN COUNTRIES is suffering today because Devil has TWISTED BIBLE to continue to make us to BREAK YAH/GOD COMMANDMENT in the CHURCHES Because African Hebrew Hebrew Isrealite are d only people on earth SUFFERING FROM CURSE OF DEUTERONOMY 28:15- 68 Because we refuse to keep Yah/God Commandment and Faith Christ/Yeshua because this is why GENTILE NATION ARE SUCCEEDING and PROSPEROUS Because YAH/GOD COMMANDMENT WAS NOT GIVEN TO THEM.

BELOW ARE SUPPORTED BIBLE REFERENCES THAT WE NEED TO KEEP GOD/YAH COMMANDMENT



JOSHUA-1:8 NKJV REVELATION-14:12-NKJV REVELATION-22:14-NKJV

PSALM-1:2-3-NKJV ROMAN-2:13 NKJV


PLEASE ALSO READ ( ACT 21 )

TO SEE APOSTLE PAUL DOING ANIMAL SACRIFICE AFTER THE DEATH OF CHRIST/YESHUA AND PAUL WAS ALSO TAKEN FOR AN EGYPTIAN BECAUSE ANCIENT EGYPTIAN WERE BLACK



Pls let us meet on email ( shaloms179@gmail.com )