• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged A God of Love / The Living God

Oh, really? When my contacts have specifically stated that they want anonymity as a condition of their response? You think I should take a massive dump on them and their right to privacy? Just for your benefit? That's what you think?

Nope. I didn't say that. I said you were caught. But there are more to ask. Maybe you will be more wise when you speak to others. Or do you think all 4000 are ghosts? I mean you found some ghosts. Are the others following?

As I said in another reply. There is one church that went against all the others. They are called "Die Lede in Christus". I do believe that they might value not being ghosts and are are from a different spirit. They do not believe in "back speaking" and court orders. They have admitted that fighting me is wrong. They went further. They also called me back and accepted me as a brother in Christ. One of the guys I can remember well is Kobus Loyd. He is a leader there. Maybe you should ask him if he has courage enough to say something which obviously he will have to stand for and not hide away from.

Thus making him reality vs the ghosts.


OK, "god" or "mom" or whatever it is you are calling yourself today, if you are a deity, compel me to reveal whatever it is you want to know. Bet you can't. Why? Because you are powerless. Why else? Because I signed a code of professional ethics decades ago and I meant it.

I never said to go against their wishes. But to be part and parcel of ghosts are not wise. Get real people. Like me.

You simply will not extract from me any identifier for anyone, ever.

No need to. You can stick with your ghosts.

And there is nothing you can do about that, "god"/"mom"/whatever.

Do not want to do anything. You can stay in your corner.

Why not? Because you are powerless to do anything about it.

Nope. I show you the path. If you do not want to walk there then stay with the ghosts.
 
Last edited:
Be a dear and humor those of us new to your claims with an executive summary.

Nope. Laziness are not condoned. God deals with that. He gives excitement to explore the new. With that it will be no effort to run from. And that is what you need.

Then will I be a real "dear" and not a fake keeping you in your baby shoes while giving you sweets to eat to comfort you in your baby crawling. Nope I have to show you the world and help you to stand up and walk. Much is waiting.
 
As I said in another reply. There is one church that went against all the others. They are called "Die Lede in Christus". I do believe that they might value not being ghosts and are are from a different spirit. They do not believe in "back speaking" and court orders. They have admitted that fighting me is wrong. They went further. They also called me back and accepted me as a brother in Christ. One of the guys I can remember well is Kobus Loyd. He is a leader there. Maybe you should ask him if he has courage enough to say something which obviously he will have to stand for and not hide away from.

 
Nope. Laziness are not condoned. God deals with that. He gives excitement to explore the new. With that it will be no effort to run from. And that is what you need.

Then will I be a real "dear" and not a fake keeping you in your baby shoes while giving you sweets to eat to comfort you in your baby crawling. Nope I have to show you the world and help you to stand up and walk. Much is waiting.

That's a whole lot of words to dance around the fact that you can't find any quotes that contradict my assertions. But hey, at least you tried.

Nwr3VJM_700wa_0.gif


And bless your heart, you keep trying:

ene6oiN.gif


But in the end we know where your claims of deity will wind up:

6e2ngHY.gif
 
And it is. Not a single supporter have you found here.

Still your opinion.

You are helping nobody with your spam. Sorry.

That is God's forum. Why are you running from the facts? You will need to investigate and not run from "spam".

But you can try to tell us why you call it spam?


You should provide facts which you are running from.

That's in your head.

Nope. In the thread.

Again with the insults. Not very godly, is it?

Only in your mind. A mother loves her babies.

No, that simply goes to the bloke drinking beer in a shack. This has been pointed out to you countless times.

Well speak to that bloke. Ask him about what I said and where the evidence is. That is not a ghost. That is reality. Do not run from reality!

Seems you left something out. What last one are you reminding me of and where have you done so?

Fixing planet earth. You missed it?

Also, you have provided no evidence for any god of any description. It is almost as if you have none and you know it.

You are running from the evidence and then you say there is none. Again very "baby - like".
 
Oops! You totally missed me. You will need to read some more in this thread. Do not be lazy. Do your homework. Sloppiness is a bad spirit.

No, this whole thing is just some kind of weird fetish for you. None of this god bride, world mother stuff is real; it's just your kink (also called a fetish). You are wrong to expect anyone not into your kink to participate. Scrape some money together and fly to Berlin, Germany where people with your particular interests are welcomed.
 
Last edited:
well well well. That facebook link now works. Have a look and a laugh.
Zola: (caption) "me and my mother"
comment: 'Uyamthanda upa" (are you in love with that (older guy))
Johan: Not father, mother. [she didn't mean 'father', that's just a respectful reference in isiZulu for someone who is older]

More comments questioning what is obviously Johan's silliness.
There's nothing extraordinary about any of this. (eta: except possibly Johan spamming ISF and Delphi links on poor Zola's page as badly as he spams FB links in this thread)
 
Last edited:
well well well. That facebook link now works. Have a look and a laugh.
Zola: (caption) "me and my mother"
comment: 'Uyamthanda upa" (are you in love with that (older guy))
Johan: Not father, mother. [she didn't mean 'father', that's just a respectful reference in isiZulu for someone who is older]

More comments questioning what is obviously Johan's silliness.
There's nothing extraordinary about any of this. (eta: except possibly Johan spamming ISF and Delphi links on poor Zola's page as badly as he spams FB links in this thread)
Interesting timeline.

Around mid September JA started all of this "mother" nonsense. After multiple challenges to him Zola posts that pic and caption on the 25th of September, but makes a hames of it so that nobody can see it. On the 26th, JA starts spamming the link that nobody can get to. When told it does not show what he claims it shows, he accuses everyone of being liars. Finally, the post is opened up to public view on the 11th October.

Plainly, this is simply an attempt to create "evidence". And JA will not be admitting his blunder in getting it amusingly wrong. I consider it likely that JA simply harassed Zola into posting the pic.
 
Interesting timeline.

Around mid September JA started all of this "mother" nonsense. After multiple challenges to him Zola posts that pic and caption on the 25th of September, but makes a hames of it so that nobody can see it. On the 26th, JA starts spamming the link that nobody can get to. When told it does not show what he claims it shows, he accuses everyone of being liars. Finally, the post is opened up to public view on the 11th October.

Plainly, this is simply an attempt to create "evidence". And JA will not be admitting his blunder in getting it amusingly wrong. I consider it likely that JA simply harassed Zola into posting the pic.

THIS is the evidence JA has been preening about?

Seriously?

A random dude posting a photo with the text "Me and my mother," with no other context is supposed to prove something?



Seriously?

That's even more pathetic than I expected.

This is the evidence of Johanabrahams being a god. This is his "proof" that all his threats have weight and that he has followers. This is it folks, the high water mark of the evidence Johanabrahams has to offer to support his claims.

It's a joke so bad, any decent editor would have a fiction writer cut it from a book due to the sheer implausibility of such a thing being offered as proof of anything.
 
Last edited:
Interesting timeline.

Around mid September JA started all of this "mother" nonsense. After multiple challenges to him Zola posts that pic and caption on the 25th of September, but makes a hames of it so that nobody can see it. On the 26th, JA starts spamming the link that nobody can get to. When told it does not show what he claims it shows, he accuses everyone of being liars. Finally, the post is opened up to public view on the 11th October.

Plainly, this is simply an attempt to create "evidence". And JA will not be admitting his blunder in getting it amusingly wrong. I consider it likely that JA simply harassed Zola into posting the pic.

I also think it's likely.
I don't understand why it would be described as 'the first pic of its kind in the history of the world' or 'so extraordinary your head will burst', which is a rough paraphrasing of how i remember it being presented in the thread. I'm not interested enough to go back to find the page where he's posted the description.

In addition to JA's mental health, I am starting to question Zola's. Without any intention of being unfair, that picture looks as though he as some kind of head trauma. It may just be camera angle, or some kind of image defect, but it wouldn't be the first time i've seen cranial damage that looks that way. I hope i'm wrong.

---------------
JA also seems to be misrepresenting information:

Craig4's post on ISF
So you have to knock back a bunch of South African home brew liquor before someone sees you as their mother? Is that it?
is being presented by JA on FB as:
johanAbrahams said:
Somebody said that I bought you.
I think that's highly irresponsibly worded given SA's history. I'll grant that it may be unintentional.

---------------
Further, JA shows bizarre crossed wire / circular logic in one comment:
johanAbrahams said:
The "extraordinary photo" on the Sceptic (sic) Forum. They are calling themselves "sceptics"(sic) because they do not believe in God and His existense (sic). Their main reason is that there is no evidence. Suddenly my son provided them with the evidence they needed. Well done, my son
This apparently contending that a photograph of Zola calling JA his mother is somehow evidence that JA is ... what?... god? :confused: or his mother? :confused:.
 
Last edited:
Well, just for interest...

I wander these fora under the user name "abaddon". The name is found in Rev. 9:11 and is the angel of the abyss, gatekeeper of hell, etc.

If somebody would be willing to provide confirmation that this is indeed true that I am the actual gatekeeper of hell, then JA would have to accept it, right?
 
Well, just for interest...

I wander these fora under the user name "abaddon". The name is found in Rev. 9:11 and is the angel of the abyss, gatekeeper of hell, etc.

If somebody would be willing to provide confirmation that this is indeed true that I am the actual gatekeeper of hell, then JA would have to accept it, right?

By JA's standards of evidence, yes, he would have to concede that role to you.

Unless of course he's a rank hypocrite.
 
I call it that because that is exactly what it is.

Yep. But you should have facts.

The only link you provided that works is a random(to anyone who doesn't personally know him)guy and his buddy having a beer.

Yep. That was the case. But my son changed his settings.

<snip>

There are no comments to be seen that back up your claim, nor is there anything else on that page that is out of the ordinary.

It was only because of your sloppiness.

You should take your own parting advice.

Nope. You should get thorough.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well that's rich. First you admit that there was a problem with the security settings on the image by admitting those settings needed to be changed:

Yep. That was the case. But my son changed his settings.

...

It was only because of your sloppiness.

Then go on to accuse one of the people who called you out on the problem of '"sloppiness" when it was in fact YOUR ignorance and inability to understand remedial Facebook permission concepts that caused the problem.

I've seen gas lighting on this forum before, but to see someone try to gaslight about something that they admitted earlier in the same posts is rare indeed.

kali1137 was not the sloppy one, you were. Try owing up to your mistakes for once.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom