The problem of changing and twisted the truth started even when the apostles were still alive.

But they the apostles kept on correcting the errors that the greek Philosophers that claimed to be christians then were bringing in
to corrupt the truth, but the apostles stood their ground and prevented the corruption when they were alive.

That is, they the apostles served "as a restrain" to the corruption, preventing the corruption then.

Enigma:



Cf. from here https://www.nairaland.com/497445/trinity-doctrine-invented-council-meeting/2#7181702

2 Thessalonians 2:7

New American Standard Bible (NASB 2:7)

For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.
^

This false teaching was "already at work" even when the apostles were alive on earth in the first century ce serving as a restrain to falsehood coming in.

The school of higher learning then were the greeks; they could not just fold their hands for this new teachings from the Jews to over turn their own philosophy.

(imagine some one who is not a graduate from a university being recognised more than a prof, so it was to the greek philosophers then)

so, @Enigma
It did not just started when the apostles had died(Iraniuse time) but it had started when the apostles where on earth, that was when the lawlessness started or "was at work". >> false christianity.

As such, quoting extent document of befor 4ce other than that of christ apostles is tantamount to falling to the ploy of satan, it is still sure to still lead one away from the truth.

Not when the true christians were reserve due to pesecution.

The message of truth was reveal to the Jews and Jews alone.

Thank you.

Deep Sight:
Thank you for your very robust final response on D1, which I am still digesting. As per our rules, I can have no further comment until our concluding remarks at the end of the thread.

D1 has now been fully treated.

I would like to make a proposal on your treatment of A2. It seems to me to be similar in character to A1 - in that it is like a list of three. As such, I feel that you might end up repeating yourself. Can we take your comments on A1 to be mirrored in A2, and as such move on straight to the more substantive A3?

Nevertheless, I might be jumping the gun. Perhaps you might have an angle or a spin on A2 that I have not anticipated. I await you sire.

You know what, I agree with you. A2 isn't normally the kind of verse I would have selected if I wanted to defend Trinity anyway. If it is ok with you, I would like to substitute A2 to explore something I touched on towards the end of my last response i.e. the Lordship of Christ. If this is not alright with you, I'm happy to move on to A3 with no problems.

Mr anony:
You know what, I agree with you. A2 isn't normally the kind of verse I would have selected if I wanted to defend Trinity anyway. If it is ok with you, I would like to substitute A2 to explore something I touched on towards the end of my last response i.e. the Lordship of Christ. If this is not alright with you, I'm happy to move on to A3 with no problems.

It is certainly okay with me. While you are at it, please also take the opportunity to substitute any other verses that I put up in your behalf in my OP. I was quite surprised that Romans 9:5 was not one of your verses - and when it came up, I had to handle it without the benefit of full responses as would have been the case if it had been cited properly by either of us as a verse for treatment by itself. As it happens, it was only treated as a subset of D1, because you alluded to it in your rebuttal.

Nevertheless I am satisfied with our treatment of it, so please do feel free to substitute any verses for a more apt verse.

I await, sire.

Anony, we need to step up the pace, or it will take a full year to treat the verses. Remember we have only treated A1 AND D1 so far, and we have 38 more verses to treat!

Deep Sight:
Anony, we need to step up the pace, or it will take a full year to treat the verses. Remember we have only treated A1 AND D1 so far, and we have 38 more verses to treat!

I agree with you. The pace should increase but it should not be too fast O. Its an academy and hopefully future trinity debates can refer to this thread for answers.

present!!

research make sense... you guys have to be careful in making it so you don't mistake... take time but not much time though... some of you are very busy so i understand... we can wait... i believe anony is as fast as he can... you hardly see him posting on other threads... I think he has alot on his table.

benalvino: research make sense... you guys have to be careful in making it so you don't mistake... take time but not much time though... some of you are very busy so i understand... we can wait... i believe anony is as fast as he can... you hardly see him posting on other threads... I think he has alot on his table.

agree wit you

Sorry Deep Sight but time really hasn't been my friend these past few weeks. I'll get back to posting over the weekend. Cheers

A2 - The Lordship of Christ.

After these things the Lord appointed seventy others also, and sent them two by two before His face into every city and place where He Himself was about to go. - Luke 10:1

I'll argue that "the Lord" as used here in reference to Jesus Christ and as used in many instances in the New Testament is not merely used the way one would the title to show respect for a person of higher authority such as how one would call a judge "my lord".

All over the Old Testament, We see "the Lord" being used to describe God and in the same way, we see that it is used in reference to Christ in the New testament.

A few examples
NT
1. Matthew_28:6 He is not here, for He has risen, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
2. John_21:12 Jesus said to them, Come, break fast. And none of the disciples dared to ask Him, Who are You? knowing that it was the Lord.
3. 1Thessalonians_1:6 And you became imitators of us and of the Lord, for you received the word in much affliction, with the joy of the Holy Spirit,

OT
1. Exodus_13:9 And it shall be a sign to you upon your hand, and for a memorial between your eyes, that Jehovah's Law may be in your mouth. For the Lord has brought you out of Egypt with a strong hand.
2. Psalm_77:7 Will the Lord cast off forever? And will He be favorable no more?
3. Amos_7:7 He made me see this: And behold, the Lord was standing by the plumbline-wall, and a plumbline in His hand.

Now upon normal reading, without knowing the story of the bible, one might immediately assume that "the Lord" in the old testament is used in the same way as in the new testament. . . .and such a person would be right.

Yes the title refers to different persons but still, the title refers to one God. By calling Jesus Christ "the Lord", the New Testament writers accorded Him maximum authority as can be seen in the old testament.

---

A Little Background Information
First of all, before we jump into looking at it, I'd like to point out that in the original language of the old testament the name of God is usually written with only consonants and no vowels so expressed in English it comes out as the tetragrammaton YHWH (what we pronounce Yahweh, Jehovah, Yehova). It is said that to the jews, the name of God was so hallowed that they were not permitted to mention it so easily so when they wrote, they wrote only the consonants. Also when the Greeks translated the OT, they translated YHWH as Kurios(Lord). In most English bibles today, you can recognize when YHWH has been used because you would see LORD(written in all caps). Some translations like the MKJV use the word Jehovah. Some translations also like the HRB (Hebraic Roots Bible) even go as far as pointing out the name Yahweh where it is used in the New testament.

What I will try to show you with this post is that the title "Lord" used for Christ in the New Testament is precisely the same as is accorded to the Father in the old testament. Basically I'll prove that Jesus Christ is YHWH. (note: I am not saying that the Son is the Father, I am saying that the Son is God)

---

Jesus Christ is YAHWEH
I'll present to you the following reasons:

1. I will show that Jesus Christ is worshipped with the same titles as the Father.
2. I will show that the New Testament writers believed Jesus to be Yahweh by citing some of their quotations of the OT

By the time I'm done presenting these, I hope to have convinced you that the Lord Jesus Christ is much much more than a mere title.

---

1. Jesus is Worshipped.

First of all let us compare some passages

Mat 14:33 And those in the boat came and worshiped Him, saying, Truly You are the Son of God.
This was after Jesus had walked on the water with Peter and gotten into the boat. All those in the boat came and worshipped Him as the Son of God. I hope you do realize that these were Jews who knew fully well that none other deserved worship than God Himself not even angels but isn't it curious that somehow, they knew that the Son of God was equal to God and hence deserving of worship?

compare with Peter when he went to visit Cornelius and Cornelius came and worshiped him. Peter vehemently rejected this worship.
Act 10:25-26 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped. But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up! I also am a man myself.

Notice that even Angels do not accept worship, yet Christ did on numerous occasions.

The second question is how was Christ worshiped? Was it as unto God or merely like the way homage is paid to a human king?

We can find this out by looking at the names Christ is called.
1. Christ is not merely Lord but the Lord of Lords
Compare:

Revelations_17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

to:

1Timothy 6:13-16 I charge you before God (who makes all things alive) and in the sight of Christ Jesus (who witnessed the good confession to Pontius Pilate), that you keep the commandment without spot and without blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ. For He in His own time will reveal who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality, dwelling in light which cannot be approached, whom no one of men have seen, nor can see; to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.

Compare also to:

Deuteronomy_10:17 For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe.

Psalm 136:3 Oh give thanks to the Lord of lords; for His mercy endures forever.

Another thing I would like you to consider is "the day of the Lord". I won't go into it in depth because it will make this post really long (if you are really interested, I could) but I'll ask you to read about the day of the Lord when the kingdom of God is meant to come on earth. From the Old testament, it reads like Yahweh is going to come but in the New testament, it reads like Christ is the one coming. You can compare Obadaiah 1:15 to Revelation 22:12. You mght also want to take note of how Christ talks about "the kingdom of God is at hand" and by that he means the time He (Christ will return like a thief in the night)

Also notice how the kingdom of Christ is often equated to the kingdom of God in the Nt (see 2Peter 2:11, 2Timothy 4:1, Ephesians 5:5, Colossians 1:13)

Even more, Christ promises to personally answer prayers in His name (See John 14:14). Any and every first century Jew knows that only God is to be prayed to.

So we have evidence from the New testament that Christ is to be worshiped and prayed to. This should tell us that He is definitely not called Lord in the same sense as one would call a mere man such as a magistrate "my lord" rather He is called God in the same sense that God is Lord.

I'll give you one last piece of evidence for this point and it is from the writings of Pliny the Younger(112 AD). He was commenting on the practices of Christians in the Roman empire at the time and he had this to say:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/pliny.html

The above tells us that even to the observation of outsiders, the Christians rendered deity worship to Christ.

2. References from the Old Testament in the New Testament

Here I will present to you a few instances where New Testament writers quote the Old Testament referring to Jesus Christ and we'll look up the Old Testament reference and find out who the original passage refers to

Let us begin by looking at

a. 1Corinthians 10:7-12 (emphasis on verse 9)
And do not become idolaters as were some of them. As it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.” Nor let us commit sexual immorality, as some of them did, and in one day twenty-three thousand fell; nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents; nor complain, as some of them also complained, and were destroyed by the destroyer. Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.
What Paul is talking about in verse 9 refers to Numbers 21:4-9 where the Israelites in the desert sinned against God and He sent serpents to attack them. How come Paul says that they tempted Christ?

I'll show you another passage:

b. But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift. Therefore He says:
“When He ascended on high,
He led captivity captive,
And gave gifts to men.”
(Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)
And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,
Ephesians 4:7-11 (emphasis on verse

Notice that here Paul quotes the Hebrew scripture in reference to Jesus Christ, let's see where he quoted from

Psalm 68:17-19

The chariots of God are twenty thousand,
Even thousands of thousands;
The Lord is among them as in Sinai, in the Holy Place.
You have ascended on high,
You have led captivity captive;
You have received gifts among men,
Even from the rebellious,
That the Lord God might dwell there.
Blessed be the Lord,
Who daily loads us with benefits,
The God of our salvation!

Notice that from the Psalm, David sings to God the Father yet in the New Testament, we see it directly applied to the Son.

I'll show you one more instance of this

c. John 12:39-41
Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again:
“He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts,
Lest they should see with their eyes,
Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn,
So that I should heal them.”
These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.

Now John quotes from Isaiah 6:10. Isaiah said these things when he saw the Glory of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now let us examine Isaiah 6 and discover whose glory Isaiah saw

1 In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. 2Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3And one cried to another and said:
“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts;
The whole earth is full of His glory!”
4And the posts of the door were shaken by the voice of him who cried out, and the house was filled with smoke.
5So I said:
“Woe is me, for I am undone!
Because I am a man of unclean lips,
And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips;
For my eyes have seen the King,
The Lord of hosts.”
6Then one of the seraphim flew to me, having in his hand a live coal which he had taken with the tongs from the altar. 7And he touched my mouth with it, and said:
“Behold, this has touched your lips;
Your iniquity is taken away,
And your sin purged.”
8Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying:
“Whom shall I send,
And who will go for Us?”
Then I said, “Here am I! Send me.”
9And He said, “Go, and tell this people:
‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand;
Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’
10 “Make the heart of this people dull,
And their ears heavy,
And shut their eyes;
Lest they see with their eyes,
And hear with their ears,
And understand with their heart,
And return and be healed."
11Then I said, “Lord, how long?”
And He answered:
“Until the cities are laid waste and without inhabitant,
The houses are without a man,
The land is utterly desolate,
12The Lord has removed men far away,
And the forsaken places are many in the midst of the land

This concludes my case for now. I hope I have been able to show you that Jesus Christ is the LORD indeed.



Once again please accept my apologies for the slow pace at which I am moving.

Anony, with the above, U don' win... Deep, offa to U!

Lol!!!

DrummaBoy: Anony, with the above, U don' win... Deep, offa to U!

Lol!!!

Brother, it is not about winning or losing, it is about learning. So far, I have already learnt a lot. Because of this discourse, I have had to study so much more about Christ.

My prayer is that by the end of this exercise both I and DeepSight as well as everyone else on the thread would have increased in knowledge.

Anony, Please what verse is your last post treating?

Is the verse being treated Luke 10:1?

Because you seem to have discussed generally many verses, and not a specific verse as we have been proceeding?

Deep Sight: Anony, Please what verse is your last post treating?

Is the verse being treated Luke 10:1?

Because you seem to have discussed generally many verses, and not a specific verse as we have been proceeding?

I remember asking your permission to treat the subject of the Lordship of Christ with A2 because I was going to treat something which I touched on earlier. The aim of this post was to show you that where "the Lord" is used in reference to Christ it is almost always pointing to His deity in much the same way "the Lord" does in the Old Testament. It isn't necessarily to look at a verse in particular but to provide a background explanation for what is meant when Christ is referred to as Lord.

Luke 10:1 is an example such usage and I placed it there in the hope that after you have read my post and you read the verse again, you would see it in a whole new light.

I would still suggest that we treat my post in the same manner of Post - Rebuttal - Response to Rebuttal - Response to Response as we have been doing all along. I hope I have not gone foul of the rules.

^^^ Ok, I will address it as such.

Lol. What made u think Anony won because of his post? Its just that we are not allowed to join this debate (in fact I luv discussion instead of debate), I tell u that Anony would have seen a suprise package especially with regards to d divine name, YHWH, as translated in the septuagint as LORD. I think Deepsight will explain that though.

JMAN05: Lol. What made u think Anony won because of his post? Its just that we are not allowed to join this debate (in fact I luv discussion instead of debate), I tell u that Anony would have seen a suprise package especially with regards to d divine name, YHWH, as translated in the septuagint as LORD. I think Deepsight will explain that though.

I can guarantee your surprise is not new...

@Deep Sight

Has this discuss been abandoned?

A little fun in the interregnum of waiting for the protagonists.

For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus

Argument: because Jesus is a "mediator" between God and men, then he himself cannot be "God".

Pretty obvious counter: On above argument, if Jesus is mediator between God and men, then he himself cannot be "man".

Biblical revelation: Jesus is God eternally; Jesus incarnated as man.

Conclusion: Jesus is God-man, therefore he is most apposite to mediate between God and man.

I'm in the mood a little today.

For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus

Argument: that passage clearly calls Jesus "Man"

Pretty obvious counter: By calling Jesus "Christ", it also refers to Him as God

Biblical Revelation: Christ = Messiah = Mighty God (inter alia)

Conclusion: Jesus must be God-man!

DrummaBoy: @Deep Sight

Has this discuss been abandoned?

O no, not at all, I have just had a few distractions here and there.

Treating all verses at all events will probably last at least a year.

how can Jesus being the Christ mean that he is the almighty?

that Jesus is the mediator makes him different from the two parties he is mediating between. one may argue that Jesus was a man. yes he is, but he is not included in the "men" spoken of in the verse. because humans can only approach God thru Jesus, but Jesus cannot approach God through anybody. can he?

Jesus is not the same as the God in that verse cos Jesus prays to that God for help (remember when he was about being killed).

so the result of the exegetic analysis by deep sight is in order.

So far in this discuss my trinitarian position has not changed but the argument of those against the concept of trinity has made me appreciate more the person of God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I believe Jesus is deity but that it does not detract from God's deity and that Jesus is subject to God at the end of all times. That Jesus is strictly God, and God is strictly Jesus is a concept I doubt now from this discuss.

Jesus is deity but Jesus is not God.

I am paying close attention to this thead.

Enigma: A little fun in the interregnum of waiting for the protagonists.

Argument: because Jesus is a "mediator" between God and men, then he himself cannot be "God".

Pretty obvious counter: On above argument, if Jesus is mediator between God and men, then he himself cannot be "man".

Biblical revelation: Jesus is God eternally; Jesus incarnated as man.

Conclusion: Jesus is God-man, therefore he is most apposite to mediate between God and man.

Error! You will jubliate but not when am here.

Don't you know the difference between the man Jesus and men. The man Jesus is without sin while men are sinners. Son of God and sons of God no be mate.

Why he is mediating is to plead for sinners. If the mediator is a sinner, then you can put him in the category of men as you are happily doing.

If Jesus is the mediator between God and men, does this God include Jesus? How many persons are in this God? A question all trinitarians can afford to dodge.

.

DrummaBoy: So far in this discuss my trinitarian position has not changed but the argument of those against the concept of trinity has made me appreciate more the person of God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I believe Jesus is deity but that it does not detract from God's deity and that Jesus is subject to God at the end of all times. That Jesus is strictly God, and God is strictly Jesus is a concept I doubt now from this discuss.

Jesus is deity but Jesus is not God.

I am paying close attention to this thead.

Actually, I was going to laugh, then I just felt how tragic this is. How many are straying like this? Beginning from wanting to be the different one, the one who thinks outside the box and has a reputation for questioning things, many end up uprooting the foundation of their faith. It's worse when they follow champions of rebellion like frosbel.

If Jesus is not God, what is your faith? What is it that you believe that sets you apart from the world? On what basis are you a Christian? I have not yet by that last question denied your Christianity, I have only asked you to examine yourself.

DrummaBoy: So far in this discuss my trinitarian position has not changed but the argument of those against the concept of trinity has made me appreciate more the person of God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I believe Jesus is deity but that it does not detract from God's deity and that Jesus is subject to God at the end of all times. That Jesus is strictly God, and God is strictly Jesus is a concept I doubt now from this discuss.

Jesus is deity but Jesus is not God.

I am paying close attention to this thead.

Completely in support of your conclusion; Jesus is deity, the only begotten of the almighty God but he is not the same or equal to God almighty.

You all are Sun worshipers! and Jesus is only a metaphor. The Sun is the light of the world, it comes in the cloud and departs on the same cloud.

Christmas, Passover,Easter is all Sun worshiping twisted to get you involved in the same thing. Same applies to the muslims worshiping the moon

DrummaBoy:

Jesus is deity but Jesus is not God.

There is hope for you in seeing Him as God... soon

Ihedinobi:

Actually, I was going to laugh, then I just felt how tragic this is. How many are straying like this? Beginning from wanting to be the different one, the one who thinks outside the box and has a reputation for questioning things, many end up uprooting the foundation of their faith. It's worse when they follow champions of rebellion like frosbel.

If Jesus is not God, what is your faith? What is it that you believe that sets you apart from the world? On what basis are you a Christian? I have not yet by that last question denied your Christianity, I have only asked you to examine yourself.

DrummaBoy: So far in this discuss my trinitarian position has not changed but the argument of those against the concept of trinity has made me appreciate more the person of God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I believe Jesus is deity but that it does not detract from God's deity and that Jesus is subject to God at the end of all times. That Jesus is strictly God, and God is strictly Jesus is a concept I doubt now from this discuss.

Jesus is deity but Jesus is not God.

I am paying close attention to this thead.

Hello Ihedinobi, long time.

I appreciate your concern for the state of my faith but your concern will have been better appreciated if you had directed that statement at me directly, rather than the third person manner you are using. But you can be forgiven, it is your style.

Funny enough, my position is taken from scriptures like this:

1 Cor 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God

John 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

The position of God being distinct from Jesus is clearly stated in the first scripture quoted: God is the head of Christ; the position that eternal life comes from a correct understanding of who God is is taken from the latter scripture that is in bold. So I am understanding God, my friend, and my salvation is intact.

That Jesus is referred to as Lord in scriptures shows his deity; and that he is different from the person of God the Father is clearly defined too.

It is unfortunate that rather than respond to an issue, folks like Ihedinobi, cook up old beefs to respond to new issues on ground. Frosbel and other did help me understand the concept of tithing better: an issue I had doubted most of my Christian walk but practiced in ignorance. Is it wrong to come to understanding?

The discuss is still on. The concept of Jesus being strictly God seem to be the invention of one of the creeds and not scripture. If at the end, we see that Jesus is God, I am sure Deep Sight, myself and others, will humbly accept.

This discuss is the most civil discuss I have found on Nairaland.com. I would wish that Ihedinobi and I could have a similar one on Tithing - the issue that shurred up his response at me in the first place.

Deep Sight:

It is certainly okay with me. While you are at it, please also take the opportunity to substitute any other verses that I put up in your behalf in my OP. I was quite surprised that Romans 9:5 was not one of your verses - and when it came up, I had to handle it without the benefit of full responses as would have been the case if it had been cited properly by either of us as a verse for treatment by itself. As it happens, it was only treated as a subset of D1, because you alluded to it in your rebuttal.

Nevertheless I am satisfied with our treatment of it, so please do feel free to substitute any verses for a more apt verse.

I await, sire.

Hi Deep Sight, if it is ok with you, I'd like to substitute two of the verses you put on my behalf (A6 and A9) with the following:

A6 - Acts 20:28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

A9 - Luke 5:20-21 When He saw their faith, He said to him, “Man, your sins are forgiven you.” And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, “Who is this who speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Please copy and paste them over the corresponding numbers in your post so that the thread reads smoothly. These are the only changes I'll be making, the other verses you presented are fine with me. Many thanks.

Been following this thread from the start, but I consider it best to not actually get involved. Begging the pardon of Deep Sight and Mr Anony. I just think I should point out how curious this statement is: "Jesus is Deity and not God". What does that even mean, abeg?

What is Deity? What is God? How does the submission of Jesus make Him less than God considering that Scriptures say that He deliberately humbled Himself to take the form of man?

Anyway, not discussing any further, just thought to point that out.

@DrummaBoy, I'm not inclined to a full study of tithing yet with you. I think it's an interesting idea but it's too much for me right now. The first instant I am ready to handle it I'll reach out to you. And, by the way, responding to your post was not my only intent in quoting it, I meant to both make an example of it and respond to it and those are what I did. There's no.need to get upset about it.