shdemidemi:

who is contesting that, Did it not occur to you that Abraham could not be used by God until his father died?



Well, may be by your standard I am not a christian. Come to think of it i dont pay titthe, I dont propagate money doubling, i dont believe i am under mosaic law, i dont believe in hearing God's voice outside scripture, I dont believe in talking gibberish in the name of tongues and more..........

Anyway God related with Abram through the things that were not strange to him.



What law? did I tell you he copied heathen practice to give the law. I thought we we were speaking about Abraham, how did you get to Moses?

Goshen360: @ Gombs,

Sometimes, it appears some Christians study the word BUT they don't understand tenses. This is not an insult to them but that's what it seems like. How can someone be reading "A is LIKE B" and be telling us it is the same meaning as "A IS B"? This is the problem we have with folks today and we wonder why so much argument as if we, Christians are bunch of confused people. The same problem I have with the OP, if he likes, let him call Melchizedek anything but saying Melchizedek is Christ, Oh Lord, help us!

And, YOU, Gombs, leave that tithe matter this Christman season, the one una don collect don do.

Bidam: bro.. i meant no disrespect o..sorry if you feel that way.

Bidam: I don't agree here...Angels are never worshiped by men,Even angels always insist on them not being worshiped. No angel or man who was godly ever accepted worship from men even when they were mistaken. The Gen18 account was not an angelic visitation. It was Adonai Himself that came down with 2 angels..read it in context..Abraham called Him Lord. If I have found favor in your eyes Adonai, my Lord, do not pass your servant by (18:3).

Gombs:

No wahala bro, sorry I lashed at u...had a tough morning at the office...

noblefada:
I use to think likewise until I discovered a mystery in scriptures, remember Jacob and the fight with an angel and Moses with the burning Bush in exodus 3

Bidam: Yeah.. but the point is neither of these acct showed they were worshiped.

Gombs:

Lol.... u have a great sense of humour.... but eh, meilyn sometimes make me wonder whether english is that hard... a is like b now means a is b.... na wa o

andico34: melyn my brother pls one advice. pls be humble about these revelations and dont argue with anyone. THE HOLY SPIRIT MOVES MOST IN AN ATMOSPHERE OF MEEKNESS

Bidam: I am sure you know what i am taking about.Why introduce a pagan culture into Christianity? As far as i am concerned Abraham had a prompting to give tithes as a show of appreciation for the defeats of the kings.

Bidam:
God also told Him specifically to sacrifice His ONLY son and this was alien to him..Abraham had two sons..if this was a pagan culture why didn't he take Ishmael since he loved Isaac more than Ishmael?

Bidam:
Let's interpret the word of God as it is without additions abeg. Terah descended from Noah and deviated from a righteous path and that doesn't mean Abraham should copy pagan cultures from the ur of chaldees.

shdemidemi:

The problem with religious folks is that they don't see beyond morals in every story in the scriptures. Why would Abraham need to appreciate Melchizedek for a war he fought and won without him?

My friend, as far as God and the seed of Abraham is concerned Ishmael was not a son. The reason is that it is through the line of Isaac that the Nation of Israel and The Messiah were to come.

Plus I don't get how whomever was sacrificed debunk the fact that Abraham and is father were idol worshipers.

Are you sure about the above statement?

IseOluwa777: @Op. Let me say this. Jehovah came in flesh in the person of Melchisedek to Abraham. Now Jehovah has come in flesh in the person of Jesus (Yehoshua - meaning Jehovah our Saviour). Jesus was the Father ( Jehovah in human flesh). So yes Jesus and Melchisedek are the same.

However, here is nothing like reincarnation in God's Bible. The Bible is not open to private interpretation. You will die spiritually when you do that because you would have effectively added to the Word of God by your private interpretation.

MEILYN: Oh my God. What is this? God came in flesh to earth? What a blasphemy. And calling God and Christ jehovah is also a blasphemy and a private interpretation. That name is a pagan name, not associated with God.

What does private interpretation mean? Can you do us a favour by quoting the private interpretation in any of my post. I will like your post so you will come back here. Tanks.

IseOluwa777:

My friend, if you do not believe the Jesus Christ is God almighty in human flesh, then there is no basis for your salvation because "[bold] Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.[/bold]

The blood of Jesus is the blood of God.

Private interpretation means this: Every Word of God has the meaning which God intended when He said it. That means on doctrinal issues, there is only one right answer. If you say "A" on a doctrinal issue and God meant "B", then you are in trouble with God. So you have to find God's "B", and only say God's "B". Anything outside that is private interpretation. So the bottom line is getting God's meaning and not what You think is God's meaning.

Jesus is the God of the Old Testament (whatever you choose to call Him, thats up to you) in human flesh. The scriptures say so. However these are deep things that only God's predestinated seed can understand. It is not given to all to understand.

MEILYN: "The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem." (Ecclesiastes 1:1).<< the book was written by Solomon, he had much wisdom you know, so he understood these things.

"Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1:2).

"What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?" (Ecclesiastes 1:3).<< Remember this verse is talking about MAN, Human being, take note.

"One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever." (Ecclesiastes 1:4).<< the earth stays but one generation to another keeps coming, still talking about man.

"The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose." (Ecclesiastes 1:5).<< this verse explains the above verse. The sun rises and disappears but the sun still comes back to the place where it arose.[reincarnation]

"The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits." (Ecclesiastes 1:6).<< this is another example, the wind goes south and north continually but it returns again according to his circuits.[reincarnation]

"All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again." (Ecclesiastes 1:7).<< Another example again, all the rivers run into the sea, to the place where it comes and it returns again. [reincarnation]

"All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing." (Ecclesiastes 1:8 ).

"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." (Ecclesiastes 1:9).<< Now remember this chapter is talking about man? So what is the thing that isnt new? What is the thing which hath been that will still be?

Let the bible tell us, here is a precept from the same book. Lets know the thing Solomon was talking about.

"That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it is man: neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he." (Ecclesiastes 6:10).<< now you see? That which hath been is named already, and it is man. Which means the man which hath been , it is that which shall be, and what the man did is the same thing the man shall do and there is no new man under the sun.

Lets continue.

"Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us." (Ecclesiastes 1:10).<< is there anyman whereof it maybe said, see, this is new? The man hath been already of old time, which was before us.

"There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after." (Ecclesiastes 1:11).<< the reincarnated man shall not remember what he did in his past life and who he was. No remembrance of things. Reincarnation.

What was Christ? An high priest, what was Melchizedec? High priest. They did same things. What is the job of a high priest?.

MEILYN: "The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem." (Ecclesiastes 1:1).<< the book was written by Solomon, he had much wisdom you know, so he understood these things.

"Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1:2).

"What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?" (Ecclesiastes 1:3).<< Remember this verse is talking about MAN, Human being, take note.

"One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever." (Ecclesiastes 1:4).<< the earth stays but one generation to another keeps coming, still talking about man.

"The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose." (Ecclesiastes 1:5).<< this verse explains the above verse. The sun rises and disappears but the sun still comes back to the place where it arose.[reincarnation]

"The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits." (Ecclesiastes 1:6).<< this is another example, the wind goes south and north continually but it returns again according to his circuits.[reincarnation]

"All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again." (Ecclesiastes 1:7).<< Another example again, all the rivers run into the sea, to the place where it comes and it returns again. [reincarnation]

"All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing." (Ecclesiastes 1:8 ).

"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." (Ecclesiastes 1:9).<< Now remember this chapter is talking about man? So what is the thing that isnt new? What is the thing which hath been that will still be?

Let the bible tell us, here is a precept from the same book. Lets know the thing Solomon was talking about.

"That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it is man: neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he." (Ecclesiastes 6:10).<< now you see? That which hath been is named already, and it is man. Which means the man which hath been , it is that which shall be, and what the man did is the same thing the man shall do and there is no new man under the sun.

Lets continue.

"Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us." (Ecclesiastes 1:10).<< is there anyman whereof it maybe said, see, this is new? The man hath been already of old time, which was before us.

"There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after." (Ecclesiastes 1:11).<< the reincarnated man shall not remember what he did in his past life and who he was. No remembrance of things. Reincarnation.

What was Christ? An high priest, what was Melchizedec? High priest. They did same things. What is the job of a high priest?.

otipoju: MEILYN: your conclusion tha Melchizedek is Jesus rests on your answer to the question " where did Jesus and Abraham meet?"

And you concluded that it must have been when Abraham gave him tithes.
Sounds plausible but have you considered at the judgement of the saints where the justified and the condemned asked Christ when they helped and hurt him respectivel and HE told them that it was their treatment of his brethren that immediatel applies to him.

A similar scenario plays out also when Jesus appeared to Saul and asked Saul why he was persecuting him even though Saul had never seen Jesus,but because he was persecuting his disciples it meant saul was persecuting Jesus.

And so I dare say that Abrahams good treatment of strangers who turned out to be beings from God was considered as good treatment of Christ. Unlike the Isrealites who persecuted his prophets.Perhaps this was what Christ meant.

And so if Melchizedek was a priest of the most high God, then abraham giving him tithes as a representative of God would mean Abraham was really giving the tithe to God and so Jesus being God would be pleased with it.

Also you have not adressed the matter of " is like" and "is". When something is said to be like, it is taken for granted that it is not exactly "it" but is similar to it by possessing some of "its" characteristics but it is still not it. My her may be as tall as I am, fair as I am,gentle as I am, articulate as I am, but is still not me.

It is not stated explicitly that Christ is Melchizedek and let us refrain from jumping to conclusion.

otipoju: @MIELYN

Man is said to be created in the lmage and likeness of God, does that make him God?

IseOluwa777: Signing out of this thread my friend. Cheers and God bless you is my prayer.

MEILYN: See bro, this is not the type of Revelation you get in Church, not the type of revelation on who will die and who will live. This here is the bible, i dont post anything without using the bible to explain what am posting.

Now what am saying is this.

I will change my mind on this issue, if only you tell me, what i wrote is a lie, and you also prove it with the bible the way i did.

Tanks.

ajayikayod:

Give more time to study and prayer bro as a good workman. D understanding and conviction may tarry but will surely come.

otipoju: Don't you also think that your ideas of judgement of the world contradicts that shown in the book of revelation.?

According to your private intepretation man is punished or his rewarded for the sins or virtous acts of his previous life in the current one.

But we see Christ sitting in judgement over the nations in the book of revelations. Can you shed more light on the contradiction.

otipoju: @MEILYN

You have claimed that melchizedek is christ because Jesus said that when Abraham met him he treated him nicely as opposed to his offspring who took persecuted prophets.

I have said that your basis for this your claim does not hold water and I have explained using the words of Jesus himself to indicate what he meant by being treated nicely.

If you are going to claim that melchizedek is christ, you will need a stronger argument. The burden of proof is on you. You are the one who is claiming divine revelation to a question that has burdened the christian world for centuries .any way your argument is not convincing enough because you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt which you have not.

Go dig more, you have barely scrathed the surface. I am not impressed.