Romeo4real:

@Deep Sight -
Your game is to obfuscate, muddle, perplex, evade and cloud. You constantly shift your position, attempting to hide your stance behind dogmatic reasoning and straw man logic, using tautology and non sequitur arguments.
You have been found out in this regard. Most posters here would agree on that - irrespective of their stance on your original argument

I don't think that you can find this kind of grammar on any other section of Nairaland. And some people will argue that religion makes you stupid. Au Contraire!!

Pastor AIO:

@Inesqor, let me address this because if I don't then I know that I'm in serious hot pepper soup.  

I am currently reading a book by Karen Armstrong called A History Of God.  Now, while I don't agree with a lot that she says, she brought up some interesting points.  First of all the radically different nature of El to Yahweh (or jehovah).  
El, the canaanite God which Abramham, Isaac, and Jacob worshipped was a more approachable figure.  You could sit down and have a meal with El.  In fact El came visiting Abraham with 2 other fellows of his.  Abraham welcomed them and entertained them before they then left.  His grandson Jacob even had a wrestling bout with El.  This is a very interesting ontology of El.  
And before the Muslims come jumping in and saying that it is because of corruptions in the bible let me hasten to add that this is in keeping with the way the Canaanites saw their Gods.  So it is not only the bible.  In that part of the world at that time it was possible to eat with God and even wrestle with him.  In fact in the bible there is an incident where Paul and Silas go to a Greek city and get mistaken for deities.  That could only happen if people expect to be able to see deities in physical forms.  The Hindus call them Avatars, I believe.wikipedia

I knew u were going to shoot yourself in the foot and reveal inevitable traces of ignorance.

1. The same El whom u address as a cananite and loving God who interacted with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was the same God, who
a. banished adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden.
b. placed a mark/curse on Cain for killing Abel.
c. destroyed the world with flood and saved just Noah and his family.
d. destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah with stones of fire.

El was always the same person as Yahweh/Jehovah, with the SAME ontology and personality. The problem is u never took time to study the bible.

2. It pains me to see u address urself as a "pastor" . . . I wonder what u teach your flock.
The same relationship El had with Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is the same relationship Jesus came to re-establish with believers. If u dont believe in the sacrifice of JC. . . . .how then do u partake in this special relationship?

So these stories are not a corruption but rather in perfect harmony with the way the people of that part of the world at that time thought of their deities.  

This is rather dogmatic and shows a preconceived belief that Yahweh, El, Jehovah and Elohim are different persons. This belief is erroneous as how then do u explain the reconcilable ontology of these names?

But then comes an apparently new figure.  A terrifying awe inspiring, jealous being.  A deity unheard of in Canaan.  El was a Canaanite deity.  El Elyon was the Ruler of the Gods, the Elohim, in ancient canaanite religion.  How this new deity was first encountered, not in canaan, but in Midian.  He tells Moses not to approach but to take of his shoes.  Already this is quite different from El.  El walked through paradise in the evening calling out to Adam.  Yahweh is telling man to keep a distance.  

1. whats the difference between El who banished adam and Eve because of sin . . . .and the Yahweh who would not tolerate any form of sin?

2. whats the difference between the El who cursed Cain, destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and the entire earth with flood . . . . .and Yahweh who brought plagues to Egypt for defying Him and asked that all idolatry nations be destroyed?

Karen Armstrong suggests that there was conflict with the introduction of Yahweh to the Israelite community, and that the Israelites didn't first accept him because they didn't know him.  I find that all highly speculative.  I have no opinion on that matter but without a doubt and by Yahweh's own admission the reason why Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did not know him was because he used a different name with them.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_(deity)

Karen has a preconceived agenda and you "pastor" AIO is confusingly ignorant of biblical teachings.
What other introduction could Yahweh have given His people . . . , other than[i] I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.[/i] For God's sake these are the patriarchs who the whole of Israel look up to and from whom the 12 tribes are descendants of.

Wiki continues:
Yet Yahweh seems soooo different from El in so many ontological aspects.  Not just El as he was generally understood and worshipped in Ancient Canaan, but also the El that revealed himself to Abraham in the bible.  

I laugh at your ignorance in ibibio  

I'm not going to go through the entire thing right now, but the above should just be a start to whet your appetite to look deeper.
One day, if I ever get out of my present financial mess and I make a lot of money I will commission a bible to be translated that left all names intact in their original language.  So Yahweh will always be called Yahweh instead of 'The Lord' and El will always be called El instead of God along with a myriad of other names.  The Elohim will also remain strictly the Elohim ( a plural word), rather than the sons of God, or the council of God, or the Council of El even.

I think u should post it all now to educate my ignorance . . . , but why would u commission the translation  of the bible since u believe it is filled with errors?

@Romeo4real:

Are you sure you don't answer the moniker "Viaro" on occasion? Whatever, I'm loving you, bro. Big Time!!

DeepSight may end up with only the name the way he's being slapped, kicked, bashed, whipped, assaulted, gang-banged etc all over NL. Seems Yahweh has the last laugh on you guy! His children (plenty of them too) seem to find it so easy to stick ceremonial swords (scabbards and lanyards included) up your behind, SIDEWAYS! You might want to move over to the romance section.

Mr. Romeo4Real (under suspicion) -

You stated that the issue is whether a Principal and his messenger are the same person.

That whas a ghastly mis-perception.

That has never been the issue - just as I pointed out -

Deep Sight:


What do you mean by saying – “The argument is not about whose letter it is; but if the sender, and the messenger are the same” –

The argument is, always has been, and will continue to be about whose letter it is for Christ’s sake. Exactly because we are trying to uncover whose lie it is. I am sure you are not so befuddled as to fail to see that that is EXACTLY what the discussion has been from the point you entered right up to this very millisecond.

How dare you state that the argument is about “if the sender, and the messenger are the same? ? ? ? ? ?” Are you for real?

Is there any person on this thread that asserted that Yahweh is the same person as the spirit that came up to him? ? ?

Haba, did you not see my several references to a Principal and an Agent? ? ? ?

Did I for ONE SECOND state that the Principal is the Agent? ? ? ?

Did I not repeatedly state that the Principal remains responsible for the acts of his agent: indeed those acts are his own acts so long as he instructed the Agent to act in that regard!

This is comical.

I am sure you can now see how dreadfully you have confused the issues. Frankly I am aghast that you could assert that the issue is “not whose letter it is.”

Wake up son! That is, and always has been the issue.

Unless you are hallucinating NO ONE here EVER argued about God and the messenger being the same entity. Where the hell did you get that from? ? ?

Kindly do some study on the law of Agency and the relationship between Principal and Agent.

I positively assert to you that it is ridiculously absurd to claim as you have that the actions of an Agent who takes command from his Principal are not the actions of the Principal. For what you assert to me is that no General in history has ever fought a war – given that they issue instructions to others regarding the wars. Or that no Head of State has ever taken an action – given that they simply give orders to other people regarding such.

I note that rather than address ANY of the issues I pointed out to you: namely the reality of a Principal and an Agent - and my rebuttal of your claim that the discourse centred on "if they were the same person" - you have responded by asserting that I am a fool, amongst other things.

Since you have made no response to the points I raised above, I summarily conclude that you agree with them: but are strangely compelled to insult me for offering my perspectives.

Smile. Life is beautiful.

nuclearboy:


DeepSight may end up with only the name the way he's being slapped, kicked, bashed, whipped, assaulted, gang-banged etc all over NL. Seems Yahweh has the last laugh on you guy! His children (plenty of them too) seem to find it so easy to stick ceremonial swords (scabbards and lanyards included) up your behind, SIDEWAYS! You might want to move over to the romance section.

I will urge you to review issues, and not personalities.

For my part I do not have, and will not be persuaded to have, a negative view of you.

noetic16:

I knew u were going to shoot yourself in the foot and reveal inevitable traces of ignorance.

1. The same El whom u address as a cananite and loving God who interacted with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was the same God, who
a. banished adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden.
b. placed a mark/curse on Cain for killing Abel.
c. destroyed the world with flood and saved just Noah and his family.
d. destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah with stones of fire.

I did say that El was a Canaanite God and nothing you've said above has refuted that. I DID NOT say that El was a loving God, I said that he interacted with his followers on more familiar terms than Yahweh did.
All your points from a to d are totally and utterly irrelevant.

Fellow Believers,
Gone are the days when we spent time convincing unbelievers, these are perilious times. I think we have more job to do preparing ourselves for the journey ahead than standing by and answering any bystander whose only aim is to slow us down.
Light and darkness do not mix and so how does light explain to darkness what he is or darkness explain to light what he is? IT IS NOT POSSIBLE.

My point? Its not for every rain that falls that you run to bring out bowls to fetch water.

El was always the same person as Yahweh/Jehovah, with the SAME ontology and personality. The problem is u never took time to study the bible.

The educated thing to do here is to show some documentation demonstrating what you said, or at least produce an argument to support your assertion.  But alas, you lack education, don't you?

2. It pains me to see u address urself as a "pastor" . . . I wonder what u teach your flock.

Awww . . . pele.  Don't let it pain you too much.

The same relationship El had with Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is the same relationship Jesus came to re-establish with believers. If u dont believe in the sacrifice of JC. . . . .how then do u partake in this special relationship?

I thought that relationship that Jesus came to re-establish was the one broken by Adam in the garden of Eden.  Perhaps you can teach me more about this part of your 'christianity'.

I think u should post it all now to educate my ignorance . . . , but why would u commission the translation of the bible since u believe it is filled with errors?

I would commission it so that nunceheads like you will not conflate Yahweh, El, and Elohim as you have done here:

This is rather dogmatic and shows a preconceived belief that Yahweh, El, Jehovah and Elohim are different persons. This belief is erroneous as how then do u explain the reconcilable ontology of these names?

I cannot explain what I cannot see. Please show me the reconcilable ontologies. (Why the need to reconcile if they are the same, even). The Elohim are in fact plural. Were you aware of that?

Sun Tzu:

Fellow Believers,
Gone are the days when we spent time convincing unbelievers, these are perilious times. I think we have more job to do preparing ourselves for the journey ahead than standing by and answering any bystander whose only aim is to slow us down.
Light and darkness do not mix and so how does light explain to darkness what he is or darkness explain to light what he is? IT IS NOT POSSIBLE.

My point? Its not for every rain that falls that you run to bring out bowls to fetch water.

Ha ha. Why is it that you guys just can't get over the lies and hypocrisy of your genocidal Yahweh?

Haba, the Jews created their Yahweh, why don't you create yours - and keep him far from lies and genocide.

You can simply co-opt one of the millions of already existing African Deities and substitute him for Yahweh, since Yahweh has become an international embarrassment to you.

@DeepSight:

The only bad impression I get from you is the DELIBERATE BIAS towards error when Jesus is discussed. Aside that, you will remember the respect I have stated for your mind.

However, the language directed towards you in a few posts on this thread amused me and remembering Viaro, it seems almost a gangup. The spirit behind my post then was amusement and not ridicule. But I am affiliated to the "Carpenter" so you may continue the bias against me.

I wonder why you didn't find anything against MyJoe who's suddenly "liking" Romeo4real. Oh, I remember - he's not Christian!

^^^ Simple - he did not use these rather offensive words (bolded)-

nuclearboy:

@Romeo4real:

Are you sure you don't answer the moniker "Viaro" on occasion? Whatever, I'm loving you, bro. Big Time!!

DeepSight may end up with only the name the way he's being slapped, kicked, bashed, whipped, assaulted, [size=16pt]gang-banged [/size] etc all over NL. Seems Yahweh has the last laugh on you guy! His children (plenty of them too) seem to find it so easy to [size=16pt]stick ceremonial swords (scabbards and lanyards included) up your behind,[/size] SIDEWAYS! You might want to move over to the romance section.

I am always happy to have fresh blood to interact with.

@Deep Sight -
I did not address the points u raised as i have no interest in circular arguments of no intellectual value.
I did not mean to insult you. Unfortunately, patience with people who persist in advancing fatally flawed dicussions, despite being shown the error inherent in their argument, is not a particularly strong point of mine. I do apologise if you took anything in my post to you as an insult. It certainly was not meant to be so.

Back to your post. I am sure you are quite aware of the timeline of this particular discussion. Maybe i was not absolutely clear in what i wrote, but this was under the assumption that we are both articulate and erudite to a certain degree - so no need to spell out stuff as children.
The principal and the Agent are not the same. I never said YOU said they are the same, and i never intended to say they are the same - my previous posts hv been clear on that - but im sure u knew that. Hope that clears it up.

What you said, is that the ACTIONS of the Principal, and the Agent are seen as the same - in law. You clarified it further by saying - Yaweh has admitted he tells lies. He sent a lying spirit (I dnt have access to the original quote at the moment, but this shd not be far off).
To buttress your point, you further assert that someone who sends an asassin is guilty of the crime of murder, same as the asassin himself - this i refuted, and showed that this is not NECCESSARILY so.
On this issue, so far, i think we agree that this is what u are postulating.
Consequently, you conclude that Yaweh is also a liar - because he sent a lying spirit.

This is what i refute, because its a logical fallacy, and a deductive argument. The premise is true (Yaweh sent a lying spirit), but the conclusion is wrong(Yaweh is a liar).  And my response to your analogy using your PA send a letter show why it is an invalid conclusion. If you refuse to see this, then there is no point in advancing any discussion further.

I have no issue with u on your beliefs, as i also have mine. Howeveer, the purpose of healthy debate is to stimulate thought, and advance our intellectual  viewpoints and knowledge base. Stubborness and dogma shd have no place in that.

I do apologise for the txt speak and any errors contained in my post. Also i hv been unable to quote ad verbatim. I am composing this at an airport, on my phone.

noetic16:


El was always the same person as Yahweh/Jehovah, with the SAME ontology and personality. The problem is u never took time to study the bible.

I agree with PastorAIO. Your assertion does not take into account evolutionary factors within religion. The God of Abraham in the OT is of a different personality to that of Moses'. Take it further down the line and he's totally different from the god in the NT. The god evolved and morphed into another as his followers developed and expounded on their religion. There are many, many instances where religion has evolved and the nature of god has changed with them. Judeo/Vhristianity is no different and there is no logical reason why that should not be so.

I'd have to also disagree that the god of the early OT and that of later pages is of the same personality and ontology. Although there are some similarites, this would only be natural. But take a look further down the line to the NT and you can see that there is a clear difference - we go from warrior desert god to universal loving god - the two couldn't be further apart in character.
Similarites do not point to El/Jehovah being the same god. it's like saying that a banana is the same as an apple because they are both fruits when clearly they are two separate organisms with different attributes. As for using the name as evidence of an identical god? Let's not forget that the Christian god also had many others. And we can't read anything into the names El or Elohim as they predate Judaism and were just general terms for the name "god".


I too have read the Karen Armstrong book. Once cannot place ridicule at her doorstep as she is only repeating what many theologians have stated for years - there are many gods in the bible.
God is a belief. A theory. Non-believers often point that out yet totally ignore the facts that theories always evolve - even in such dogmatic practices as religion.

@ Romeo -

Well thank you for your response.

I believe the lines are clearly demarcated as you have said:

 1. We agree that he sent a lying spirit

 2. We disagree on whether that makes him a liar.

You for your part have stated that that does not make him a liar. To buttress this you stated that if I send my PA to deliver a message, that does not make ME a Messenger.

I refute this analogy as being a flawed one: for the simple reason that we have not argued concerning Yahweh's vocation.

I state (and I earlier stated already) that what is significant is the content of the message. The content of the message is doubtless mine.

This you cannot dispute.

Accordingly the content of the false message sent to those prophets belonged to Yahweh.

This logically and ineluctably renders him a liar.

In this regard note the specific words in 2Ch 18:21 - "[the lord] said - 'You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go forth and do so.'

I hope this reasoing is clear.

As a post-script, let me just emphasize one thing again - I have no particular interest in denigrating Yahweh. As you know, I believe in and worship God. I simply do not believe that Yahweh as described in the OT is God. His Ontology is too inconsistent with the purity that I ascribe to God. And it tickles me that people cannot see that.

Psalm 82 verse 1, (The King noetic version):

God stands in the council of God and judges God . . . . I say you are God, the Son of God but you will die like a man!!

Origin Hebrew:

Psalm 82:1 Hebrew Study Bible (Apostolic / Interlinear)

מִזְמֹ֗ור לְאָ֫סָ֥ף אֱ‍ֽלֹהִ֗ים נִצָּ֥ב בַּעֲדַת־ אֵ֑ל בְּקֶ֖רֶב אֱלֹהִ֣ים יִשְׁפֹּֽט׃
KJV with Strong's
A Psalm of Asaph God standeth in the congregation of the mighty he judgeth among the gods

What it actually says is:

The Elohim congregate in the council of El and he judges among the Elohim.

http://biblos.com/psalms/82-1.htm

verse 6:
You are elohim, all of you are children of El Elyon

Now tell me how in God's name ( ) IS Elohim equal to El Elyon. Isn't it obvious that elohim is plural and refers to many beings.

In that specific passage it is plural.
But it should also be remembered that Elohim is also plural intensive with singular meaning.
There are instances where it refers to the "one" god and others where it refers to many.

^^^

Wikipedia -

Elohim (אֱלהִים) is a Hebrew word which expresses concepts of divinity or deity, notably used as a name of God in Judaism. It is apparently related to the Northwest Semitic word ʾēl (אֱל) "god". Within Hebrew, it is morphologically a plural, in use both as a true plural with the meaning "angels, gods, rulers" and as a "plural intensive" with singular meaning, referring to a god or goddess, and especially to the single God of Israel.

That's what I just wrote.

I know. Just buttressing the point.

The bottom line is that El, Elohim, and Yahweh do not mean the same thing.

You can say of Yahweh that 'Yahweh shall be my elohim'. eg in the phrase and he shall be your god and you shall be his people. Yahweh shall be your elohim and you shall be his people

As I stated earlier, "elohim" and "el" were just generic terms for god/s that predate Judaism.

i give up . . . i only popped up to say - good to see you again bastage!

Bastage:

As I stated earlier, "elohim" and "el" were just generic terms for god/s that predate Judaism.

True, but there is actually a specific Deity called El as well who fathered Hadad(ba'al), Yam, and Mot. 

davidylan:

i give up . . . i only popped up to say - good to see you again bastage!

Now this is unexpected!!   I wasn't expecting you to give up so suddenly when you came into this thread huffing and puffing and hurling insults left right and center like an ancient semitic deity. (lest you accuse me of impiety I am not referring to yahweh here but any of a vast number.  Take your pick.  Let me choose for you - Marduk). 

You usually have more stamina than this.  I was expecting more selective picking and choosing of verses.  I was expecting more oxymoronic statements like telling me that my questions are ignorant.  Of course it was not that  you were offended by ignorance as much as you were hoping that I would feel hurt or insulted by being called ignorant.  That didn't work, did it?  It usually doesn't because I've long made my peace with the knowledge that I'll remain ignorant of most things in the universe even if I lived 1 thousand years.  so abeg allow me to keep making inquiries in blissful ignorance.

Pastor AIO:

Now this is unexpected!!   I wasn't expecting you to give up so suddenly when you came into this thread huffing and puffing and hurling insults left right and center like an ancient semitic deity. (lest you accuse me of impiety I am not referring to yahweh here but any of a vast number.  Take your pick.  Let me choose for you - Marduk). 

You usually have more stamina than this.  I was expecting more selective picking and choosing of verses.  I was expecting more oxymoronic statements like telling me that my questions are ignorant.  Of course it was not that  you were offended by ignorance as much as you were hoping that I would feel hurt or insulted by being called ignorant.  That didn't work, did it?  It usually doesn't because I've long made my peace with the knowledge that I'll remain ignorant of most things in the universe even if I lived 1 thousand years.  so abeg allow me to keep making inquiries in blissful ignorance.

considering the number of things on my plate, its no longer expedient for me to respond to the vast amount of misinformation that passes for posts here. Have a good day.

davidylan:

considering the number of things on my plate, its no longer expedient for me to respond to the vast amount of misinformation that passes for posts here. Have a good day.

I appreciate that you are busy. But you cannot say that the passage does not mention Yahweh or have the prophets speaking for Yahweh. Please do the prophet speak on Yahweh's behalf or not? Answer. It is okay you can take your time if you are busy. Me too I'm am quite busy these days. I don't mind if you make your contribution once every 2 or 3 days.

Utterly and totally and completely off-topic: So I'm minding my own business behind the scenes, reading the thread, chuckling at all the witty exchanges and I[i] mistakenly[/i] click on David's profile and    wow  who woulda known David the NL warrior is such a fine fine boi.

In light of the above, Pastor AIO I beseech thee to please take am sofly with David. Furthermore, please Pastor feel free to mistakenly upload your picture, so I can be once again stunned lol. All these undercover fine dudes on NL self . . . saw Abuzola's pic a while back and was like  lol does not fit the cyber image at all.

sorry Mazaje for going off-topic.

JeSoul:

Utterly and totally and completely off-topic: So I'm minding my own business behind the scenes, reading the thread, chuckling at all the witty exchanges and I[i] mistakenly[/i] click on David's profile and    wow  who woulda known David the NL warrior is such a fine fine boi.

In light of the above, Pastor AIO I beseech thee to please take am sofly with David. Furthermore, please Pastor feel free to mistakenly upload your picture, so I can be once again stunned lol. All these undercover fine dudes on NL self . . . saw Abuzola's pic a while back and was like  lol does not fit the cyber image at all.

sorry Mazaje for going off-topic.

Okay o, but I wouldn't like to run into him in a dark alley. Especially not standing like that arms akimbo looking like he is ready to take on the entire hosts of hell. He looks like if he just gave the sky a warning glance all that snow will halt immediately.

Well, as regards my own picture, I don't want to stun you in the other direction. Feel free to imagine me in any delightful form that you choose. I promise you it'll be better than the reality.

@PastorAIO;

Are you numbered in the "hosts of hell"? Sincere question (no pun or whatever intended) - what exactly do you subscribe to (religious belief) and who/what do you pastor? And yes, you were right, this section is the only one where you find this level of "enlightened" diction and reasoning.

@Jesoul:

First picture we should be looking for is yours

Pastor AIO:

Okay o, but I wouldn't like to run into him in a dark alley. Especially not standing like that arms akimbo looking like he is ready to take on the entire hosts of hell. He looks like if he just gave the sky a warning glance all that snow will halt immediately.

  its the warrior in him now Pastor, I doubt he can help it.

Well, as regards my own picture, I don't want to stun you in the other direction. Feel free to imagine me in any delightful form that you choose. I promise you it'll be better than the reality.

Yeah yeah . . . the stunnerz - both inside and out - always try to deflect the attention from themselves in a noble attempt at modesty. Be conceited for once in your NL life pastor - unleash your inner Narcissus and show us the stunner 

nuclearboy:

@PastorAIO;
Are you numbered in the "hosts of hell"? Sincere question (no pun or whatever intended) - what exactly do you subscribe to (religious belief) and who/what do you pastor? And yes, you were right, this section is the only one where you find this level of "enlightened" diction and reasoning.

I laugh. Some of us have wondered and tried to solicit definitive answers from him on many an occasion. My guess is Pastor himself is still figuring it all out - just like the rest of us.

@Jesoul:
First picture we should be looking for is yours

Lol, it has made an appearance or two in the past. But for today? after you sir .

nuclearboy:

@PastorAIO;

Are you numbered in the "hosts of hell"?

Did you not know that anyone who disagrees with DD's take on Christianity is numbered thusly?

BTW. Hi David.

Pastor AIO:

I did say that El was a Canaanite God and nothing you've said above has refuted that. I DID NOT say that El was a loving God, I said that he interacted with his followers on more familiar terms than Yahweh did.
All your points from a to d are totally and utterly irrelevant.

dude in contrast to Eli u claimed that Yahweh was an angry, jealous God not properly introduced to the jews? . . .what other meaning did u connote other than the one pre-stated? . . . .The least u could have done is to admit ur folly