InesQor:

@nuclearboy: This whole man is god thing is hinged on a lie that grew deep. The funny thing is that there is a spurious theory with no Biblical backing, that man was god on earth till the devil took it and became god of the world. Its wishful thinking at best!

^In fact, if man was already a god as they claimed, then Satan couldn't have been able to tempt Eve with the words: "you shall be as gods (Genesis 3:5)"
Which ever angle you consider it in the light of scriptures; their claim break down on several levels.

^^^ Very true!

aletheia:

^In fact, if man was already a god as they claimed, then Satan couldn't have been able to tempt Eve with the words: "you shall be as gods (Genesis 3:5)"
Which ever angle you consider it in the light of scriptures; their claim break down on several levels.

Your reading is incomplete.

1. First and foremost if the temptation was that ye shall become as gods, then eating the fruit fulfllied that, no?

2. Secondly, God himself confirmed the words of the devil regarding the effect of eating the fruit by saying - "behold, the man has become as one of us, knowing good and evil" - Gen 3:22.

CASE CLOSED! GBAM, GBOGA GBOSA!

Deep Sight:

Your reading is incomplete.

1. First and foremost if the temptation was that ye shall become as gods, then eating the fruit fulfllied that, no?

2. Secondly, God himself confirmed the words of the devil regarding the effect of eating the fruit by saying - "behold, the man has become as one of us, knowing good and evil" - Gen 3:22.

CASE CLOSED! GBAM, GBOGA GBOSA!

IF THEY WERE ALREADY GODS, WOULD THEY "BECOME" GODS AGAIN? The argument is IF THEY WERE ALREADY, not what came after! Plus what came after was they had the knowledge without the wherewithal to make "profitable" use of it, thus they became false gods! Is that not what the Word you hate so much says? So what is new that you said? How difficult is it to comprehend that IF THEY WERE, they would NOT be becoming and the argument is some said they already were BEFORE?

How many more times do you want it repeated? Or you want it in other languages?

Why don't you use your intellect for something that supports truth for once rather than exposing the spirit that hates truth in you so blatantly? You start to bore with the senseless hatred that flies to err without even considering what is being discussed. Kilode?

nuclearboy:

IF THEY WERE ALREADY GODS, WOULD THEY "BECOME" GODS AGAIN? [size=14pt]The argument is IF THEY WERE ALREADY[/size], not what came after! Plus what came after was they had the knowledge without the wherewithal to make "profitable" use of it, thus they became false gods! Is that not what the Word you hate so much says? So what is new that you said?  How difficult is it to comprehend that IF THEY WERE, they would NOT be becoming and the argument is some said they already were BEFORE?

Amazing. Just amazing.

I wonder if you stopped to read before posting at all sir.

I do not know that the argument from inception has been about Mr. Agbaje claiming that he already was something: rather he has stated over and over again that he "became" something - and this is evinced right from your opening post, where you quoted him as having asked if others were interested in how he "became" a god.

Thus, ab initio what you have posted is completely off-centre and appears shockingly as though you were ignorant of the words that you yourself used in your own OP - "How Joagbaje BECAME God." There. Completely different from what you are now suggesting - namely being already god in the first place.

How you can then make a full 180 degree swing and state that the issue is if he was a god already, absolutely beats me and will have to take prize for the most bizzare turn-around in this Forum's history.

So, there, friend - clearly you did not reflect for even a nano-second before posting. So who's filled with hatred for the truth now? ? ?

The Scripture states - " behold the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil." - and this is in tandem with Joagbaje's statement using the word "become" and also in tandem with your OP and even your title. How then can you claim its about what they were, prior to that, already? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

I laugh, friend.

Now, in light of the foregoing, your words -

Why don't you use your intellect for something that supports truth for once rather than exposing the spirit that hates truth in you so blatantly? You start to bore with the senseless hatred that flies to err without even considering what is being discussed. Kilode?

- - Leave me flabbergasted as it is obvious that your high and mighty opinion is, in your arrogance, presumed by yourself to be "truth" and anybody in disagreement with that exalted opinion, you have branded as bearing "a spirit that hates truth." That is super-presumptuous and reeks of the most unchristian arrogance that I can fathom.

Especially in light of the fact that you got it all twisted.

For the umpteenth time i adjure you: and I will never tire to adjure you: address issues and not people. It will do you some good.

Your own post #258 defeats you and shows what you were responding to. Those who read have brains.

A simple sequence =

He says he's a god or God (according to the word HE claims to believe, there is NO difference).
We say the context of gods in the Bible says he's a false god (if he wants to take the letter rather than the spirit)
He says man was god on earth before satan overthrew him (to advance his case)
Aletheia shows that to be a lie simply by stating if man was god THEN, satan couldn't use the desire to be as God to tempt him
===
you jump in head first into a dry pool saying God said man became as the "us" which was AFTER the fruit.
===
Was Aletheia speaking of "AFTER" or "BEFORE" to prove man was not (which is why man wanted to); thus showing Agbaje lied putting cart before horse?

BTW, the statement was "become like one of us, "KNOWING GOOG AND EVIL", not "become a God like us"

Knowing good and evil is not why you believe infinity is God, is it OR does your (and Agbaje's) godship start and end with that capability?

^^^ So why o why is the thread titled "How Joagbaje BECAME God"? ? ? ?

Did you not quote that directly from him?

Besides it beats me that, even taking your own argument to be true, you do not see that being a god on earth, is different from being like Almighty God - or having the same powers as such. For this reason, even if man was a god on earth, it would still be possible for the satan  to tempt him with being  GOD like the almighty - which connotes greater and absolute powers.

So that does away with Alethia's concern, and ends your rebuttal.

Now can I ask you a question? Why don't you use your intellect for something that supports truth for once rather than exposing the spirit that hates truth in you so blatantly?

Sounds familiar?

Aha.

^^^ daft response, I must say and a prideful attempt to move the target since you see your folly.

For others reading, the point is any slowpoke can call themselves god which is why I stated the cow from which the beef you ate last was a god before the knife struck. In that context, you and Agbaje are gods.

In the Biblical context, only one God exists thus you, Malu and Jo are fakes (but you can call yourself whatever). I'd expect you to prefer to call yourself satan anyway you're obviously closer home there though I wager even there, you're cause for embarrassment

nuclearboy:



BTW, the statement was "become like one of us, "KNOWING GOOG AND EVIL", not "become a God like us"

Knowing good and evil is not why you believe infinity is God, is it OR does your (and Agbaje's) godship start and end with that capability?

Run, twist, hide and distort all you care: those words are not my words, but are taken right out of your own ancient semitic book of myths -

It states clearly - "Behold the man has become as one of us knowing good and evil. . . "

Thereby showing that "knowing good and evil is one of the key attributes of the "one of us". . .this cannot be denied.

There is therefore sound logic in an interpretation which holds that that rendered the man a god, even if a lesser god of the world only.

You seem to forget that your Jewish Landlord was thereafter eager to prevent the man from gaining more powers. . .he was frightened that the man could also eat from the tree of life and live forever, lol, so he placed a flaming sword there, lol.

nuclearboy:

^^^ daft response,

I'd expect you to prefer to call yourself satan anyway you're obviously closer home there though I wager even there, you're cause for embarrassment

Somehow I never expected us to sink to these.

I will have to sign out at that, thanks. I really don't know what warrants your abuses. Enjoy.

@Deep Sight:
You did hasten to post without considering the posts that came before. A central tenet of the "Joagbaje is a god" belief is that Adam was created as a god ab initio before Satan tempted him; a consequence of which was that Adam fell and lost his godhood. Here are Joagbaje's own words to that effect:

Joagbaje:

Man generally was created to be immortal and a god on the earth

I responded to this by pointing out that;

aletheia:
. . .if man was already a god as they claimed, then Satan couldn't have been able to tempt Eve with the words: "you shall be as gods (Genesis 3:5)"
Which ever angle you consider it in the light of scriptures; their claim break down on several levels.

This is so simple. But you responded thus:

Deep Sight:

Your reading is incomplete.
1. First and foremost if the temptation was that ye shall become as gods, then eating the fruit fulfllied that, no?
2. Secondly, God himself confirmed the words of the devil regarding the effect of eating the fruit by saying - "behold, the man has become as one of us, knowing good and evil" - Gen 3:22.
CASE CLOSED! GBAM, GBOGA GBOSA!

Firstly, what you neglected to consider in your response was the initial premise of Joagbaje's belief that men were originally gods, then lost that godhood before subsequently regaining it. The title of this thread refers to how Joagbaje supposedly regained that lost godhood. I believe you should acquaint yourself with WoF doctrines before rushing in to defend them. But then you would particularly find them appealing since they try to undermine the historical uniqueness of the Son of God---Jesus Christ, something that you have consistently striven for.
Secondly, As you yourself point out in #1 of your post; the temptation was that ye shall become as gods. If the man and woman were already gods then Satan would not have been able to use that as bait to tempt. This was starring you in the face but you didn't see it!
Thirdly, Genesis 3:22 is clear as to what God said: Adam became as god in the sense of having knowledge of good and evil not that Adam became god.

^^^ Yup, that was the sequence of the current matter.

BTW I really like nuclearboy's line about jumping head first into a dry pool

You know, many modern songs can be simplistic and even theologically weak; nevertheless, in the simplicity of some of them we find profundity.

Example:

Jesus na you be Ọga
Jesus na you be Ọga
Every other god na so so yẹyẹ
Every other god na so so yẹyẹ

One doesn't readily think about this song in the context of the type of discussion on this thread.

Deep Sight:

Somehow I never expected us to sink to these.

I will have to sign out at that, thanks. I really don't know what warrants your abuses. Enjoy.

What exactly is wrong with this joker that takes himself so seriously?

You know what esteem we hold Christ and God in and you call one the jewish Carpenter in an offensive manner.
The other you called "jewish landlord". Then you say the Bible is a book of myths YET YOUR repeatedly lying deluded confused arse that has had practically everyone here from A to Z calling you a liar, twister, every-friggging name is what nobody can address as daft when you proffer daftness as scholarship.

Yeah, better to sign out. Please ensure the door hits you on the way out and pushes you into the mud you should live in

@ Alethia - Please try to space your paragraphs, it makes your posts easier to read an neater.

aletheia:

@Deep Sight:
You did hasten to post without considering the posts that came before. A central tenet of the "Joagbaje is a god" belief is that Adam was created as a god ab initio before Satan tempted him; a consequence of which was that Adam fell and lost his godhood. Here are Joagbaje's own words to that effect:I responded to this by pointing out that;
This is so simple. But you responded thus:Firstly, what you neglected to consider in your response was the initial premise of Joagbaje's belief that men were originally gods, then lost that godhood before subsequently regaining it. The title of this thread refers to how Joagbaje supposedly regained that lost godhood.

1. After the creation, the bible does record that God gave man "dominion" over the earth and all that was in it. I do not know what that connotes, if not godship over the Earth - Man's particular sandbox. It is rulership - and this is a cardinal element in the question of being "a god" over this world. Your own bible states clearly that that dominion was given to man. So I cannot see anything wrong with Agbaje's surmise that Man was indeed "a god" over the Earth initially.

2. Why do you think that the lower case "a god' was used? Please do be honest with this point. This clearly denotes that it is a reference to a lesser than the ultimate "GOD."

3. If this is the case, then it still remains possible to tempt man with greater powers and knowledge than his "dominion" had already given him.

4. God confirmed the words of the satan by stating that the act of eating the fruit had indeed expanded the man's knowledge. Thus he had "BECOME" as "one of us". . . .that was a further expansion of his worldview which included attaining some of the attributes that the ones referred to as "us" already had. This is clear an undeniable.

5. God withheld the tree of Life from man, so that he would not eat and then live forever.

6. To my understanding, that eternal life is what Christ is said to have won back. . .thus adding another attribute to the qualities the man had lost/ gained. . .this again is "becoming" something else.

Bros. . . I see no contradiction on the foregoing.

I believe you should acquaint yourself with WoF doctrines before rushing in to defend them. But then you would particularly find them appealing since they try to undermine the historical uniqueness of the Son of God---Jesus Christ, something that you have consistently striven for.

Bros, please do hesitate to make assumptions regarding my motives. I simply noticed that Joagbaje seems to have become a punching bag for a large number of supposed christians on this forum and it baffles me because a great deal of what he says has scriptural backing and he quotes extensively to elucidate his points from the bible. The mere fact that you have different interpretations is no reason to demonise him as the generality appear to have done.

I could scarcely be bothered otherwise: you know I am not a christian.

nuclearboy:

What exactly is wrong with this joker that takes himself so seriously?

You know what esteem we hold Christ and God in and you call one the jewish Carpenter in an offensive manner.
The other you called "jewish landlord". Then you say the Bible is a book of myths YET YOUR repeatedly lying deluded confused arse that has had practically everyone here from A to Z calling you a liar, twister, every-friggging name is what nobody can address as daft when you proffer daftness as scholarship.

Yeah, better to sign out. Please ensure the door hits you on the way out and pushes you into the mud you should live in

Very well, Nuclear. Thanks again.

Im laughing like a maniac here. DeepSight has done it again, laminated his ignorance and hung it up on the wall as a trophy! Bros, dont always be in a hurry to attack fundamental Christian beliefs without adequate understanding! It makes you look like a fool at the end!!

InesQor:

It makes you look like a fool at the end!!

Touche. Gracias. Read.

@ Deep Sight

In all honesty and without malice, iwọ naa ma n' tan eeyan ni suuru!!!

The point you attacked is as nuclearboy and aletheia stated it --- if man was a god already how could he again become a god. In any event the argument has been that at no time was man or did he become god. You might at least have acknowledged that but instead you switch to the "Jewish Landlord" spiel.

I can only hope you give some of these supposed "personal attacks" on you some thought and consider perhaps, just perhaps you are doing something quite wrong.

Juxtapose -

Quote from: Joagbaje on Yesterday at 02:02:57 AM -

"Man generally was created to be immortal and a god on the earth"

Genesis 1: 26 - Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

I must be missing something, ehn?

@DeepSight: Being sole administrators does not make them gods to any capacity! They had dominion over creation, they were authorized to take care of earth. Thats all! By your token, then, considering the hierarchies in the flora and fauna kingdoms, everything is a god. Maybe except procaryotes?

"Tend the garden" has become "you are God over the garden and the rest of the earth"!

Amazing how one can start with a portion of truth and end with a totality of error.

My maiguard is therefore "GOD" of my gate. Joagbaje is GOD of his mouth! Every dolt is GOD of idiocy.

@ Inesqor - Let's not mess about with semantics.

It is pretty obvious considering the language deployed in that verse that I quoted. What do you understand by the term - "a god?"

I am surprised that you will find no offense if Roger Federer is called a "Tennis god", or if Maradona is called a "football god" or if Tyson Beckford is called a "s.ex god". . .however when man is called "a god of the Earth," you suddenly see this as blasphemy, forgetting that it is qualified.

It is clear that -

1. Man was indeed rendered a god of the earth in terms of the genesis creation account

2. That godship was NOT GODship (upper case - reference to the almighty)

3. Thus it remained open for man to be tempted with further attributes which he did not have - such as knowledge of Good and evil

4. He was tempted as such

5. God himself confirmed that the man had acquired another attribute of godship in saying "behold the man has become as one of us. . ."

Given these, I cannot see that that which Alethia and the other abusive gentleman have laid out in anyway reverses that which Agbaje laid out!

And this leaves me at a loss as to how it renders me "a fool," and "daft" and "an embarrassment" and deserving to "live in the mud"

You would expect much higher standards from such famed apostles of Christ.

I had to backtrack a little because there are many things wrong with what Joagbaje posts which might be overlooked.
For example here in the same post we see Joagbaje claiming that Jesus had a beginning:

Joagbaje:

Don't push me, what if I tell you Jesus wasn't there in the beginning?

While he (Joagbaje) is an eternal being (with no beginning).

Joagbaje:

I am an eternal being.

In the same post; Joagbaje first denies that the Son is distinct from the Father

Joagbaje:

The word was not a separate person.

Only to turn round later and say:

Joagbaje:

See your contradiction. Is father and son same personalities? These are two distinctive individual. Don't you agree?

^^This only highlights the dishonest way with words and the feats of mental gymnastics that Joagbaje et al have to go through in order to maintain such a biblically unsustainable position. That they cling to this doctrine despite all scriptural evidence as to its falseness is driven partly by fear and partly by a lack of understanding of the nature of faith.

Liar!

Where's the "fool" issue? AND I said your RESPONSE was daft, not you. I stated and anyone who is honest will intepret my statement of embarrassment to mean even satan would be embarrassed by your brazenness considering the absurdity of your position and statement.

And where does anyone throwing mud start from? Which reminds me to look in a mirror too! But then, I am not proud or vain and neither do I take myself seriously enough to believe/expect I can fling it but am protected by infinity from taking it.

So again I say, Liar!

@ Alethia - Well, now that I have become Agbaje's (incompetent?) Voltron, I might as well take another jump head first into that empty pool.

I do not see contradictions in the quotes above that you have mined.

Let's have a look -

1. "Don't push me, what if I tell you Jesus wasn't there in the beginning?" / "The word was not a separate person" - This is a reference, as I see it, to his perspective that there was no separation between God and Son in the beginning. There was just God. This perspective is actually shared by alot of christian trinitarian groups as well - and also by adherents of movements such as the Grail Message. Thus the view is that the son only became a separate and distinct personality when he was severed from the GODHEAD. . . which is why the pure trinitarian will tell, you - just as Nuclear has often argued in the past - that it reallt is ONE GOD showing as three -  -  - in line with this you can better understand the statement that Jesus is not said to be there as a distinct personality separate from God in the beginning. . . again this is why Jesus is called 'begotten' of God. . .because in primordial eternity, it is just GOD and nothing else. . .this does not contradict the trinitarian worldview.

2. "I am an eternal being" - I presume he means eternal in the future and not eternal in the past, by virtue of attaining salvation and eternal life through Christ.

3. "See your contradiction. Is father and son same personalities? These are two distinctive individual. Don't you agree?" - This I presume refers to the stage where the son is severed from the father.

Just my thoughts on what he's thinking.

nuclearboy:

Liar!

Where's the "fool" issue?
So again I say, Liar!

No lies bros, "fool" was Inesqor's word, not yours. I indicated I was referring to the words you both had used.

But please do drop it, I don't enjoy the rather petty aspect that this seems to be generating.

Deep Sight:

@ Inesqor -  Let's not mess about with semantics.
It is pretty obvious considering the language deployed in that verse that I quoted. What do you understand by the term - "a god?"
I am surprised that you will find no offense if Roger Federer is called a "Tennis god", or if Maradona is called a "football god" or if Tyson Beckford is called a "s.ex god". . .however when man is called "a god of the Earth," you suddenly see this as blasphemy, forgetting that it is qualified.

^^That is what men call them. God's Word makes clear they are all false gods no matter how qualified.
For though there be that are called gods [whether tennis or football gods], whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Deep Sight:

2. That godship was NOT GODship (upper case - reference to the almighty)

^^This is a weak argument because the Hebrew scripture to which you appeal makes no distinction between god and God in uppercase or lowercase terms. This is just a convention of the English language. The distinction the Bible makes is always between the One Living God and all other false gods. There are no grey areas in between, no points of intersection. They are two mutually exclusive categories. Moreover, you simple refuse to account for the various meanings of the Hebrew word Elohim (translated into god in English) in order to try and sustain your argument.

Deep Sight:

5. God himself confirmed that the man had acquired another attribute of godship in saying "behold the man has become as one of us. . ."

^^One attribute of the Commander-in-chief is to order soldiers into battle. The Chief of Army Staff has this authority too (delegated to him by the C-in-C). Does this now make the COAS the C-in-C?

Deep Sight:

Given these, I cannot see that that which Alethia and the other abusive gentleman have laid out in anyway reverses that which Agbaje laid out!

^^Please let me know how I have abused you. I'm willing to apologize.

aletheia:

^^That is what men call them. God's Word makes clear they are all false gods no matter how qualified.
For though there be that are called gods [whether tennis or football gods], whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Surely you will not by this suggest to me that football, tennis, and s.ex are things that the almighty participates in, so as to be called "god" thereon?

^^This is a weak argument because the Hebrew scripture to which you appeal makes no distinction between god and God in uppercase or lowercase terms. This is just a convention of the English language. The distinction the Bible makes is always between the One Living God and all other false gods. There are no grey areas in between, no points of intersection. They are two mutually exclusive categories. Moreover, you simple refuse to account for the various meanings of the Hebrew word Elohim (translated into god in English) in order to try and sustain your argument.

Let's be fair: Joagbaje did not speak Hebrew: he spoke English. And the fact remains that in English there is a distinction between the upper case GOD and the lower case god.

^^One attribute of the Commander-in-chief is to order soldiers into battle. The Chief of Army Staff has this authority too (delegated to him by the C-in-C). Does this now make the COAS the C-in-C?

Exactly! You come to my point now! Nowhere is it claimed that man is GOD - but it is claimed that he is a lesser god in the earth only, and the example you have given above of lines of command bears this out entirely! The COAS is not the C-in-C; but a lesser commander with commanding powers over the army below him! Note: he is a commander as well - just not the ultimate commander!

Now let me ask you in all sincerity what you understand by man being made in the "image and likeness of God?"

^^Please let me know how I have abused you. I'm willing to apologize.

Noooo, you didn't o, it was Oga Nuclear that used olumo rock on my small head o, helep me warn am o, lol.

DeepSight, it is common knowledge that a fool disparages a matter without knowing anything about it. So I asked you to be careful cos it would otherwise make you sound like a fool. I dont see what to apologize over, honestly. It has nothing on you unless you let it.

Pastor AIO:

What I wonder now is, if a God is a being that is worshipped, and Joagbaje is claiming to be a God, then does Joagbaje require us to worship him.

You can monetize the worship. I know Jo, he will gladly accept cash in lieu of worship  

But seriously, is Jo a clone? I don’t think so, Jo does not think/act like one. For e.g. he likes money too much   I don’t think that is an attribute of the Almighty.

Pastor AIO:

Because I see all this brouhaha to rest on what we understand as a God and how we are expected to interact with a God. By calling himself a God does joagbaje claim to abrogate God in all his functions.

True talk sir.

Deep Sight:

Your reading is incomplete.

1. First and foremost if the temptation was that ye shall become as gods, then eating the fruit fulfllied that, no?

2. Secondly, God himself confirmed the words of the devil regarding the effect of eating the fruit by saying - "behold, the man has become as one of us, knowing good and evil" - Gen 3:22.

CASE CLOSED! GBAM, GBOGA GBOSA!

I know this post been addressed by Nuke & co, but just can’t resist the temptation of posting something  

My interpretation of the verse: Prior to eating the apple, Adam & Eve were more like dummies, running around the garden – naked and not give a hoot about what anybody think   Adam did not become god, eating the apple only improved his intelligence quotient (qualities hitherto restricted to), even the serpent knew good and evil and still did not qualify for ‘godly status’. Adam came to the realization that he got features/assets Eve would die for   Don’t tell me dat’s godly thinking   Dumb abi? I know   I don’t have the superior intelligence of gods, the like of Jo  

Deep Sight:

Juxtapose -

Quote from: Joagbaje on Yesterday at 02:02:57 AM -

"Man generally was created to be immortal and a god on the earth"

Genesis 1: 26 - Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

I must be missing something, ehn?

Based on your analysis here, are you saying Jo’s godly powers are restricted to harassing goats and chickens as well as bulldozing trees    

Zikkyy:


Based on your analysis here, are you saying Jo’s godly powers are restricted to harassing goats and chickens as well as bulldozing trees    

LOL! ! ! You are a riot, man!

Zikkyy:

You can monetize the worship. I know Jo, he will gladly accept cash in lieu of worship

Based on your analysis here, are you saying Jo’s godly powers are restricted to harassing goats and chickens as well as bulldozing trees

True talk - why desire worship when cash is available?

All Hail the Lord of mutton and chicken flesh! Truly then, the dude "gods" those (till they die and as long as they belong to him - WHAT a mighty god)