rexben:
Paul and his mysterious quotations. He almost never quoted accurately.
Let's see one of his dubious works.
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us (because it is written, " Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree "
Gal 3:13
It is crystal clear that Paul got this from the old testament. He said "because it is written"
So, let's go to the old testament.
22 If a person commits a sin punishable by death and is executed, and you hang the corpse on a tree, 23 his body must not remain all night on the tree; instead you must make certain you bury him that same day, for the one who is left exposed on a tree is cursed by God. You must not defile your land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
Deut 21:22-23
When a criminal is hung, his corpse must not remain on the tree through the night but if the corpse is left on the tree through the night, the person will be cursed by God.
Paul is now saying that it is written that "cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree". I wonder where he got this his version from. It is clear that Paul was lying. Paul is a thief.
Jesus was hung on the tree but His body was not left on the tree through the night. Therefore Jesus was not cursed by God. Matt 27:57-60
This negates Gal 3:13, If the Christ Paul was referring to is Jesus, then Jesus did not redeem you from curse by becoming a curse for you.
And he said, "Whoever has ears to hear had better listen!"
Mark 4:9
Quit following Paul and follow Jesus. You can't follow both.

This is the original rendition of that text;

Deu 21:23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God; ) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

And the phrase "for he that is hanged is accursed of God " is the hebrew "Talah qelalah Elohiym". Which translates exactly as it was phrased in the KJV.

If the phrase were to be "he that is LEFT HANGING is accursed of God." or "he that REMAINS HANGING is accursed of God. " ; as you said,

Then the word "yathar" (left or left behind ) or "shawar" (remain) would have been added before "talah" (hanging or to hang). But the hebrew text wasn't phrased that way.

So that verse is not "he that is LEFT HANGING is accursed of God." It is exactly as the KJV translated it;

Deu 21:23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God; ) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

Shalom

Ubenedictus:
Ayoku77

Offering someone else prayer before God is called intercession. That is exactly what the angel did, he offered d prayers of the saints to God, That is very clear, an angel still present the prayers of the saint before God. That office didnt end when Jesus became d only mediator, instead all in Christ, both angels and the host of heaven still present ur prayers before GOD. The one who prayed is d saints, the one prayed to is God, the one who presented d prayers to God and mixed it with incense (i.e made it pleasing and acceptable) is an angel. clearly the angel is a go-between in this case, the angel interceeded.

Syncan clearly explained this and it is laughable that u find something this clear to be ludicrous

Intercession is not offering or presenting someone else's prayer before God. Intercession is praying to God for someone else.

You had to manufacture your own definition of intercession to suit your doctrinal bias.

When you pray for someone else, you don't need the person's prayers. Infact, sometimes what you are praying might even be different from what the person himself is asking.

When Jesus intercedes for us, He prays in His own words to the Father, not present our own prayers to the Father. Many times, what Jesus even says to the Father is completely different from what we are asking the Father to do in our ignorance.

The angel here is not praying or interceding for the saints, he is mixing the prayers of the saints with incense and presenting the smoke of it to God.

If I wrote a letter to you, the post office delivery man that packages the letter and delivers it to you, did not write you a letter -anymore than the angel presenting the smoke of our prayers to God is praying to God for us.

Let the scripture say what it said and mean what it meant. Don't redefine intercession to suit your bias. What this angel is doing does not qualify for the scriptural definition of intercession.

I already showed you what angelic intercession looks like in Zechariah 1.

Shalom

daviddext:

Talking about prayer,when Jesus says "Ask", what does He mean?
Now tell me, in Revelations 8:3, who did the asking, the angels or the saints?
I thank God you left the scripture intact when you said "the angels still continue TO OFFER the prayer of d saints."

(TO OFFER THE SAINT'S PRAYER) will never be translated by a sane translator as(TO PRAY FOR THE SAINTS). Although, sane interpreters like you and many others often do so to hide from God's convicting power like Adam did.
I hope you understand.

Thank you. The word in bold says it all.

Ubenedictus:

it was earlier settled by syncan that d unique mediatorship of Jesus doesnt prevent those in christ from interceeding.
Jesus is d only mediator yet d bible shows that i and any one in christ can interceed,

The angel also interceed.
Rev.8:3-4 " [An] angel came and stood at the altar [in heaven] with a golden censer and he was given much incense to
mingle with the prayers of all the
saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints...

This is a very subjective interpretation of scripture. There is no where this act by the angel is interpreted to mean intercession. It was the saints that prayed.

Notice that the prayers of the saints was already on the golden alter before God's throne.

Rev 8:3 Another angel came and stood over the altar, having a golden censer. Much incense was given to him, that he should add it to the prayers of all the holy ones on the golden altar which was before the throne.

The prayers of the saints were already before the throne of God, the angel simply added the incense of sweet spices and pure frankincense (which are symbolic of Christ's grace and righteousness) so that the prayers of the saints can ascend to God in sweet fragrances and aroma.

Exo 30:34 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take unto thee sweet spices, stacte, and onycha, and galbanum; these sweet spices with pure frankincense: of each shall there be a like weight:

35 And thou shalt make it a perfume (incense), a confection after the art of the apothecary, tempered together, pure and holy:

The angel did no intercede for the saints, he simply added incense to the prayers of the saints that was already on the golden alter before God's throne, and put them in the censer.

How this act got to be interpreted as intercession by you is ludicrous and desperate. Angels are ministering spirits to heirs of salvation (Heb 1:14) but they are no intercessors, mediators or advocates under the new covenant.

This scripture below is what it looks like for an angel to intercede for man.

Zec 1:12 Then the angel of the LORD answered and said, O LORD of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?

13 And the LORD answered the angel that talked with me with good words and comfortable words.

That is what an interceding angel looks like, and no angel does that anymore for any man under the new covenant. We have only Jesus Christ for that role now in heaven.

Heb 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

Shalom

Ubenedictus:
THERE IS NO SCRIPTURE THAT SAYS THEY HAVE STOP PERFORMING THAT ROLE. The bible doesnt teach anywhere that the intercession of the angels have come to an end. Instead it shows us in rev that the angels still continue to offer d prayers of d saint to God.

the bible bears witness against u, it doesnt teach anywhere dat d role has stoped instead it shows us angel assuming dat role in heaven.

Stop debunking things with word of mouth. Doctrines are established with scriptures, not with personal opinion.

I've shown you from scriptures that angels no longer mediate as intercessors or advocates between God and men under the new covenant.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and ONE mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

If angels still mediate in heaven between God and man, Jesus would not be the only mediator. And the scripture that said there is only one mediator between God and men would be wrong.

Feel free to show me in scripture where angels were found interceding for man before God under the new covenant.

Shalom

rexben:
The concept of the husband is the head of the wife is evil.
The husband being the head of the wife is a product of the curse which 'God' supposedly cursed Eve when she disobeyed and 'deceived' Adam.
Moses had it recorded this way;
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Gen 3:16
Christians believe that they were freed from the curse of the law including that of Adam and Eve.
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us (because it is written, " Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree "
Gal 3:13
If Christians say they are free from the curse of the law, why are they still holding unto the curse that says "and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." by saying the husband is the head of the wife?

It is not consistent with the words of Jesus. Jesus taught about husband and wife.
Lets see what He said;
4 He answered, "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female , 5 and said, ' For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and the two will become one flesh '? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate."
Matt 19:4-6
'The two will become one flesh'. Did you see that? They are no longer two,they are one.
So, if the husband is the head, the wife is the head likewise. If the wife is the tail, the husband is the tail likewise because the two have become one.
This is subjugation rather than religion.
Two will become one, it is not that the greater one will be joined to the lesser one.
A husband being the head of his wife is a culture of the world, it is not from God.
If Jesus is the head of the husband,He is evenly the head of the wife and not the husband.

The principle of the man being the head in a marriage has nothing to do in relation to the fall and it is not a product of the curse. This is purely about organisational order in any God-ordained institution.

Just like the Father is the head of Jesus, and Jesus is the head of the man, the man is also the head of the woman.

1Cor 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.

Is The Father the head of Christ because of the curse too? Remember Jesus and the Father are also one.

John 10:30 -I and my Father are one.

And even though they are one, the Father is the head of Christ. It is so in marriage too. It is the principle of organisational order in institutions.

No matter how equal two people are, they can't both sit in front when they ride together on a horse. They will end up not getting anywhere. Someone must sit in front and hold the rein of the horse, while the other sits right behind and holds the one holding the rein. It's a God-ordained natural order.

And in the institution (or horse) of marriage, it is the man God gave to sit in front and hold the reins. This is not a position of dominion and subjugation, but of responsibility and service. The one to chart a Spirit-led course for the direction of the home and also to take the first and heaviest hit for whatever arrow (or challenge) comes their way.

The All-Wise God who instituted marriage also established that order for it. A similar order to what exists in heaven between Him and Christ.

And two things can make that order crumble,

1. If you have a man who is not holding the reins in love and service as Christlikeness demands.

2. Or if you have a woman dragging the reins with the man, as if it's a position of class.

So the advice I will give to Christian brothers and sisters getting ready to enter the institution of marriage is;

>> Pursue Christlikeness like your life depended on it. You need to be the quality you want in your partner, lest you become a hypocrite.

>> Make Christlikeness your number one turn on in the person you want to marry. He or she must have as much passion for Christ as you do. Lest you end up in a frustrating unequally yoked marriage. Every other quality should just be an added bonus.

When Christlikeness becomes the highest pursuit of married or "about to marry" believers, being the head or the neck will not be an issue of class but of order unto effective service. And loving and submitting would be done in a restful atmosphere of joy and happiness, not of competition.

Shalom

Do you know that that statement is taken directly from the scriptures?

Pro 23:23 BUY THE TRUTH, AND SELL IT NOT; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding.

And it implies that you invest your time and treasure to getting truth, wisdom and understanding. And that you not give it up for anything.

I see nothing wrong with that scripture. And the Pastor could be well-intentioned with that title. Don't judge others with the bias of preconceived stereotype.

Shalom

2dugged:
if there are, I am sure having a difficult time finding one, we now have more of modern Christians

Are you saying even you yourself are a hypocrite and not a true Christian?

kobosmalls:
Exodus 24:9-11New International Version (NIV)

9 Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel went up 10 and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement made of lapis lazuli, as bright blue as the sky. 11 But God did not raise his hand against these leaders of the Israelites; they saw God, and they ate and drank.

Compare.....
◄ 1 Timothy 6:16 ►
New International Version
who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen

God being all invisible and a spirit, which one do we consider right here?

You see, context is everything when it comes to understanding and interpreting the scriptures.

Seeing God has levels of depth and measure.

When Jesus walked the earth, we can say everyone saw Him, but definitely not to the same measure and depth to which his twelve disciples, who ate and drank with Him and saw him walk on water and speak to storms, saw Him.

And even the twelve also didn't see Him to the measure and depth that the three (Peter, James and John), who followed Him to the Mount of transfiguration and to Gethsemane, saw Him.

That's because there are depths to seeing God.

So when Jesus said in;

Joh 1:18 - NO MAN HATH SEEN GOD AT ANY TIME; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared Him.

You would think Jesus was contradicting scripture, since there were clear biblical accounts of Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, etc all seeing God.

Isa 6:1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.

Dan 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.

Ezekiel 1:26 And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it.

27 And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about.

28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.

But Jesus was talking about seeing God in the context of "The bosom (or Heart) of the Father". Who God really was at heart, or at His core.

At this depth of seeing God, Jesus was right; no man hath seen God. Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, etc might have seen God's form or a similitude of Him; but they truly have not seen God in the context that Jesus was referring -His heart. Only Jesus had seen the Father at that depth and declared Him.

We must have this similar context in mind when we read Paul's statement in;

1Ti 6:16 -Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

Paul is equally correct, because no man has seen, nor can fully see God -in all His glory. Infact, we are going to spend the rest of eternity growing in our ability to behold and comprehend the glory of God, so that we can continually be changed into the image of it. And it will forever be an inexhaustible and infinite adventure.

So, the scriptures that said that men saw God, and the one that said no man hath seen God, and that no man can see God; are not contradictory verses, but complimentary; if we read and interprete them with the benefit of context.

It's true what they say about the scriptures;

"When you take the TEXT out of the CONTEXT, you're left with the CON"

-from where comes CONTRADICTIONS and CONFUSIONS.

Context matters a lot in understanding and interpreting the scriptures.

Shalom

hahn:


God himself came to earth and was unable to give any meaningful or useful information.

It is truly incompetent and mediocre

And what's your definition of "meaniful or useful information" ?

This is what Jesus said;

John 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I AM COME THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE LIFE (ZOE) and that they might have it more abundantly.

ZOE is the "God-kind" of life.

Jesus Christ came to give us the "God-kind of life" and you don't consider that information useful and meaniful?

What could be more meaningful and useful than the knowledge and understanding of how to have the God-kind of life - How to be like our Heavenly Father in power, purpose, principles and personality?

The Father is the most important person or "thing" in all of creation, and teaching us how to be like Him is the most meaningful and useful information anyone can give someone else. And if it's not to you, then your definition of "meaniful and useful" is greatly misplaced and grossly misappropriated.

To me, what Jesus Christ brought is the most meaningful and useful information anyone can give. And that is all that would truly count and matter when all the chips are down.

Shalom

AmenRa1:

No he didn't use it, how was he able to wake up the dead according to Ur holy book?? But ordinary to read and write was hard for him??

And who told you Jesus couldn't read?

Luke 4:16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, AND STOOD UP FOR TO READ.

17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

Next time, make well informed arguments.

Shalom

Jesus Christ came into this world to, among other things, show us how to live. And to effectively do that, He needed not to take advantage of His innate divinity privileges.

If He had used His innate divinity privileges, He wouldn't be able to tell us that we can do what He did. Because we would just say, "Well, You're the Word of God and you created all things, that's why you can do all that."

So that was why even though Jesus is the Word of God and the Begotten Son of God, He laid aside His innate divinity privileges, and walked among us as the Son of man.

Philippians 2v6 - (Jesus) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, AND WAS MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN:

So Jesus lived and walked among us like a man.

He ate and drank like a man.

Matthew11:19 -The Son of man came eating and drinking, ...

He got tired and slept like a man.

Mark 4:8 And he was in the hinder part of the ship, ASLEEP ON A PILLOW: and they awake him, and say unto him, Master, carest thou not that we perish

He felt pain and sorrow like a man.

Matt26:38 - Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.

He read and studied and increased in wisdom like a man.

Luk 2:52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.

Even the miracles He performed, He didn't do any until after He had fasted and prayed for the power of the Holy Spirit, just like we can.

Luk 4:1 And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness,

14 And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about.

Jesus Christ laid aside His innate divinity privileges in His earthly ministry and walked among us as the Son of man, seeking and depending on the leading and power of the Holy Spirit for His daily life, like every man should.

He did this to show us how to live and walk. That was why He could tell us confidently that;

...verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. (John 14:12)

He could say this because He did everything He did by the power of the Holy Spirit, which we can also seek and have.

The only thing Jesus did in His earthly ministry that no one else can do, is His death for our sins. And that's because Jesus alone is the LAMB OF GOD slain from the foundation of the earth.

Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

But aside from His death as the Lamb of God for our sins, we can do the works that He did, because He laid aside His innate divinity privileges, and walked among us as a man. That was why He grew and learnt like a man.

Shalom

davien:
Ayoku777 How can you say god is both scientific and supernatural when the supernatural is defined as something beyond the natural while occurrences that are viewed with science or are "scientific" are termed natural?

Sadly god can't have it both ways as the two are mutually exclusive.

God created the heavens and the earth, the spiritual realm and the physical realm, and all the supernatural and scientific laws by which they are ordered and governed.

So to God, the supernatural and scientific are not "either and or", they are both His creations which we can and should walk in.

Shalom

HardMirror:
I am shocked at the hypocrisy and lack of faith of Christians!

I have discovered beyond doubt that Christians actually don't Believe in God!

A girl had leukemia and the dad refused to follow the doctors recommendation, instead he kept his daughter at home and was believing God's report that his daughter was healed. The daughter died and everyone came for his head. Even Christians said he was a fool.

A fool for what? For believing God?
For trusting God?

Do we truely believe God or just playing along just in case God exists?

Makes me wonder...

Why do people, and atheists in particular, have this idea that once a Christian engages scientific laws in doing something, he has defied spirituality, and is therefore a hypocrite?

The same God who created supernatural laws is the same one who created the laws of physics. And whichever one we decide to harness and engage to solve our problems is fine with God.

The same God who created the heavens and the supernatural laws by which they are ordered is the same one who made the earth and all it's resources and the scientific laws that govern them. So using either one is perfectly good and okay.

God made the earth and gave it to the children of men.

Psalms 115:16 The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD'S: but the earth hath he given to the CHILDREN OF MEN.

And He commanded us to subdue it.

Gen 1v28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, AND SUBDUE IT: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

And harnessing the earth's natural resources and engaging it's scientific laws to our benefit are part of how we subdue the earth.

This opinion by some that spirituality is anti-science or vice-versa, is one of the most ignorant and narrow minded opinions.

God is both supernatural and scientific. He is the most supernaturally powerful being in the universe, and also the most scientifically intelligent mind in the universe. In fact, He created the laws of both realms. And He wants us to excel at working and walking in both -the supernatural and the scientific.

So I agree with those who criticized that pastor, who didn't take his daughter to the hospital or give her drugs because he felt it would be an indictment on his faith. That was very ignorant and arrogant of him.

The same God who ordained healing by the laying on of hands, is the same God that ordained healing by the leaves of trees.

Mark 16:18 - ...they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Rev 22:2 -In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree WERE FOR THE HEALING of the nations.

As a Christian, if you know you haven't perfected walking in the supernatural in solving your problems, the scientific is another God-ordained way we are given to solve our problems. God ordained both.

Shalom

Sound doctrine

Did anyone ever tell you that the translators of the scriptures are infallible? Ofcourse not.

The only writers of the bible that are considered infallible are the original manuscript writers -the prophets, kings, apostles and saints who wrote the original hebrew, aramaic and greek manuscripts that are being translated into different languages. These are the ones considered infallible.

Believers who are now translating the original manuscripts into different languages are doing it within the human limits of their academic understanding of the meaning of the manuscript words, and their sense of love and service towards the work of God.

So while their translations are for the most part correct on an academic level, we don't consider the translators infallible and faultless as we do the manuscript writers.

So that is why if you want to be really studious with the Word of God, you must also get, along with the Holy Spirit; study bibles that include hebrew, aramaic and greek transliterations and dictionary. These study books help bring you closer to home in understanding what was really said and how it was said in the original manuscripts, beyond how it was translated.

I have such study books. Like Strongs' Original Hebrew and Greek Study bible; or The Vines Hebrew and Greek transliterations. Many android bible apps also have it too. Like MySword bible app, Blue Letter Bible app etc.

The bible passed through four stages of languages before it got to us.

1. The event-occurence language: This was the language that was spoken when that bible event actually took place real time.

2. The Narration language: This was the language in which the story was written down by the original manuscript writers, that we consider infallible.

3. The Translation language: These are the various languages that the original manuscripts have been translated into today. Like Latin, English, Spanish, Yoruba, Igbo bible translations.

4. The Spirit language: This is the language of the heart and mind of God. It is the revelation of what God had in mind, and wanted to convey, when He allowed the event to occur and/or be written down.

So understanding the bible requires more than just literacy in a language or simply reading the bible academically in the languages they were translated into. You need the Holy Spirit most importantly, and sometimes an extra study of the verses in the language of the manuscript writers.

So yes, the Bible is the Word of God, but the translations are not infallible. That's why we need to STUDY the Bible and not just READ it.

Shalom!

FACIAL AND BODILY ADORNMENTS ARE NOT SIN

There are passages of the bible that also talks about bodily beautification and adornment in good light. They were even done by God Himself.

Ezekiel 16v9 -I bathed you with water and washed the blood from you and put ointments on you.

10 I clothed you with an embroidered dress and put sandals of fine leather on you. I dressed you in fine linen and covered you with costly garments.

11 I adorned you with jewelry: I put bracelets on your arms and a necklace around your neck,

12 and I put a ring on your nose, earrings on your ears and a beautiful crown on your head.

13 So you were adorned with gold and silver; your clothes were of fine linen and costly fabric and embroidered cloth. Your food was honey, olive oil and the finest flour. You became very beautiful and rose to be a queen.

This was God Himself talking here to Jerusalem about how He beautified her with

Oil on her skin,

Costly fine linen on her body,

Bracelets on her arms,

Necklace around her neck,

Ring in her nose,

And earrings in her ears.

If these things were in themselves carnal or wrong, would God Himself be adorning His beloved with it?

According to conservative preachers who are against physical and bobily adornments, shouldn't God have been satisfied with her natural beauty? Why all these artificial extras? Right? Oil on skin, ring on nose, bracelets on hands. Are they not carnal to God?

Ofcourse not. Adding artificial adornments to natural beauty is not a sin. Otherwise, God would not have done it to His own bride -Jerusalem.

So just because Jezebel wore adornments in 2Kings 9v30; doesn't imply that anyone who does is a Jezebel. Jerusalem also wore adornments courtesy of God Himself.

And just because God told Jerusalem in Jeremiah 4v29, that their painted faces and jeweries will not save them in the day of judgment doesn't mean that those things in themselves were their problem.

If you tell the rich, that their riches will not save them in the day of judgment. It does not mean that being rich is their sin.

Scriptural verses should be understood in context, facial or bobily adornments are not sin. God Himself adorned His bride.

Shalom.

Princewell2012:


@ayoku77 you did made a very profounding statement. And this has ever been my stands. The way we view things before christ is differents from the ways we view it now especially those who are bornagain.

Good one there.

But I will still have an issue with you depending on your stand to this question.

Now do you believe, that God will burn person with fire whom he created with sand forever for disobeying his commandment

Thank you in advance.

Though I will still like to follow you. Goshen36 is still my very good teacher. I love people that have a very good knowledge of the bible.

This was my facebook post some days back. It explains what "Hell" really means relative to heaven. It might help bring some things into perspective.

<<< Isaiah 33v14 -The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. who among us shall dwell with THE DEVOURING FIRE? Who among us shall dwell with EVERLASTING BURNINGS? 15 He that walketh righteously, and speaketh uprightly.

The difference between heaven and hell is not the fire or the burning. Even heaven is a place of fire and everlasting burning (v14).

The difference is the manifest presence of God. When you reject the presence of God, you automatically choose the absence of God. Once you reject the fire of His presence, you have chosen the fire of His absence. When you reject the everlasting burning of His presence, you have chosen the everlasting burning of His absence.

I hear people saying, How can a loving God send people into hell to burn for eternity?

Hell is not uniquely about fire and burning per se, even heaven is that. Hell is the total absence of the manifest presence of God, hell is the total absence of the glory of God. Hell is when God completely grants the request of sinners for Him to leave them alone. >>>

Then secondly. Another thing you need to understand is that the lake of fire was not prepared for man, according to the scriptures.

Matthew 25v41 -Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, PREPARED FOR THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS:

Can you see that?

Hell was prepared for the devil and his angels. But those who follow the devil will end up where he ends up. If you road-trip with someone, you will end up where the person is headed.

So those who end up in the lake of fire, took themselves there by their own choices. Hell was not prepared for them. They chose to go with the devil, and his end became their end.

And God will not force anyone to follow Him or force anyone not to follow the devil, because there is no force in love. God can only warn and intreat the sinner about where the person he's road-tripping with is headed. And if the sinner chooses to stick with the devil, then him ending up where the devil ends up is not an indictment on God's love and justice.

Shalom.

Nwaonyeocha:
Matt 16:18.

“And so I tell you, Peter: you are a rock, and on this rock foundation I will build my church, and not even death will ever be able to overcome it.”

Was the christian faith built on Peter?

Let's read the preceeding verse to get the big picture of that statement of Jesus.

Matthew 16v17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar–jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art PETER (PETROS), and upon this ROCK (PETRA) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Peter is "Petros" which means a stone or a rock pebble. While Rock is "Petra". Stones or rock pebbles are gotten out of rocks.

After Peter received the revelation from the Father of who Jesus is; Jesus called him a Petros (a stone), and that on this Petra (the rock from which the stone was gotten) will Christ build His Church.

From this metaphor, it is clear that we believers are the stones (petros), and the revelation of who Christ is, is the rock (petra). Believers are those born of the revelation of Christ; or the stones gotten from the rock.

1Peter 2v5 - Ye also, AS LIVELY STONES, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

And these;

1Cor 10v4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was CHRIST.

Peter, or any believer for that matter, is not the rock upon which the church is built. The rock is the revelation of Jesus Christ; the church is built on the revelation of Jesus Christ. We believers are the stones gotten from that rock; we are the people born of the revelation of Jesus Christ from the Father.

So Peter, like every other believer, is the stone. And the revelation of Jesus Christ is the Rock. We are the church, the church is not built on us. The church is built on the revelation of Christ. The Rock is the revelation of Jesus Christ, the Rock is not Peter.

Shalom

kevoh:

Seriously, how does not being able to type Jesus and allah in capital letters reduce what the name signifies to its adherents?

It doesn't. But is asking to know why such a big deal? What is wrong with asking?

johnydon22:


Try (A.L.L.A.H) in all caps like this ALLAH.. it still goes back small letters just like JESUS..

Also try typing jesus with a small letter beginning

That doesn't explain the why? You're only arguing that it does the same for Allah.

Issue is why does the autotext bot refuse the names in capital? Because normal default settings allow caps for names, so it needed to have been reset to disallow caps for Jesus and Allah. Why? What is the sentiment behind that?

The one I don't even understand is why the Nairaland autotext bot brings the name of Jesus back to small letter everytime you put it in captial letters.

I notice that. Whenener I want to explain something and I put the name of Jesus in capitals for emphasis, the autotext bot brings it back to small letter.

And it does it only for the name of Jesus.

MUHAMMED
BUDDHA
JESUS
VISHNU
KRISHNA
ZEUS

Not that this any major big deal for me, because this doesn't take away the power in the name of Jesus; but I just wana know the rational behind refusing the name of Jesus from being put in caps. Why does the autotext bot always bring it back to small letter when you put it in capitals?

Shalom

Double post.

akeensbussy:


You have not answered my question. why would God even allowed the devil near them not to talk of tempting? because God Love is unconditional. after creating something and u claim to love your creation very well. Why would you give the devil access to it when you know that the devil only come to steal and to destroy.

Then u start blaming your creation for your lapses.

God does not want beings who obey Him because they can't do otherwise, or because there's no temptation. God wants those who will obey Him inspite of temptations to do otherwise.

If there was no temptation, Adam and Eve would do what God says, but not because they love Him or are loyal to His ways, but simply because they don't have the choice to do otherwise and there is no freewill to disobey.

God does not want programmed robots or zombies, but people who can choose to obey Him in the midst of trials and temptations. People who will do His will inspite of the freewill to do otherwise.

It is in temptation that love is made manifest, and it is in trials that loyalty is revealed.

Shalom

cloudgoddess:

Ok. There are millions of Christians who subscribe to Holy Trinity. Maybe you should alert them that they're wrong.

You probably haven't noticed but the bible can be used to support an unlimited number of diverse positions, due to it's disorganized and contradictory nature. That's why there are over 30,000 denominations of Christianity who all think they're correct. I don't see yours as any different.

Ofcourse I've alerted a lot of people to that error. And many others are doing the same. And the truth is spreading gradually.

And the error is not the bible's fault. Its people's fault. Anybody can project their sentiments to any scripture and give it their private interpretation depending on their motives. That doesn't make their opinions correct.

And its not just the bible. People can also judge someone or something rightly or wrongly depending on their sentiments towards that person. Its a common human error.

But believers who don't project their sentiments to the interpretation of verses but simply let the bible say what it said, will see that the doctrine of three persons in one God is wrong.

Yeshua and Yahweh are not the same person, and they are not on the same level of authority either. You don't pray to yourself or to your equal or call your equal "My God", the way Yeshua calls Yahweh.

This is no brainer to someone who interpretes scripture without sentiments. The bible is clear enough. Don't blame the scriptures for human errors.

Shalom

cloudgoddess:

Yes, according to those who subscribe to the holy trinity doctrine.

How about "according to what bible said" and not "according to those who subscribe"?

Because according to the bible you're wrong. That's why its good to get your opinion directly from the scriptures and not from people's opinion.

Jesus Christ has a God and Father -Yahweh;

John 20v17 -Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; AND TO MY GOD, and your God.

Someone He prays to and obeys;

Phil 2v8 -8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and BECAME OBEDIENT unto (the point of) death, even the death of the cross.

Someone He can be tempted to disobey (but He never did);

Matthew 4v8 -Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

9  And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

10  Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord (Yahweh) thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Jesus is in heaven now, seated at the right hand of Yahweh. Can Jesus be seated at His own right hand; if He is also Yahweh? No! He is at the right of His God and Father.

Acts 7v55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, 56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

Jesus is also in heaven now, interceeding for us. Who is He praying to? It can't be Himself. It is to His Father and God, Yahweh.

Romans 8v34 -Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also MAKETH INTERCESSION FOR US.

I can go on and on, to show you more scriptures that make clear that Yeshua is not Yahweh. They are two different persons.

Jesus is God, but He Himself has someone He calls "My God". Jesus is not the Most High God. It is Yahweh, His Father and God. And only Yahweh cannot be tempted.

Shalom

cloudgoddess:

Wasn't Jesus tempted?

Is JESUS Yahweh?

davien:
If god made them in its image and they were "tempted" then won't that mean by deduction god can be tempted by the devil?

No, God cannot be tempted. Because temptation is the enticement to disobey God. God cannot disobey Himself, He can't be enticed to disobey Himself. So God cannot be tempted.

James 1v13 -Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

It is only Yahweh that the logic of temptation does not apply to. Because He cannot disobey Himself. But we can disobey God. Being made in the image of God does not make us Yahweh.

Shalom

akeensbussy:
If God's love is unconditional, why did he allow the Devil to have access into the garden of Eden knowing-fully well that Adam and Eve are not as powerful as he is?

Your assumption is wrong. The devil is not more powerful than the human will. The devil can only tempt you to do something, he can't force you to do it.

If Adam and Eve had told the serpent, "God said not to eat of this tree, so we won't." The devil will not force the fruit down their throat, he has no such power over them.

So those who say, "The devil made me do it.", are lying. Because the devil can only tempt you to do something, he can't make you do anything.

The only authority the devil has over us is the one we give to him when we yield to his temptations.

Shalom

MrPresident1:
Deuteronomy 12:5-7
But unto the place which the LORD your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put his name there, even unto his habitation shall ye seek, and thither thou shalt come:
6 And thither ye shall bring your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and heave offerings of your hand, and your vows, and your freewill offerings, and the firstlings of your herds and of your flocks: 7 And there ye shall eat before the LORD your God, and ye shall rejoice in all that ye put your hand unto, ye and your households, wherein the LORD thy God hath blessed thee

There was no free standing physical temple in ancient Israel where the Israelites worshipped God. In actual fact, the House of God was Jerusalem itself.

And the chambers of the house of the Lord were the houses in Jerusalem.
The vessels of the house of the Lord were the people of Jerusalem, the Jews themselves.

Ezra 8:29
Watch ye, and keep them, until ye weigh them before the chief of the priests and the Levites, and chief of the fathers of Israel, at Jerusalem, in the chambers of the house of the LORD.

Jeremiah 35:4
And I brought them into the house of the LORD, into the chamber of the sons of Hanan, the son of Igdaliah, a man of God, which was by the chamber of the princes, which was above the chamber of Maaseiah the son of Shallum, the keeper of the door:

Ofcourse there was a literal temple in the city of Jerusalem.

Look at this scripture;

1King 6- 1 And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord.

2  And the house which king Solomon built for the Lord, the length thereof was threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof twenty cubits, and the height thereof thirty cubits.

A biblical cubit is measured as the lenght or distance between the middle finger and the elbow; which is 17.5inches or 44.5cm or .45m for a short arm and 20.6 inches or 52cm or .52m for a long arm.

According to the scripture;

The length of the temple was 60cubits, that is, 31.2metres

The breadth of the temple was 20cubits, that is, 10.4metres

And the height of the temple was 30cubits, that is, 15.6meters.

Does this look like the dimensions of a city to you? This is just approximately the size of a basketball court. And these are the measurements of the temple of Solomon according to the scriptures.

So if Jerusalem is the temple as you claim, then you're saying that the city of Jerusalem is just the size of a basketball court, because that is the measurement of the temple according to the scripture.

Even the dimensions of Noah's ark was larger than the temple of Solomon, so how can the city of Jerusalem be the temple?

I think this shows clearly that there was a literal temple built in the city of Jerusalem.

Shalom

laribari:
Finally, someone that understand scriptures and that we can share properly.

Howver, before I go on with that because I will show u stuff too and explain but first I want ur view on the following.


1. Purgatory

2. Praying through Mary when we need something from Jesus

Purgatory and praying through Mary or through saints etc are heresis. They are inconsistent with the truth revealed in the scriptures. One would need to give twisted interpretation to clear verses of the bible or smuggle in extra-scriptural books to justify those roman catholic doctrines and traditions.

Purgatory is not in the bible, neither is there anywhere in scripture we are admonished to solicit for the intercession of saints in heaven.

Shalom!

joey150:
"Since when did the bible became the only rule of authority ? Where did Jesus and His apostles say "sola scriptura" ? Which perverted fundamentalist bible version is your authority ? The Canon of Scriptures was defined, codified and canonized by the Catholic Church in the 4th century which is nowhere instructed by Christ and His apostles ! The Holy Bible itself is unbiblical because it came from the Sacred Tradition of the church not from the unbiblical sola scriptura. Now why are you using the Holy Bible that the Catholic Church decided, closed and published ? The Trinity, Nicene Creed, The Latin Vulgate (Holy Bible) / Canon of Scriptures, Immaculate Conception, Assumption were all defined by the Catholic Church to fight and dispel heresies because they are all ancient beliefs held by the early church (fathers).

Cuts across various answers from sola scriptura to saints and intercession.
You use the same bible the catholics gave you..yet you accuse us of heresy. Isnt that plain stupidity?! A bible that is a product of oral tradition.

I am a proud catholic and i will defend my faith whole heartedly. Even if that be the only good i do on earth. I will defend God's own church!

I was typing a reply to your post and questions, when I thought to myself that, "How do I use the scriptures to change the mind of someone who believes his church is superior to the bible?" That was when I knew that my explanations and quoting of bible verses will be a futile endeavour. You need more of prayers. And I say this with all humility and sincere sense of concern for you.

Now; that being said, let me add.

Just because God in His grace used the Roman catholic church to compile the texts of the gospels and the epistles of the apostles into a single book doesn't make them an authority on the interpretation of the scriptures. For them to presume that would be a great self-delusion on their part.

God also used the pharisees, the sadducees and teachers of the law to painstakingly rewrite, compile and preserve the old testament texts of the law, the prophets and the psalm into scrolls. Yet that did not make them spiritual authorities on the interpretation of those texts.

Infact no one misinterpreted and wrongly used those scriptures more than the pharisees themselves, so much so that when Jesus, the very Messiah that was talked about in all their law and the prophets came, they rejected Him.

The same thing goes for the roman catholic church in many regards. Trying to make themselves authorities on the interpretation of the scriptures because God used them to compile it into a book is nothing short of self-delusion.

They also have misinterpreted and wrongly used the scriptures of truth, not to talk of adding human traditions and man-made philosophies and calling them church doctrine and even elevating their tradition above the written word (same thing Jesus rebuked the pharisees for -making the word of God of no effect through their traditions).

And when the roman catholic interpretations are challenged, they claim, we compiled the bible so we should know better. Seriously?

And when their claim can't even be found anywhere in the written word, they go overboard to say the catholic church is superior to the bible and so their claim stands. Say what?

I am someone that loves to debate with the use of the scriptures, quoting bible verses to buttress and emboss my arguments. But of what use would all my typing be to someone who believes and is fully convinced that his church is what defines truth and not the word of God? I would just be straining my thumb for nothing.

Honestly, it is prayers that can do the job of renewing the mind at this point, not scriptural debates that keep us going in circles.

Shalom!