₦airaland Forum

Perhaps that explains why the thread originator hasn't shown up since his last cold feet experience!

simmy:
simply ridiculous

Wish my answers are often that powerful and concise!

@desodgi,

@desodgi:
To my conclusion,the angel of the Lord is the spirit of God in tha old testament and he's the same spirit of God that has come to dwell in the life of a believer![/b]

There are a few questions that I'd like to offer:

(a) If Jesus was not in the OT, does that mean that JESUS and the WORD are two different Persons?

(b) did you read anywhere in the OT where 'the Angel of the LORD' came to dwell in a believer?

(c) Have you tried to check every reference to the Angel of the LORD as pointing to the Holy Spirit?

jlee:
Please all reading this article don't follow the multidude, make up your mind for salvation they say is a personal race

Acts 4:12
"Neither is there salvation in any other:
for there is none other name under heaven given among men,
whereby we must be saved."


John 14:13
And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do,
that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Hi TV01,

I understand your concerns. However, in as much as I've tried to outline my core concerns on this debate, it's sad that what I've been repeatedly offered are the very same things you're decrying. That is why I once again gave an outline on what I'm trying to share -- see this link:

        https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.928.html#msg1225127

When I've finished my piece even in the midst of a very busy schedule, then you'd read it.

If there's anyone that should complain that people are not availed any smidgin of edification, it should not even be you; because you can't here try to hide the fact that your posts on the previous page have done precisely the same thing that you decry as well. There are well over 930 posts on this thread, and over the course of two nights, I've been going through every single one of them so as not to make assumptions about the "concensus" that often appealed to.

I'm still asking that if anyone has any concerns strong enough to flaw the outline of my piece delineated above, they could raise them. We're all trying to share and learn; but the idea of referring to others accusatively/perjoratively as "tithe eaters" and "stealing in the name of the Lord" is morally wrong - and I had hoped you would rather have had something to say in that regard. What's the point even discussing this subject if we're more interested in casting aspersion on people than we should be on looking into the Bible for answers?

Cheers.

@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:
I think somebody some where is over assuming when he has said nothing he assumed to have flaw a point what a lawyer. If one look at himself as "Great Mind" true self assessment might be lacking and no humility traces that show the characteristic of a true Son of God. Tithe eaters knows that they misinterpret the bible to generate incomes in whatever form once BIBLE is involved.

I don't parade myself as a great mind or scholar; nor do I pride myself as if accusing people will score any point in my inputs. The one thing, however, that I notice from those opposed to tithing is that they are very quick to accuse others while making no point at all from the BIBLE itself!

The attempts you have made to quote the Bible were not in context to the topic; rather, you have used them as pretext to propagate your dogmatic position and continued accusations - and this is what I've challenged and continue to do so. I really don't mind the sly invectives, as again they're simply the imprints of self-defeated discussions or arguments!

Hnd-holder:
We are all waiting for those words to support Tithe from the NORMal point of view.

Please wait patiently rather than quickly react with the invectives. Afterall, I've given you a foretaste of what I intend to treat. If you had any concerns to address in the outline, I'd appreciate if you did just that and save the slobbers, thank you.

Hnd-holder:
Tithe is never the same as Giving or offering in Todays Churches.

Nor are tithes the same as TAXES as you dogmatically assume.

Hnd-holder:
My last line.
Good day.

Don't spend yours in vexations. Enjoy and God bless.

@Aproko,

Aproko:
somehow, i still believe that Isaiah's prophecy in Isaiah 7:14, or Daniel's in Daniel 7,13-14 of the birth of the son of man Immanuel, means the son of man is not Jesus Christ! Immanuel means God with us, while Jesus is the saviour, so i'm still convinced that they are two different people.

Well, if you had carefully considered those texts (which you most probably have), you'll find indeed that what is described there are features which point to none other than the Lord Jesus Christ.

First, let's quote them in context:

Isaiah 7:14-16
⁽¹⁴⁾Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive,
and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. ⁽¹⁵⁾Butter and honey shall he
eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. ⁽¹⁶⁾For before the child
shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest
shall be forsaken of both her kings.

Daniel 7:13-14
(13) I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the
clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
(14) And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations,
and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall
not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

Now please note the highlighted words and ask if they point to the Holy Spirit or to the Lord Jesus Christ in His Humanity. Let's look at a few of these:

#1. 'a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son' (Isa. 7:14)
Who was conceived in the womb of the virgin Mary? (see also Isa. 9:6; Matt. 1:21-23; Rom. 9:5)

#2. 'Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil' (Isa. 7:15)
Two things here: (a) he shall 'eat' - a quality of humanity (Luke 7:34 - 'the Son of Man is come eating and drinking'); (b) he may know to 'refuse evil' - in reference to the temptation in Matt. 4:1-11. You cannot apply these features to the Holy Spirit; for He was not the One who was incarnated or tempted by the Devil - it was rather Jesus who was tempted in the flesh (Matt. 4:1 and Heb. 2:18).

#3. 'before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good' (Isa. 7:16)
The Holy Spirit was never called a "child" - and if you read Isa. 9:6, you'll see that this reference is to the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

Aproko:
the son of man is the one to judge the earth, and jesus spoke about him in John 16:7-14, and since the holy spirit is synonymous with justice, then the holy spirit must be the son of man.

John 16:7-14 does not say at all that the Holy Spirit is the Judge or even that He will execute Judgement. Rather, it says that the Holy Spirit shall do three things: (a) He shall reprove the world (of sin, righteousness and judgement - vs.9-11); (b) He shall guide believers into all truth (vs. 13); and (c) He shall glorify the Lord Jesus (vs. 14). In none of those was the Holy Spirit addressed as "the Son of Man".

Further, we know that it is the Lord Jesus Christ as Son of Man who will judge - and this is consistently spoken of in the Bible:

a) the Judge is the Man appointed and raised from the dead:
Act 17:31 - "Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead."

b) the Judge is the Son unto whom the Father hath committed all
John 5:22 - "For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son."

c) the Judge in the Second Coming is the Lord who will judge:
Jude 14-15 - "And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

Matt. 16:27 -- "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his
angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works."

I Thes. 3:13 -- "To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness
before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ
with all his saints. "

Rev. 1:7 -- "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen."

According to Rev. 1:7. Aproko, you know that it was Jesus that was pierced:

"But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side,
and forthwith came there out blood and water. . .And
again another scripture saith, They shall look on him
whom they pierced" - John 19:34 & 37

Aproko:
if we read the whole of John 8, I am tempted to say that Jesus tried to tell the Jews and those around him that he is the light of the world (verse 12), so when he goes ahead to say that "when you have lifted up the son of man, then you will know that I am he", I am again convinced that I am he, meant I am the light of the world, and its only in lifting up the son of man/Immanuel/holy spirit would they realise that Jesus was indeed the light of the world.

The Bible doesn't mix them up in that manner. I've already explained that Jesus being lifted up in that chapter clearly alludes to the Crucifixion and nothing else.

Aproko:
and why did the jews keep asking who the son of man was? perhaps, it is because they knew jesus christ wasn't the son of man, and they were curious as to the identity of that son of man jesus spoke so much about.

The simple reason was that they refused to heed His answer which He had repeatedly given. That was the characteristic response the Jews gave to His words in His earthly ministry; and it was in that regards that He reminded them of Isaiah's prophecy concerning them:

Matt. 13:14&15
"And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."

Although he had mentioned many times previously, the Jews continued to reject His word and belaboured the question.

Aproko:
i hope i have been able to state my point as clearly as you always state yours

Lol, you really have - and I appreciate that.

@Ndipe,

Thanks for opening this thread on this much awaited topic; and doing so with a very good introduction!

I've been itching to open a similar thread; but you've captured my thoughts quite well. Sometime in future, I'd be making inputs from other passages to buttress my persuasion that the Angel of the LORD is none other than the pre-incarnate Jesus.

Regards.

@Hnd-holder,

Just to soothe your mind on what specifically I'd like to address when I eventually post my points in defence of tithes and other types of giving:

(a) I'd be proffering my answers from the Bible; and not from arguments derived from quarrels between Protestants and Catholics - neither branch of Christianity wrote the Bible!

(b) I'd be outlining why tithes are NOT the same thing as TAXES!

(c) I'd be addressing the question of tithes from the broad perspectives in what I read in the Bible - OT and NT!

(d) I'm not in the least interested in accusations, for I consider such the clear imprint of self-defeated discussions! So, please, please and please: keep the slobbers for small minds!

(e) I'd also be addressing my own questions in terms of the justification of ANY type of giving in the OT and NT!

(f) Consequently, I'd be offering reasons why the default position of ALWAYS assuming that tithes are mandatory, coerced, stealing, compelled, and/of forced are NOT what the Bible teaches!

(g) And then, on the practical side, I'd be looking at what blessings the Bible offers to those who tithe!

If you have any concerns that you think are strong enough to flaw these points, please offer them so that I could also address them in my post. If there's none at the present moment, could you please take some time and go through the Bible on this subject instead of the usual over-reactive responses so far?

Thanks again for your kind understanding.

@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:
I hope you would remember not to be so dogmatic by forgeting that the bible is just not a BOOK but collection of Scriptures written in diffrent languages by inspired authors.
That Christianity met tithe as a practice which Our lord Jesus Christ never spoke about as a way of getting God blessing.

Let's look at it this way:

(a) If I was being so dogmatic in my rejoinders, would I even have appealed that that the default position assumed by those who are opposed to tithing be reviewed and possibly challenged? Why would you suppose that I was making that appeal if I was being dogmatic at all? Rather, I've asked that you and our dear friends who applaud your position on the subject should try and look a bit closer at your default persuasions!

(b) The very fact that the Bible IS a book comprising several other books is another strong reason why I asked again that you should please look at the subject of tithing in its BROAD PERSPECTIVES as presented there!

(c) Indeed Jesus spoke about tithing; and He mentioned the principle that giving begets blessings in return (Luke 6:38 and Matt. 6:4).

Hnd-holder:
2000 years ago, they wouldn't even dare say the word
God.' God was distant, remote, terrible.

How does that address the present question?

Hnd-holder:
Today, Jesus gave the picture of God as kind, like our earthly father.
Loving. Forgiving. Approachable.

Yes, Jesus pictured God as Father - loving, forgiving, approachable.

Moses also presented God as loving, forgiving and approachable (Exo. 20:6; 34:7; Deut. 5:10; 7:9,13: 10:15, etc.).

Hnd-holder:
That God said people are stealing in terms of TITHE and offering then will not hold today.

Really? I now understand just how very narrow you guys always wanted to keep shlepping your dogmatic views about tithing. First, please remember that I don't argue in favour of tithing from the LAW. Second, please understand that the OT speaks to us in principle relating this and other subject.

Now, I'd like you to consider this one question in regards to your persuasion against Mal. 3:8. Question: What exactly justifies your giving or not giving any other type of giving you read of in the NT?

Hnd-holder:
"The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."

Does preaching the goodnews to the poor mean that the poor should NOT give anything at all? Is that verse telling you that those who receive the Gospel of Jesus Christ are NOT to tithe or offer any other type of giving?

Hnd-holder:
Philosophical interpretation of the Bible would be wrong because of the protestants over reacting to issues Just to discredit the Catholics who cleverly preserve the scriptures in scrolls before turning it into a book form in the 14th century when the printing press came.

Which again is another point I've appealed against: let's look into the Bible for answers, and not the far-fetched (or philosophical quarrels between Protestants and Catholics) on this or other issues.

Hnd-holder:
Mr. bari_kade you are holding the ball too long than necessary aim at the post and fire the shot.

What a defense tactics

You guys have been shlepping this accusation far too long it has become tiresome! Please open the Bible, outline the reasons for ANY TYPE of GIVING you approve of, and then we can take it from there.

I've already offered that you'll read my points in due course - which I'm still drafting to help you easily understand what you've been missing! If anyone has been appealing to and applying defence tactics, it would rather be you guys who have not been able to address the fresh questions I've offered you. There's nothing new in your dogmatic position - and such dogmatic arguments have already been debated and flawed! Why would you suppose that I go back to them and reproduce the very same points?

Could you please offer answers to the fresh questions I've asked?

Thank you.

@Hnd-holder,

In due course, you'll be reading from me concerning the points that you guys often miss when discussing this subject. So far, what I've tried to point out to you are these:

1. The arguments often adduced in opposition to tithing are flawed: (a) on almost all points where you guys have assumed a default position to see tithes as mandatory, coerced, forced or compelled, I've been trying to point out to you that such assumptions are not what the Bible teaches; (b) that the same weak assumptions often proffered to militate against tithing are the very same ones that stand to reject other types of giving in the OT and NT; (c) that the question of tithing should be discussed in its broad context viz-a-viz the question of giving in spiritual service in the Bible; (d) that tithing should not be interpreted as TAX, for the Bible does not misconstrue them at all in that way; and (e) that those in opposition should very carefully outline their justification for any other type of giving they read and promote in the NT.

2. When discussing this subject, it would help to share Biblical answers; and not the weak reactive responses from far-fetched articles that are only meant to peppered preconceived notions. Often, these articles substituted for 'answers' have been used derisively to attack the subject, rather than such discussants to have shared what they understood from the Bible itself on the point. How do such derisions answer the question if all that such discussants have to offer is the terse 'stealing in the name of the Lord'; as if the other type of giving can be justified at all? When you arrogantly call tithing 'stealing', you're effectively saying that all other types of giving you read in the Bible are also stealing - and that would simply go to show that those who argue against tithing are themselves unable to understand the reason for any other type of giving mentioned in the Bible.

3. The often weak questions whipped up to argue against tithing should be applied to any other giving you read in the Bible. I've challenged such questions before, and the reaction I got was the very predictable "stay on this topic: to tithe or not to tithe", which clearly shows how narrow such arguments get because those opposed to tithing are simply not presenting a balance in their arguments.

These are the core concerns that I'd like us to deal with before proceeding on to to seeing what exactly tithing is in Biblical teaching. Simply militating against tithes because one feels it is stealing does not answer the question. You would have to allow the same inference by mere feelings to be applied to any other type of giving you approve in your reading the Bible!

Now, it may look as if I've been applying a mechanical device to excuse my arguments. Far from it. I've called TV01's attention to some of the issues that have already been treated, reminding him of how such ideas of "mandatory, coerced, forced tithing" is completely outside the sphere of my concerns. Further, I reminded him of how the idea of seeing tithes as TAX has been soundly debunked by syrup; etc. Thus, it would be needless for me to go round again reproducing the same arguments to show him his flawed assumptions.

Instead, what I have done in entering this debate is to proffer fresh questions; and even you come back have clearly been dramatically flawed yet again! The Church does not replace Israel; tithes are not TAXES; tithes are not only to be seen as agricultural produce; etc. These are the same tired assumptions that people continue to shlep up every so often without even attempting to challenge their preconceived notions that have been shown up for their weakness as far as Biblical teaching is concerned.

I'll be sharing some of these issues further in my subsequent post; and then go on to outline answers to my own questions - especially that of the justification for any type of giving mentioned in the Bible. It is not enough to pretend that 'giving is a response in worship', and then try to argue against that very statement by militatiing against tithes!

Cheers.

@Study,

I'll come back and reply to your unstable assumptions. For now, I just want to keep my promise to Horus after his sobs!

Horus:
THIS THREAD IS:Jesus Prophesied and Warned: Paul is False Prophet/Messiah
bari_kade IS OFF TOPIC

Another manifestation of self-defeat! I was wondering why it took you this long to cry that one as well! Okay, go down on your knees and cry that same thing again - then I will pardon you and be gone!  

I'm counting. . . down on your knees and cry it again:

one. . .

two. . .

threee. . .!!  

Post your sobs again! For tonight, I'll let you weep with swollen chest!

Tip: Learn to be honest to yourself, Horus. It costs nothing and will save you loads of the self-inflicted mental slavery of your dented black psyche.

Cheers.  

@onyex,

onyex:
Our intuitive perception is a bridge which connects us with spiritual.It is our backbrain.Our intellect is our frontal brain.We are supposed to use our intuition because it is a connection to the light.Instead,we began to use our intellect on getting here.Our intellect does not connect us to the almighty,therefore it is earthly.They are supposed to work hand in hand but on getting here,we over cultivated our intellect leading to the FALL OF MINE.Everything earhly is not pure.It is our intellect we use to produce bad thoughts.Our intellect and intuition are connected at the solar plexus in our chest.

I'm reading more fallacies here. Intellect (frontal brain) and perception (back brain) are both connected with the brain, not so? Do you then suppose that if you put any part of your brain to sleep, you would function at all as a normal person?

Let me ask you a simple question: did you read my rejoinder? Which part of your brain did you apply in order for you to understand my post: the frontal brain (intellect) or the backbrain (perception)?? If you used one part of your brain, could I begin to wonder at all if you actually had a good intellectual understanding of what you read in anyone's posts?

My submission is that the brain was built to function in all its faculties - that is why it was put in us. God did not create a part of your brain to be disregarded in order that some back part of the brain may take precedence over your being. The perception of any man would be entirely flawed if the intellect were suspended.

onyex:
2)The Almighty is THE LIGHT,POWER,TRUTH,LIFE AND G O D.In the christian bible,the name God,was not mentioned once by Jesus christ. He was always using my father and the likes of it.

Okay, let's look into the Christian Bible and see if your assumptions hold. Indeed, Jesus spoke of the Father; but I'll offer you a few of Jesus' direct statements in the same Bible where He actually mentioned "God":

1) Matt. 4:4
        "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone,
         but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."

2) Matt. 4:7
        "Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."

3) Matt. 5:8
        "Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God."

4) Matt. 6:30
        "Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to
        morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of
        little faith?"

5) Matt. 6:33
        "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these
         things shall be added unto you."

6) Matt. 19:26
        "But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible;
        but with God all things are possible."

7) Matt. 22:21
        "They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto
         Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

Please notice that all the quotes are from Matthew alone! There are more than 30 more such instances that I clearly remember by heart where Jesus actually mentioned the name "God"; so I really don't know if you were simply going by what you read in the Grail message without first verifying their claims.

onyex:
According to THE LORD'S PRAYER,'our Father who hath in heaven,HALLOWED be thy name, "Hallowed means to give respect or honour.Even Jesus christ respected the name so much that he didnt mention it.We are allowed to say it in times of greatest joy and in deepest sorry.We are supposed to call him;the light,life,truth,power and G O D.LORD means the trinity.

You're still mixing up issue here, unfortunately.

onyex:
3)Our intellect is over cultivated.Our intellect is not good when we use it to produce bad thoughts.

Your argument is not about bad thoughts; rather, you've tried to maintain that the intellect should not be used at all.

onyex:
4)(i)Our being her on earth is for our development.We are meant to use our intuition not our intellect.We are not meant to use it because it is bound by space and time and is unconnected with the spiritual.

If you do not use your intellect, it would be hard to see how you would ever even be able to function at all as a normal human being. Your intellect enables you to think; your perception enables you to formulate concepts about what you're thinking; while your intuition produces the impressons of your thoughts. Now, when all these are in proper coordination in a person, they produce what is called DISCERNMENT!

You cannot arrive at discernment in any matter if you suspend or militate against any part of your brain.

onyex:
(ii)No,we should try to keep our thoughts(from our intellect)pure.This is the type of thought we should try to bring out.It is our enemy if it can destroy us.Dont get me wrong.Not wanting to think or act is INDOLENCE OF THE SPIRIT

You're making two opposite statements and trying to applaud them all at once. You're position on the intellect is that it should NOT be used. In that strain of thought, it is no surprise that you'll keep contradicting your arguments.

onyex:
5)Man is the only creation in the whole of creation that is given free will.Even the elemental beings,angels or animals are not given free will.They all use their intuition.

If angels were not given free will, how do you account for those angels who chose of their own volition to rebel against God?

onyex:
Man misused this opportunity.No other being apart from the Almighty is truely pure.This is because the Almighty is DIVINE.(So since were allowed to do as we like we made our intellect a lie).

Actually, the lie of the intellect is the idea that the intellect is our enemy and should not be used.

onyex:
ONCE AGAIN,KEEP THE HEARTH OF YOUR THOUGHTS PURE BY DOING SO YOU WILL BRING PEACE AND BE HAPPY.

How does one keep the hear[b]th[/b] (did you mean heart?) of the THOUGHTS pure if that which is responsible for the thoughts is being denied its proper function of thinking in the first place??

Horus:
IT IS NOT TELLY B
CAN YOU STPOP BEING OFF TOPIC AND STAY AWAY FROM MY ASS?

Go visit the thread - Telly B took up the issues with you on that and you kept replying him on the same death threat stuff! It doesn't cost anything to be honest to yourself; and failing to do so is another dent on your black psyche!

PS. You don't need to be vexed if you can't be honest to yourself. That is another sign that such mental slavery needs to be put behind you.

Horus:
Not at all SEUN will make a verification BEFORE locking a thread,he is not stupid and notice that you don't see those who sended those trheat anymore.
I did tell you DONT GIVE ME ANY ATTENTION.
Can you please stay away from my ass?

For a few weeks after the thread was locked, Telly B was still posting on this Forum, and if you're trying to cheat on this drivel here, try something else. That you even had to cry like a child is another dent on your black psyche; and it's not worth the attention you had hoped to create for yourself.

Horus:
Crying!!!!!,ha ha ha ha ha .The topic was looked by SEUN after those DEATH TREATH and i don't give a DAMN about what you think. DONT GIVE ME ANY ATTENTION.

I'm not paying you any attention even though you're pretentiously solociting it. The thread was locked after you had cried about the non-existent death threats - which is only too characteristic of the same self-inflicted black mental slavery you've been advertizing about your clan.

Horus:
Paul focus was uniquely self-ward.

2 Cor. 4:5 - "For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake." (Paul's statementf in his epistle to the Corinthians)

Which again demonstrates that your deliberate self-inflicted misanthropy is a cheap attention seeking exercise.

In 2 Pet. 3:15, the apostle Peter recognizes Paul's ministry with due respect to the wisdom given him. Reading the very next verse 16, Peter speaks precisely about chaps like you who go about trying to wrest words out of Paul's epistles to your own gloom.

Paul was known to many besides Luke the physician. Peter, as above; James and the other apostles as recorded in Acts 15.

On the other hand, it's such a hilarious adventure for guys like you to fail to stand up to your own words, claiming a black jesus that up until now YOU have been too scared to even talk about while crying about non-existent death threats!

I never called you a religious person. If you cared enough to pretend to tell others about a Yashu'a and yet dribble around questions about the same things you post, it only demonstrates your position in precisely what I've stated before.

I believe in the ministry of the apostle Paul.

Trying to be so disingenous is not helping your black racist self-defeated image; and I can understand that as the reason why you have no answers to questions being offered you.

As I've said before, I'll offer again: if you want to discuss racism, please oblige me - I will spare nothing at all in exposing the very ugly side of you and your black racist clan.

If you are not still a shadow of your scared image, then answer the simple question: what has your black Yashu'a done for you?

@TV01,

TV01:
That depends on your take on the root of the word translated soul in every case. If the soul survives death, as above please show it. Upon death, I believe the scriptures show that sleep follows. No more consciousness.

How do you understand Rev. 6:9-10 - "And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? "?

Rom. 9:1 - "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost." (Paul in the same book of Romans).

What has Yashu'a done for you, Horus?

There's just one thing i've noticed about chaps like you. Unable to free yourselves from your self-inflicted mental slavery, you turn on yourselves with issues of little import to you and your racist clan in order to whip up cheap attention. Unfortunately, when questions are asked, you evade them and are frightened of proffering answers; you dribble around issues; and you're characteristically the first to cry that someone is sending you "death threats" where there was none!

If you really want to discuss racism, please oblige me and I'll spare nothing at all in exposing just how ugly black racists are to THEMSELVES! Crying that the white man should be blamed for your lazy illiteracy and half a millenium-old retrogression is a sad manifestation of how backward black racists are.

Horus:
you are following Paul (the Deceiver) and not Yashu’a (Jesus).

What has Yashu'a done for YOU, Horus? Are you not the same chap that was denying that Jesus because it was an English name?

@onyex,

I've been trying to make sense of what you've offered so far; and there seems to be some huge disconnection in flow of your gist.

For example, you stated that "we're supposed to use our intuitive perception here"; and on the other hand you stated quite the contrary in saying that "using our intellect is not good because it is earthly". See:

onyex:
We are supposed to use our intuitive perception here,

onyex:
Using our intellect is not good because it is earthly

So, how do you reconcile them both?

onyex:
It is an alter in us which we use to receive power from the ALMIGHTY.

Who do you mean by "the Almighty"?

onyex:
We use it to talk,walk, Instead on getting here,we started using our intellect.Therefore,leading to our over-cultivation of the intellect.

So, what is wrong with using the intellect?

onyex:
Our thoughts are produced by our intellect which was not meant to be.Our thoughts good or bad returns to us through a spiritual thread under the DIVINE LAWi.e,THE LAW OF RECIPROCAL ACTION(you reap what you sow).Since our thoughts(bad thought)can also come back to us and harm us,it is our enemy.

Two things here:

(a) How is it that our thoughts are not meant to be produced by our intellect?

(b) If the thought is our enemy, is man supposed to live as a thoughtless being?

onyex:
Using our intellect is not good because it is earthly.All that are earthly are bound by space and time and are not PURE,are not from the ALMIGHTY.Thus,being a LIE.

But then, if the Almighty created the earth and man reckons relationships by the reality of space and time, how could the same creation be IMPURE? How could that which the Almighty has created be a LIE?

Never heard of born against, or came across anyone going by that appellation. People are either born again or they are not.

@ajadrage,

ajadrage:
TayoD, sorry to burst your bubble, but it is clearly and explicitly documented in the bible that Eve did not bear further children until after Abel was murdered. Seth was born into the world after Cain had already taken a wife, so, it is most unlikely that Cain took as wife his sister, as there is no bible reference to that effect, thus lending further credence to the fact that there were other peoples inhabiting the earth simultaneously with Adam.

The Bible makes plain that Adam was the first man to be created, though. It's interesting how you reason out your persuasion; but could you share as to why you make these assumptions?

ajadrage:
I still maintain that Adam was not the first inhabitant on the earth, in fact, he becomes somewhat of the most recent creation, but his status as a perfect man amongst other manlike creations is that of an earth god representing the almighty God in his creation and figurehead of all created.

That Adam is the first man created is what I read in the Bible. However, what would you mean by "other manlike creations"?

That's an allegation, not an established truth.

I digg! It's just the signs of the times!

@misright,

misright:
Now for the sake of arguement, define TRUTH

I hope you're not ordering people around like we live in a military cantonment!

Would it not help if you took the first step as the topic starter to give your own defence and then let others follow? I notice you've been raising topics and never seeking to actually discuss issues. Here's an appeal: please give us your own understanding of "truth" so others know what you're seeking!

@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:
It seems some one here thought Christianity came out of those electronic organs.
Leaving out catholic means leaving out your authority.

I don't take my spiritual authority from the traditions of the Catholic Church (and in the context you used it, you know very well that refers to the Roman Catholic Church).

Hnd-holder:
What is the meaning of BIBLE?

I hope that is not suggesting that you're averse to Biblical teaching.

Hnd-holder:
Go on tell us why we should continue to give out money in the name of tithe to those who call themselves tithe eaters (stealing in the name of the lord)

I don't give my tithes to those who call themselves tithe eaters; nor am I aware that anyone calls himself or herself by that term! In fair exchange, please tell us why anyone should even give ANY other type of giving to those whom you be call such?

I've made a repeated call to the point that we should try and examine this subject from the broad perspectives given in the Bible. I still don't see that being offered in your rejoinders; and every so often, there's been the same default accusation against others just merely in the name of defending the opposition against tithing. This is not helping this discussion.

@Study,

Study:
Could it be that you have never read or noticed this??  Could it be that you have never studied in depth the New Testiment  Could it be that in your laziness you have just decided to listen to other men talk about the Bible and just take their word for it

You don't even sound like someone who has done an iota of what you drivel on here. If you have studied the Bible by any stretch, you would definitely have settled your mistaken adventure long ago.

Study:
If you are going to worship the word of Paul Over Jesus, then you fall into the same group that followed David Koresh and Jim Jones to Hell.

The very same thing that David Koresh did is what you are trying to do. After having condemned the epistles of the apostles, slicing and choosing whatever seemed to have peppered his cultic slants. . . he went on in this characteristic pseudo-spirituality until he declared himself to be the messiah!

I don't worship the words of Paul over Jesus; but to pretend to be a follower of Jesus and yet disregard the epistles of His apostles is the very thing cultic servants do. If the description fits you so well, congrats.

Study:
But if reading the Word is just too much to ask of you, then continue in your "CHURCH OF PAUL", And I will pray to Jesus that he sends you guidence and wisdom to free you from the teachings of Satan.

You don't need to send your prayers for me or anyone reading this - I guarantee they would not be answered! I have a covenanted commitment to God to nullify the pretentious "prayers" of cultic disciples who masque their slobbers with a so-called "guidance and wisdom"!

Study:
I say the teachings of satan because any man twisting the Word of God is doing the work of satan.

Precisely - and that's what you have done.

Study:
And before you sling that back at me remember I am trying to tell you to STRICTLY adhere to the teachings of Jesus. (Satan would want you to veer from the teaching of Jesus).  And he would do this by changing the Word to something different and then deceiving the very elect so that they convince you to follow these falsities, and them, to hell.

So you were so scared that your own accusations would be returned? Pity. Even Satan comes with fine-sounding silly arguments; but somehow he's such a loser that he often fails to cover his mark: that of accusing the brethren! When you launch an unwarranted accusation against the apostles and yet end up twisting their words to fit your petty world, you might as well be doing the work of. . . the same one (Satan) who restelessly accuses the brethren.

Relax - for we have overcome him by the blood of Jesus Christ; and he knows he's such a doomed loser!

@donmayor,

I tire for guys who have arrogated the title of personal chief inspectors to themselves all in the name of trying to preach Paul as a deceiver.