let me remind everyone on the tread, the real 'road' or 'church' that leads to life will always be 'an unpopular road' and unfortunately 'few' are those 'going thrugh it'!

but as for the 'broad road' 'broad church' it entertains 'all sorts' ............read for yourself below;

Matthew 7:13-14

13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and[b] many enter through it[/b]. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and [size=18pt]only a few find it.[/size]

jesus concludes in mathew 7, that; by their fruit 'ye shall know them'

unfortunately, fraudulent pastors and overseers who themselves are currupt always manuever Gods standard to suit their own currupt standards,they disguised as angel of light,but inside them,they have a selfish scheme that they want to execute, but know them by their fruit!

@Boomark;



my broda i dey hail u!

nothing do you, i love your consistency!

@True2God

I made my point on the issue, dat JW is lying calling Jesus an angel. I dnt tink ur (or fake barrister's) excessive post will change my stance on d issue. Go and tell dat to a kindergatten pupil.
Wen next u go publishin tell ur prospect dat Jesus is an angel and make ursef a laughing stock. I knw u wont come up with dat at the outset.

let me show you a mess smelling in your so-called church; Assemblies of God church.

Morris Cerullo is an ordained Assembly of God Minister and Healing Evangelist. His personal ministry mansion and two-storey home is over 12,000 sq ft. It is behind two secured gates in the richest neighborhood in America and has been estimated at over $12 million. Mr. Cerullo and his wife are the only two that live there, and report that they are on the foreign field 70% of the time... what a waste of God's money!

Morris Cerullo's sky limousine, a Gulstream G4, is estimated to be worth $50 million. He has two full-time pilots and a stewardess who said in recent depositions that the plane has a gold-plated interior. He has had three similar private jets since.

Morris Cerullo claims to be a miracle maker, but he is under investigation for being a money taker. John Paul Warren, a former Senior Executive with Morris Cerullo World Evangelism (MCWE) has filed a lawsuit claiming he was ousted from the MCWE organization after confronting Cerullo about "unethical and fraudulent fund-raising techniques."

This is the second such lawsuit against Cerullo. Warren, who is a highly respected, third-generation, ordained Assemblies of God Minister, filed his suit in May of 2000 in San Diego County Superior Court. He is represented by attorneys Dean Broyles and Tim Rutherford of San Diego, and Hunter Lundy, based in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Lundy successfully represented Marvin Gorman in his suit against televangelist Jimmy Swaggart in 1991, which resulted in a large verdict against Swaggart."

Cerullo refers to himself as `Dr. Cerullo,' although he does not have any degree earning him this title," says Lundy. "He runs MCWE from offices in San Diego, which he calls `mission control,' but he does not serve as the minister of any physical church or congregation." Cerullo raised millions of dollars and bought the defunct PTL Network, theme park and conference grounds from bankruptcy court after Televangelist Jim Bakker's career ended when he was convicted and sent to federal prison for fraud."

[size=14pt]Cerullo purports to have first met God at the age of eight.[/size] Since then, his life has apparently been one unbelievable experience after another," says Lundy. "He says he was led out of a Jewish orphanage by two angelic beings; transported to heaven for a face- to-face meeting with God; has the ability to predict the future; can heal the sick; and has told audiences when they look at him they `are looking at God.' He also asks them to `give me your pocket books.' "

According to Broyles, Cerullo's primary focus is raising millions of dollars in the name of God to support his own personal lavish lifestyle both overseas and in the United States. He says, "The victims of Cerullo's tactics and the source of his millions are the elderly, widows and poor here in the United States as well as in distressed third world nations." Broyles says Cerullo's fundraising tactics include direct solicitations, prayer rallies, the sale of videotapes, prayer networks, television marketing and mail campaigns, among others, all of which are based upon misrepresentations and false promises.

Warren, who has first-hand knowledge of MCWE operations, says, "Cerullo made countless promises to his donors he never intended to keep. He would raise money for popular projects that would generate extraordinary donor support, then never do the project, but keep the money." Warren says shortly after moving to San Diego to assume the leadership of MCWE he discovered that Cerullo used the charitable status of MCWE to personally profit. "Cerullo merchandises the gospel for his own personal wealth," says Warren. Warren has asked Cerullo to repent for his deceptive fundraising practices and to return millions to his donors, but Cerullo refused.

Cerullo's son, David Cerullo, runs the former PTL Network, now known as the Inspiration (INSP) Network based in North Carolina, which serves as a primary medium for disseminating Cerullo's solicitation programs and generating names for future fundraising efforts. "Neither Cerullo's MCWE nor his Inspiration Network are financially accountable to any group," says Rutherford. "In fact, Cerullo, his son David and his wife Theresa are all members of MCWE's board of directors."

Warren's attorneys say their sources report 70% of Cerullo's income comes from profit-oriented business activities as opposed to the non-profit activities dictated by his tax- exempt status.

"Cerullo lives in plush comfort in a multi-million dollar mansion behind two security gates on a luxurious estate in the exclusive Ranch Sante Fe neighbourhood, purported to be the richest neighbourhood in the country. MCWE owns and controls numerous business properties, several luxury automobiles and a gold-plated private jet. He is reported to have personally estimated his net worth at 100 million dollars. Does this sound like the lifestyle of a minister of the gospel?" asks Lundy.

Attorneys say trouble seems to be following Cerullo and his MCWE ministry. Numerous former employees have reported possible criminal violations to the Internal Revenue Service, U.S. Customs and the U.S. Postal Inspector. Cerullo has been banned from television in Great Britain unless he can authenticate the miracles he supposedly performs, and the Jewish community has protested what they call his underhanded attempts to convert practising Jews to Christianity. In addition, many established, respected religious organizations have distanced themselves from Cerullo and MCWE.Attorneys in this case are deeply concerned that Cerullo's fundraising practices are harmful, especially to the elderly.

Previously Superior Court Judge Linda B. Quinn denied a motion by Cerullo to dismiss Warren's claims. Cerullo appealed Judge Quinn's ruling. He sought immunity from litigation under the First Amendment to the Constitution. The appeal was to be heard in the Superior Court of Appeals of the State of California at the San Diego County Courthouse at 9am on November 14.

By all accounts, the hearing went well for Cerullo's opponents. Cerullo himself was present with his wife to witness the proceedings. Rather than answer the charges, Cerullo is trying to hide behind the first amendment that states that ministers cannot go to court against one another. The Appeals court will give a ruling within the next 90 days.

John Paul Warren, Cerullo's antagonist, is determined that Cerullo be exposed to the Christian community for his actions. He says he tried for nearly two years to get Cerullo to submit to Church leadership for correction, but predictably Cerullo refused. He says he travelled with Cerullo throughout the world and witnessed his actions first hand. He asked Cerullo to return millions of dollars to the donors, but predictably Cerullo refused. So Warren felt he had no other choice but to take him to court.

Warren's suit also claims that an AG church in Oregon reversed its decision to hire him after learning of his lawsuit against Cerullo. Warren alleges that MCWE officials' interference damaged his relationship with the AG and affected his future job prospects.

The MCWE board statement said that prior to filing his lawsuit, Warren had demanded $2.2 million not to sue. He had been asked to submit his grievances to binding Christian arbitration, but refused. Warren said he would go to nonbinding arbitration if MCWE paid all expenses, the board said.

Another suit against Cerullo was recently settled out of court. Harry Turner, a MCWE vice president who resigned in November 1999, said that the agreement prevented him from revealing the amount of the settlement. According to a letter on court file, Turner's attorney had asked for $800,000 to settle "short of litigation." Turner's list of grievances against Cerullo included allegations of lies and fraud by Cerullo to his donors.

Davis Frast, a public information officer and postal inspector with the Postal Inspection Service, said that his agency had received complaints about Cerullo's ministry and that it was in the first stages of an investigation.

Back in the 90's Assembly of God Evangelist Morris Cerullo had a telethon on national telethon with a special guest Robert Tilton. The purpose was to collect money to buy back Jim Bakker's Heritage USA, the Christian theme park in Fort Mill, South Carolina, founded by Jim Bakker. In the 1980s, Heritage USA attracted 6 million visitors annually and employed more than 2,000 people.

Evangelist Cerullo was successful in his undertaking and the park stayed opened for a few years but nevertheless closed its door closed November 30, 1997. But unknown to most people was the fact that Morris Cerullo undertook this venture because the number one boss of the Assembly of God denomination Thomas E. Trask asked him to do it. The Assembly of God denomination through its different superintendents was a driving and controlling force behind Jim Bakker's PTL Club.

Jeffrey K. Hadden, professor of sociology at the University of Virginia at Charlottesville reported that 'A little-known clause in the Heritage USA charter bequeaths the entire kingdom to the Assemblies of God in the event that Jim and Tammy were not able to reign?"

Karl Strader has gone on record to state that I was one of those who helped him build PTL,", "and I never did know what he did wrong, frankly. And if he did do something wrong, I forgive him, and I know everybody else here forgives him," said After getting out from prison Baker once spoke at Carpenter's Home church and said Strader's wife, Joyce, wrote him a letter once a week while he was in prison.

What was significant was the Robert Tilton was never part of the Assembly of God or PTL Club crowd. He was an independent "faith' evangelist who saw the value of television and the buy back of Heritage USA included its state of the art Television facilities and dishes. (Oral Roberts also competed in this venture against Morris Cerullo and lost!)

The secular news media reported that in the Brownsville Assembly of God revival four pastors involved in the revival each set up personally owned non profit corporations to profit from the revival. Unfortunately for the sheep it's very common in America for TV Evangelists and even pastors and preachers to be con artists and thieves.

Although it's an American Federal law that all non profit corporations, including universities and Evangelical ministries, must release to the public their five top salaries few of the Religious ones do it

A former Pentecostal pastor sentenced to prison recently for fleecing his Colorado congregation admitted doing "some horrible, horrible, things," as a handful of church members sat in court.

According to "The Colorado Springs Gazette," John Harris, who previously led the First Assembly of God church in Canon City, received a 21-month federal prison term Tuesday for embezzling more than $350,000 from the congregation, based near Denver.

"I am sorry for the deep wounds inflicted by the crimes of fraud, deceit and lies I have committed," Harris, 41, said in court. Without authorization, he opened an account in the church's name and took loans using forged authorization from church leaders. Harris spent the cash on a spa, a golf course membership and stocks.

"He let his desires to be successful blind him to the folly of what he was doing," said Harris' attorney, Warren Williamson, who sought leniency, citing his client's family, children and history of good works.

Judge Walker Miller said the pastor pursued "the altar of the material god." "It is not my job to forgive you," Miller said, the "Gazette" reported. "It is my job to punish you." Harris' wife, Linda, will be sentenced next week for her role in the scheme.

John Harris, Morris Cerullo, Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart and Karl Strader are only the tip of the iceberg of many[b] scoundrels in the Assembly of God denomination who use the sheep for their own gain. [/b] Then we have others like Dr. Henry J. Lyons, Billy, Ned and Franklin Graham, Robert Tilton, Jim Bakker to name a few.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/9te/9te026.html
http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/graham.html

Boomark;

NO Objection

.

3 Gbosas!!! for Boomark, at least for his consistency and down to earth-christian-son-of-God attitude!

@True2God
You actually ran away since page 30,..9 pages ago,you dodged the question posed to you;

Even in dis holiday period u neva stop ur stupidity, i wonda the type of person u r (if u cannot even respect the sanity or sanctity of a season)I wonder hw u get along in a secular world. U need a paradigm shift bro!.

here is the question again;

[size=14pt]True2God claiming a proud member of ASSEMLIES OF GOD church confirmed on page 20[/size];

Thats the issue, i am not a catholic.[size=14pt] I worship with the assemlies of God church.[/size] The issue most JW hav is dat anytime their falsehood is being laid bare u guys assume its a catholic.

i actually loved his stout devotion to the church, but few question, among load of discoveries,

1, During World War I, The Weekly Evangel, an official publication of the Assemblies of God, carried this prediction: "We are not yet in the Armageddon struggle proper, but at its commencement, and it may be, if students of prophecy read the signs aright, that Christ will come before the present war closes, and before Armageddon...The war preliminary to Armageddon, it seems, has commenced." (April 10, 1917 edtion, page 3).
Other editions speculated that the end would come no later than [size=14pt]1934 or 1935[/size] ( May 13, 1916 pp 6-9 etc)

These predictions failed.

(true2God and failed prophecy part 1a)

is Reverend Benny Hinn an Assemblies of God minister?.
you may see these links before you answer so that you dont neccesarily edit answers!

http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/benny_hinn_sets_prophetic_dates.htm

or


http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Wolves/assemblies_of_god.htm

(true2God and failed prophecy part 1b)

assemblies of God doctrines;

a.HOLY LAUGHTER HERESY
b,SPEAKING IN TONGUES HERESY
c,LOSING SALVATION HERESY
d,FAITH HEALING SERVICES (DELIVERANCE)


i would love to disccuss above doctrine of yours, but first


a.HOLY LAUGHTER HERESY

is it true that there is actualy a doctrine of yours whereby you guys laugh like a jackall and disguise the abnormal laugh as a.HOLY LAUGHTER?

@OLAADEGBU

plappville was referring to Logicboy, are you one and the same?

whats your business with the tread owner? his contributions were not videos and cartoons like yours,it was sanitised! your treads are not sanitised and even my one on one with you if you can remember see the tread that i engaged you;https://www.nairaland.com/870257/worship-one-true-god-not/11
you abandoned the tread here on page 11, since August without explanation! do you answer my question? NOOOOO!

pls stop advertising your treads here! ok! upload more videos and cartoons,insult the bible with your videos and go for builders of your categories;.... chukwudi44.free123.true2God,ihedinobi,Ubenedictus et all...stop inviting people here so as not to derail your tread,ok!

You create a tread since 3 months ago, and you are still on page 7! ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaa! that is a shame!

this particular tread was created a month and 8 days after your own, Nov 14, and its now on page 39, more than 5 times encapsulated your so called tread? what a shame!

Anyway,pls stop advertising your treads here! ok! upload more videos and cartoons you are free! we deal with raw facts and not DISTORTED FACTS, olodo!

@Olaadegbu

Is it not hypocritical of you and your folks to abandon the threads I opened on this subject only for you to open another one here and then cry wolf?

are you high on something?OLAADEGBU!

im i Boomark who own this tread? Answer me! and he is not a jws, i do support the jws and no regret about that! so you cant do with the JWS comment again? in you bid to develop your tread! why not look for other religious members to develop your tread?

if you can remember see the tread that i engaged you;https://www.nairaland.com/870257/worship-one-true-god-not/11

you did not answer my question!(1) and i was disappionted when a trinitarian like you Ihedinobi said TRINITY IS UNDEFENDED IN THE BIBLE (2) and you did not challenge him but leave the tread since Aug 08,(3) when you refused to answer all my respose,see them again..... Re: We worship one TRUE GOD not a TRINITY - A Provocative discussion by OLAADEGBU(m): 1:24pm On Aug 08 you cowardly came in here to SOLICIT for tread builders! see your request below!

Here are some of the threads your JW gang abandoned:

so you need a jw to develop your tread? wonders shall never end, thats so coward of you!


see what you call tread, the first one; opened since october 06, 3 monthe ago, and you are still on page 7,

why not look for your trinitarian to help you develop it!

see your yansh ...OLAADEGBU(m): 5:22pm On Oct 06 just appeal to people to help you build your tread! ole!

the two tread below of yours opened since september 04 and october 14 respectively 4, and 3 months ago both treads are less than just a tread we contributed in, now on page 39! now you were jealous! you just need someone to build your tread,but unfortunately,among your companions,you cannot boast of legitimate arguments, see what you call tread below?

https://www.nairaland.com/1067350/another-look-trinity/7#up

https://www.nairaland.com/1038080/wonderful-truth-trinity/16

https://www.nairaland.com/531625/evidence-deity-christ/17

only above tread alone, you guys have nothing to hold on except the lords mercy! pagan beliefs are always transformed to angel of light!

pls stop advertising your treads here! ok! upload more videos and cartoons,insult the bible with your videos and go for builders of your categories;.... chukwudi44.free123.true2God,ihedinobi,Ubenedictus et all...stop inviting people here so as not to derail your tread,ok!

@Mr Anony

you seemed to be too slow in your replies,

ok, ponder on these to add to your replies!; here we go again and more on the way!


Paul does not depict Jesus as co-equal with God, but instead says that God ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― is of superior rank to Jesus,

“But I would have you know that the head of every man in Christ and the head of the woman is the man and [b]the head of Christ [/b]is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3).

Paul puts a considerable strain on “trinitarianism” when he clearly distinguishes between God and Jesus by saying,

“For there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.” (1 Timothy 2:5 KJV)

Paul did not indicate any change in the nature of God as he wrote:

“A mediator is not a mediator of one, BUT GOD IS ONE.” (Galatians 3:20 KJV)

The disciples viewed Jesus as the “one mediator between God and men,” not as God himself, but two separate beings.

While Jesus is often called the Son of God, nobody in the first century ever thought of him as being a deity. Paul confirms this relationship as he wrote:

“Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort.” (2Corinthians 1:3 KJV)

The idea of a trinity is not even present in the Church of Jerusalem when Peter, leader of the church wrote:

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Peter 1:3 KJV)

The idea of a trinity is a man-made concept, just like all Abrahamic Derivative Religions (ADR). The trinity only came into being in the 4th Century, when the Constantine in 325 CE started talking about it as a way, a common bond, to unite vast Roman kingdoms (Eastern and Western). Since the concept of multiple gods had been prevalent for a thousand years, i.e. trinity(s), it was easy for emperor Theodosius I (February 27, 380 CE) to declare Christianity ― the Father, Son and Holy Ghost ― the only legitimate imperial religion.

However, the Eastern Orthodox Christians disagree with Roman Catholics and other western Christians over the text of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed because they claim that the “Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.” The Roman Catholics maintain this is not true because the “Holy Spirit also proceeds from the son.” All, DELUSIONAL IDIOTS!

So when was Jesus God? Jesus lived for 33 years. When was he God? Some say when he preformed miracles. That is no documented proof, besides many other people performed miracles. So, when was Jesus god ― Invisible Man in the Sky?

· At birth?

· When the bird appeared at baptism?

· On the mount?

· In the garden?

· On the cross?

· Upon death? or perhaps

· At ascension?

Where in the New Testament does the holy Christian god-given bible clearly say when Jesus became God? No other religion tells of their God dying. Please explain how a God can die?

Christians say this is not true.

“That whosoever believes in him (Jesus) should not perish but have everlasting life” and

“He that believes on him (Jesus) is not condemned but he that believes not is condemned already because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” (John 3:16 & 18KJV)

MR Anony

we are waiting for your response on this;

I can show you verses of the Son reading people's minds i.e. they couldn't hide their thoughts from Him like the Father (Omniscience),

why is 'the son'(jesus), parralled in ignorance with 'the angels' by not having the 'knowledge of the day and hour' of which the father possesed.

in affirmation, jesus declared 'no one except the father have the knowledge' note in the context that he is not making a case for his bodily form,because 'the fulness of deity lives in him bodily'

Mark 13:32 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

fast pls!

Mr_Anony:

If you say that God is love,

the bible says.......'God is love'......say after me,....the bible says.......'God is love'

stop attributing a confirmed truth as a mere opinion of someone because you disagree with the bble verse, repeat again,.....the bible says.......'God is love'

ehn hennn! its the bible discription of God, okay?

then who was He loving before creation? Himself? Or did He only start loving after He had created?

you posed to be wiser here,with your questions!

see why your logic here will not work!

1 cor 1:20-21;

20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

"it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe'' so your logic is nulled! sorry! leave God the way he is!

Mr Anony

you tried to sell the insinuation that in colosians 2:15 'jesus as the firstborn of creation',

that what is meant was that he (jesus) is the 'first to exist' instead of him (jesus) being the first creation of his father, the the oversight of creation handed to him after his(jesus) being created. lets see how the creation job was handed to jesus by his father;

psalm 89:4, 25-27;

25 I will set his hand also in the sea, and his right hand in the rivers.

26 He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation.

27 Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth.

@Mr Anony

deny this one by one, i will still supply more;

If Jesus were the “true” God ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― why would he need to request from himself legions of angels,

“Do you think I cannot call on my Father and he will at once put at my disposal more than 12 legions of angels?” (Matthew 26:53 King James Version)

Apparently Matthew did not consider that Jesus was God because Matthew clearly said it was the Father not Jesus who granted the sons of Zebedee to sit at the right and left of Jesus in heaven as he wrote:

“It is not mine to grant but is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.” (Matthew 20:20-23 KJV)

THINK! If Jesus was God ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― he could have anyone he wanted to sit beside him in heaven.

If Jesus was God, why did he cry out:

“My Father, if it is possible may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will but as you will”,

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? (Matthew 26:39 & 27:46 KJV)

Jesus, knowing he was going to die, showed who was his superior. He prayed in the garden (not to himself):

“Father, if you wish, remove this cup from me, not by my will, but yours.” (Luke 22:42 KJV)

Luke continues:

“Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.” (Luke 23:46 KJV)

Would God ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― need to beg and cry to himself to save himself from death? Jesus offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the one who was supposedly able to save him from death! Apparently Jesus was not crying to himself! I wonder how Christians, who maintain Jesus was God ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― and even God incarnate, explain him crying to himself. Maybe it was just for dramatic effect in future “Passion” plays and movies. THINK Christians, THINK!

When Jesus was near death on the cross, Mark wrote that Jesus cried out:

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me.” (Mark 15:34 KJV)

Was Jesus co-equal to God then? Was Jesus God then? Was Jesus God incarnate then?

Even John had trouble associating Jesus to being the one and only God. John showed a Jesus that insist that the Father is the “only true God” ― the Invisible Man in the Sky. The gospel of John claims Jesus spoke:

“Father, the hour is come; glorify your Son - as you have given him power over all flesh”

John continues:

“…know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” (John 17:1-3 KJV)

Time and time again, Jesus showed that he was separate from God; having a God above him, a God whom he worshiped and a God whom he called “Father.” Ergo, Jesus is subordinate to God and was neither God, nor God incarnate!

Jesus supposedly made statements such as:

“The Son cannot do anything at his own pleasure, he can only do what he sees his Father doing.” (John 5:19 KJV)

Jesus states that he and God ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― are two separate beings as he said:

“I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me bears witness of me.” (John 8:18 KJV).

As the Son of God he could not be God himself, for John says:

“No one has ever seen God at anytime.” (John 1:18)

The New Testament is very clear about the relationship of God ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― to Jesus and Jesus could never be co-equal with God in power or strength. Why would John say Jesus told Mary that he considered her Father as his Father and her God as his God?

“Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father…I ascend unto my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17 KJV)

John sums it up when he wrote,

“I (Jesus) go unto the Father, for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28 KJV)

Mark did not believe that Jesus was the “true God” either. Mark's Jesus said to the women,

“Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.” (Mark 10:17-18 KJV)

How did he become the only begotten son before his resurrection?

he became the only begotten son conciously here on earth during his baptism, and not when he was in heaven! he fuffilled Gods decree(made after adam sin),used to remedy the our parents sin when he died.

Matthew wrote when Jesus came up out of the baptismal water:

“And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:17 KJV)

MR Anony

I can show you verses of the Son reading people's minds i.e. they couldn't hide their thoughts from Him like the Father (Omniscience),

why is 'the son'(jesus), parralled in ignorance with 'the angels' by not having the a 'knowledge of the day and hour' of which the father possesed.

in affirmation, jesus declared 'no one except the father have the knowledge' note in the context that he is not making a case for his bodily form,because 'the fulness of deity lives in him bodily'

Mark 13:32 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

fast pls!

where are Ubenenedictus, Olaadegbu,true2god,free123,chukwudi44 etc..

even on their own tread, they are nowhere with their contribution,but rather, the most contribution that dominates their own tread is from non-trinitarian, na waoo!

Mr Anony

I will tell you the same thing I have told Barrister. Please define God. Lay out His attributes. Point out out those things that only God can possess and if Christ does not possess them, we can conveniently drop the whole "trinity" issue.

i was compiling my reply when i saw a replica of my reply to that questions you ask,beautiful answers, so i concur,in otherwords,accept 'todaynatoday' post as part of my contribution to your question i have continued from the objection you raise to 'todaynatoday' post, ok?

@Mr Anony

Perhaps this might be the best way for us to understand what is meant by Trinity is to ask you to define God. Who is God?

Is He omniscient?
Is He omnipresent?
Is He omnipotent?
Can you show me these 3 words in the bible? I am sure you can't because they simply are not in the bible however we read verses that confirm these attributes of God.

I can show you verses that show that the Son can be at more than one place at a time like the Father (omnipresence),
I can show you verses of the Son reading people's minds i.e. they couldn't hide their thoughts from Him like the Father (Omniscience),
I can show you the Son assuring us that He will do anything we ask for in faith(omnipotence)

bolded above is where confusion sets in, they are not bible concepts! and since it is not defined in the bible,but rather different interpretations culminate in the concept, i cannot give you my mandate on this because its not defined in the bible, but we know God to the extext described in the bible as the most powerful and abundance of knowledge ,how powerful he is,rests within the bible context, maybe he is all powerful? or all knowing should not be our inflated imaginations!
Mr Anony

The Son was uncreated and existed from the beginning [/b]with the Father (The Son is also eternal)

you lied!

Proverbs 8:22-24
(NIV)
22 “The Lord [b]brought me forth as the first of his works,[a]
before his deeds of old;
23 I was formed long ages ago,
at the very beginning, when the world came to be.
24 When there were no watery depths, I was given birth,

''The Lord [b]brought me forth'' ''I was formed'' ''I was given birth'' i was created by the LORD


prov 8:22 king james ver.

I was 'possesed'

using the original hebrew/greek translation H7069=Create
H7069

קנה

qânâh

kaw-naw'

A primitive root; to {erect} that {is} create

New International Version
"The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works, before his deeds of old;
New Living Translation )
"The LORD formed me from the beginning, before he created anything else.

English Standard Version
“The LORD possessed me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old.

New American Standard Bible
"The LORD possessed me at the beginning of His way, Before His works of old.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
The LORD[b] made me[/b] at the beginning of His creation, before His works of long ago.

International Standard Version
"The LORD[b] made me[/b] as he began his planning, before his ancient activity commenced.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
The LORD possessed [/b]me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
“Lord Jehovah [b]created me [/b]at the beginning of his creation and from before all of his works.”

God proposed to make jesus 'my firstborn'

Psalm 89:27
King James Bible

Also [b]I will make him [b]my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth[/b].

The Son accepted worship to Himself (Mind you this is something no angel would dare to do)

he was granted by the father to receive worship! phil 2:6-9
and His father is exempted!

@Mr Anony

It is the same context in 1 Corinthians 8. Paul is letting the Christians know that even though the pagans around them worship multiple gods, their God is singular i.e. one God, one Lord. The Father and the Son.

One God here refers to 'the only supreme Almighty God' i cant believe that you mention 'singular' only to smuggle in '2 persons' (Father and the Son) as singular?error!
this is abracadabra the more you see the less you understand.

If Jesus was not deity at all, Paul would only need to mention the father

unless you pose to be apostle paul,how do you master his choice of words? and even what he needs to do conform with your own logic!

but then we notice that not only does he mention the Son

he is distinguishing God as the almighty one, from his son,the lesser person to the father thereby using lord, note that in distinguishing these persons(head to head) in this situation,one person inferiority(christ) have to give way to the other persons superiority (God)in a head to head situation like this,that does not reduce christ as inferior, because christ is superior to every other creation.

Mr anony

, he adds "....through whom are all things and through whom we live" compare this to the statement Paul made when talking about God as the creator in Acts 17:28 ".....for in Him we live and move and have our being..."

from this above,the distinction between God and jesus is even more manifested in their roles,lets see;

our source is 'from God' and we live 'for God'

(1cor 8:6)
one God, the Father,from whom all things came for whom we live

agrees with;
(1cor 8:6a) and(Acts 17:28)'in him'(God) we live 'in God' our source is 'from God' and we live 'for God',

but

(1cor 8:6b)

one Lord, Jesus Christ;.... the word 'through whom' gave us the picture of a secretary(jesus) receiving a direction,[b]'from' [/b]a boss(God) to perform a task on behalf of the boss 'through' the secretary ,even though the secretary wrote with his handriting, he cannot claim the content,because he is not the boss!


'through whom'(christ) 'through christ' vendor of the first part!

'through' whom all things came and 'through' whom we live.

this is self explanatory, unless there is a virus preventing a simple understanding here!

@plappvile

Isaiah 29:13. "...these people draw near to me with their mouths, and honour me with their lips, yet have removed their hearts far from me.
Moreover, their worship toward me is the doctrines of men.

Mark 7:7 But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

(beware of the video)***
the concept of selling trinity,which bible did not surport is dated to
11th-century experiments in symbolizing the Trinity in abstract visual form — mainly by Petrus Alfonsi's Tetragrammaton-Trinity diagram of ca. 1109

this example of using an enhancement diagram to illustrate a pagan belief,leads to contradictions and confusion, but God is not that of confusion (1 cor 14:32-34)like trinitarians who locked theirself up in a self constructed ''mystery'

lets see how they cage theirself and how they want to sell the virus(beware);

1,(see pics below) The "Shield of the Trinity" or "Scutum Fidei" [/b]diagram of traditional Western Christian symbolism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shield_of_the_Trinity

• "The Father is God"
• "The Son is God"
• "The Holy Spirit is God"
• "God is the Father"
• "God is the Son"
• "God is the Holy Spirit"
• "The Father is not the Son"
• "The Son is not the Father"
• "The Father is not the Holy Spirit"
• "The Holy Spirit is not the Father"
• "The Son is not the Holy Spirit"
• "The Holy Spirit is not the Son


''Of course, [b]if the diagram is interpreted according to ordinary logic, then it contains a number of contradictions (since the set of twelve propositions listed above is mutually contradictory)''.

''like some other logical or mathematical constructs sometimes offered as analogies for the Trinity (such as the Venn diagramand the cube viewed by inhabitants of a two-dimensional plane),[b] the Shield of the Trinity does not too easily lend itself to interpretations [/b]which are non-orthodox from the traditional mainstream Christian point of view''

(Wikipedia).


2, (see pics below) “Great Mother,” “Queen of Heaven,” “Mother of God.” All of these titles have been attached to Isis. Ishtar too, the Babylonian goddess, had similar titles. Moreover, the lines between the various goddesses of antiquity blur, with each mirroring the other in terms of purpose, symbolism, and meaning.

The biblical figure of Mary has been erroneously elevated to a goddess status by Roman Catholic theologians. She is known as the Queen of Heaven, Mother of God, Eternal Virgin, Queen of Peace, Our Mother, Lady of the Good Death, Co-mediatrix, and Blessed Mother.

3, (see pics below)Isis. In Crete, was represented as a mother who made friendly contact with snakes. In Greece she was known as Demeter, and in Rome she was worshiped as Cybele, the Magna Mater (Great Mother), a mother goddess of Phrygian origin. There is practically no ancient culture that did not worship this type of deity.” ( The Myth of Mary, pp.74, 75)

the only trinitarian on NL that i feel is very straightforward is Ihedinobi, he said it plainly in another tread after a long debate together with OLAADEGBU and ubenedictus that guys, Trinity is undefended in the bible, and cautioned a trinitarian to stop what he termed as 'soiling sacred things'! the one cautioned obliged and opt out of the tread!

Mr Anony is only trying to play a game that is already lost! but i would still want to engage him,he is yet to adress my last post, if not, the trinity doctrine is so impotent and devoid of surpport in every corner of the bible to such an extent that it requires 'an enhancement in form of a concortion mixed up in a video or cartoon presentation to sell the pagan idea, im very sorry for those already dip in the mess!

Jn 3:16

"for God loved the world so much that He gave His only begotten Son,...."

How did he become the only begotten son before his resurrection?

can you supply us what is meant by 'beggoten'!

@Boomark

Boomark:

So the decree "You are my son..." was made after his stay on earth?

Yoooowah! see it below,it was 'fuffiled'........... when it was made is not the issue, but it was after his death! paul aknowledge!

Acts 13:33

''he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm: "'You are my Son; today I have become your Father.''

@boomark

Rhetoric questions has answer ready for it. If you are asking so many questions without answers or the following questions implying the answer, then what you are asking is a direct question.

[size=14pt]As an heir and due to his inheritance, he was better than the angels and not at their level or one of them[/size].

an heir

he was appointed 'an heir' not when in the heaven;

bolded above, heb 1 verse 2;whom He [size=14pt]has appointed[/size] heir of all things.

his appoitment as heir of all things. is confirmed after his fuffilment on earth;

phill 2:9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name.

that is the [b]dramatic answer [/b]the rhetoric question is trying to pose, im only trating verse 2 alongside because it is parrallel with verse 4, which highlight jesus rise after his obtaining 'a better' name!

@Mr Anony

you ask a question below?(bolded);

Now with this in mind Matthew 26 becomes easy to understand because we now know that at the point when Christ was on earth, He was acting in humility to the father so it should follow that He was submitting to the Father's will. Remember that part of His prayer also was ".....And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was."(John 17:5)

Why would Jesus ask God to glorify Him? and notice the glory He is demanding here; He is demanding for the same glory as God the Father has and also He is claiming that they had this glory together before the world existed. No man or angel would dare make such a "blasphemous" prayer unless of course that it is true.

now let me answer! starting this way;

glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was;

dont confuse yourself with the word,'before the world was' because,

at some point in time, there was no jesus,before God created him 'as the firstborn'there was no world/earth at that time, lets see

Proverbs 8:22-24
(NIV)
22 “The Lord brought me forth as the first of his works,[a]
before his deeds of old;
23 I was formed long ages ago,
at the very beginning, when the world came to be.
24 When there were no watery depths, I was given birth,

''The Lord [b]brought me forth'' ''I was formed'' ''I was given birth''
all these shows that jesus was created by someone superior,that is by God who had no begining! and later, God handed the job or oversight of creation to jesus! like a secretary who wrote things on the boss's behalf on the boss intruction; 'a vendor of first part'

1 Corinthians 8:6

yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, [size=16pt]through whom [/size]all things came and through whom we live.

John 1:10

He was in the world, and though the world was made [size=16pt]through him[/size], the world did not recognize him.

through jesus , and not his volition! okay?

with the glory which I had with You

''the glory which I had with You''

what glory?,

the verse that detest you is popping up again!

hebrew 2:9..'jesus was made lower than the angels'

as at the time that jesus agreed to his fathers request and he 'took' the servant's form, he is devoid of that glory(spirit supernatural nature) he shared with the God and the even commander of the angels talkless of that of his father, note that one angel killed 185,000 assyrians, and that is the supernatural nature (glory)that he was missing,

lets see where letter 'G' was used for another person other than The Almighty God himself,

see where the angel before 'the house of David' was said to be as 'God' using letter G?
zechariah 12:8;

''and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.''

'as the angel' in this verse parralleled with, is 'as God'!

so it is no big deal calling jesus God or god, since he is the son of almighty, he is a god;

Psalm 82:6 "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High

allowing bible to interprete itself will make things plain, and seeming controversy laid bare!

That said, I'll still suggest you watch the video.

how old is the video? at least i can say from reseach that the bible should be over 20 centuries old! and its still the most circulated in almost all lingua franca even in my mother tongue, im not blind and could read, so lets compare the age of the video! maybe it is not embarrassing the bible!

@Mr Anony

"choosing" to become a servant and "agreeing" to become a servant. Nonetheless, let us look at what the bible says:

you are a huge joke on this tread by clearly re-writing the scriptures,

lets see what jesus himself said, maybe ''he chose on his own volition'' or ''agreeing to become a servant'' lets start from the same bk of phillipians;

Going to the turture stake itself showed obedience to someone other than jesus;

“And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself[size=18pt] by becoming obedient to the point of death[/size], even death on a cross” (Philippians 2:8.).

you dont need a lens to read this bro! abi you need? see this again;

“Although He was a Son, [size=18pt]He learned obedience[/size] from the things which He suffered” (Hebrews 5:8.)

can you see that? he obeyed, as the right choice! and not his own making! he agreed to perform a role offered by a superior!

the bible favors "agreeing" to become a servant, as you evade commenting on hebrews 2:7-9 where jesus was actually mentioned as 'being made lower' by someone, you rather go into irrelevant distraction of how man was made and how psalms was quoted, they are stories brother,

see it again ''jesus was made to be lower than the angels''(hebrews 2:9)

'was made' here here agrees with 'his acceptance' and not 'his own volition' okay.

Even funnier still, you try to suggest that it wasn't really of His own volition but that someone else made him do it. Let us look at the verses you pointed at: Hebrews 2:7-9

''Let us look at the verses you pointed at: Hebrews 2:7-9'' i and the whole forumites were expecting you to supply the content as the next thing here, but to our surprise you went into history that is 'pure diversion' below to water down the point that jesus 'was made by someone to be lower' and he accepted that; see your story here meant for diversion

Mr Anony

The writer of Hebrews wa quoting Psalm 8 and Psalm 8 clearly talks about man and how God has placed man in dominion over everything. Note David wasn't painting man in that Psalm as a position of humility but one of greatness. (just wanted to make that bit clear)

clearly, you are not honest in the analysis of these verses, you chose not to mention jesus while the verse actually metioned jesus, why? because most trinitarians fight the bible, and will refer to a plain verse in the bible like heb 2:9 above as 'ones suggestion' as you did, is that fair for the truth?

now, see another gimic you tried to use here again, you tend to 'redefine' the bible's 'humility,and replacing it with your own defination of humility, lets see;

Mr Anony;

Furthermore, if Jesus did not choose to come, then it wouldn't be an act of humility rather it would simply be following orders. It can only be humility when you submit to someone who is deemed your equal or lower than you.

Mr Anony;

In fact in order for you to nullify the the word "chose" as I used it, you must show from scripture that Jesus had no other choice than to be made a man.

let me start with these;
Mr Anony;

If God told an angel to become man, it wouldn't be an act of humility if the angel obeyed, he would simply be following God's orders

this is where you get the whole thing wrong,

now let me give an example as a proof, of an angel (cherub) who 'chose' not obey Gods command,and was declared; Devil and Satan, ''who deceives the whole world''and causes disobedience to God, rev 7:9),

Ezekiel 28:14-15
New King James Version (NKJV)

14 “You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;...........
15 You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you.

Isaiah 14:12-15

12 “How you are fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer,...........

13 For you have said in your heart:
‘I will [/b]ascend into heaven,
[b]I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will [/b]also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
14 [b]I will [/b]ascend above the heights of the clouds,
[b]I will be like the Most High'.....


'I will' in bold above shows how lucifer pursue his 'wills' against Gods will',
God gave every person 'freewill to chose wrong and right', and so lucifer chose the wrong way, thereby diobeying God and even leading disobedience in the garden of eden.

from this experience, we can appreciate 'christ unselfish and beneficial choice' to 'be made' a servant for a purpose; to correct the wrongs of lucifer to mankind, remember too that God has his own way to achieve his purpose, so even in an evet that jesus pursue his own desire like lucifer and refuses,he God will fashion another of his spirit creatures to address the wrong caused by lucifer.

but from Gods dealings with jesus who is the firstborn of all God's creation(colosian 1:15-16) jesus has impressed his father with being unselfish or making an unselfish decision, hence his affirmations 'not my own will, but YOUR own will'(john 12:14)

@boomark

Rhetorical questions always have[b] an already made answer for it[/b] which ever type of rhetorical question it is.

before i proceed, are you changing your stand that,Rhetorical questions do not expect any other question, that is the 'question itself' also pose as the answer, because when you say 'an already made answer' is it within the context of the idea, or within the sole question itself?

So tell us the answer to Hebrew 1:5.

4, Being made so much better
than the angels, as he hath by
inheritance obtained a more
excellent name than they.
5, For unto which of the angels
said he at any time, Thou art my
Son, this day have I begotten
thee? And again, I will be to him
a Father, and he shall be to me a
Son?

bolded is the answer! par 4,5 are joint statement! 'for' in the beggining of par 5 confirm a continous idea in the the statement,and hence vs5 cannot stand alone!

The decree is the focal point. You said the answer should be within the context, why then do you criminally separate v5 from the context?

i never did, but rather joined it rightly so as to make a meaning!

@Mr anony

"Anony who is in the very same nature as the president did not want to use his equality to GEJ to his advantage but [size=16pt]chose[/size] to humble himself and argue on Nairaland....."

wrong! and distorted use of word (bolded above)

jesus did not on his own 'chose' but rather he accepted an offer or proposal 'to be made a servant' from a 'superior' person;'his father' not his own will but his father's.

someone([size=14pt]you[/size])(not jesus himself) 'made' jesus even lower than the angels(below),he jesus,agreed to accept that below;

Hebrews 2:7,9
New King James Version

7 [size=14pt]You have made him a little lower [/size]than the angels;
You have crowned him with glory and honor,
And set him over the works of Your hands.

9 But we see [size=14pt]Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels[/size], for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.

clearly not jesus's own wish,but his father's

mathew 26:39

39 He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, “O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, [size=14pt]not as I will[/size], [size=14pt]but as You will[/size].”

not as I(jesus) will, but as You(God Almighty) will

Hebrews 2:7,9
and
Mathew 26:39 above have knocked off your analogy above.

jesus obeyed a superior order, he did not want to make 'a reputation' by disobeying Gods order,but surrendered hiimself and accept a servant's form.(philipians 2:7)

this is how scriptures interpretes scriptures,
it is an insult to the scriptures potency to assume using a video or catoon to interprete by distorting the facts in the scriptures!

For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword hebrew 4:12

pls use the bible, and let us stop degrading the scriptures.

may i say at this point that the purpoted video have no relevance in our common constitution here:the bible/sacred scriptures, it does not form part of it, and as people of different background, we knew the source of the bible by its history,and we believe it, but we do not know neither the history of the video and moreso cannot be accepted to compete or alter our view of the scriptures,and so anybody has got the right not to watch it based on the legitimate facts above, but rather proceed on making neccesary rebutals to clarify objections that stand the way of the truth,and the only truth 'the word of God' which in it self sharper than any video!

@Boomark

i adressed you and ubenedictus earlier on this,but you never replied, only to see this below;

Hebrew is what they can't crack. If the Son was an angel, that rhetoric question wouldn't have been asked. So for the archangel to fit into this he must not be an angels. He must have been created above the angels he leads.

see it again, there is nothing in that hebrews 1, that i have not adressed, but on the use of rhetorical question, see my reply to both you and ube,

@ubenedictus and
@Boomark(pls ignore the part that concerns ube and trinity i knew you are not one)

d wiki d quote said one plays two parts of a stage usually when one asks and answers himself! This isnt the case in heb 1, paul doesnt ask and answers his question, he isnt playing two parts of a stage.

firstly, i dont expect you to see the answer expecially when you are determined to reason from the trinitarian angle! and that has led you into this mistake of using a wrong gramatical example (erotema) in describing my own figure of reasoning (anthypophora)below

Just d way "can't u do good?" implys d subject fails in doing good so does "to which of the angels has God ever said "..."? Imply that he has never said it to anyone!

i will advice that You need to understand what 'rhetorical questions' inludes and all the different usages,
"can't u do good?" or ''why are you so stupid''? are examples of [erotema];'The technical term for rhetorical questions in general' and the aim is to ''affirm or deny a point strongly by asking it as a question''. no one is disputing that! im not making a case for [erotema]



we have other kinds of rhetorical questions, in which one asks the opinion of those listening, called [anacoenosis]. and many more......!

rather,

the one im reffering to,as quoted in the wiki, thus ''especially when the speaker both asks and answers them himself, as if he were playing two parts on the stage'' is known as ; [anthypophora]

Anthypophora is a figure of reasoning in which one asks and then immediately answers one's own questions (or raises and then settles imaginary objections). Reasoning aloud.

Anthypophora sometimes takes the form of asking the audience or one's adversary what can be said on a matter, and thus can involve both anacoenosis and apostrophe.

rhetorical uses, the question as a grammatical form has important rhetorical dimensions;
examples are;

# Is the Republican party the best? I think not. Why else were they beaten? Because they are no longer in touch with the people.

# Are they ministers of Christ? I am talking like a madman--I am a better one..." II Cor. 11:22-23.

so also,[size=14pt] verse 4 and 5 of hebrews 1, were to be read altogether [/i]this way [/size](see the bridge between vs4 and 5 in the first word in vs5 [size=16pt]'for'[/size])the answer is contained in verse 4, fortunately provided by the same writer;

hebrews 1:4-5;

4, Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5, [size=16pt]For[/size] unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

[i]''To which of the angels did He say: "You are my son...."? is criminally seperated from a context,thereby rendering it impotent.

the point here is that the answer is within the context and the writer presents it in a technical way, hence the argument!

Anthypophora uses the principle of rhetorical questions to ask questions which the speaker wishes to answer. as you see above.
Boomark

a

@Boomark

(a) “Who makes His angels spirits
And
(b) His ministers a flame of fire. (HEB 1:7)

you seemed to have confused 'all the spirit creatures form'(that is their appearances) to that of 'only the angels',
that is you believed that it is only the the spirit angels that has the appearance of 'flaming fire'

but, lets treat the spirit uniformity among the heavenly host first, to satisfy (a) above, “Who makes His angels spirits;

other heavenly creatures too are ministers/servants all working for the supreme God.they are also spirit, lets prove that;

lets see how the heavenly host appearance looks like; they all have the ''flame of fire/lightening appearance''
who constitutes the heavenly hosts? Note here ‘with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host’

"And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying," (Luke 2:13).

some of those who form the heavenly host with angel;

1, The Living creatures....(part of heavenly hosts)

Ezekiel 1:13
''As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like burning coals of fire,and like the appearance of lamps: it went up and down among the living creatures; and the fire was bright, and out of the fire went forth lightning.

2, [b]Angels (part of heavenly hosts)
Heb 1:7
And of the angels He says: “Who makes His angels spirits And His ministers a flame of fire.

3, twenty-four elders From the ‘already seated thrones’ by the elders came flashes of lightning

revelation 4:4-5
‘’Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold on their heads. 5 From the throne came flashes of lightning, rumblings and peals of thunder’’.

having treat the (spirit uniformity) above, now we treat;

(b) His ministers a flame of fire. (HEB 1:7)


Psalm 103:20-21
King James Version (KJV)

20 Bless the LORD, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word.
21 Bless ye the LORD, all ye his hosts; ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure.

Psalm 103:21 (niv)
21 Praise the LORD, all his heavenly hosts, you his servants who do his will.

Summary,

''His ministers a flame of fire''.

It has been proven above that heavenly ‘hosts’ which includes (1)the 24 elders,(2)the living creatures with the spirit (3)angels all are ministers/servants from the above verses.since they are all spirit creatures as agreed, [i]'there is nothing like angelic beign, but diffrent oversights,that is spirit creatures are delegated duties as a team,playing different role, all in a united aim to minister/serve God!


Any objection?!

come with blblical quotes, note opinions pls!