₦airaland Forum

I might as well add this post from elsewhere [/b]here as well.

According to the author of Hebrews God was speaking to and of the Son in Psalm 45:6. And what did God say to/of the Son? [b]God called the Son God!

Hebrews 1:8

But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.

If God the Father thinks and says that the Son is God and so calls Him God, oh boy do I agree with God the Father!

I am sure that our resident mockers will tell us with EMPHATIC Proof and make it "staggeringly clear" that Isaiah 53 is not referring to Jesus. {From recollection, I think even Joagbaje has doubted Isaiah 53's reference to Jesus} However, the Book of Acts tell us that the apostles, specifically Philip in this case, disagree with them and tell us that Isaiah 53 does in fact refer to Jesus.

Acts 8

26Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Go south to the road—the desert road—that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” 27So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopiand  eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians. This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, 28and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the book of Isaiah the prophet. 29The Spirit told Philip, “Go to that chariot and stay near it.”

30Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked.

31“How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

32The eunuch was reading this passage of Scripture:

“He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,

and as a lamb before the shearer is silent,

so he did not open his mouth.

33In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.

Who can speak of his descendants?

For his life was taken from the earth.”e

34[b]The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?” 35Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.[/b]

Olaadegbu Bros, bonus for you: first posted here: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-497445.64.html#msg6792424


One for Olaadegbu; nice piece on the Godhead by Dr Kumuyi

God’s Word teaches:

That the Godhead consists of three separate, distinct, and recognizable personalities and qualities, perfectly united in one. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are different Persons in the Godhead, not merely three names for one Person (Matthew 3:16,17; Il Corinthians 13:14; Matthew 28:19,20).

also

The Godhead is a great mystery, which is clearly beyond the finite mind of the unsaved, natural man (I Corinthians 2:14). The believer accepts the gospel truth of the Trinity by faith, recognizing that God remains the eternal repository of all mysteries (Deuteronomy 29:29); that with respect to His being or essence, God is one; with respect to His personality. God is three; and the essence must neither be divided nor the persons confused. In spite of the great mystery surrounding it, the doctrine of the Godhead has always proved to be eminently rich in spiritual and practical values. And for all those willing, the Lord Jesus Christ promises the advent of a blissful reign by the Godhead (John 14:23; Revelation 3:20).

From http://www.dclm.org/AboutUs/WhatWeBelieve/TheGodHead/tabid/160/Default.aspx

According to the author of Hebrews God was speaking to and of the Son in Psalm 45:6. And what did God say to/of the Son? God called the Son God!

Hebrews 1:8

But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.

If God the Father thinks and says that the Son is God and so calls Him God, oh boy do I agree with God the Father!

Zikkyy:
It didn’t cost the Europeans this much to bring Christianity to Africa. Now we are spending far more taking it back to them. With true sincerity of purpose, these churches will achieve far more with less money.

They are not even taking the gospel back to the Europeans because their targets are firstly Nigerians and then Africans and other black people in these countries. Even more insidious in any event is that what they are taking back to these people (Nigerians, Africans etc) is not the gospel anyway but the false "gospel" which is no gospel of so-called "prosperity"!

Siyanda

Enigma pleads NOT guilty, look at the last few posts again.

^^^ There is a difference between "good news" and "the good news" meaning the gospel of Christ.

Chri[b]S[/b] Embassy preaches false good news and not the good news of Christ; thus it preaches a false "gospel", which is no gospel, and not the gospel of Jesus Christ.

[quote author=siyanda.N link=topic=193649.msg6970888#msg6970888 date=1287490278]Please be advised that we are no foolish man arguing about giving - our arguement on this forum is about the danger of prosperity gospel of greed the false gospel that Chris teaches.[/quote]Yep, what Chris and his partners-in-crime (those similarly benefitting from fleecing the flock in Chris Embassy) teach or preach is no gospel at all or at best indeed only a false "gospel" --- which in the end is no gospel.

^^^ Unfortunately, kola oloye is not thinking clearly. What is worse, he is not humble enough to say "Wait! Maybe I should think about this thing again because, what if I'm wrong?"

One thing should make any person say "Maybe, I should think it again"; that thing is this: for 2000 years Christians and the Universal Church have held that Jesus Christ is God. That alone should make a person at least think twice before denying the deity of Christ.

[quote author=siyanda.N link=topic=193649.msg6969120#msg6969120 date=1287473381]. . .
1 “Beware of practicing your righteousness before men to be noticed by them; otherwise you have no reward with your Father who is in heaven.

2 “So when you give to the poor (or Chris), do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be honored by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. 3 “But when you give to the poor, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving will be in secret; and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you. Mathew 6 . . . .


God still has His heart set in sharing with less priviledged. You would rather have Chris buy a Jet than share your money with others who wont bless you back. You forget that blessing come from God. . . .[/quote]"Will you kiss the leper clean
and do such as this unseen,
and admit to what I mean
in you and you in me?"

Full song here: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-476100.0.html

aletheia:
In view of the forgoing then:

John heard a voice. What did the voice say? I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: But who else is declared in the bible as the First and the Last, even before the book of revelation was written?

Isaiah 41:4  Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he.
Isaiah 44:6  Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.

Logic: Only One can be First; Two can not be First. Only One can be Last; Two cannot be Last. The One Who is First is also the One Who is Last.

This is what is brought out by this verse:
John 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

So John heard a voice and turned to see who was speaking. Who did John see? And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man,

Who is the Son of Man? Your challenge is this: "What someone says about himself is more important than what people say about the person."
Who calls Himself the Son of Man? I know you know the answer, but in order to help those who may have forgotten or who don't know. . .

Mark 2:10-11.  But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house.

The verses  from Mark are particularly revealing of the Deity of Christ, for as the Pharisees rightly asked: ". . .who can forgive sins but God only?" They were not wrong to ask this as the scriptures themselves show.

Isaiah 43:25  I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.
Psa 130:3-4.  If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.

Where they missed it was to wilfully, deliberately reject the Scriptures that spoke of God Himself walking with them:
Micah 5:2  But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

Isaiah 9:6  For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Isa 7:14  Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

As the incident in Mark shows; if Jesus did not have the power to forgive sins, He would have been unable to heal the man.

That this is Jesus Himself speaking is further revealed by the words: "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."

All the scriptures testify that it is Jesus who died and indeed rose from the grave, triumphant: Death swallowed up in victory!

Heb 2:9  But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Heb 2:14  Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Summing up: Jesus Himself as we see by His very own words declares "I am the first and last" And even in Revelation 1:8 directly declares that He is God as He does in several other places in the Bible.

Rev 1:8  I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

. . .The Almighty

From the First Book of the Bible:
Gen 17:1  And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.
From the Last Book of the Bible:
Rev 4:8  And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.

Edited to add: There can not be two different Almighty for then neither would be Almighty since there would exist another of equal potency, therefore either Jesus was lying in the Book of Revelation (impossible) or He is who He is.
^^^
I beg to differ: the book of Revelation are Jesus' direct words to His people. Suppose that I want to write a book; and I dictate it word by word, line by line to my secretary. Who is the author? My secretary or myself?

This is clearly shown by the very first verse of the book of Revelation and the letters to the 7 Churches.
Rev 1:1  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

The sense of the original Greek is brought out by the Amplified Version:
1[u][THIS IS] the revelation of Jesus Christ [His unveiling of the divine mysteries].[/u] God gave it to Him to disclose and make known to His bond servants certain things which must shortly and speedily come to pass [a]in their entirety. And He sent and communicated it through His angel (messenger) to His bond servant John,
^^^
And have you read this as well in Revelation:

Rev 2:23  And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

Have you compared it to this other scriptures?

Jeremiah 17:10  I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.

The scriptures are clear as to who Jesus is. It would do you good to accept their testimony rather than the reasonings of men. Just as in Jesus' day, men have found it difficult to accept His claims. Did they not ask themselves questions like: "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him."

John 13:19  Now I tell you before it come, that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.

Isa 43:13  Yea, before the day was I am he; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand: I will work, and who shall let it?

John 5:39  Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

May God's peace be yours.

I . . . . juuuuuust . . . . lurrrrrrrrrve . . . this post.

Joagbaje:
@kaecy

Pls enlighten me here. Do you mean you have to take permission before performing some christian songs in US ?

Jo

Technically many if not most Nigerian churches (at least the Pentecostal ones) are breaking the law when they sing "Christian" songs that are subject to copyright without authorisation or infringement acknowledgment. I am not by any means saying this law is good ---- but that is how it is!

kola oloye:
Jesus never called himself God.

Wrong! Here is one example of Jesus calling Himself God

Revelation 1:8

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

  Rejoicing with the miners, their families, rescuers, the people of Chile, the entire humanity ---- and with you Ivynwa.

Do you notice how many of the miners acknowledged that they were placing their hopes in God --- one clutching a small Bible tightly when he reached the top? Also, read the speech of the second rescued manner miner and his moving trust in God.

vescucci:
. . . Jesus would be just as awesome either way.

Jesus is indeed awesome anyhow you look at it; indeed it is an apt time to remind readers of these words of the Master Himself.

At that time Jesus said, "I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants.

Matthew 11:25 NASB

QED proven by Deep Sight in 2010: Jesus was not born of a virgin.  This after 2000 years of debate by all those unintellgent people in world history.

Nobel Committe, do you hear?
Pullitzer Prize people where are you?
Honorary doctorate people where are you?

Or is it a case of the Emperor's New Clothes and all that . . .?

^^^ So why are you then asking us to continue debating with you?

^^^ You have provided "EMPHATIC" proof and made things staggeringly clear, aren't you happy enough with that? What is there to debate after that?

However, I do know that extremely clever people had been arguing this issue for 2000 years and we have yet to see "EMPHATIC" or "staggeringly clear" proof from them --- only from you.

Deep Sight:
You really do know how to tire a man, Enigma.

1. I had made many arguments above before referring you to the views of Jewish Scholars as presented on that Wiki Page. You did not respond to those.

2. What is wrong with research? Do you not soooooo many times refer me and others to links to sources which argue one point or the other? In this very thread you have provided two such links. What did I do? I went over and read them and then responded commenting on them. I did not say "do you expect me to argue with x or y internet page" - I dealt with the issues. I did not know that wikipedia is a contemptible site of ill repute that is not worth referring to. I expect you to address the points and not cover under - "i cannot respond to wikipedia" - or do that which you do best - simply ignore the id.iotic plagiarist called Deep Sight.

3. If you are above responding to wiki, then you may respond to that which I had stated myself.

Refer to my last post; you should learn that if you want to speak about research, Wikipedia is at best only a place to start, it is not something with which to seek to impress others about research or scholarly acumen! 

Deep Sight:
Address issues please, or (as is your wont) simply ignore me for the contemptible, lowlife irrelevant bambino that you so often depict me as.

It may be that you are these things which you describe yourself but that is not simply why I ignore some of your "points". As I've said before once you have provided "EMPHATIC" proof of something or made the thing "staggeringly clear --- especially a thing so monumental as saying Jesus was not of a virgin birth ---- then your "points" are not worth bothering about.

This is simply because such statements betray ignorance of scholarship ----- do you know how long the debate on Isaiah 7:14 has been going on? Do you know when it first started? Apart from Wikipedia and Rabbi Singer, have/had you read any scholarly material on the debate? I put it to you that if you had, you will not be so unwise to speak of "EMPHATIC" or "staggeringly clear" proof. 

Deep Sight:
Contrariwise, there is a great deal in my last few posts that you have absoluetly refused to respond to. After accusing me of plagiarism for an extract the source of which I acknowledged, and also provided the link therewith, you also refused to address the many deep and certain points contained therein.

Now you are asking me to debate with Wikipedia?

Interesting!

Deep Sight:
Enigma it is beyond belief that you could look at an extract in a post where the very first line announced the source, and the link also provided, and begin to insinuate plagiarism.

So if you were using such material  in legal writing it will not be in quotations or at least indentation so as to avoid misrepresentation or misunderstandin; they did not teach you that in University or Law School? And, by the way, I did not accuse you of plagiarism.

Address the issues if you will, or . . . - [sigh] - ignore them.

Did you not notice that I had already started ignoring some of your "points/issues"?

EDITED

^^^

Enigma:
See also how many questions thst we posed and points that we raised that he studiously avoided in each post only to jump to another thing.

nuclearboy:
. . .
You've made up your mind and settling this specific issue will only result in you searching the web for something else to say. You've evidenced that too brazenly. . . .

Say hi to the good Rabbi Singer.

Do you see? See also how many questions thst we posed and points that we raised that he studiously avoided in each post only to jump to another thing. The latest is jumping to Wikipedia to quote a sizable chunk without even placing it in quotes, even granted it is acknowledged;  a lawyer not realising the potential misrepresentation in that. I mean this is something that even first year law students are taught about!

In any event quoting wikipedia indiscriminately is, to the informed, a very obvious sign of poor scholarship.

Some of us debunked the Ekechukwu nonsense way back in the day.

Oh by the way, in relation to

nuclearboy:
. . .The "young woman's" son would be named "Immanuel". Was that Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz? . . .

Is the prophetess in Isaiah 8:3 who gave birth to the Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz the same person as the "young woman" (or the virgin) in Isaiah 7:14?

Note that the prophetess is widely seen to be Isaiah's wife, so not likely to be a "young woman" or for that matter a virgin especially as Isaiah already had a son named Shear-Jashub (Isaiah 7:3) who, presumably, was by his wife "the prophetess" --------------- unless it can be proved that Isaiah was definitely or probably polygamous, for which I'd like to see the evidence.

Listen to Micah for another Messianic prophecy:

2. “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,

though you are small among the clans of Judah,

out of you will come for me

one who will be ruler over Israel,

whose origins are from of old,

from ancient times.”

Or try the NASB rendering:

"But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity."

nuclearboy:
You perfectly embody the scripture that describes Christ's encounter with Satan after He prayed - its like "let me try this, no, it doesn't work. I'll try another. no way" etc.

Rabbi Singer didn't work even with your squatting on verse 20 so you go away for a season (?) and come back with this.

Of course; a sort of 'bait-and-switch' and an example of why pursuing a discussion is often not a worthwhile exercise.

nuclearboy:
But why did you stop at Chapter 8? Why didn't you continue till Isa 9:7 which continues the entire story of the prophecy and after your fulfillment continues the prophecy describing again Messiah.

Or even beyond to Isaiah 11 or going through until Isaiah 61? Let me use a form of backward chronology to demonstrate why the quoted point is extremely important.

Let us start with the New Testament in Luke 4

14 Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. 15He taught in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.

16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read. 17 The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:

18 “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,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”e

20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, 21 and he began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”

22 All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” they asked.

So what do we have? Jesus read Isaiah 61 and said that the prophecy in that book was fulfilled in Himself. This tells us that Isaiah 61 is a Messianic prophecy.

OK so we know that Isaiah 61 is about Jesus; it makes two references (among others) (a) the Spirit of the Lord is upon Him and (b) He will bring good news to the poor.

Now see the connection --- read Isaiah 11!

2.The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him--the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD .

and

4. but with righteousness he will judge the needy, with justice he will give decisions for the poor of the earth. He will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth; with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked.

In any event in reading the whole of Isaiah 11 one will see clearly that Isaiah 11 is another Messianic prophecy i.e. one referring to Jesus Christ. In its own right an important verse in Isaiah 11 is verse 1

A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.

Remember that we have already shown that Isaiah 11 is a Messianic prophecy referring to Jesus Christ. Now that shoot from the stump of Jesse in Isaiah 11:1 who is ruler and judge (11:4) is also identified in Isaiah 9 and in particular

6. For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the Lord Almighty will accomplish this.

I think the connection so far is pretty clear if not in fact self-evident.

Moreover: two critical points follow. Firstly, it is widely agreed even by Jewish Scholars that Isaiah 9:6 is Messianic i.e. refers to the Messiah that the Jews are/were expecting; (we Christians of course believe that Messiah to have come as and is Jesus Christ). Secondly, it is also widely accepted even by objective Jewish scholars that the child referred to in Isaiah 9:6 is the same child referred to in Isaiah 7:14!

Meaning what? Meaning that the child to be born by the "young woman" (or the virgin) is the Messiah! And so we bring it back home to Isaiah 7:14!


Now what I have done is a very simple trace back ---- the whole of the Book of Isaiah is riddled with Messianic prophecies and of course Christians will know that further connections can be made.

My homily to Christians on this forum: please do not be intimidated by mockers and the spiritually blind no matter how "intellectual" sounding their arguments may appear; always remember the Spirit of God in you and that that is greater than anything in and of the world; remember, 'Let God be true and every man a liar'!

Deep Sight:
Aite. I see you have no plausible response to offer against that which the scripture clearly conveys. . . .

If you really think that, then you are even less clever than I thought!

Again, if you think it makes it "staggeringly clear", then I am happy to leave you with that thought.

^^^

I have said all I need to say on the topic for now; perhaps if I see anything worth addressing further later on I will address it.

In the meantime if you think you have found "EMPHATIC" proof that the Bible does not speak of the virgin birth, I am quite happy to leave you to that thought.