₦airaland Forum

Emusan:
So what was the role of the Son during Creation?

Ken4Christ:
The term firstborn is used for Jesus because he was the first to be born again or the first who was raised to life from spiritual death.

Ken4Christ:
Unbelief will send you to hell. Continue.
.

Oga, stop deceiving yourself
Pastor,did your Bible prove that ego eimi ("I AM" is s the final word in John 8:58 & John 9:9?
Yes.
The meaning is the same in John 9:9 & 8:58.

Ken4Christ:
Jesus is God. Jesus is Lord. Jesus is Alpha and Omega. Your Unbelief doesn't change the truth. But it will set you on the pathway of destruction.

Emusan:
It's Mariam you ran to now

The fact still remains that Rev 3:14 didn't say Jesus is a CREATED BEING but ORIGINATOR OF ALL CREATIONS.

Emusan:
At least you wanted to deny ORIGIN from that verse before your lying mouth was exposed.

MaxInDHouse:
Angels (God's spirit sons) don't grow old or die so as one of them Jesus exists even before Adam who is great grandfather of Abraham.

Emusan:
Can you imagine this

Ken4Christ:
Why did he say, "Before Abraham, I Am"

Dtruthspeaker:
I understand that everyone agrees that YHWH was mostly used by Isreal however they keep attaching it's basis to Canaan and pantheon and all the pagan things. And then Isreal went frolicking with Canaan.

The whole transaction just makes me cut away that part of Israel's idolatries with Canaan and just stick to clear non contentious English parts.

In the 3rd century CE, The expression "I AM" that the Egyptians attached to their deity was carried over by Greeks to give a faulty interpretation to Hebrew "Enyeh" ( which correctly means "I will be".
The KJV dictionary proves that Ehyeh (G1961) means " I will be", Exodus 3:12,14 & Zechariah 2:25 is very solid evidence.
See the screenshots

Emusan:
Can you hear talk.

Ashamed ke..

Just show me where the disciples SHARE GLORY WITH GOD before the World began.

Emusan:
But the someone was a FATHER.

You're not making sense. Try again!

MaxInDHouse:
The TRINITY is their problem because it's clearly written in the Bible book of Revelations that the message was given to Jesus by his God and Jesus passed it onto John who is still alive and among humans:

This is a revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must happen soon. And Christ sent his angel to show it to his servant John! Revelations 1:1
So when the AUTHOR says "

“I am the Alpha and the Omega. I am the one who is, who always was, and who is coming. I am the All-Powerful.” Revelations 1:8

How can any diligent scholar say that was Jesus when he himself was given the information to pass across?😟

Steep:
Isaiah 44:6 described yahweh as the only God. There are no two Gods but only one.

So Jesus cannot be another God from yahweh.

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.

Isaiah 44:8 Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

Compare this with

Revelation 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Revelation 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:

Revelation 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;

Revelation 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

SIRTee15:
U are simply picking what suits u which shows your argument lacks sound logic.

U argued God called Jacob IsraEL but have a problem when God told Abraham he is YHWH.

Genesis 15.7
He also said to him, “I am YHWH , who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to take possession of it.”

What do u mean by Holy exclusive name, and what's that Holy exclusive name.

Elijah literally means My God is YHWH. What do u mean there's no YHWH in the name.
Isaiah literally means YHWH is my salvation.

Isaiah – Yesha‘yahu “YHWH is salvation”
Jeremiah – Yirmeyahu “YHWH exalts / appoints”
Elijah – Eliyahu “My God is YHWH”

It's highest degree of cognitive dissonance when u reject the name YHWH but believes in prophets that has their name rooted in same YHWH reject.

Jesus name literally means YHWH SAVES- YEHUSHUA

It's mad.ness rejecting the name of your Lord JESUS CHRIST.

If u reject YHWH but accepts I AM THAT I AM, u are simply putting your head in the sand.
I AM in Hebrew is pronounced YHWH.

U can't reject YHWH BUT SAYS ITS OK TO CALL GOD I AM.
IT MAKES NO SENSE

YHWH appeared over 6,800 times in the bible. It's mentioned loudly in the Holy of holies right in the presence of God on the day of atonement.

On the day of atonement the high priest will enter the Holy of holies, stand in the presence of God and call the name YHWH 3 times.

Common man, don't tell me u believe the high priest will call God a wrong name right in his presence.

Check out what happened to Abihu and Nadab when they disobeyed God in his presence.

Once again a conjecture and guess work is not fact and can't be the truth.
YHWH being a pantheon god is an hypothesis, not a fact. There's no evidence anywhere to support such claim.

There's no evidence anywhere that any pagan idol is pronounced I AM exact way it's pronounced in Hebrew.
Even the inscriptions are only similar due to closeness of Semitic languages thus scholars concluded JHWH must mean YHWH, they are not exactly the same.

THE WAY YHWH IS WRITTEN IN HEBREW IS DIFFERENT FROM THE WAY THE PAGAN IDOL yhwh is written.

The meaning is different and the way they are worshipped is different.

No ancient text ever mentioned any group of people apart from Israelites worshipped YHWH.
There's no inscription on any ancient idol that states Yhwh.
No ancient manuscript of cuneiform or tablet mentioned yhwh as a Canaanite god.
All ancient evidence that we have mentioned yhwh as God of Israel not God of any other people.

The only evidence scholars use to back their hypothesis is from the bible itself. They used secular reasoning to denounce the bible as false and then deduce their own argument from the same source.

The writings are not the same and the pronunciation is not the same. So I wonder what made u conclude yhwh is a pagan god.

I will advise u to do more study on historicity of YHWH b4 jumping to wrong conclusion and sink into heresy.

U can start with this link which is shorter, then proceed to the longer video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEEQOZKmHDY?si=NFulf1V4bQ3BGODt

https://www.youtube.com/live/pBGUtnUf584?si=G17hUCZ5nedo9fhw

Dtruthspeaker:
No.
I say that he should challenge the status who by showing the world the proof that they are wrong just like I did when Google reported that polygamy and slavery is permitted by the bible and I raised a thread proving that it is not True.

So, since he disagrees with them, then he has a duty to give us the valid Truth.

gohf:
Janosky this guy is still on nairaland 😂🤣 be like he abandoned his thread after I asked him just 2 simple questions 😹

Chai !!!!!!!
:

How do you expect him to give you scripturally proven answers that he doesn't have?

Nobody gives what he doesn't have.

He resorts to deflect scripturally proven points they can't refute,na that style wey Oga Steep & Gabrielshow24.

Their claim is always faulted by the holy scriptures. .

Dtruthspeaker:
Then, since you dispute that that Google's reports on Yahweh being a Canaanite god is not True, then the burden is on you to supply the valid evidence and proof in rebuttal to me and Google if you have it. But I know you don't have any hence all these antics of placing burden of proof even when it is your turn to prove your denial but you cannot because you never knew that Yahweh that people scream all over the place is a Canaanite god

MetalJigsaw:
Na comedian u be🤣🤣

MetalJigsaw:
And the word became flesh and dwelt amongst us.

.

Emusan:
Just imagine the nonsensical talk.

Ancestor for heaven

Emusan,Go & write your own Bible nau.

Yahweh the only true God is ANCESTOR, Senior, Elder to Jesus Christ in heaven.
That is their relationship.
John 5:19 screenshot.
Trinitarians how market?

MetalJigsaw:
Where did he say ancestor? . You're threading on dangerous waters, bro. Don't attract a permanent curse from God.

"Whatever the father does the son does likewise"- Jesus is clearly referring to his father in heaven.

He's simply saying he cannot work separately from the father, him and the father are in perfect unity so they work together.


@ steep , Emusan come and see this😮

Emusan:
Yes! That is why Jesus can't be a creature because Universe is the whole creation from beginning to end and since you also agreed that Jesus is created the Universe. That gave us a good point.

Are you saying Jehovah didn't use Jesus to CREATE THE UNIVERSE?

Can Jesus still be PART of what He was used to create?

Emusan:
Just look at this wack interpretation.

Not only fresh

At least you can't deny the word ORIGIN from that verse which means John wasn't talking about Jesus being the first created being but SOURCE/RULER/AUTHORITY (which ever meaning you decided to go with of ALL CREATION.

Ken4Christ:
Which truth?

Gabrielshow24:
Fallacy of irrelevance. I asked about your god not the True God👀. You have also committed Fallacy of false equivocation by equating your ’mutable god’ to the ’immutable God'🤨

Pls, let us know how your god was an eternal Father when he didn't have a son? 🤨

gohf:
bro so several thousands of creatures are getting born again, please are our dogs cats and chickens included as well 🐴

Emusan:
Still repeating the same ignorance

Emusan:
Firstly, your link didn't work as it directed me to just Bible Books & chapters.

Lastly, I've already dealt with the propaganda and misinformation about 1 John 5:7 since 2020. The thread is still very much there.

Janosky:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20John%205%3A7-8&version=NET

"Our discussion will briefly address the external evidence. This longer reading is found only in ten late mss, four of which have the words in a marginal note. These mss range in date from the 10th century (221) to the 18th (2318). They include the following (with dates in parentheses) 221 (X), 177 (XI), 88 (XII), 429 (XIV), 629 (XIV), 636 (XV), 61 (ca.1520), 918 (XVI), 2473 (1634), and 2318 (XVIII). There are minor variations among these codices. The earliest ms, codex 221, includes the reading in a marginal note, added sometime after the original composition. The oldest ms with the Comma in its text is from the 14th century (629), but the wording here departs from all the other mss in several places. The next oldest mss on behalf of the Comma, 177 (11th century), 88 (12th), 429 (14th), and 636 (15th), also have the reading only as a marginal note (v.l.). Codex 177’s Comma is in a marginal note that must be dated after 1551, the year of the first Greek New Testament with verse numbers added. The remaining mss are from the 16th to 18th centuries. Thus, there is no sure evidence of this reading in any Greek ms until the 14th century (629), and that ms deviates from all others in its wording; the wording that matches what is found in the TR was apparently composed after Erasmus’ Greek NT was published in 1516. Indeed, the Comma appears in no Greek witness of any kind (either ms, patristic, or Greek translation of some other version) until a.d. 1215 (in a Greek translation of the Acts of the Lateran Council, a work originally written in Latin). This is all the more significant since many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity. The reading seems to have arisen in a fourth century Latin homily in which the text was allegorized to refer to members of the Trinity. From there, it made its way into copies of the Latin Vulgate, the text used by the Roman Catholic Church. The Trinitarian formula (the Comma Johanneum) found a place in the third edition of Erasmus’ Greek NT (1522) because of pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared, there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma because he found no Greek mss that included it. Once one was produced (codex 61, written in ca. 1520), Erasmus apparently felt obliged to include the reading. He became aware of this ms sometime between May of 1520 and September of 1521. In his annotations to his third edition he does not protest the rendering now in his text, as though it were made to order, but he does defend himself from the charge of indolence, noting that he had taken care to find whatever mss he could for the production of his text. In the final analysis, Erasmus probably altered the text because of politico-theologico-economic concerns: He did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go unsold. Modern advocates of the TR and KJV generally argue for the inclusion of the Comma Johanneum on the basis of heretical motivation by scribes who did not include it. But these same scribes elsewhere include thoroughly orthodox readings—even in places where the TR/Byzantine mss lack them. Further, these advocates argue theologically from the position of divine preservation: Since this verse is in the TR, it must be original. (Of course, this approach is circular, presupposing as it does that the TR = the original text.) [b]In reality, the issue is history, not heresy: How can one argue that the Comma Johanneum goes back to the original text yet does not appear until the 14th century in any Greek mss (and in a form significantly different from what is printed in the TR; the wording of the TR is not found in any Greek mss until the 16th century)? Such a stance does not do justice to the gospel: Faith must be rooted in history. Significantly, the German translation of Luther was based on Erasmus’ second edition (1519) and lacked the Comma. But the KJV translators, basing their work principally on Theodore Beza’s 10th edition of the Greek NT (1598), a work which itself was fundamentally based on Erasmus’ third and later editions (and Stephanus’ editions), popularized the Comma for the English-speaking world. Thus, the Comma Johanneum has been a battleground for English-speaking Christians more than for others. [/b]For a recent discussion of the Comma Johanneum, see Rodrigo Galiza and John W. Reeve, “The Johannine Comma (1 John 5:7–: The Status of Its Textual History and Theological Usage in English, Greek, and Latin,” AUSS 56 (2018) 63–89.

Emusan:
Firstly, your link didn't work as it directed me to just Bible Books & chapters.

Lastly, I've already dealt with the propaganda and misinformation about 1 John 5:7 since 2020. The thread is still very much there.

1 John 5:7 is part of God's word and there's nothing people like you can do to remove it.

gohf:
but how can "they" be witnessES if they are one and the same person bro?

MetalJigsaw:
Don't pretend you can't comprehend a simple English sentence

What's the difference in all these verses? testify/ bear witnesses all mean the same. You have no point.