₦airaland Forum

Organiccourses:
The Lagos State Government has rescued a 14-day-old baby girl after her parents refused to allow her have blood transfusion, citing religious beliefs.

The state government, through the Office of the Public Defender, was said to have applied for a court order under the Child Rights Law.

After a clash with members of the Jehovah Witness who had mobilised to resist the rescue of the baby, the little girl was eventually taken to the hospital where the blood transfusion was done.
The Head of Public Affairs, OPD, Mahmud Hassan, confirmed the incident in a statement on Monday.

He noted that the child was born prematurely at a private hospital in Surulere to the family of one Mr Emmanuel Onokpise of Abata Close, Orile-Iganmu.

Hassan said the baby was discovered to be “severely jaundiced” and was recommended for blood transfusion to survive.

“However, the parents of the girl, who are Jehovah’s Witnesses and on medical insurance, vehemently opposed the blood transfusion for the baby, citing religious beliefs and contrary to medical advice, decided to discharge the baby and took her home.The critical health condition of the baby and the defiant position of her parents persuaded a spirited member of the public to inform the OPD to save the child from untimely death.
The agency swung into action immediately, got the relevant court order by invoking the relevant sections of the Lagos Child Rights Law of 2015 and the Lagos State Safeguarding and Child Protection Policy of 2016. In collaboration with the Nigeria Police, Adeniji-Adele and Orile stations, the baby was eventually taken from the parents’ home after stiff resistance from other mobilised members of the Jehovah Witness on December 30, 2019. The baby was taken to the Massey Street Children Hospital,” he added.The OPD official said the baby, who weighed 2.2 kilogrammes at birth, weighed less than 1.7kg after being kept at home for one week and five days.The Director of the OPD, Mrs Olayinka Adeyemi, during a visit to the baby, said no responsible government would allow any parent act ignorantly on religious grounds in a way that would be injurious to the life of any other person, especially children.

She said, “The current administration will not spare any effort in protecting the rights of women, children, the vulnerable and indigent residents of the state, irrespective of gender and religion.”Adeyemi urged members of the public to take advantage of the agency’s free legal services to get redress, protection and enforcement of their rights.

The director also asked residents to furnish the OPD with information on where human rights were being abused so the agency could take legal action.

She said the rescued baby was enjoying free medical treatment in line with the current administration’s policy of free and qualitative medical services for residents.

The Jehovah’s Witness could not be reached for comment as their official line said they had closed for the day.

Copyright PUNCH.
All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from PUNCH.

hupernikao:
Good day,
I have been off for a while, reason for my late response.

I am likewise still surprised you committed the same offence i warned you off in referring to just a link or doing copy and paste. I have a good feeling you arent a studious bible student. You must maybe have been taught or told about what you are saying but you haven't spend YOUR TIME to look into it and get your footings. You cant be arguing the scriptures with this attitude, you will be not more than an athiest who insist on not studying the even a single book of bible but already confirm how wrong all the books are in him delusion.

You must study, spend time also ti explain here not just snippet but body of knowledge you prove to know. I have already getting tired of not seeing you doing a good explanation by yourself but just putting links. I want to read your understanding, your words and your thought share, not another man's own. You can use others as references. I will rather delay my sharing until i have time than doing copy and paste all around.

ValeeLove:
I don't think he hates Ronaldo. Zlatan is very cocky and he respects good players alot. After the match between Sweden and Portugal, he went to congratulate Ronaldo himself. I honestly don't think he hates him.

ValeeLove:
I don't think he hates Ronaldo. Zlatan is very cocky and he respects good players alot. After the match between Sweden and Portugal, he went to congratulate Ronaldo himself. I honestly don't think he hates him.

johnw47:
lying pharisee deceiver false jw Janosky/OneJ

you often have said God(the Father) is "The" God
and that the Word(theos) is "a" god

polytheist false jw, you have two god's there
and surely your "a" god(theos) is a lesser god than "The" God

but of course God the Word is no less God than God the Father
just like i am no less human than my human father

you way hep big fraud oh mumu brain

Janosky:
In the bible ,Greek theos refers to Yahweh, to Man and to Jesus . 1 Cor 8:4-6.
The million dollar question:
Was Jesus Christ ever called "ton (TOV) theon" (the God) in the holy Bible?

ANSWER: The hard evidence is NO...

*"*** Ton (TOV) theon" >the God) exclusively refers to the God Almighty Yahweh.
https://biblehub.com/greek/theon_2316.htm

**********"*******
Greek John 1:1 says "the Word is NOT ton ( tov) theon...> the God Almighty.

PROOF: Ton (TOV) Theon >(the God,Almighty).

The Logos >(theos)
*** Two different beings.. Two different personalities.


** Greek " ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon kai Theos ēn ho Logos (KJV)

English: the Logos was facing towards the God and theos (a God/god) was the Word"

**"Omission of TOV (before theon) from the Trinitarian interlinear is DUBIOUS.

Reno Omokri is correct jare...

*** ******* ****
Can you be with the bus driver and still be the same bus driver?

rottennaija:
I might be wrong in capital letters as my "learned" friend Barristter07 had posited, but let me ask you. Refer to Re 21:3-7. The concluding says,

Revelation 21:7 "
All who are victorious will inherit all these blessings, and I will be their God, and they will be my children."

Who are victories? Who are Gods children? Who Inherits the earth? (See Re 3:21)

You said, "For something to be No more, it must have previously existed in that place, death existed at where, heaven or on earth ?? Emphasis on " No more" . That is one way, and JWs only think of things in one way or direction. It's a simplistic reasoning that does not allow the use of one's brain.

Another way is to the leave the location of lack to that of plenty. Leave Nigeria today to say dubai and you will no longer experience darkness. The promises mentioned in verse 3-7 are for God's people who are victories, who are his sons and God is their father. They will no more experience those bad things they experienced in their former places of dwelling. No more death, sickness, mourning, pains...

That is why God promised to spread his tenth over them, to dwell with them, to be their God etc. That is what the Holy city, New Jerusalem is for. I encourage you to read again the whole chapter of Re 21, this time, dispassionately.

Then too, refer to the description of the holy city, new Jerusalem between chapters verse 9 - 17. This new Jerusalem is said to descend out of heaven from God, the lamps bride or wife, same description as in verse 2.

It says it has walls which is broad and bright, has 12 gates, 3 gates on each side of north, south, east and west among other descriptions.

Going by your small reasoning, tell me, where do we have gates? Where do we have north, south, east, west? Where do we have walls? Shey the precious earth? So the new Jerusalem, the lamps bride will be in earth, where we have 12 walls, gates, etc.

You asked: "Is there heaven In that text?" Check verse 2". In fact, read the whole chapter and see the context, you will see heaven written all over it. However, even if you see heaven in the said text, your mind and heart will remain blind to it. After all, didn't you see heaven in Re 19:1? Didn't a veil cover your face and eyes over the glorious future of the great multitude in heaven?

cc: Janosky

rottennaija:
But there will be gates, walls, street, tree of life, stream of water of life in heaven. Tell me South South behind, do we have all those in heaven?

rottennaija:
No.

Barristter07:
Everyone created by God are God's children , are you aware Paul called those pagans at Athens God's children ?


28 ‘By his power we live and move and exist.’ Some of your own poets have said: ‘For we are his children.’ 29 We ( he and his audience ) are God’s children.

So don't tow that path or you get burned.


You actually couldn't dispute the point.
Rather than think about that fact , You postulated it's only a way , then you presented another way . Here is your explanation below, let's see how sensible it is.



[i] YOU FAILED TO REALIZE THAT MOVING TO ANOTHER LOCATION INVOLVE , NEW ENVIRONMENT DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF NIGERIA, NEW GOVERNMENT DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF NIGERIA, NEW SYSTEM AND SET OF LAWS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF NIGERIA . Hence a shift to a totally new design.

Your Another way theory Fails because this location in question here - Heaven, is not designed for Human beings with flesh and blood. 1Corinthians 15:48 says The heavenly ones are not the same as those made of dust . Human beings mentioned at Rev 21:3,4 are made of dust, the system in heaven cannot sustain human beings of flesh and blood , any objection to this FACT ?



The text clearly says " HUMANS " , what is born of spirit is Spirit not humans, These people are human beings made from EARTHLY DUST . Not in heaven .

rottennaija:
And you don't see the irony? That you are making the case for me? Or are you saying anointed Christians will be mourning, crying, having pains in heaven? Jesus experienced all those, but when returned to heaven, did he experience all such? He did not.

All those experiences are to be had in heaven, where no mourning, no pains, no death. Yes, because God's tent is with his people. He is going to be with them and clean their tears, pains, anguish, mourning etc.

In the words of my beloved Jozzy4, where is God? That where his tent will be, his people will be there.

hbatagarawa:
In the light of recent controversy generated by the General Overseer of the Mountain of Fire and Miracle Ministries, Dr. Daniel Olukoya that Christmas was unbiblical and a date originally set aside by worshippers of the sun, Rev. Fr. Anthony Akinwale, Vice-Chancellor, Dominican University, Ibadan has further explained the essence of Christianity, attributing the controversy to ignorance and lack of exposure to Patrology and rigourous theological formation.

Fr. Anthony Akinwale affirmed that “Sola scriptura—the Bible alone”, was one of the principles of the Reformation according to Martin Luther. Presupposed in that principle is that all there is to be taught and known about Christianity, all there is to be believed, and all that is to be practiced by Christians are contained in the Bible. In other words, the Bible is self-sufficient.

There is no doubt that the Bible teaches us a lot about Christianity. But the Bible does not teach us everything about Christianity. The Bible contains the word of God. But the word of God is not contained by the Bible because, as we learn from the Prologue of John’s Gospel, the word is God himself. God cannot be contained by, that is, limited to a book. Not even the Bible. For this reason, no one can understand Christianity by reading the Bible alone. Whoever wishes to understand Christianity would need to study history of early Christianity. Negligence or ignorance of history is a problem created by the Reformation principle of sola Scriptura. This ignorance combines with Biblical positivism and finds an expression in the gratuitous declaration by Pastor Olukoya of the Mountain of Fire and Miracles that the celebration of Christmas is a pagan practice.

History teaches us that the celebration of Christmas began during the fourth century. The earliest available documented reference to Christmas was by the Chronographer of 354 who noted December 25 as “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun” (Natalis Invicti). At the beginning of his list of martyrs’ anniversaries, a list drawn up in 336, he noted: “December 25: Christ was born in Bethlehem”.

If the list was compiled in 336, the first celebration of Christmas at Rome could be dated the beginning of the 330s. Until then, early Christians observed one feast, and that was the Day of Christ the Lord, the day we call Sunday today. It was a weekly (Sunday) and annual (Easter) celebration of the Passover of the Lord, of his death and resurrection. The celebration on December 25 of his coming in the flesh was initiated to respond to the influence of paganism on early Christians in Rome.

In order to draw Christians away from the pagan feast of the Sun celebrated on December 25, the Church in Rome chose the same December 25, the pagan feast of the Sun, as the day to celebrate the coming of the Son of God. It was to shift attention from paying homage to pagan divinities to paying homage to the Son of God. Pastor Olukoya therefore misrepresents history by confusing the celebration of the birth of the Son of God with the pagan celebration of the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun. It is pathetic that a Christian pastor would so misrepresent the history of Christianity. For if a pastor misrepresents Christianity who then will tell its story?

In order to emphasise the contrast between the Christian celebration of the birth of the Son of God and the pagan celebration of the birthday of the Sun, Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, said in a Christmas sermon he delivered in 412: “This is the birthday of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. It is the anniversary of the day on which Truth sprang out of the earth, and the Day of Day was born to bring light to our day. It is a day we ought to celebrate; let us rejoice and take delight in it” (Sermon 184).

In another Christmas sermon, delivered between 412 and 416, the Bishop of Hippo spoke in the same vein: “When we speak of Christmas, we mean the day on which the Wisdom of God manifested Itself as a speechless babe and the Word of God was heard in the voice of humankind when it cannot yet utter words….

“With due solemnity, therefore, do we celebrate the anniversary of the day on which were fulfilled the words of the prophecy: ‘Truth is sprung out of the earth, and justice has looked down from heaven.’ The Truth which abides in the bosom of the Father, is sprung out of the earth to dwell also in the bosom of a mother. The Truth which contains the world, is sprung out of the earth to be borne in the hands of a woman. The Truth which is the food of incorruption for the angels, is sprung out of the earth to receive milk from the breasts of a woman. The Truth which the heavens cannot contain, is sprung out of the earth to be placed in a manger!

“Let us joyfully celebrate the coming of our salvation and redemption. Let us celebrate the hallowed day in which the great Eternal Day came from the great Eternal Day into this, our so short and temporal day.”

The reader would have noticed Augustine’s frequent reference to Jesus as the Day. I have taken the trouble to quote these words because they show that, for the Bishop of Hippo, and for his contemporaries, what is celebrated on December 25 is the birth of the Eternal Day, not the birth of a Sun that rises and sets. The Eternal Day, the Day of Day, is the Son of God. Not the Sun.

Pastor Olukoya is right to say the word Christmas does not feature in the Bible. However, there are times when the truth is spoken in a way that misleads, and Pastor Olukoya’s declaration is one of such instances. For while it is true that the word “Christmas” is not found in the Bible, it is totally untrue to say the celebration is pagan. What the Pastor has failed to do is to differentiate between what is signified and the name that is used to signify it.

Christmas signifies the incarnation, the coming of the Word of God in the flesh. The incarnation is attested to at the very beginning of the Gospel according to John. This doctrine is central to Christianity. It is about the presence of God among us. It was proclaimed at the Council of Nicaea in 325 when the Council declared that the Son of God is of the same nature as the Father and is God. Christmas is the feast of the incarnation, of the manifestation of God among us in the flesh. Contrary to the charge of paganism levelled by the Pastor, Christmas originated as replacement of a pagan feast.

This controversy points to the sorry state of Christianity in Nigeria.

Here is a country where you can become a pastor without undergoing any theological formation. A rigourous theological formation would involve taking a course, a Level 100 course for that matter, on the history and doctrine of early Christianity. An organized study of patristic texts is absent from virtually all departments of religious studies in our universities. Patrology as a course is not listed in the Benchmark Minimum Academic Standard for teaching Christian Religious Studies in Nigerian universities.

Many preachers today do not even know that patristic texts exist. Yet, not to study them is to shut oneself out of the two millennia of Christian tradition.

Preachers with no knowledge of Biblical languages, and no knowledge of the historical contexts of Biblical texts, casually and habitually misrepresent the word of God before a gullible and uncritical audience, an audience traumatized by Nigeria’s numerous social, political and economic challenges, an audience that would enter into any kind of place called Church. The greatest danger facing Christianity is that the Gospel is seriously undermined by many a Christian preacher. Here in Nigeria, we are yet to fully appreciate the damage that such preachers have inflicted and continue to inflict on the Nigerian psyche.

A pastor is a doctor of souls. No one would want to allow an untrained person masquerading as physician to treat his body. But, sadly, what we witness in contemporary Nigerian religiosity is a case of submitting our souls to untrained preachers, a high rate of pastoral malpractice.

Whereas there is abundant evidence to show that December 25 was adopted and adapted to become a Christian feast, there is no evidence to show that, it was a pagan feast for those early Christians who first celebrated the birth of Christ on December 25. Pastor Olukoya’s denunciation of Christmas amounts to saying it is a pagan feast because it looks like a pagan feast. But it is not in the nature of wise judgments to be based on appearance. Wise judgements are based on evidence.

http://www.mediaissuesng.com/news/real-meaning-of-christmas-by-rev-fr-anthony-akinwale/

rottennaija:
You can mastubate as long as you want with high sounding words that makes you appear intelligent, I'm unmoved.

I'm not one to explain Re 21:3,4 for you. You are one making the claim and now asking me to explain something to fit your claim. Isn't that insanely foolish expectations?

At times I wonder how foolish JWs can be. Of course I remember, because I use to be one. Where do you see earth in the said verse? Can you show me?

In fact, If you can point me earth in Re 21:3,4, I'll stop posting about JWs, surrender myself to the elders(as a fugitive), confess all my sins, get disfellowship and then after 6 months, write to the elders for call back.

Just point earth in Re 21:3,4.

hupernikao:
This is what you found with many Christians today and has birth many into confusion, unanswered questions, myths, even to denying God and the scriptures.

hupernikao:
Morning.
Firstly, i wouldn't expect you to be dropping links/video for me to be reading here without you providing your own explanations. Links can be a reference after you have done thorough explanation by yourself. I count as lazy folks who argue without any thorough or in-depth knowledge or explanation of what they are arguing on but dropping links/video, and i usually dont take them serious. I believe this is a one-time experience with you

Secondly, i will still take you based on the link you post (though, using JW links as a prove of explaining Greek text is shallow in itself, i have never come across or know, or read about any renowned Greek scholars among JW). Still going by your link, which i dont think you read yourself, you will know that the first set of paragraphs agreed with all i have been saying here and disprove your assertion. I will post/quote that part here.



The bold is all i have been telling you for over 9 pages (~120 post) of this thread. I believe your link should help you settle that now.

Thirdly, your link moved further to explain the definite article (the) issue which you have been trying to induced into this thread and i see that as not the main reason for this thread, mainly because i dont want you to cloud the true interpretation of Theon/Theos and not about issue of Trinity or John 1:1 itself. I am sure i have done a good work on Greek text Theon/Theos already except you have chosen to be adamant about it. So, it should be clear to you that i am in no way hiding from your "Tov" explanation, its not just part of discussion.

Having said that, if you insist on discussing the issue of definite article here (the/Tov), go ahead i am open to your explanation and will be ready to give you a detailed correction of your assertion. But PLEASEEEEEEEE, be ready to explain and explain well, not using links or other people's work without providing your detailed knowledge of study/explanation well. You will be a lazy Bible student if you do so and will implies you only go for snippet knowledge not proper understanding of the origin/original writing of the scriptures. Remember 2 Tim 2:15


Now and Lastly, kindly present your argument on the Tov usage on Theon/Theos issue, i want to clearly know where you stand and your interpretation across board. Expect my response afterwards.

hupernikao:
Compliments of the season to you.

It is obvious you arent open to follow what is the real issue here. You only chose to see your bias mind. The Reno quote you extracted "which is not part of the discuss here" still repeat the same wrong information by claiming Theon means a superior God while Theos mean a lesser God to Theon. He is never a student of Greek but just a random reader of Greek text or movies as you showed yourself to be too.

I have done an exhaustive explanation on this earlier, see my second post on this thread. I will still help you further to learn the basics of Greek usage of words. I expect you to know that Theon/Theos (God) are nouns.



Lastly, like i said, this isnt to prove or disprove same personalities/trinity according to John 1:1. If you want us to discuss that open a thread. You are currently doing a bad job even in your debunking of same personalities in John 1:1. Ensure you do further and proper studies with open mind.

NwaAmaikpe:



I love JWs for their strongwill and adamance to wrongly conform.
They understand that they only have Jehovah to please and not mere mortals who have been mostly led astray.

They are very grounded biblically and have no shame in preaching the gospel just like Christ instructed.
However what I find intriguingly confusing is the zeal in which their members struggle for Christmas gifts, Xmas Bonuses and souvenirs from events they do not endorse.


I also am aware of how easily their ladies easily spread their legs to be pummeled by the pendulums of unbelievers who they sought out to preach the gospel of redemption to.

Most importantly is the known notion of how terrible they are when they serve as landlords.

Our lives will be a lot better if only we practiced what we preach.
Better still, if we truly understood what we practice.

solite3:
Spiritual is not Always opposed to physical, for example,

1 Corinthians 2:14-15 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

Paul talks about the natural man and Spiritual man Although although both are physical people but they are different.





the brothers of Joseph couldnt recognise Joseph when then saw him does it also mean it was another person not Joseph?
Jesus body was glorified.





1 Corinthians 15:44
It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
Just as in the case of 1 corinth 2 :14-15,
It was raised a spiritual body does not mean it was not physical.

hupernikao:
Like I told you, learn to stay in narrative. That's how make educative arguments. I have given you below again what Reno said.



You have tried to divert by using the word per se. What does that mean in serious and definite interpretation of scriptures. It's either you can't simply understand basic Greek beyond the Tov you are mentioning or you are just being hardened to say the obvious.

I won't start a discussion on trinity or the meaning or intention of the writer in John 1:1 with you here. Like I said, it is a diversion but For a starter in Greek language lesson, you already missed your case with all your emphasis on Tov,Ton and so on as your prove. To me, It is lazy and also lack seriousness to base your explanation to debunk or prove trinity on a single text of the scripture like John 1:1. Even the John 1:1, I am still trying to give you proper knowledge of its grammar you adamantly refuse and kept your bias. What will now happen when we look at the whole body of scriptures.
It's good for you though. Keep it up. You don win!

solite3:
Question: "Does Jesus have a physical body in heaven?"

Answer: The physical, bodily resurrection of Jesus is foundational to Christian doctrine and our hope of heaven. Because Jesus rose from the dead with a physical body, every Christian has the guarantee of his own bodily resurrection (John 5:21, 28; Romans 8:23). Now Jesus is in heaven, where He is pictured as sitting in a place of authority, at the right hand of God (1 Peter 3:22). But is Jesus’ body in heaven the same as His body on earth?

The Bible is clear that Jesus’ body was resurrected. The tomb was empty. He was recognizable to those who knew Him. Jesus showed Himself to all His disciples after His resurrection, and more than five hundred people were eyewitnesses to His earthly, post-resurrection presence (1 Corinthians 15:4–6). In Luke 24:16, on the road to Emmaus, two of Jesus’ disciples “were kept from recognizing [Jesus].” However, later, “their eyes were opened and they recognized Him” (verse 31). It’s not that Jesus was unrecognizable; it’s that, for a time, the disciples were supernaturally restrained from recognizing Him.

Later in the same chapter of Luke, Christ makes it plain to His disciples that He does have a physical body; He is not a disembodied spirit: “See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have” (Luke 24:39). After spending forty days with His disciples, Jesus ascended bodily into heaven (Acts 1:9). Jesus is still human, and He has a human body in heaven right now. His body is different, however; earthly human flesh is perishable, but heavenly bodies are imperishable (1 Corinthians 15:50). Jesus has a physical body, with a difference. His resurrected body is designed with eternity in view.

First Corinthians 15:35–49 describes what the body of the believer will be like in heaven. Our heavenly bodies will differ from our earthly ones in type of flesh, in splendor, in power, and in longevity. The apostle Paul also states that the believer’s body will be an image of Christ’s body (verse 49). Paul discusses this subject again in 2 Corinthians, where he compares earthly bodies to tents and heavenly bodies to heavenly dwellings (2 Corinthians 5:1–2). Paul says that, once the earthly tents come off, Christians will not be left “naked”—that is, without a body to live in (2 Corinthians 5:3). When the new body is “put on,” we will go from mortality to immortality (2 Corinthians 5:4).

So, we know that the Christian will have a heavenly body like Jesus’ “glorious body” (Philippians 3:21). At His incarnation Jesus took on human flesh, and at His resurrection His body was glorified—although He retained the scars (John 20:27). He will forever be the God-Man, sacrificed for us. Christ, the Creator of the universe, will forever stoop to our level, and He will be known to us in heaven in a tangible form that we can see, hear, and touch (Revelation 21:3–4; 22:4).
www.gotquestion.org

solite3:
1st LIE
Dont quote me if you have nothing reasonable to say.

2nd LIE
Jesus body is spiritual and yet his resurrection was a physical one. people saw him held him with their hand, and he even eat with them.
Jehovah witness antichrist deny the bodily resurrestion from the dead.

3rd LIE.
Saying God destroyed the body of Jesus, whereas the bible said Jesus body saw no corruption. yet again Jesus said he will raise his body after it was destroyed by the Jews.

East2West:
***1)
Bro, stop inserting to another man's narrative. You aren't a mind reader. Reno words are open for all to see and you have confirmed it wrong in your explanation too. Leave trinity out of this discussion, it wasn't mentioned at all nor inferred. Or how does Theon and Theos discussion become "Tri".

**2)
Reno assertion is like this statement in English "He loves his shirt" and then Reno claims because "He" is used first and then "his" is used later, then the "he and him" cannot be the same person. Whereas the English statement above can refer to same person or different persons. Why are you then supporting such wrong grammatical explanation because you have a motive to discuss trinity here.

**3)
I have told you that it's not too hard to open a thread on trinity and give your own detailed explanation for discussion but when you see a wrong say it as it is not trying to justify it because of your own motive.

MiddleDimension:
the questions you raised all have answers. but since jehovah's witnesses practice a christianity that is not mystery based, or revelation based, you just won't understand or accept it.

Mcuzy:
the fact that Herod celebrated his birthday is enough to show any wise person that ancient Jews did birthdays and Herod was not pagan he also served Jehovah.

hupernikao:
I guess you already have a set mind to defend an issue that is not in discussion.
It is good to always stay with narration irrespective of your knowledge, conviction or rejection. This you failed to do in this discussion.
Reno never talk about any Ton or Tov, it is your inclusion trying to prove what doesnt exist in this discussion.

Reno assertion is "because theon is used and then theos for the other (God) mentioned, then they must be different personalities". Is this assertion true? Of course you know the answer. Theon or Theos literally doesnt differentiate God or personailties. I am not here to display knowledge or argue Greek text but to clear wrong interpretation of the text Reno mentioned.

You have already answered Reno here and proved him wrong with your quote below

. That means we have options in Theos used in John 1:1 - It can refer to God, man or Jesus. Hence Reno assertion is wrong by saying Theos is not/cannot be used for God and you proved him wrong yourself. What/Who Theos refers to there will be another discussion for you.

Now, like i said before, if you have other things to discuss on this why not create a thread for us to discuss. The premise of your trinity debunk is different from Reno's own and Reno's own have been debunked here even by you. So open a new thread and give detailed explanation for your assertion. Then we can have discussion. By the way how do you think Trinity can be proved or debunked by just a text of the scriptures when for example KJV has 31,102 verses and 783,137 words. So, please if you have another or higher argument concerning John 1:1 start an educative thread. Dont let us distract or derail this. Thanks.

solite3:
educate yourself on the meaning of natural and physical.

LordReed:
31

Edit: For those who do not know what #deactivateyourmoniker is, heres a brief primer:

https://www.nairaland.com/5086138/back-bit-whats-up-whats/3#82577185

Jesusjnr has declared that on or before 11:59pm 31st December 2019, a miracle will occur on Nairaland that will effectively end atheism on Nairaland. Should this miracle fail to occur, on the 1st of January 2020 jesusjnr shall deactivate all his monikers. If the miracle does occur, budaatum shall deactivate her moniker. #deactivateyourmoniker

For further details I suggest anyone interested peruse the entire thread the above post came from. In it clarification was made on the expectations of the participants jesusjnr and budaatum.

hupernikao:
Firstly i will appreciate you do two things:
1. Have an open mind in this discussion
2. Keep to the real topic, the reason and essence of this discussion.

Now, let me re post Reno Omokri assertion and conclusion here, then check on my response again and answer based on that.

Reno Omokri as posted



If you a truly a bible scholar with knowledge of original writings, How true is the bold above. That the scriptures here referred to God because it uses Theon but Theos will refer to Jesus. Is this the reason for usage of Theon and Theos in Greek writings?

That is his explanation. Now read my response again below.




Now, my explanation is on text usage in the scriptures to debunk Reno false explanation of the same text. Whether the Theos and Theon referred to same person or two person, same status in John 1:1 is another discussion, and whether there is trinity is not also the discussion here. You can open a new thread to give your detailed explanation for further study on trinity, i will contribute mine there provided it is educative and not abusive.

On final note, the real discussion here is was if Theon is used for God alone and Theos was never used for him in the scriptures? I have given you enough scriptures to debunk that, most come is John 3:16 (For God - Theos...) Hence Theos here can never depict a lesser God. This i have cleared above that both Theos and Theon was used for God all through the scriptures, it s just grammatical construction of the Greek such as he/him in English.

Ahamefuna0001:
The bible was initially written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic before been translated into English by various English scholars.

which of the following translations best portrays God's word without any omission?
KJV- KING JAMES VERSION,
NKJV-NEW KING JAMES VERSION,
AMP-THE AMPLIFIER BIBLE,
AMPC- THE AMPLIFIER CLASSIC BIBLE,
TANT- THE AMPLIFIER NEW TRANSLATION,
TLB- THE LIVING BIBLE,
CEV- CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH VERSION,
NASB- NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE,
ISV- INTERNATIONAL STANDARD VERSION,
NIV- NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION,
MSG- THE MESSAGE TRANSLATION,
WEB- THE WORLD ENGLISH BIBLE,
DRB- DOUAY RHEIMS BIBLE,
EBR- ROTHERHAM'S EMPHASIZED BIBLE,
WESNT- WESLEY NEW TESTAMENT,
MOFFAT- MOFFATT NEW TRANSLATION,
TNLT- THE NEW LIVING TRANSLATION,
ASV- AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION,
TEV- TODAY'S ENGLISH VERSION,
RSV- REVISED STANDARD VERSION,
GNB- GOD NEWS BIBLE,
WNT- WEYMOUTH NEW TESTAMENT,
NRSV- NEW REVISED STANDARD VERSION.

Ahamefuna0001:
The bible was initially written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic before been translated into English by various English scholars.

which of the following translations best portrays God's word without any omission?
KJV- KING JAMES VERSION,
NKJV-NEW KING JAMES VERSION,
AMP-THE AMPLIFIER BIBLE,
AMPC- THE AMPLIFIER CLASSIC BIBLE,
TANT- THE AMPLIFIER NEW TRANSLATION,
TLB- THE LIVING BIBLE,
CEV- CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH VERSION,
NASB- NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE,
ISV- INTERNATIONAL STANDARD VERSION,
NIV- NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION,
MSG- THE MESSAGE TRANSLATION,
WEB- THE WORLD ENGLISH BIBLE,
DRB- DOUAY RHEIMS BIBLE,
EBR- ROTHERHAM'S EMPHASIZED BIBLE,
WESNT- WESLEY NEW TESTAMENT,
MOFFAT- MOFFATT NEW TRANSLATION,
TNLT- THE NEW LIVING TRANSLATION,
ASV- AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION,
TEV- TODAY'S ENGLISH VERSION,
RSV- REVISED STANDARD VERSION,
GNB- GOD NEWS BIBLE,
WNT- WEYMOUTH NEW TESTAMENT,
NRSV- NEW REVISED STANDARD VERSION.

Emusan:
Where exactly did Jesus command you to go to Hall on Sunday?

So you're acting out of Christ command....continue