₦airaland Forum

TruthinAction:
There are so many after life experiences. But even if you are told, you will not believe it. You have made up your mind on what to believe. I hope you will be able to stand the pains of hell?

Why is it that none of those who died and come to life in the Bible give such stories ?.

Do not " PAY ATTENTION TO FALSE STORIES " 1 Tim 1:4

TruthinAction:

Jonah died and he talked about the pains of hell.
Jonah 2:2 And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the LORD, and he heard me; out of the BELLY OF HELL CRIED I, and thou heardest my voice.

His lifeless body was in the fish belly but his soul was in the belly of hell until it was reunited with his body just as the fish vomited him out.

Jonah never died in the fish belly, He was alive praying. Jonah 2:6 "But you, O LORD my God, snatched me from the jaws of death! " NLT

@ Red , so Hell has Belly ? Answer this simple question: from where was he crying for help ... In the belly of the Fish?

Act 24:15 we look forward to a RESSURECTION. That's the only hope for the dead to be alive again

TruthinAction:
There are overwhelming evidences in the Scripture. Take time and read the Bible, you will see them there.

If biblical prophecies on the emergence of successive kingdom from the time of Babylonia Empire has come to pass as predicted in Daniel, Chapter 2, then be sure that all other prophecies of the last kingdom of the world and the final judgment will all come to pass.

Revelation 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:

Jesus is coming back. If the devil couldn't stop him from rising from the dead, he certainly cannot stop him from coming back. And the resurrection of Jesus is a proven fact. No one has been able to disprove it. His tomb is empty.

No such thing in the scripture. People actually died and were ressurected but None claims afterlife

Ecc 9:5

Jesus even said concerning two of them , they are sleeping . just to let you know

TruthinAction:
I understand you very well. These are those who died biologically. Besides, there are also a few people who never died that visited hell supernaturally. An example was Mary Baxter. She was taken to hell by our Lord Jesus for 40 days every night. She visited hell with her two eyes opened. And the experience she had is in her book.

Her brain is working, that's clinical death . strictly mental images based on her belief system

None of those who died biologically in the bible give stories of hell .

The question is wy is it that none of those who died and come to life in the bible give such stories ? Total brain death is the opposite of life

Maximus69:
They just come up with different fabricated gibberish to defend what has been rendered defenceless!
People are alive after Adam brought sin and death upon mankind and Jesus have to come and do what again for the dead?
Please in what sense is Jesus' death of any significance if the righteous are already living?
Abi there are other righteous people somewhere apart from those who live by Godly principles?
Humility is surely a key factor in the process of redeeming mankind. Psalms 37:11, Matthew 5:5, Galatians 5: 23
I just keep wondering how all these stubborn goats could grasp thte concept of a single channel that God is using to dispense spiritual food for obedient mankind? Matthew 25: 32

Those guys are enemy of Jesus ransom, always rendering it invalid with their human tradition.

Emusan:
One thing I've noticed is that you people don't consider the center of your discussion when arguing.



@underlined is my final point!

Isn't it obvious now how hypocritical you are?

Compare @underlined with this "Shall be called does not imply the person isn't already in that capacity"

But you have to shift only everlasting father to post resurrection simply because it contradicted your devilish doctrine.




Read it again and again, maybe you'll understand this time.



Yes



That's why I'll always say you people lack scriptural understanding.

That's to tell you that the person in question wasn't an angel, which proves your organization wrong that Jesus is an angel.

Angels are called the sons of God not in a sense Hebrew addressed that God Himself has never called
any angel "His Son", so it's evident from the view of the writer that when the uncreated Word of God became human, He must take FIRST POSITION in everything.

And the Son inherited the name



Heb 1:2 begins with "Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son..."

Big tyme trash , first position yet others are Sons BEFORE him . right ?

The world was made through the Son, deal with it


@ uncreated word, Lolz , uncreated can be the beginning of creation right?

Emusan:
You are asking me to quote in full, very funny!

Here is NIV version maybe it can cure your delicious.

"37 But in the account of the burning bush, even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he caluuls the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ 38 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.” Luke 20

Notice: 1st @underlined: the statement isn't in the future tense like "the dead will arise" but "DEAD ARISE"

and the last @underlined should cure your brainwashed forever because it says "...for to him ALL ARE ALIVE"

After have told you its about ressurectiom, you still type this thrash
That the Dead rise means what ?

[quote author=Emusan post=78954485]And the same Bible says God is not the God of the dead but of the living...who is correct, you or God? [/quote

Quote it in full , Jesus spoke concerning Ressurection of the dead, has the ressurection occur ?

U need sense Emusan

Emusan:
Where did I agree with the @underlined

Then @color it means you agree He's already an EVERLASTING FATHER

Wonderful...

You mean he wasn't a Mighty God before his birth ? Wow .

Ole....he was a mighty God but not an everlasting Father.

What is different?
Isn't the phrase "SHALL BE CALLED" also applied to everlasting father?

You want to eat your cake and also have it.

Because your knowledge is small nah , Everlasting father won't have died . he ought to be everlasting ... But did the Messiah die ?
Until after his ressurection, he wasn't everlasting father

See master of the most low level comprehension talking.

Read the write up again and again to see you're just lying and couldn't comprehend what the writer meant.

Meanwhile, no where your claim is established within Trinity doctrine, then it's an evident that you don't understand what you're even fighting against.

Son was begotten before the world, didn't it say so ? Use your sense nah

See the mofo laughing at when you should be ashamed of your lies and lack of scriptural indepth.

>>>Wasn't Hebrew 1 distinguished Jesus from the angels, which your lying organization claimed He was?
>>>Wasn't Hebrew 1 established that God has never addressed any angel as "His Son"

Are angels his son ? Job 38:7

>>>Wasn't Hebrew 1 established that the name "The Son of God" was inherited by Jesus which you claimed He has always been before He was born?

U are sounding silly already, Didn't Angels got called Son of God before he was born, Are they not more excellent if they got the name before him ?


Read Heb 1:2 he made the world through the SON . if he wasn't son then that won't have been true .

shadeyinka:
God bless you my sister.

Even though you are almost completely correct by calling the JWs robots, of a truth they act like they have been programmed and it prevents them from reasoning either with their God given brains or with the Scriptures. When you ask them a question, they side step it and give you memory verses instead.

I still pray for them hoping that the little ember of God's love within them will cause a spark of light to catch.

Just imagine if on dying, a JW discovers he is not unconscious but very much alive. How can he explain that an organisation told him all he was to believe from the Scriptures!

Our faith should rest solely on Christ and the Scriptures, not on any organisation!

You have uttered this trash before and have been corrected , Nothing survives a man at death . the Bible said you can't find the living among the dead .

Emusan:
Keep blabbing boy...



Imagine, see the life of an hypocrite! You said calling Jesus mighty God means He must be before His birth.

Do you agree that calling Jesus everlasting Father means He must be before His birth?

The point is that we both agree Jesus is Mighty God before birth_ That already send the message needed, Shall be called does not imply the person isn't already in that capacity

Do you agree that Jesus is an everlasting Father before His birth?



But the same Isaiah you are using to mean Jesus has been mighty God before His birth says He is also an everlasting Father. You can see your hypocritical face now.

You don't want to agree that He is an everlasting Father but he's a mighty God

You yourself know he didn't become everlasting father at his birth . But he was a mighty God , both are different

Your claim is "the Trinitarian take Him to be GOD THE SON before creation or birth" all you're just doing is crying around like a child who missed his mum.

If not because you lack comprehension, All I needed in that quote was " Son " , which the write up quoted admitted he was before his birth,

Now let me add to your confusion.

Your position will be:
1. Jesus is an angel before his birth
2. Angels are called sons of God before Christ was born.

Then, fast forward to the book of Hebrew, you see these facts:
1. "So he has become better than the angels to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs." v4

Comment: Here the scripture told us That Christ INHERITED A NAME more excellent than their own.

What is the name that Christ inherited?

"For example, to which one of the angels did God ever say: “You are my son; today I have become your father”? And again: “I will become his father, and he will become my son”? NWT

Comment: the name CHRIST inherited is THE SON OF GOD according to v5.

Also see how these verses shamble all your devilish doctrines about Christ is an angel.

hahaha mehn

Job 38:7 " THE SONS OF GOD " ( Angels)

They even got the name before him ? eeyah

Emusan:
Like I said to your brother only a liar and dishonest person will deliberately omit something to hide under.

Why are you guys single out only MIGHTY GOD in that verse wasn't EVERLASTING Father written there too? Hypocrite!

Keep shut man

You said Isaiah calling him Everlasting Father and Mighty God means He must be God

All am interested in knowing from this
Statement of yours is, has he always been God or just God when he was given birth to ?

That's all .

And it's obvious the reason is that you believe Jesus is a mighty God before His birth

Do you ? Abeg face matter

but to take Him as an everlasting Father will shamble all your lies and evil doctrines.

How exactly , when we know he is the beginning of the creation by God?

Lastly, I'm still waiting for you to clear your lie that Trinitarians claimed that God the son existed before creation or birth...

Mr have given you enough proof, take this as well


We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons) , Lit's obvious the reason is that you believe Jesus is a mighty God before His birth but to take Him as an everlasting Father will shamble all your lies and evil doctrines. - Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed

Emusan:
After all my explanations you still couldn't grab it...na wa for you oooo

Now you're not after he was WITH THE FATHER...

Isaiah was about the child read it again...

The word of God became man...how does this hard for you to grab

Mr answer his question and stop per ambulating - , Is Luke 1:35 not also about the child ?

It says the child shall be called Mighty God , Has he always been God or just God at the moment he was born ?

malvisguy212:
if I say were is the beginning of the river Niger ? were is the source ? were did it came from ? all of God's creation (with the exception of Jesus Christ) came through Jesus Christ. John 1:3 - Through him all things were made;

Through is an agent not source Mr . so u can't support your claim

anyway the person you quote go reply una

Emusan:
One funny attitude of JWs is how you eat your cake and also want to have it.

You discard part of my post by removing them...why?



If not because your brain is paining you...you'd not have said this!

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH God,..."

Is it the Son that was with God?

I also asked you to show us where it was written that Son became flesh, you used style to boycot it and swept it under carpet.

What people see is a human being like them, The Word who became flesh is to be called The Son of God, if Jesus called God His Father, how do you expect Him to address people in reference to God?



Why He SHALL BE CALLED, if he was already Son before? You haven't answered this since I've been asking you...



Firstly, why did you single out only Mighty God and not include Everlasting Father? You know the dubious act you play there because it'd contradict yourself and your doctrines.

Secondly, Isaiah 9:6 is a prophecy about the feature Messiah, I don't need to stress myself here, all I'd do is just to quote some reputable Bible scholars:

"And his name shall be called — That is, he shall be: for the following particulars are not to be taken for a description of his proper name, but of his glorious nature and qualities;" Benson Commentary

"And his name shall be called - That is, his attributes shall be such as to make all these applications appropriate descriptions of his power and work." Barnes Commentary

"name … called—His essential characteristics shall be." Jemeison Fausset commentary

"His name shall be; for to be called in Scripture is off put for to be, as I have noted before on Isaiah 1:26, and oft elsewhere. But this is not to be taken for a description of his proper name, by which he should be commonly called, but of his glorious nature and qualities." Matthew Poole's commentary

"and his name shall be called Wonderful: not that he should be commonly called among men by this name, nor by any of the following; but that he should appear to be, or to have that in him, or to do what would sufficiently answer to this name, and to the rest:" Gill's Exposition

"his name shall be called] The name of the Messiah consists of a series of honorific titles, pertaining to Him in His kingly capacity and expressing mainly the qualities displayed in His government." Cambridge Bible for School

" His name shall be called. It is perhaps not very important whether we view what follows as one name or several. Isaiah does not really mean that the "Child" should bear as a name, or names, any of the expressions, but only that they should be truly applicable to him." Pulpit commentary

If you take your time to read the works of these people very well, you'd notice that they expressly talk about the person of the Messiah and never His preexistence.

You may then ask, why then this verse is usually being used by the Trinitarian to proof that Jesus is God?

The simple answer is, for Bible to applied title such as ETERNAL FATHER, MIGHTY God to the Messiah means He must be God.

And Luke 1:35 is a straight forward because the angel directed his message to THE THING Mary will give birth to.

That's why I keep asking you go and learn when the scripture is talking about Jesus before He came to earth and after.

Now let me quote this from your post:

If not because you're a fraudster and dubious like your father devil, why didn't you include ETERNAL FATHER here

So, you agree Jesus has been an ETERNAL FATHER before coming to earth...



You have issue because you've been shouting that it was Son, now apostle Paul says it is Christ Jesus.

Let me use this to round up my post with you...


Jesus said: "No one knoweth the Son except the Father" and also "I have a name written that no man knoweth except Himself"


So most times Bible is speaking about Jesus is solely applicable to His person in human form, only gives us a glimpse of who He actually is before His incarnation and only a well taught Bible student can see it not the ones Satan has blindfolded their eyes.

Loooooooollllzzzzzz
See what Emusan went through to justify to try and justify his lie that Christ isn't the son of God before his birth. And it says no one knoweth the Father except the son, How could this be if his sonship only begin on earth ?

asalimpo:
this blatantly lying comment. As a jw,you will go to any length to deny the diety of Jesus including changing the scriptures without justification.
At least b honest about your stance. There is no way, you can read that verse and come to the conclusion you are trying to derive.
The mere whiff of man thinking he is equal to God is ludacriss and never crossed the minds of the people the letter was written to. When were the philipians afflicted with such megalomania?

Well we must have the same mind of Christ

Does that now mean Jesus is not equal to God ?

malvisguy212:
yes. unlike other, He was raised to die NO more. long time bro.

So how is this different from what I told you ?

asalimpo:
How does that verse alter the meaning of this verse i quoted?

Read it again, if Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal to GOD, can we have the same mind and see ourselve equal to God ?

malvisguy212:
you said first born of creation mean Christ was created, what about first born from the dead ? is He also the first to be raised from the dead ?

Yes, the first to be truly raised from the dead and not to see death again.

Emusan:
You're still lying....

From the links you provided, where did you see it written that He EXISTS As GOD the Son either before creation or birth?

Even the links you provided never claimed this... yet you're still lying boldly.

Just see how you're contradicting yourself in one post and no even place to hide your rotten shame face.

In Trinitarianism this "Logos" is also called God the Son OR the second person of the Trinity. Theologian Bernard Ramm noted that "It has been standard teaching in historic Christology that the Logos, the Son, existed before the incarnation. That the Son so existed before the incarnation has been called the pre-existence of Christ."[3







https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-existence_of_Christ

It will continue to haunt you

rottennaija:
I cannot help you there. I think you need to learn more about who the church of God is.

The word Church is not a person, but an assembly of people .

rottennaija:
Ok, we are still in the derivative, not original or real. But these things mentioned happen in the supposed spiritual paradise?

Adam and Eve were perfect beings.

That's why it's called a derivative, people in there are yet to be perfect . if they are it won't have been a real paradise

rottennaija:
Hmmm, so you don't know that each individual Christian is a congregation of Jesus?

Does an individual renouncing Jesus or his ways now means Jesus congregation died ?

rottennaija:
But either way, it happened in this spiritual paradise. Okay, great.

Please explain the spiritual paradise again, is it just about abundance of spiritual food and spiritual people or other things like peace of mind, friendliness, orderly, lack of hurt, pain, anger etc are included.

Go back and read

Have given you my definition. And I repeat again: its a derivation not the original itself

rottennaija:
So in the congregation where those trait exist among elders, the congregation is spiritually dead, yes?

So an offspring of Adam that died mean everyone else died ?

When did someone becomes congregation ?

[quote author=Emusan post=78842913][/quote]The firstborn statement is connected to different things.

One - Creation

Two - dead


The fact that stand out is , to be a firstborn of something is to be a part of or beginning of that thing

Was he part of the dead ?

Same way he is the beginning of creation . Rev 3:14 .

I know that Rev 3:14 was written for clueless ones who might try not to understand

Emusan:
Lying liar...now you begin to say you mean... Blah blah blah...

You now change from "Hahahaha they said he exist as God the son before creation,..." TO "Trinitarians maintain Jesus exist as God the son before his birth"

Are the two statements the same?

You need to enroll to an English class first before coming online to argue.

Let me understand your understanding of the first statement was shallow

What about the second that was made to clarify it that same yesterday ?

Is that not proved ?

Why is he a Son ?

rottennaija:
If they do, why do elder fight over positions? No Unity among elders in many congregation? Why do elders scheme against another elder or look for others downfall in this spiritual paradise?

I said in my explanation to you, abundance of spiritual food and spiritual people .
Not spiritually dead ones.its impossible to be spiritually dead and enjoy spiritual Paradise

The above behaviours you highlight are not Christlike , so anyone engaging in this is like an offspring of Adam who refuse to eat the trees God provided in Eden, he will die, others will continue to enjoy the Paradise . So likewise , when a person refuse to eat and digest those spiritual food they can become spiritually dead and exhibit those things you highlighted . once that happen, that person stops enjoying the spiritual Paradise, but others continue to do .

Emusan:
The text already established that "He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead,..." before "so that he might become the one who is first in all things"

And as a result of this v19 said the Father was pleased to have all the FULLNESS of Deity in Him...this is an evidence that what Apostle Paul was talking about is when the Word became part of the creation.

I just even notice something from your dubious organization...

Imagine, inserting the word OTHER from verse 16&17 only to drop it in verse 18 which is the same content...yahoo yahoo organization!

The text also ESTABLISH that he is the firstBORN of creation, did that occur when he came to earth too ?

rottennaija:
So isn't it the same with Christ kingdom a derivative of the original? That as a result of Christ work and sacrificial death, that all true Christians are delivered and transferred s from the power of darkness to the KINGDOM of the SON of God's love? (Col 1:13)

Colossians 1:13, 14
For he has rescued us from the one who rules in the kingdom of darkness, and he has brought us into the Kingdom of his dear Son. God has purchased our freedom with his blood and has forgiven all our sins.

Not the original, its a HOPE Paul said he eagerly awaits

Emusan:
Dull empty skull...

Your claim was "Hahahaha they said he exist as God the son before creation,..."

Where was it claim that He exists as GOD the son before creation

Why simple English is so hard for you

Brainwashed JWs!

By creation I mean earthly creations which you said Jesus become part of when he was born
Didn't you say Jesus become part of creation when he was born by Mary . I state my point from that angle , by born you refer to his earthly existence

. study context
2:08pm on May 28

I state clearly :


Trinitarians maintain Jesus exist as God the son before his birth


Are u so dull not to see that and understand my post in context ?

Is the highlighted not proved ?