₦airaland Forum

tctrills:
Your writing is very interesting but not one thing is based on christian truths or the scriptures.. I learned so much though.

okay, what's the Christian truth? Let's break it down and analyze. Christian truths are things found within scripture and are taught by Christians or at least early church.

If you suggest yours is the christian truth? Then why insufficient evidence to support your theory, but his evidence as regards adoption is overwhelming . That's a scriptural truth, it doesn't rely on only one ambiguous verse to derive its truth. It is well confirmed in several places.

If you argue for your christian truth? Then you contradict the verses of adoption. If we were already sons we would need "No adoption!" We are sons in the first sense as having origin from God and in the second sense as being adopted in our earthly nature, because obviously flesh cannot please God. This is why he is extending your logic to the universe. This way he can show you logical errors.

Now, there's something that you must understand about "context". If I were to read Paul's admonishment on women not speaking or teaching in the church, I will say he was misogynistic but if I consider, Priscilla, who along with her husband taught Apollos. I understand the context better. That's why sometimes comparative studies and analysis is important. With what he has written, I can say he has done comparative studies on the Jewish background.

If you also perform such background analysis, you will see that "sons of God" along with elohim, godlike beings refer to the heavenly host in God's throne room which act in a functional role as being "sent". The Jewish description of angels is based on function, "the act of being sent", which is why the Greek writers used "Angelos", roughly angels in English.

That's why he pulled a quick one on you by asserting that since God could send his Son then every other being falls under such umbrella, tricky dude . You have to understand the definition before you can progress. The definition you also provide "ministering spirits" didn't do your argument well as you only have him more firepower .

You have to draw out what you observe as christian truth else it's just subjective, as you deem it fit and not objective as the texts says. If you have questions let us discuss. We can start quoting scripture and doing textual and comparative analysis.

Therock5555:
You've been trying to get my attention. What exactly do you want?

Nope, I am just addressing your misogynistic replies .

Easyincome24:
As an intending groom to be, which of these qualities do you meet?

No blabbing, no dribbling, no calling of names.
Which of these qualities do you fulfill?

A lot of them can't meet all the requirements , definitely not! —Balablu is still showing them shege.

CorperKola:
How is it possible to be 'excellent' in bed and not be a womanizer

'cuz you know how to control your gbola without eating every kind of snake

Blackskinman007:
Greedy set of gender...
I spit on her grave, if indeed the execution will be a success...

As if your gender isn’t also known for the same vice? 🙄 Please, spare us the appeal.

Therock5555:
After all this years, you still no wan get sense ABI?

All men don't have sense, your brother is just one evident case

Jeon:


Omo,ebi like say nah this career I go follow now ooo.

You don't have anything to make cougars or gilfs attracted to you? Better focus on your hustle and leave such sophistry to us, women

Boomark:
The aim of this discussion is to bring all scriptures in support or against trinity.

Warning: Please do not make any post here until the whole challenge is over. This is to ensure that all the scriptures in support or against are seen by all without distractions. You will be banned and your post removed for violating this privacy rule.

This is the link for discussion on the challenge.

https://www.nairaland.com/8484151/bible-challenge-prove-trinity-falsehood#136238868

Bible Challenge Topic:
The Father is One God over all and greater than all who are called God
Vs
The Father is God, the Son Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet they are one God (Trinity).

Participants:
Boomark [The Father is One God over all and greater than all who are called God]

And

Image123 [The Father is God, the Son Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet they are one God (Trinity).]


Duration: Till the last claim

Bible Versions:
Any version allowed. Each participant must state the version used when quoting scripture.




Daily Challenge Format

Claim and rebuttal/support will be rotated in turn between Mr A and Mr B. And it must not exceed 24 hrs after it has been made, else, +10 point will be awarded to the opponent of the one who refused to respond.

Mr A will make his claim in favour or against trinity with one or more scriptures.

Mr B will either support or offer a rebuttal to his claim with scripture.

Note: Always remember the add, "Do you agree?" after each claim.

Make your presentation in this format:

Claim:

Key verses:

Or

Rebuttal:

Key verses:


SCORING

The admin or marker we choose will add our claim and rebuttal into this scoring prompt below and paste into ChatGPT after each round.






AWARDING POINTS:

Winner = +10 points

Instruction number 3 only (for avoiding point) = -5 points to rule breaker, +5 to opponent. Do not award points incase of draw.

Total score for each participant:

Claim:

Rebuttal:


Claim without a counter or rebuttal will be regarded as successful after 48 hours.

If one of the participants has exhausted his claim, the one who still have claims will continue to make claims while the opponent has the right to rebuttal or support and points will be awarded accordingly.

The screenshot of the results will be posted in the challenge thread to ensure transparency.


Round 1, 2, 3, etc.

Cumulative Score and Winner

Boomark score: +80 points

Image123 score: 0 point

Let's make clear the will of God.


Round 1 Result:
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123#136298876

Round 2 Result:
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123#136306032

Round 3 Result:
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123#136317575

Mini Challenge Result:
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123/2#136345173

Round 4 Result:
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123/2#136346625

Round 5 Result:
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123/2#136379742

Round 6 Result:
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123/4#136397889

Round 7 Result
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123/4#136424982

Round 8 Result:
https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123/5#136449660

80-0? how did this come about? Did you prove Jesus is not God?

Boomark:
Check the link to results in the op. But most importantly read the through each subtopic, their claim and rebuttal.

No link in the Opening post?

tctrills:
I believe now we are going round in circles and repeating the same things so let me just summarize.
You believe that angels slept with women because thousands of years before that, the children of God shouted for joy.
You have no scripture to back your angels are the children of God theory so you go into Judaism for answers.
You also believe that everyone in heaven is an angel even though the bible never made such claims.
I believe the Sons of God that slept with the daughters of men are human beings because the only 2 people referred to as Sons of God in the bible are Jesus Christ and man. No angel was called a Son of God. In fact, both you and I produced dozens of passages where man was called the Son of God both literally and figuratively. You made assumptions that in the old testament times, no one was called the Son of God but we saw plentiful examples of that.
Again you claim that it must have been angels that shouted for Joy because man wasn't yet created but you are not able to show any scripture that indicates the creation of angels before the foundation of the world.
I showed you scripture that indicates man being chosen before the foundation of the world not angels. You claim it all happened in God's mind. Then I reminded you that we are pilgrims on earth and you began to invent definitions for pilgrims as if it is a difficult word.
The bible was clear, we are strangers upon this earth that alone should convince anyone with understanding but it went on to state that we are pilgrims. Now this gives you no excuse to doubt.

Finally, you are in the habit of saying those things you disagree with in the bible are figurative. But that is cheap. Everyone can declare that the stuff they disagree with are figurative. The JW bros do it all the time. They disagree and tell you it's a parable.

Does the bible contain lots of figurative language? Yes. But when we see such, we don't argue, we know. Being born again is one of such.

I guess this is my summary of our discussions. I am such you have more to add and I will reply if you bring up new issues or new points and angles we have not yet explored if not, we shouldn't keep going round in circles.
Alright man

You have made some assumptions here that are wrong, and you have the same crime you imputed to him.

1) there are several verses that strongly suggest that the "sons of God" there are for pre-existing beings. You both have gone through this so I am not adding any extra. He has brought out Septuagint and others that corroborate with such. Even other texts around the "Jewish Second temple" period support this. You are the one dismissing them because you do not find them clear.

2) you are the one assuming there's not a verse for the sons of God being angels because of 1) above, which you have assumed without any concrete evidence implies man.

3) the verse you cited as your only proof is misplaced and wrong because you are taking it out of context, kindly read through the entire chapter and you will see the proper context being passed across.

4) As he highlighted, all major words have multiple meanings and the context warrants the meaning. Fatherhood has many meanings: origination, adoptions etc., in the scripture. If you assert Fatherhood without giving it proper context, you commit an error.

5) You mentioning going into Judaism is not any sort of refutation as the Jewish text, old testament, is incorporated into christian scripture so invariably they are from scripture. You must dismiss them from scripture to invalidate them which is not possible.

6) the context of the verse, in job, was God trying to make Job answer some questions. These questions highlighted that even before the Earth was formed, or while its foundations was being laid, sons of God shouted for joy. I don't know whether you understand what that implies . It adds an additional account to gen1, before the existence of the earth, before the existence of man. No matter how you put this it is not logical. You are arguing for conscious spirit before the foundation of the world, which is wrong. Only Jesus was the conscious spirit before the foundation of the earth.

You will need to prove logically that you existed before the foundation of the world, God knew everything before the foundation of the world it doesn't mean that everything was in existence before the foundation of the world! The proper context as I have added above is foreknowledge. Apart from this, you are just appealing to something that is not biblical. No prophet taught that, they only taught alienation from the things of the world, with Heaven as the final goal.

7) In Gen1, heaven and its hosts were made first, so I see why he logically concluded that man came after. He even used the inverse form by claiming since man was made on the last day,sixth day, and he is the last born of creation, then angels were made before him. It's a logical deduction, it's not expressly stated there but only Jewish scholars along with present Christian scholars align that the host there referred to Angels. I also think he made his heaven clear, he is not mentioning the cosmic realm, also called heaven or some other realm above that but solely the realm of heaven where God is surrounded by beings. This heavenly beings are what he terms angels. You didn't grab that. He differentiated between both, you are the one using the complexity of the word heaven to expand or incorporate other beings which he is not concerned about. His focus once again was on the beings in the throne room.

Based on this, you have to consult scripture to disprove him since he made a pretty hard point, all the theophanies before addressed them as angels(malaikim), you can verify yourself, with new revelations adding new types of this beings to our purview. His point in Hebrew 1 is actually very strong since God pointed to his angels, all those in the throne room, to worship his son, Jesus in flesh. Which they did in revelation that buttresses a generic name or axiom that they are called angels.

You have to negate with scripture otherwise it's the logical conclusion of scripture on that stance. Both of you can use "absence of evidence as evidence" to prove your cases but he has more logically appealing examples than you do, so it favors him.
" If one third of the stars were to fall and Satan is counted among them" then automatically Satan is a star, whether he is a cherub or not, doesn't change this fact. Satan has been counted among them. This places cherubs as a subset under stars, heavenly beings which roughly translates to malaikims in Hebrew and angels in Greek.

So, I agree with him, at least in his logical exemplification but in his methodology, I do not. Give us proofs, concrete proofs not speculations from inference to suggest such. Hope you didn't find it lengthy.

At least, they can finally end this needless war.
Two more characters needed.

Lukuluku69:
We are not in Europe.

Sarcasm, dear. Even without Europe’s constraints, we still wouldn’t sniff the top 10. 😏

Mko123:
Let me call my babe to attend this event.


Just that I'm always insecure seeing her going out because of the fear of politicians staring at her. I believe she'll be the cynosure of that event

Insecure man. Better deal with your insecurities

Where's Nigeria my country?

Seun, add the remaining characters.
Edit: Don’t bother reminding me Nigeria isn’t in Europe—basic reasoning should tell you it’s a subtle jab at our "minimum wage."

orisa37:
GOD IS WISDOM !!!

This is more befitting because if one suggests God created wisdom, except in the form as "wisdom originated from God", then it is completely wrong. A transcendental being such as God is immutable, hence He doesn't change!

If He acquired or created wisdom then He was foolish earlier, which now begs the question which Gabrielshow24 has posed, "how did he attain wisdom when he is foolish? " Note the use of "is" since he is eternally present. Hence it becomes impossible for him to acquire or create wisdom since he is foolish!

The orthodox view is what you have surmised above! God is wisdom. The owner of the thread is wrong on that footing.

Immatex:
The Israel of God today is not the State of Israel.

They do not and would not enjoy divine protection as they did under the old covenant of Moses.

The Israel of God is the nation of spiritual Israel not of fleshly Jews. They are from every tribe, tongue and nation.

Cornelius was the first of many non- Jews to enter into this covenant.

As at today, God is not fighting Israel’s battles nor is he with them in their controversies.

Then you render God's words useless. God is still with them, in fact he has plans to turn them over to his side.

Whew, this is a long debate. Let me grab a popcorn and see how it ends🍿.

Hopefully, the populace sees the impact of this.🤷 And hope these contractors are not just placeholders for high men in rank and file looting our money in ways unimaginable? 👀

Gabrielshow24:
You can consult my previous replies if you need a refresher. Since you gave the definition, we’ll stick with it and apply it consistently. You’ve boxed yourself into this precarious position—your conundrum, not mine.

Whether you find it funny or not is irrelevant. What’s clear is that your logic is funny—absurd, even—and I’m simply putting those absurdities on display for all to see. If you can’t see it, I can’t help you… but others certainly will 👌.

By your own definition, your elders and cherubs aren’t excluded. I even hinted that if the Father sent the Son, then no one—no matter their rank—is “above” going on an errand. That automatically places your elders and cherubs under the umbrella of “angels” 😂. Now it’s you who must prove otherwise. Unfortunately for you, your reliance on the absence of evidence as if it were evidence only strengthens my case and weakens yours 😂.

We’ll definitely continue tomorrow—you’ve made me laugh, and I’ve enjoyed it. Since I blocked Max, I haven’t had such an amusing prey 😂 in a while. Hopefully by tomorrow you’ll come armed with actual evidence 👀… though given the lack so far, that’s looking extremely futile 😁.

Theoretically all heavenly beings fit such description. Even though you have tangled him in his own web what he solicits for is that there's no direct linkage. Even though he has committed the same error of inference in other places where there's also no direct linkage to support his point.

You can be more understanding instead of resorting to sarcasm. Most of your quotes are sarcastic, we should correct each other in love. It's his will to ignore scriptural evidence, just say what you have to say then leave him alone. Sooner or later such seeds will grow.

Nowhere does the bible both in the old testament or new testament support "conscious preexisting life for men"! All his re-intrepreted verses only show the foreknowledge of God. In this aspect he is wrong. You are wrong because your methodology is not of love but rather taking everything too academical and consistently applying sarcastic tones throughout your messages.

This is interesting, so who now won?

It's well just forgive and forget.

AngelahFlo:
A followup to my post and also my last stand on this argument.
After this I'm digressing to another topic and post.

The Sons of God spoken about were not descendants of Seth as some people have supposed even though the men of this race were also referred to as "sons of God" but it was to angelic beings.
To prove that the sons of God were really angels and not mortal men Jude 1:6-7

6 And angels who did not keep their own designated place of power, but abandoned their proper dwelling place, [these] He has kept in eternal chains under [the thick gloom of utter] darkness for the judgment of the great day,
7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the adjacent cities, since they in the same way as these angels indulged in gross immoral freedom and unnatural vice and sensual perversity. They are exhibited [in plain sight] as an example in undergoing the punishment of everlasting fire.
provided the answer. It's recorded there that the Angels which left their habitation and came down to dwell among men has been kept in chains in outer darkness awaiting the day of Judgement.
Verse 7 related what these fallen ones did to warrant the punishment meted on them by God.
The Children born out of their union were the Nephilims. Yes there were Nephilims on earth before and after the flood but the ones that existed before the flood were offspring of the Fallen angels and the women they had sexual relations with.

Hi, there. Is this not reaching? It's more of an inference that is categorically not stated in the context.

Go gal, you have said it all😘.

Seun find the remaining characters.