₦airaland Forum

[quote author=Perfectbeing post=69792491]"The problem lies in making the father Co equal with the son he beget."

And that problem is where the fallacy of the Trinity lies

Tomorrow we'll talk about whether the Father and the Son are one or not. And when we're done you yourself will give me the answer..

Ok

Perfectbeing:
By "father of Jesus", do you mean "creator of Jesus? "

Jesus was beget by God Almighty the father, if you choose to use creator, fine by me.

Samogbo1:
I'm yet to get a concise answer to my question, Is God n Allah d same??

If yes, Y do Muslims oppose Trinity
If No, Y do u think they are not the same

...Generally, Top Islamic clerics dont gv a hoot about using God in place of Allah in their presentations, Y

@ Seun, Lalasticlala, Mynd44, Hardmirror, Johnydon22, Kingebukablog, Hopefullandlord

You have been given comprehensive answers already. Except you did not notice.

God = English
Allah = Arabic

All mean the same thing which is the Supreme entity (the creator)

Where the difference is with both Christian and Muslim God/Allah.

The Islamic God/Allah is not the christians God/Allah.

According to the bible "Those who worship God/Allah must worship in spirit and in truth". You can't claim to worship God/Allah and bow to a black stone from the sky 5 times a day.

Who or what God/Allah is differs when it comes to both faiths.

I've been there before.

You will all get the hang of it.

OneJ:
Maamim, these Trinity peddlers will keep twisting & distorting the scriptures for their own ends. With out such, the carpet would be pulled off their feet sharp sharp..
It's so obvious that their heart is already foreclosed to the truth.


" IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE GOD HIMSELF , who put everything under Christ". 1 Cor15:27.
The Lamb was given access to the throne by the One who owns the throne, his Father,Jehovah ( Yahweh.).


"For you (the Father) granted him (Jesus) authority over all people that he (Jesus) might give eternal life to all those you(the Father) have given him(Jesus)". John 17:2.



The Lamb is addressed as Prince (Isaiah 9:6) appointed heir (Hebrew 1:1,2). Were such titles ever addressed to Almighty God at anytime? No !! Obviously, the Lamb is a subordinate.
When a man lies to himself, his only redemption is to speak the truth to himself.


Shalom aleikhem.

CC :
perfectbeing

mutteylaff

The problem lies in making the father Co equal to the Son He beget...the funny thing is that the Father is so unique that there is none like him. He can't be sqweezed into a 3=1 confinement of human being. He is way more than that yet he is but one and there is none like him.

Isaiah 40:18 To whom then will ye liken God? or what likeness will ye compare unto him?.

Isaiah 40:25 To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One.

Isaiah 46:5 To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like?

That is how unique God the father is.

Perfectbeing:
Yes they are.

Maamin, are you still having issues about God Almighty the creator being Jesus?

I don't have issues, it is triniterians that have the issues with

God Almighty the creator being the father of Jesus.

Perfectbeing:
Those are not theories sir..

The original scriptures that make make up the old and New Testaments of the Bible we read today were not written in English language but in Hebrew for the Old Testament and Greek for the New Testament.

Some words in the Greek could have different meanings and then requires different applications in different contexts. Since most of the early translators were not Christians but just translators, they put the meaning that made best made sense to them sometimes out of context (eg, the passage about baptising in the name the Father, son and Holy spirit that Muttleylaff explained earlier).

The Greek word "kai" is an example of those words.

"Kai" is a conjunction joining two words, phrases or clauses together.
"Kai" could mean; "and," "then," "even", "but", "that is" etc..
Application of each of those meaning of "kai" requires different approaches (4 of which I mentioned and which you termed "my theories".
Some translators interpreted or translated "kai" wrongly (either out of ignorance or in some cases to deliberately distort it's meaning.)

In my first "theory", "Kai" is translated as and as in, James and John etc.

In the second one "kai" is translated to mean "then". as in, "follow me, then I'll make you fishers of men". "and" can be used cos it won't change the meaning of the words.

In the 3rd and fourth, "kai" is correctly translated to mean "that is". As in "... some, pastor, that is, teachers (Eph 4:11). And in 1 Thess. 1:12, "the grace of our God, that is, the Lord Jesus Christ"..

Rev 5:13 also is rightly translated as, “..To him who sits on the throne, that is, the Lamb...."

I don't speak Greek or Hebrew. But I made my research to ascertain all these. I suggest you do the same.. Proper Bible interpretation can only be know if what you're reading in the Bible is correctly translated in the first place.

There will be serious problem everywhere in the Bible where the word "and" appears going by that your interpretation.

Take for example that Rev. 5:13 you quoted.

13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

Your interpretation

13 And every creature which is in heaven, that is on the earth, that is under the earth, that is such as are in the sea, that is all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, that is honour, that is glory, that is power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, that is unto the Lamb for ever that is ever.

However if you choose to replace "and" with "then" the passage looses it context completely.

There is no 1 Thess 1:12 I guess you meant to say 1:2

The fact still remains that Jesus the Son came from/out of the father. You can't pick fault now in that passage. No! You can't.

Perfectbeing:
A good illustration about the "manifestations" (as Muttleylaff which I think I'm going to using now) of God is this this;

A man can be a father to his son yet, in other modes, a husband to his wife and a brother to his siblings. He could even be a son to his father. Now here we have, a father, a husband a brother and a son. Not four men but one Man.

So is the one on the throne and the lamb. Not two beings. But one

This analogy does not hold much water...

For him to be called father he beget a Son out of him or from him.

Perfectbeing:
Maamin said there that, the one on the throne is the Father, separating him from the lamb. Or was I getting him wrong? Probably I was. If I was accept my apologies..

When did I make the separation?

The bible said one sit on the throne, the Lamb came forth to collect the book from the right hand of the one who sit on the throne

Perfectbeing:
The one sitted on the throne and the lamb is the same. Both one and the same. Not different from each other. In Acts 7:55–56; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1, Jesus (the lamb that was slain) was said to be SITTED at the right hand of the Father. The phrase, "God’s right hand" as some of us said earlier, is used throughout Scripture to indicate His power and authority and sovereignty. Jesus is sitted at this place of power and of authority and of sovereignty with God. Doesn't that tell us that Jesus and God are both the the same and not different, since God won't share his glory with any one.

That being said, I want to introduce us to the Greek word "kai". Please ride down with me.

"Kai" is a Greek word that is used to connect two words, phrases or clauses together, who function at the same level. With this function it is often called a coordinating conjuntion.

Things to note about the word "kai"

1. When Kai joins words or phrases together, it is simple enough and similar to English word "and".
E.g; James and John, Paul and Silas.

2 When Kai joins clauses and sentences, it is more complicated. Kai can function like an English "then" as in Matt 4:19 (Follow me, then
I will make you fishers of men). The English "and" can function the same way as in 'follow me and I will make you fishers of men.

3. When two plural nouns are connected by "kai" as in Ephesians 4:11, ...and some, pastors and teachers; The first noun, pastors, and the second noun, teachers are the same. So "teachers" is a further description of "pastors", not a separate category of individuals. This Greek construction means "pastors who are teachers", or "pastor - teachers".

4. When two SINGULAR nouns are connected by "kai", and the FIRST noun is ARTICILAR( has the article), and the SECOND is ANARTHROUS (does not have the article), the second noun is a FURTHER DESCRIPTION of the first noun.
Examples
a. Thess. 1:12, the KJV reads "the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ". God "theos" here is articular and Christ "christou" is anarthrous. Both are the same case, and therefore should read "the grace of Jesus Christ, our God and Lord".
b. Titus 2:13, the KJV reads "the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ". God "theos" here is articular, and Christ "christou" is anarthrous. Both nouns are in the same case, and therefore should read "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ".

You are rewriting your own scriptures here.....

Revelation 4 says "..one sat on the throne"

Revelation 5:6-7 says the Lamb stood in the midst of the throne, came forth and took the book from the right hand of the one that sat on the throne.

There is absolutely no need for all those theories you put up there sir!

Abdulgaffar22:
We have atheism, hinduism, buddhism etc on one part. Then we have Judaism, Christianity and Islam on another part.
Let consider the atheism: Atheists are those who reject the existence of God. They only affirm the existence of nature. However, they agree that ; nature is not aware of itself, nature cannot think, nature cannot see, nature cannot hear, nature cannot speak. Yet they believe that human beings with full self awareness that are capable of thinking, capable of seeing, capable of hearing and capable of speaking over 6000 different languages emerged from the same very nature. That is a logical contradiction! Therefore, Atheism can never be true.
Again Hinduism, Buddhism and the likes believe that a supreme god exist along with some other gods. However, this supreme god is impersonal. But how could impersonal god ( that lack free will) create personal human beings which consist of male and female? This is also logically contradictory.
Before I proceed, I want to digress to quickly address the view of those who believe that God exist but do not believe in any organized religion. The major problem with this view is that you have to believe that God did not send anybody to communicate His words to humanity. Therefore, according to this view, all the prophets of God including Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) are nothing but great liars . Yet it is impossible for all of them to delibrately fabricate a lie against God.
What of Judaism; one of the obvious problem of Judaism is that it is too restricted to some certain places. If it is truly the world view that God want us to adopt, then at this present time, it should be within our reach. We should have free access to it like Christianity and Islam. But this is not so. Besides, there is no any verse in their scriptures commanding the believers to urge the people of all nations to embrace Judaism.
Now we are left with Christianity and Islam. Out of these two faiths, which one did God Almighty endorse and approve ? Let us use a very simple logic explained below;
THE POWER OF "NAME"
Can you imagine what a mess it would be in a world that no one or nothing has a name？Without naming, to make reference to anything would be almost impossible. So, obviously all entities have to get a name in order to distinguish one entity from the other so that our world could be in a state of perfect order. Therefore, the act of giving a person or an entity a "NAME" is indispensable and unavoidable. This is the reason why you hardly see a book without a "NAME" given to it by the author of that book. Consequently, If the WHOLE of the Bible( from Genesis to revelation) was really inspired by God as the Christians want us to believe, then God Himself should have given a NAME to His book. In other words, there must be AT LEAST ONE BIBLICAL VERSE which will contain the word "Bible" because as we have established above a book MUST always have a " NAME" given to it by its original author for proper identification and to distinguish it from all other books present in the world. In the same sense, if God Almighty is really the originator of the "system of faith" we know today as Christianity, then God Himself should have given a NAME to His faith. In other word, there must be AT LEAST ONE BIBLICAL VERSE which will contain the word "Christianity" because any system of faith MUST always have a NAME for proper identification and to distinguish it from all other system of faiths that are present in the world. However, the word "Bible" and the word "Christianity" are no where to be found inside the Bible. Infact, Jesus did not call his followers "Christians" during his life time on the surface of the earth. The word "Christian" was invented in Antioch by Paul and Barnabas many years AFTER Jesus departure from this world- NOT even by the original apostles of Jesus in Jerusalem ; "When he (Barnabas) found him (Paul), he brought him to Antioch , and for a whole year they were guests of the church and taught many people. It was in Antioch that the disciples were FIRST called Christians(Acts 11:26).
If the real founder of Christianity is either God or Jesus, then the word "Christianity" should have been found in the Bible and Jesus Christ himself should have named his followers "Christians" before his departure from this world. The simple reason why Jesus failed to carry out such an important assignment is because He was NOT sent to the whole world to establish any permanent system of faith . By his own admission; I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15:24). As we have read above, the real founder of Christianity is Paul and his colleagues; not Jesus.
Some of the Christians want to argue that the reason why Christianity is not mention in the Bible is because Jesus did not come to establish any "system of faith" on the earth; he only came to accomplish a "TASK" that will lead to our salvation and reconcilation back to God. But do you know why these Christians get it wrong? They have to exercise a FAITH in this TASK before they can be entitled to its benefits (i:e salvation and reconcilation back to God). If this is the case, then this particular "FAITH" they have to exercise must also have a "NAME" in order to distiguish it from other system of faiths ( like Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism etc) that exist on the earth. Therefore, if the present day Christians reject Christianity as the name of their faith, then there is no any other name they can use to address their faith . On the other hand, if they accept Christianity as the name of their faith and insist that this faith is truly from God, then Jesus or God Himself should have made mention of Christianity in the Bible because a "TRUE FAITH" from God must have a unique NAME given to it by God in order to distinguish it from all other false faiths that exist in the world. Like Christianity, the names of all other system of faiths on the earth ( such as Judaism, Hiduism, Buddhism etc) are no where to be found inside their scriptures.
But does Islam suffer from similar problem? Certainly not! The two terms "Qur'an" and "Islam" are found in many verses of the Qur'an. Look at one example for each term
"Had We sent down this QUR'AN on a mountain, you would surely have seen it humbling itself and rending asunder by the fear of God. Such are the parables which We put forward to mankind that they may reflect (Qur'an 59:21)."
"This day, I (God) have perfected your religion for you, and I have completed My favour upon you, and I have chosen for you ISLAM as your religion ( Qur'an 5:3)".
The word "Islam" means ; submission to the will and commandment of God. Those who submit in this manner are called Muslims (i:e submitters to the will and commandment of one true God). God Almighty says in the Qur'an:
O you who believe! Fear God as He should be feared, and die not except as MUSLIMS (Qur'an 3:102).
See the evidence of divine signature! The three terms: "Qur'an", "Islam" and "Muslim" are all present in the Qur'an. But the two terms: "Bible" and "Christianity" are no where to be found inside the Bible. Even the word "Christian" that is present in the Bible is a name that was invented after the departure of Jesus Christ as we have read from above.
Looking at it from another angle, Abraham, Moses, Isaac, Jacob and the likes cannot be called Christians (i:e the followers of Christ) because these people have lived and died before the arrival of Jesus Christ. Therefore, we cannot say they practice Christianity. However, all these People can be called Muslims (i:e submitters to the will and commandment of one true God) without any problem. Hence, we can say conveniently that old testament believers practice Islam (i:e they submit to the will and commandment of one true God).
If the name of our religion is not Islam but mohammedanism (which is analogous to Christianity), then similar problem will occur since we cannot called them Mohammedans and we cannot say they practice Mohammedanism. But God Almighty Himself has carefully chosen the word "Islam" for the name of only religion He is going to accept.

Don't worry about the name Christianity not being from God. Rather you should worry about your nameless Islamic God (allah) who named your religion.

Allah is not a proper name but arabic word for "the God"

What is the name of your allah?

Perfectbeing:
And I did.
Rev 5:6; Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, standing at the center of the throne, encircled by the four living creatures and the elders. The Lamb had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth.

The lamb stood at the center of the throne. He and the throne is encircled by the the living creatures and the elders. (KJV puts it that "...in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain" English wise they mean the same thing)

And also,
Didn't the beast joined the rest of the creatures in heaven to worship the lamb and the one sitted on the throne in 5:13?

The one sitted on the throne there is the Father.

solite3:
you shouldn't ve quoted me if you have no answer to my question.

Sorry, but I must have striked at least an atom of truth inside of you

No wonder they say "truth is bitter"

[quote author=Perfectbeing post=69726382]Rev 5 introduces us to a lamb that was slain (Jesus) who took the book that was sealed with seven seals from He who sat on the throne. He is portrayed to us as "the Lamb in the midst of the throne." in Rev 7:17.

Are these ones also God? Because they are in the midst of the throne too

Rev 4:6 6 And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.


Rev 5 is continuation of Rev 4, I already asked you to read it to grasp the concept.

MuttleyLaff:
If that's what you're trying to say, you're preaching to the choir then
because Maamin knows that, I know that, and those that know, know too Perfectbeing

Thank you,

budaatum:
Why Jesus, who is claimed to be God, is now receiving Revelations from himself who is supposed to be God, confounds me! Do some religious people not see the humptydumptiness in their understanding of what they claim to read?

Sounds like one of those "my lord said unto my lord" things when people claim the same person was talking to himself. They call it "the depth of God". I call it an inability to comprehend simple written English Language!

The Son is the physical and express image of the father, no one has seen the Father at any point in time only the son who is directly from him has declared him.

Primesky:
Really?. All the bible verses are not enough?.

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

Why did Jesus make that statement?. Do we now have two Gods, or is the bible false?.

The verse 1 of that chapter made it clearer who is the source of the revelation.

Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

The bold is very important please to know why Almighty in verse 8 is not contradiction.

From God to Jesus to his angel and to his servant John.

Jesus said "as I hear, so I speak"

Perfectbeing:
I know that God resides somewhere above his creation. I also know that God resides in Believers.
Jesus said in John 17:23; I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved

Ok

MuttleyLaff:
If there is a "right hand of the throne"
there equally must be a "left, bad or wrong hand side of the throne".
It's similar to the expression of wanting to be on someone's good side

Yea, that is true

MuttleyLaff:
I thought right, you'll be referring to those verses and similar.

As I earlier pointed out there is no two thrones Maamin.
It's one throne, and its one God, having the Son of God projecting out of same one God, God the Father.

You accept, that God can project Himself however He can, don't you?

OK! Let's agree on that then.

Hebrews 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

I just want us all not to contradict the scripture.

Perfectbeing:
Exactly.. That's what I've been trying to explain to maamin about who the Holy Spirit is. That's why I asked him that question..

Talking about your physical and internal attribute or better yet the attribute we perceive as decision-making, morality, the ability to love, worship, and emotions etc.

Believe me, I get that.

Perfectbeing:
OK let me show you were the Holy Spirit is.
Revelations 4:5;
From the throne came flashes of lightning, rumblings and peals of thunder. In front of the throne, seven lamps were blazing. These are the seven spirits of God. Also in front of the throne there was what looked like a sea of glass, clear as crystal.

Right there at the front of the throne is the seven spirits of God (The Holy Spirit). Need more clarity?
Read the whole of Rev 4

Lol! Well done, You try

All I have been about this thread is to make you see the fallacy in trinity doctrine. It is gradually coming through sha!

Perfectbeing:
I previously explained your question in a previous comment. So I was asking if you've read it

May be I mistakenly skipped it unknowingly. So many mentions.

I try to reply all.

OK, will check!

Perfectbeing:
The son never started existing. The son has always existed. Rev4:8; Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under its wings. Day and night they never stop saying: "Holy, holy, holy
is the Lord God Almighty,’ who was, and is, and is to come.”

Who is referred to "who was, who is and who is to come" isn't it Jesus? And what did the living creatures referred Him to as? "Holy, Holy, is the Lord God almighty" The referred him to as God almighty. (thank God they didn't use mighty God in this place)

Hmmmmm

1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

2 And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.

3 And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.

4 And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

5 And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.

6 And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.

7 And the first beast was like a lion, and the second beast like a calf, and the third beast had a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like a flying eagle.

8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.

9 And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,

10 The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying,

11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

That is the whole of Revelation 4
Where did it mentioned that it was Jesus apart from your own opinion here?

The next chapter will help you understand who was sitting anyways! Good luck!

Perfectbeing:
According to you, God is powerless to be omnipresent.. In order words he's not omnipotent

I think if I understand him clearly, he is trying to say God resides somewhere above all his creations.

That very place he reside and makes the earth his foot stool.

That place that is unapproachable 1 Tim 6:16 "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen."

Daniel 2:22 "It is He who reveals the profound and hidden things; He knows what is in the darkness, And the light dwells with Him."

MuttleyLaff:
Let's keep the thread courteous

There is no two thrones Maamin.
It's one God, having the Son projecting out of the Father.
Post the Revelation verse(s) here, let's all examine it together

Ok...here

Two thrones were mentioned
That of God and that of the lamb..none for the holy spirit. How do we add this up as well to arrive at this very trinity doctrine

Revelation 7:10
And they cried out in a loud voice: “Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.”

Revelation 21:22
I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.

Revelation 11:15
…“The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord [God] and of his Christ [Jesus], and he will reign for ever and ever.”

Revelation 22:1
Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb.

Revelation 5:13
…“To him who sits on the throne [God] and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!”

Those are the verses

MuttleyLaff:
Haven't I already apologised for this misunderstanding?

Well you might be able to emanate but you cant incarnate like God did

I might have replied before seeing the other one..

Sorry! You can ignore it

MuttleyLaff:
Oh my apologies then,
For a moment, I thought you were saying, No it is impossible.
Well then, do you go along with:
God was God the Father in Heaven, when at the same time, He was Son of God on earth

Who also died on the cross?

Hmmm!

The Son preexisted with the father.. John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

The father sent the Son from his bosom..John 3:16

With what you have up there will be saying the God the father himself was killed on the cross. Correct me if am wrong.

Perfectbeing:
You can do the arithmetic however you like. I like to use 1x1x1=1.

Thank you.

Your logic/idea and opinion should remain yours please.

Thank you

[quote author=MuttleyLaff post=69709648]Why No!

1/ OK, so, are you saying, No! because you think and/or believe that, it is something impossible for God to do
that it is beyond God to do something like that?

I said "NO" again... meaning it is possible

Look, don't confuse yourself with the 'NO'. If you had used.."possible" I would have said 'YES'

2/ Maamin, if you need something done, if you need the thing done right
or needed it be done, in a very certain or particular way,
but there is no one, putting themselves forward to help,
but there is no one, offerring themselves &/or their services to help have this something done

If you've looked someone, looked for a man, among human beings,
who would rebuild the hedge (i.e. the wall of righteousness that guards the land),
If You've searched for someone, to stand in the gap or breach in the wall, before You, and on behalf of the land,
so that it won't be destroyed, but You found no one

There is no one to help, time is running out and it is increasingly and strongly becoming necessary for this something to be done,
now Maamin, in the absence of anyone coming forward, in the absence of anyone assisting, in the absence of anyone being up to the task,
if you're quite capable, able and especially, have the ability, means, know how, experience, skills to do this required & much needed something,
Maamin, if you can be the man, the man to deliver, if you can be the person, to get the work done,
would you not do it yourself, would you not go ahead and put yourself forward?
Would it not be best for you, considering the circumstances & situation, to do it yourself?

cc OneJ

And I also have ability to send my emanation more like my reflection/image out to do it since he too can carry out the very tax perfectly like it were me or the very me.

MuttleyLaff:
God is already everywhere at anytime

"Is it impossible for God to simultaneously and concurrently
be, God the Father in Heaven
and be the Son of God on earth, at any moment of time?"

And my answer was "NO" meaning it is possible.

Perfectbeing:
I actually don't know how else to construct my English o.. What tribe are you? So I can use Google Translator..

What is so complex in my question?

How do you explain the two thrones in revelations that of the Father and that of the Son , according to you they are figurative. You promised earlier to comment on that.?