₦airaland Forum

Dantedasz:
To the second PART-CAPITAL NO I DISAGREE.
I don't want us to derail this thread. I suggest we open a fresh thread on the issues of the virgin birth.
What say you?

Looks to me, like you are spoiling for a fight and someone to do in this morning. So it's me, who draw the short straw for "punishment" today with you, huh?

Dantedasz, notice I had conceded with you that Paul never mentioned the virgin birth of Jesus and said that because it wasnt a contention, but if you want discuss the virgin birth of Jesus, of course feel free to send me a mention invite, whenever you get round to opening a thread about it

We can talk about the veracity of the virgin birth of Jesus, talk about the reason why it needed to be a virgin birth, talk how possible, it is for God, to perform this miraculous feat that is yet or ever to be repeated by any other

Dantedasz:
To the first part of your post-No hard feelings.

You are a good and very understanding man

Martinez39:
When you ask some christians why Yahweh wouldn't prove himself, you hear "god won't stoop so low to prove himself to man?" Seriously?

How does god proving himself to man means that he is stooping low? God wants you to be saved and he cared enough about man to go through torture and tears on the cross, so how is proving himself equivalent to stoop so low? Nevermind that he proved himself to Gideon.

Please, who can answer this? How is that logic valid?

festacman:
God is sovereign. This means He is not subject to any authority but every authority is subject to Him. He does whatever He likes to in line with his plan and big picture.

So if He likes He will prove Himself at some occasions and would not in other occasions. Sometimed we have overbloated value of ourselves as created human beings in relation to the creator. Even in the world, monarchs do whatever they like and are not under any obligation to prove themselves unless if it pleases them to do so. How much more the God creator.

You are a god for making this very deep and very profound and very beautiful comment,.

Dantedasz:
Wow!
Just seeing this.
MuttleyLaff,While I take exception to you calling me a liar,I am going to ignore that and indulge you in your silly game of "going-round-in-circles-as-usual."

Chief, I didnt in any real sense call you a liar, only meant I wouldnt from past experiences, necessarily take it, hook line and sinker whatever you post and nonstampcollector uploads, but if you took it to heart and felt offended, then I retract my comment, profusely apologise to you and ask that from within the recess of your kind heart that you forgive me.

Dantedasz:
1.Saul who later became Paul, was a prosecutor of Christians.
2.While on the road to Damascus to prosecute more Christians he had an "eureka"moment when Jesus Christ appeared to him in a blinding light.
3.Saul became blind and despondent.
4.For three days Saul was blind and did not eat nor drink.
5.In Damascus,a Christian,named Ananias is sent by Jesus to go to Saul and restore his sight.
6.Ananias protests to Jesus.
7.Jesus assures Ananias.
8,Ananias goes to Saul,places his hands on him,says his lines and dramatically scales fall from Sails eye's and he can see again.
9.Saul is immediately baptised and after spending some time with the disciples in Damascus becomes Paul and begins the ministry of writing all the letters in the New Testament of the Bible.

MY QUESTION IS-WITH ALL PAUL'S WRITINGS OF LETTERS TO THE EARLY CHRISTIANS, WHY DOES HE NOT ONCE MENTION THE MIRACULOUS VIRGIN BIRTH BY WHICH JESUS CHRIST WAS CONCEIVED?
PAUL MENTIONS EVERYTHING BUT DOES NOT ONCE MENTION HOW THE VIRGIN MARY WAS VISITED BY THE HOLY GHOST AND CONCIEVED OF BABY JESUS?
It is obvious Paul never mentioned the virgin birth because it never happened. The virgin birth was later adoptions of Christianity to equate Christ to God. The virgin story was an insertion/interpolation by the writers of Mathew and Luke gospels.
The gospel of Mark which was the first written gospel does not mention ANY virgin birth.
It is obvious from Paul's writings and letters that he hadn't the foggiest idea about any virgin birth.

Dantedasz, your question is johnny-come-lately late and redundant because I had already said:
"Of course, Paul did not directly and explicitly talk about the virgin birth in his epistles, because the virgin birth wasnt at any time, with them a contention. Paul's writings however are in tune perfectly with the teaching of the virgin birth found in other parts in the bible and it's a fact and truth that, you wont find Paul, anywhere talk against the virgin birth because it is an accepted and/or known fact"

It's like you were trying to throw and leave in a cat in the chicken pen, then step back and watch several get caught in the melee that will unfold

Ihedinobi3:
I don't know any such thing. If these passages, as clear as they are, are not clear enough in your judgment, why should I expect you to receive any other witness? I doubt that you would accept even one that says unequivocally that "angels are sons of God".

I applaud your honesty in saying you do not know of such thing.

If you were able to show me where it is forcibly and clearly expressed that angels are sons of God, of course, I will glad eat the humble pie, ask for your forgiveness, admit I got it all wrong and accept on the face of the unequivocally proof you give

Ihedinobi3:
You have your own agenda which has nothing to do with what the Bible actually says in this regard, so it is not surprising that you reject its witness.

My agenda is not to suffer ignorance gladly, and please stop, at every moment being defensive and anxious to avoid opposing views

Ihedinobi3:
What you believe in this is between you and the Lord. You do not accept my authority as a teacher so I can hardly be held responsible for you here.

I remember I previously warned and told you that you are responsible for what you teach

Ihedinobi3:
As for my conjectures, what else would you call something you are hell-bent on rejecting? Are you saying anything different from what atheists say when they call the Gospel and the Bible a fiction? Suffice to say that just like your "simple" retelling of the Genesis 6 passage, your explanation of these passages you reject are bound to be just as convoluted and just as based on foreign intrusions into the Bible.

I am in good company of Paul, Peter and Jude who call what you believe in to be myths and teaching heresy. Please, dont even go there, we are not talking about the Gospel and the Bible being fiction, but rather this is about believing in celestial beings otherwise known as angels impregnated human beings

Ihedinobi3:
I can't help what you choose to see. I underlined men and daughters because both words were present in the phrase "daughters of men" which I also underlined. As I explained later, there is nothing else that you can call daughters who are born to men which would be clearer than "daughters of men". You thought to insist that there was some sort of switching happening all on your own. Clearly, no such thing happened. Men had daughters and those daughters were referred to as daughters of men since that is what they were. There is nothing better that they could have been called.

It's OK, I am not sweating it

Ihedinobi3:
This is precisely why discussing with you is a grand waste of time and a terrible test of patience. I answered a thread without making any reference to you. Someone made a challenge to the Bible and I answered it. You came and scolded me for "[buying] into this angels having sex bullshit" as you put it, and for "blindly and poorly arguing that angels have sexual desire". I said nothing to you prior. I was only answering a thread that someone else made and I was doing so from my understanding of the Bible. That understanding did not derive from you. I have never been your student so that you should feel the need to correct me when I misrepresent what you have taught me. Nor was it the first time that you had tried to have a fight with me over what I teach.

My hands are up in the air, and I am guilty as charged. Yes it does make one become infuriated at times when a well-known respected teacher knows not these things

Ihedinobi3:
I have often found what you teach objectionable. But I don't comment on it. I let you teach as you please trusting that if your heart is really seeking to honor God in what you do, you will soon come round to the correct doctrine on all things that you teach. It is not my job to correct you especially since I have seen how you can be in conversations. In fact, I only expressed a disassociation from an erroneous doctrine you put forth once for you to bristle and try to start a cantankerous debate. I wasn't even trying to correct you. I only said that you were wrong in associating me with what you taught since I didn't hold the same views. That was all. But you cannot stand having anyone hold different views from you, can you? That is why you keep starting fights and then you turn around and claim that your questions are harmless and innocent. If they are, why are they seeds that you are doing? What kind of seeds are they?

You dont like tables you're standing on being shaking, it seems, isnt it Ihedinobi3?

Some of the differences between you and I are, I love and can take criticism. I dont shy from saying things bluntly as they are. I dont call a spade a fork. It is my work to correct anybaga, I will bring any baga to the water trough, and from there the onus to drink is on you and not me. No one, including not you, a heavyweight, even not me typing, is a sacred cow. I dont mind whose ox is gored, I will say it as it is and there's nothing personal to it. I fear no one, as a clear and innocent conscience fears nothing.

So my brother, I dont start fights and then you turn around and claim that my questions are harmless and innocent Ihedinobi3, but rather I engage people by laying down my stick alongside their stick on the ground and throw in questions because he who is afraid to ask questions, is ashamed of learning. I dont like making assumptions, so that's why I try asking questions Ihedinobi3.

It is better to answer a question even without settling the matter than to try settling the matter without any attempt to answer the question. Asking questions is as important as answering them. He who asks a question is a fool for a minute but he who does not, remains unknowing and a fool forever, so can you see there is a reason and method in the questioning madness?

Now about what and when you say "... a disassociation from an erroneous doctrine you put forth once for you to bristle and try to start a cantankerous debate. I wasn't even trying to correct you. I only said that you were wrong in associating me with what you taught since I didn't hold the same views. That was all. But you cannot stand having anyone hold different views from you, can you? ...". Well I am quite sure Ihedinobi3, you are a father and not just an ordinary father, but you are a loving, fair, evenhanded and just father. I like to believe you are fair and impartial in treatment or judgement, well if you, an earthly father have all this admirable qualities when dealing with human beings, how much more than that, do you think God, our Heavenly Father has? You really believe, circumstances of every action we took whilst on earth would not be considered by God isnt it? You really think that people wouldnt be offered a free legal representative in the person of Jesus an Advocate, to defend them and put a defence to the Judge. Did you not notice, that after a length, I didnt drag the matter with you anymore? I understand, some of us, at times entertain elements of parochialism in matters such as that one you wouldnt agree with or accept.

Ihedinobi3:
I told you that I know what I know. I told you that I do not accept your teachings here as biblical. Why then has this conversation continued? Only because you are hell-bent on correcting me. Was that my concern with you? Did I try to have a conversation with you? Peace is alien to you. You cannot have it unless you have beaten everybody into subjection to you and your errors. You "re-tell" a Bible passage on the basis of the witness of a pseudepigraphical book which you yourself admit has no place in the Bible and I am the one in need of correcting? You are far more arrogant than you know. Your own desire to be top dog in teaching has blinded you to the Truth. You are ending up not only misleading weak believers but opposing the Truth of the Bible for nothing more than your own false sense of superiority because of your lack of fear of God. If you feared the Lord, you would not even permit the thought of adding anything to what He has said in the Bible into your heart.

Phew. Are you done talking? You are taking this personal and to heart now Ihedinobi3. You are becoming over sensitive. Where did this thought of "... far more arrogant than you know... desire to be top dog... false sense of superiority... lack of fear of God.... " and others emanate from? Dont mix bad words with the bad mood you're in please.

I've always learned a great deal from questioning as in when I ask questions, more than as opposed to ordinary straight talking or discussions. I think its Albert Einstein, one of the finest brains about who said: "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing." but my curiosity questions rubs you the wrong way, it apparently seems, as you dont like me questioning your answers and/or comments.

Ihedinobi3:
I have continued the conversation so far because I hope to bear witness to the Truth wherever it is possible through it. Your work here will have its reward with the Lord. My concern was not so much to correct you or to give back the same abuse that you had meted to me. It was to make sure that anyone who seeks the Truth is not turned aside by the lies you have not been ashamed to tell here. So, it is you who should be concerned that I am not answering your questions. I try to answer all questions and arguments even with antichristians, how much more with a fellow believer. My refusal now is to demonstrate that you are doing worse than even antichristians who are clearly antagonists have done. Your own antagonism is the kind that sneaks up behind the unsuspecting and harms them when they least expect it.

Ihedinobi3 do you know what I find remarkable about intelligience? Intelligience, is not that you know everything without questioning, but rather, is, you question everything you think you know.

Ihedinobi3:
My journey with God started when I was so little that I have no memory of it. I grew up to stories about my weird childhood. I have always loved the Lord and sought to know Him. So when I went to church from childhood until now, I was not merely trying to do as I was told. I went enthusiastically. That was how I came to know what is actually taught in churches. I was born and raised in the Methodist Church. My grandma took me to Roman sacraments because my mother's side of the family was Roman Catholic through and through. This is why I caught a taste for extrabiblical material. I read volumes on Catholic saints and the Apocrypha growing up. By my late teens I had explored Roman, Protestant and Pentecostal traditions. Because of the incoherence and bad practices I gave up on churches and pastors and started trying to make my own way. That was how I remained until late 2017. The Lord was merciful to me and brought me then to a teaching ministry and to a teacher who is both exceptionally gifted and better prepared than anybody else I have met in my thirty odd years on earth. Until that time, I found the Bible very difficult - and, in far more cases than I would have admitted before, impossible in fact - to understand. It was in many of these years that I took on and held to many very bad interpretations like this one that you are selling on the strength of a pseudepigraphical book and on interpretive gymnastics that only those who refuse to follow the Bible humbly would ever fail to see. I was my own teacher and was as arrogant as you are now. If there was a difference between how I was and how you are, it would probably only be in my willingness to submit to someone qualified later.

I am humbled by the testimony you've just shared here, and so again I pray may you abound in His grace to know that angels do not have gender, there is no male or female angels and that angels werent given the ability to procreate human beings. Now if you agree and accept these facts, how do you explain away, how angels supposedly managed to obtain the ability to conceive and bear children with daughters of men?

Ihedinobi3:
So, it is not that I have much error accumulated over the years or that I am hardened in error from long exposure since the interpretation that I am putting forth is what I only learned within the past 17 months. It may be you who from long years of independent or private interpretation are now hardened in error. And it certainly is not that I have any problem with the light of truth. I have changed positions and made adjustments that I have held which were either wrong or imperfectly right as the light shines brighter in my own heart. But is that true of you? You are the one who hold that the Book of Enoch is rightly excluded from the Bible thereby admitting that it is not inspired and yet it is this book that informs your interpretation of a Bible passage which is itself inspired. This is notwithstanding the fact that the book is a recent hoax and the fact that the Bible always interprets itself.

Not so fast Ihedinobi3, come back here. You are getting it twisted up with your "You are the one who hold that the Book of Enoch is rightly excluded from the Bible thereby admitting that it is not inspired and yet it is this book that informs your interpretation of a Bible passage which is itself inspired. This is notwithstanding the fact that the book is a recent hoax and the fact that the Bible always interprets itself." comment. I never anywhere suggested that the book of Enoch is an inspired book. I had advanced the point that the book is an old hoax from the first/second century that the contents of it, Peter Jude and Paul were familiar with because of its existence in their times alive and so tackled the angels having sex with human beings myths circulated and aided by the books just like that one. If Tertullian, an early Christian father figure, wrote in c. 200 that the Book of Enoch had been rejected by the Jews because it contained prophecies pertaining to Christ then it wouldnt be a recent hoax as such, dont you think Ihedinobi3?. It is an old hoax that, recently was, in batches, unearthened, rediscovered and found again.

Despite the difference(s), I highly appreciate you though , so I tell you what Ihedinobi3, if you are hellbent on insisting that, it is angels being referred to in Genesis 6:4 and elsewhere other places, then I cannot help thinking, so be it my dear beloved brother.

PS: I am sorry Ihedinobi3 were you banned and your post hidden because of responding to me? I have sent you a message to the personal e-mail shown on your Profile signature anyway

LordReed:
Yeah well when you believe in a talking donkey and snake what is speaking gibberish?

The talking donkey was a one off, it hasnt happened again ever since that one time and I doubt a retake will ever happen soon. Correctly, it never was a snake but was a serpent, and apparently it is natural for serpents to talk, so what's the big deal. Now, the real deal is about this lot and the just dang delusion of grandeur, false belief in abilities to speak an unknown language, that are not just deceiving selves but also are deceiving others along into buying the deception.

Dantedasz:
Paul that does not for once talk about the virgin birth, which is the basis for the foundation of Christianity?
Delusion and more delusion =more astounding rubbish.

This man just wants to have an argument for argument sake, with such a dim observation like this

LordReed:
You know I never really considered that. Interesting. Bible aka my book of amazing tall tales. LoLz

I would open the curtains, to check, if it was me, Dantedasz told its raining outside.

Of course, Paul did not directly and explicitly talk about the virgin birth in his epistles, because the virgin birth wasnt at any time, with them a contention. Paul's writings however are in tune perfectly with the teaching of the virgin birth found in other parts in the bible and it's a fact and truth that, you wont find Paul, anywhere talk against the virgin birth because it is an accepted and/or known fact

alBHAGDADI:
Well, the curse according to you is for the preacher who doesn't spend out of the tithe money on widows and the poor.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't own a church neither do I collect tithe. I'm only defending God's doctrine.

Whether you are concerned or not concerned, the CURSE imposed upon the priests in Malachi 2:1-2 will belong to you because you are guilty by association and your attraction to filthy lucre finds you out, you Mr Tithe Trafficker.

alBHAGDADI:
If you are a father, can you beat another man's son for doing whatever he likes in his home? No, you can't.

Same thing is happening to you who doesn't pay tithe. God is not going to punish you because you are not his son. You are a bastard, that's why you are not getting punished by God the Father, which is why you are prospering as an evil man.

But those who are God's children recieve punishment when they disobey their father the Almighty.

Hebrews 12:6-11 King James Version (KJV)
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

"¹The Lord Almighty says to the priests, “This command is for you:
²You must honor me by what you do. If you will not listen to what I say, then I will bring a curse on you.
I will put a curse on the things you receive for your support.
In fact, I have already put a curse on them, because you do not take my command seriously.
⁷The words of a priest’s lips should preserve knowledge of God, and people should go to him for instruction, for the priest is the messenger of the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.
⁸But you priests have left God’s paths. Your instructions have caused many to stumble into sin.
You have corrupted the covenant I made with the Levites,” says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies. "
- Malachi 2:1-2, 7-8

You are no believer, you are a Pharisee, your insistence on the strict observance of the tradition of men obligatory and/or imposed ecclesiastical monitised tithes gives you away as what and who "Faraway-To-See" you really are.

Cursed is the deceiver. The CURSE imposed upon the priests in Malachi 2:1-2 will belong to you, if GOD'S MONEY is spent on the rich pastors etcetera at the same time letting the POOR suffer or even if you spread and promote obligatory or imposed ecclesiastical monitised tithes on them. You are guilty by your association and attraction to filthy lucre, you Mr tithe trafficker.

InansBobo:
we two are inarguably not of the same belief

We are on the same train, only you're in the economy carriage and we are in first class carriage

InansBobo:
that tongue of power has transmitted the power of God to heal and insanity, death etc have been arrested. It's needless to argue with you though but u must not believe. It's for they that believe in God's power.

You inadventently, are making satanic utterances, when speaking in an unknown tongue in private or public, without interpretation. Show me one verse, that recommended praying in tongues to be a weapon and code language to shield off satan from getting to know contents of prayer requests?

Hermes019:
Alright
Can you explain the mechanism through which the soul would feel pain,does a soul even "feel" at the first place,if it does how

My friend, I like you, I really do. I like the way you fire on two cylinders. Here's is something you can relate to that will explain this a bit for you.

Do you ever recoil back, when watching something gruesome happening in real life or maybe just on a TV screen slash internet. That's your spirit not wanting to be grieved. Sometimes, you protect the gateway to your spirit man because you might not necessarily want to relive or remember the moment, so you block any avenue contact to the thing happening or going on

alBHAGDADI:
When tithes were given under Mosaic law, was it God that received it or the levitical priesthood? So why say Abraham didn't give his tithe to God when he gave it to his priest Melchizedec?

Tithing is not meant to make you rich but to help prevent all those nonsense devourers that make you spend uselessly.

This man is still propagating these lies that tithing is there to help prevent all those nonsense devourers that make you spend uselessly. I stopped obligatory or imposed ecclesiastical monitised tithing donkey years ago, and I have never had a second moment of regret. It has been blessing galore, good success and health in leaps and bounds since last time I tithed in that manner. Anyone that tithes under the obligatory or imposed ecclesiastical monitised tithing system is under bondage. Anyone that supports and calls for obligatory or imposed ecclesiastical monitised tithing is putting a curse upon themselves. Anyone that preys and plays on people's fear of calamity, hard times, sickness, misfortune etcetera if they don't give obligatory or imposed ecclesiastical monitised tithes is putting a curse on themselves. Albhagdadi you are warned

LordReed:
I am not a christian but I challenge the notion that what one man wrote cannot be overridden by another. Paul is a man like Enenche, if Enenche wants to speak in tongues in public I think its his prerogative, Paul's ancient letter is a guide not a legal document.

It isnt even a matter of anyone overriding anything. This is sheer blatant fakery and deception of one of the highest order.

It is delusion and make believe uttering gibberish and nonsensical noise, altenating between varying high voice pitches. When people are lazy to articulate their prayers, they resort to this quick fix alternate method to pray. I wonder why Jesus never employed this method, if it was that potent

EMILO2STAY:
the thing is they claim their speaking in tongues by babbling unintelligible jargon is heavenly language that Satan does not understand but forget the Satan himself came from heaven and also knows the language of heaven.

Its just a catalogue of delusions, ignorance and laziness to properly pray.

There even isn't anything like heavenly language and if there is, which obviously isn't, well there you are, Satan will know about it and be on to what they are secretly and in codes are praying about, isn't it.

Like, I earlier mentioned, it is the end time deception of the demonic spirit in Rev 16:13-14 happening that they arent aware of

TruthinAction:
Even if I explain, you will not understand

You that doesn't know how to tie his shoe lace and/or knot a tie, wants to explain? Pftt.

TruthinAction:
The natural man does not receive the things of the spirit of God. First, give your life to Jesus. Second, receive the babtism of the Holy Spirit. Then I will explain to you.

Please tell what is all the evidences of baptism of the Holy Spirit?

It is people like you that permits others to give the faith a bad look SMH.

LordReed:
No matter what you are , you are always beautiful in my book.

Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in all Atheism on the Religion forum I can boast of, with such great faith

Hermes019:
Finally metatron is here to enlighten us

What is the difference between the soul and the spirit ?
Let's start from there

P.s I do not like cartoons, but animated and non animated, whichever

Your soul is you.
Your soul is also the most important part of you worthy enough to be after by the devil and worthy enough for God to die for in place of you.

The spirit comes and goes back to God after death, it is your conduit that connects and/or tunes in with the Spirit which God is. The life of the soul is in the spirit, just as the life of body is in the blood. This simples should be enough for now

Ihedinobi3:
If you believe that those are the wrong passages for proving that, then I have nothing more to add.

Of course you wouldnt have anything more to add because you and I know that, there is nowhere it is in a clear and detailed manner, leaving no room for confusion or doubt, stated that angels are called sons of God. Nowhere in the bible, is it forcibly and clearly expressed that angels are sons of God. What is so difficult, in admitting this truthful fact Ihedinobi3?

Ihedinobi3:
I neither asked for nor care for your generosity, MuttleyLaff. Civility was all I asked for. As for the passages, you obviously know them already. You only appear to have a completely different take on them than one would warrant.

Of course, I know Genesis 6:2, 6:4, Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 and Luke 20:36 and that they arent talking of angels as sons of God, but I wanted to be sure you are not hinging your conjectures on any other bible verses, I am not aware of

I cant believe you're bold enough to say "You only appear to have a completely different take on them than one would warrant." but nothing spoilt, I am not fretting, because I know the penny will drop sooner or latter

Ihedinobi3:
Suffice to say that I have no clue what you mean here.

You underlined men and daughters to show the contrast in the storyline's change in tone and it switching to using sons of God and daughters of men instead of the previous ordinary use of men and daughters words, for a reason, didnt you? I am glad you did that because that was a freudian slip on your side

Ihedinobi3:
I have to say that while I was never particularly enthusiastic about this conversation, I am rapidly losing all interest in it. You keep suggesting that you possess some great exclusive knowledge here that you wish to be begged for. I already told you that I know what I know and have already willingly shared it elsewhere and in this conversation with you too. If you have something that you wish to say, feel free to say it. If you have no wish to say it, please let me be. You were the one who seemed to want to talk. I did not seek you out here.

Don't be reluctant to give information when I pose questions at you but be worried when you decline to answer them
Please find the courage to answer the questions, anytime I ask that you're cagey to answer
Why? because from your replies, is the only way you'll know which direction your truth lies

Of course, I know and understand why you particularly wouldnt want to be enthusiastic about this conversation, and its cool, as my work is just the seed. For me, sometimes it’s enough just to plant the seed, and walk away. Let someone else water the seed, seed germinate and the flower grow on its own.

Ihedinobi3:
Okay.

Ihedinobi3:
Unless you actually wish to say something, as I said above, I am not interested in answering any more questions. This conversation is happening because of your choice to mention me in your comment on the thread. I am not your student and do not consider your position here to be biblically correct. So, if you actually want to demonstrate its correctness, by all means, do so. If you do not, then let me move on to other conversations.

What comes easy, fast and furious won't last, what lasts won't come easy, fast and furious. You should know that much Ihedinobi3. Reiterating, 16 years of PDP misrule of the country, isnt going to be miracuously fixed by less than 4 years of ACP governance

The light of the truth can be harsh to those that have been in the dark. In my last post, I said a prayer for you, to be abounding in His grace (i.e. so I say may you continue to abound in His grace) Do you really understand the meaning of that prayer? It’s a prayer to open your eyes, to let you see this matter in a new way. It’s a gift that can only be felt when your eyes are open to see and you're open enough to accept the truth.

Even if not now, someday, you'll have the epiphany, look back and know exactly what we've discussed on this thread

Ihedinobi3:
You're exactly right that what the Bible says is very deliberately said. That is why I reject speculations about what it does not say. I cannot credit your "daughters of God" teaching because I see nothing in the passage itself - or, in fact, anywhere in the Bible - to suggest that it is right.

Of course, you wouldnt see nothing in the passage itself - or, in fact, anywhere in the Bible - to suggest that it is right and thats simply because whether you want to admit it or not, it's a man's world and the bible was written by men, a patriarchal society Ihedinobi3

Ihedinobi3:
I did not say that simplicity was a problem. I said that your retelling was not biblically accurate. In fact, it was false.

"Thus your "simple" and self-admitted retelling of that part of the Bible is neither warranted nor accurate."
- by Ihedinobi3: 12:01am On Feb 11

Ihedinobi3:
There was no contradiction since his biological pedigree had to do with his parentage, not with his marriage. That is what pedigree means.

C'mon Ihedinobi3, did you read the bible giving credit to Noah's ancestors or that the credit was given directly to him or not?
I dont know where out from you pulled "pedigree" I am suspecting you are confusing "pedigree" with "generation". You do know and accept that "generation" means all of the people born and living at about the same time, as Noah and has nothing to do with genealogy and/or "biological pedigree", dont you?

Do you accept and agree that it is Noah who is given credit for remaining pure by not marrying and/or going into any of the daughters of men?

Ihedinobi3:
Also note that I edited that part of my post for greater accuracy.

Thank you for the belated heads up. You wrote: "Noah was a pure blood, a full human. He was not a Nephilim at all. Nor was his wife, nor were their children. They were the only humans left alive." to which I completely concur without demur, however have you ever given thought to the daughters-in-laws?

Ihedinobi3:
First, I apologize for the earlier mistakes but I edited that part of my post before you responded. I believe that the Bible does not teach that they were the only full humans left but the human race was truly getting wiped out and replaced by the Nephilim strain.

I am not going to hold it against you because you're just as human as I am Ihedinobi3. We all make mistakes

Everything you wrote in your edit is completely true, bar the "rebel angels" bit. That is a figment of imagination. It is old wives' tale, a widely held but utterly false belief

Ihedinobi3:
Still, I am at a loss what you are saying here. Are you then admitting that the Nephilim were not fully human? Wasn't that what you were arguing against? Or is it your position that a marriage of righteous men to unrighteous women would produce half-humans?

"⁴³Why is my language not clear to you?
Because you are unable to hear what I say.
⁴⁴You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires.
He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him."
- John 8:43-44

It's you doing the arguing here, not me. I'll be the first to tell you, if I am arguing but I am not. If I am not sure of something, I wont talk about it, talkless argue over it.

Now Ihedinobi3, you and I know from the bible that, Cain, the woman's firstborn turned out to be a seed of Satan and a killer of Abel, the seed of the woman, rather than a killer of the seed of Satan. The Nephilim were already existing via Cain's lineage. Reiterating, the giants, when man fell, originally came about as Nephilim. Giants population increased and got aggravated to becoming a menace to society when the sons of God suddenly found the daughters of men's beauty powerfully and mysteriously sexually attractive to

Ihedinobi3:
I don't think I have a better answer to this than what I said before.

Fair do's.

Ihedinobi3:
The KJV translated wrong in Genesis 6:4. The Nephilim were not giants.

"There were giants in the earth in those days, yea, and after that the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they had born them children, these were mighty men, which in old time were men of renown. "
- Genesis 6:4 Geneva Bible printed before KJV

"There were giants in the earth in those days, yea, and after that the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they had born them children, these were mighty men, which in old time were men of renown. "
- Genesis 6:4 Geneva Bible printed before KJV

"Soothly giants were on the earth in those days, forsooth after that the sons of God entered [in] to the daughters of men, and those daughters begat; these were mighty of the world and famous men (these were the mighty and famous men of the world)."
- Genesis 6:4 Wycliffe Bible printed before KJV

Almost all exegesis and/or expository commentaries, say the Nephilim were already existed contemporaneously with the sons of God, that the Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them and so in line with my viewpoint

Ihedinobi3:
Okay.

Good

Ihedinobi3:
I am not asking you a thing, MuttleyLaff. I did not come to you for a conversation. You, on the other hand, thought to scold me for holding a point of view that you disagree with and I simply explained to you that I was duty-bound to be true to the Bible even if you didn't agree with me. If you feel the need to correct me, then do so. Or else leave well enough alone.

I am not scolding you, did not scold you Ihedinobi3. What do you think it has been happening so far with my stick laid down besides yours?

Ihedinobi3:
As for the Nephilim, as I said, the KJV translated wrong. They were not giants. And even if they were, why would a marriage of righteous men to unrighteous women produce giants? And why would it be considered in any way related to the disparate spiritual loyalties of the spouses? Or, as it seems to me that you might be suggesting, why would there be a connection between a race of giants and human sons of God in the latter's marrying unrighteous women?

I think you havent cop on to my Brawn and Brain scenario

Ihedinobi3:
The word Nephilim is not in that passage you posted. If you reread my post, you will see that in my edit, I explained how the Nephilim were not Rephaim and certainly not the same as any giants that followed.

"You also do realise Ihedinobi3, that even after the flood, the Nephilim gene did survive, dont you?"
- by MuttleyLaff: 4:30am On Feb 10

I am quite sure you recollect me previously saying the aove inverted commas

Ihedinobi3:
It was in my edit. The post has the reference.

" (compare the passages about Antichrist who is himself prophesied to be Nephilim: Genesis 3:15)"
- by Ihedinobi3: 12:01am On Feb 11

Is Genesis 3:15, the passages about Antichrist who is himself prophesied to be Nephilim then?

Ihedinobi3:
I don't see anything in the Bible to suggest that they were bullies. They may have been or they may not have been. But the whole idea of "bullying" is extrabiblical.

"The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
- Genesis 6:5

Ihedinobi3:
You have suggested that you know the Hebrew here. What does the Hebrew original of that verse say?

"See my comment below

To an ill-informed and unprejudiced mind, the words, as they stand in Genesis 6:4, states, as clear as day, that the Nephilim, who were on the earth in those days, as existing, before the sons of God began to go into the daughters of men. It didnt even say marry or know them, as Adam and others knew their wives, but says: "the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men" Bluntly put, the "sons of God" fairked the "daughters of men" literally."
- by MuttleyLaff: 8:38am On Feb 12

The above inverted commas is what you're asking a hebrew explanation from. Are you sure I mentioned anything about Hebrew in my comment there, hmm?

Ihedinobi3:
Okay.

I will reply to your other other next post and will get to kkins25 too asap

TruthinAction:
If you are not initiated into the kingdom of God, you will not understand. Are you born again? Do you speak in tongues? Apostle Paul only tried to check the excesses of the early believers in the manner and way they spoke in tongues. What the man of God did happens in virtually every Holy Spirit filled churches. At that point, he was nothing talking to the congregation but addressing an issue in the realm of the spirit and the members understood.

1/ Why should he speak in tongues?
2/ For what purpose and to which end should he want and/or need to speak in tongue(s)?
3/ Explain what brought about the circumstance that made Apostle Paul try to check the excesses of the early believers in the manner and way they spoke in tongues.
4/ Are you saying that because it happens in virtually every Holy Spirit filled churches, then it is biblically right, correct and true?
5/ Explain how mean "... he was nothing talking to the congregation but addressing an issue in the realm of the spirit "

Goshen360:
h t t ps://youtu.be/bSxIe3-Hl6g

Don't this people STUDY their Bible? Are these pastors not supposed to know better? What's this nonsense and craziness going on and folks following like they blind? Somebody help us call these madness out!

It is only some, lazy and indoctrinated Far-To-See (i.e. Pharisees) and Sad-To-See (i.e. Sadducees) somebody, looking for lesser praying effort, that believes that speaking in tongues, especially with using the voice and/or vocal cords, is praying in some mysterious heavenly language. This is shameless lazy and cutting corners manoeuvres praying things.

There is every legitimate reason to type that this is fake because the way this speaking in tongues is being done today, just as with other church folks and 21st century believers, is uttering unintelligible words that is bable and confused noise made by a number of different and varying voice pitches. This is not speaking in tongues (i.e. not speaking in a foreign language) but is mere babbling by unintelligible utterraces

It is the end time deception of the demonic spirit in Rev 16:13-14, symbolised as three unclean spirits that looked like frogs. And how do frogs catch their prey? Yes, by using tongues to snare believers with their false speaking in tongues deception

To speak in tongues, means audibly saying something out or make sounds with your voice to express your thoughts and feelings in a structured, conventional, intelligible and understandable way

Speak in tongues is language (i.e. tongues of man=human language) and has the same meaning with mother tongue, native tongue, dialect, vernacular etcetera. For example, you can speak in vernacular, can speak in your local dialect, might speak in a native tongue or speak in your mother tongue.

Importantly also, there is nothing like speaking in angelic or angel's tongue or heavenly language. It is from nonsense like this that the heresy about angels impregnating human beings come about and people believe the trash

EMILO2STAY:
that's if he is actually speaking in true tongues as the apostles did. what he was doing was pure mumbo jumbo, quite unbelievable that in this day and age people are still deceived with such pure nonsense.

Thank you my dear very good brother for this undiluted truthful words

TruthinAction:
You are telling me the congregation is not learning anything and they keep coming back? Sometimes, the moment of praying in tongues while on the pulpit is a time of stirring oneself up. If he just spoke in tongues and never delivered any message in understanding, then we can question his actions. Please, let's discuss more important issues.

We all, have spoken this feigned glossa, sometimes referred to as "ecstatic utterances", that is confused with, the real glossa, which is the biblical "gift of tongues". The real glossa and this man-made and fake other glossa, are like chalk and cheese, they are completely different from each other.

Not many, including you TruthinAction, know that, speaking in tongues, actually, in a way that suggests or resembles a miracle, is speaking in another ACTUAL HUMAN languages, that one couldn't speak before.

Also most importantly, are you aware that, Paul downplays the importance of speaking in tongues? He, Paul, on record, even said, do not speak in tongues without an interpreter, but this advice and guideline, is religiously, reguarly and openly disregarded during gathering worships and/or prayer sessions like as seen in this instance

Goshen360:
My brother, the things that are written is what we go by not that we're trying to write our own Bible again....the scripture says, if you are to speak in tongues in praying to God that NO MAN UNDERSTANDS, YOU SHOULD DO THAT IN PRIVACY IF YOU CAN'T INTERPRET NOT DOING SO IN A WORSHIP GATHERING.

My brother, if you are 110% sure of what you know and are saying with this, then please put forward the bible verse you are quoting from for this and lets together carefully and thoroughly review it

Goshen360:
It's as simple as that....so when you prophesy (unveiling the mind of God) you do so in human understanding.

¹³Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret.
¹⁴For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.
¹⁵What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also.
¹⁶Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say “Amen” to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying?
¹⁷For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up.
- 1 Corinthians 14:13–17

"So then, tongues are for a sign, not to those believing, but to the unbelieving;
but prophecy is not to the unbelieving, but to the believing."
- 1 Corinthians 14:22

Lets get this straight.
I hope you're not saying that from your understanding, praying in the Holy Ghost equates to praying or speaking in tongues, hmm?
Or contrary to what 1 Corinthians 14:22 says, you're saying that it is OK to speak to yourself in a tongue you dont understand, so far its done in private?

OK let's make this easier to think about. Can you hear your thoughts inside your head?
Neither can the devil hear your thoughts in your head or what you say in your mind
So isnt it clear now that, we give the devil unnecessary credit, thinking we are circumventing and finding a way around the devil to God.
Just foolery and shenanigans of the highest order abound.

HappyPagan:
this thread title though.. got me checking if I'm in the right section everytime I refresh.. GOD and CHOOSE >>>

The devil wears prada apparently, but God doesnt HappyPagan. What you see of God, is what you get, so you're in the right section. Just make the sign of the cross to reassure yourself

Hermes019:
You know this is not the issue, we regard the bible like every other book, but u Christians say it is divinely inspired, if u are of this position how did u attain it

All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us. All of them are useful for teaching, pointing out errors, correcting people, and training them for a life that has God's approval.

Are you musically inclined? What musical instruments do you play if you are? Do you also compose?

Hermes019:
I have heard this a couple of times,you are asked to imagine how it feels when a fire burns your skin,and then you are told that it would feel the same way or even worse to be cast into the lake of fire(hell). I have a problem with this illustration. When we are burned by fire or any hot object we feel hurt because we have a nervous system, if we didn't have a nervous system or if our nervous systems were not functioning we can't feel pain,even if your whole body is completely burnt u wouldn't feel any pain.Of course this is something we can relate to when you are given an anaesthetic maybe during surgery and that body region becomes numb no matter the manner of injury you inflict to that portion the person wouldn't feel any pain. Suffice to say it is not the fire that is really responsible for the pain,what causes u to feel pain is the reaction of your body (the pain receptors, brain and motor receptors) to the stimulus(the fire).
So having established this,we can say that no nervous system,no pain

So this brings us to my question

Does the spirit (if it actually exists as claimed) possess a nervous system or a replica of some sort ?
If it doesn't then how exactly will a spirit feel pain ?
Cc Ihedinobi3, originalkalokalo, Mutteylaff, rekinomtla, budaatum, Johnydon22,CAPSLOCKED, XxSabrinaxX, Frank317, Seun

"And you should not be afraid of those killing the body but not being able to kill the soul.
Indeed rather you should fear the One being able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna."
- Matthew 10:28

I applaud how you are not thinking how everyone else thinks.

Few modifications, first the moniker ID is MuttleyLaff and not Mutteylaff, that your slip up gives you away as a non cartoon animation fan.
Second, it is the soul, and not the spirit, that is going to be destroyed, so do you now see that you've asked a non question?

Hermes019:
Read what exactly, the bible?

Hold on to your knickers. Patience is a virtue, you didnt have re-post same comment twice in order to get me to respond now

Not just the bible only. It was in Mark Twain's book "Innocents Abroad" that he wrote: "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime." and with that in mind, is why I earlier said that " "I travel a lot and visit many good, bad and ugly books, but live in the Bible.""

I learned all of I share from and by reading the bible along with a few other the good, bad and ugly books. Reading is important to me. A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone, if it is to keep its edge, so the saying goes. On top, I love and enjoy reading the Bible. It gladdens my heart and ít's an immerse source of knowledge to me.

Living in the bible helps me a lot and allows me to think outside the box, as the law of liberty gives me the opportunity to do just that.

HappyPagan:
Religion has its benefits...

Religion is a relative word

HappyPagan:
but it will be ridiculous to claim the world we live in today is a mess because we depend on reason and logic. That's illogical.

unrealiable "reason and logic" is how we got into the right fine mess the world got into. It is through and from justifying eating the fruit against an express command not to that landed us in the mess the world is in

HappyPagan:
Glorified robots, or human angels. Satan wasn't a glorified robot, see where that got God.

I guarantee you the means justifies the end of the whole matter

HappyPagan:
God, at least whatever the Christian defines him as, is just a buhari in the sky, always giving excuses, sees no reason to be held accountable or responsible.. every good thing is of him, every bad thing is carnal(human)... what a disgusting, repressive philosophy to follow..

The truth is a bitter pill to swallow

HappyPagan:
lol, buhari again
Considering I'm neither omnipotent, omniscient, or any of the multitude of omni-attributes your Buhari claims to possess, I don't think I'm doing too bad.

Your God has made a lot of awful decisions, and his methods of correcting those mistakes are not methods I'd ask any divine being to emulate. (noah's ark, son's death, moses 40 years trip)

Show a human being, any other being and/or god that has improved upon and/or beat God's track record

JujuSugar:
1/ I'll advise you to shelve the bible sometimes and pick up books that aren't a disservice to reality.

I live in the bible, "I travel a lot and visit many good, bad and ugly books, but live in the Bible." was self explanatory enough

JujuSugar:
2/ Next time you want to address my comment, quote me directly. Your inclusion of my comment in your reply to Lord Reed in that manner is actually insulting. But I'm just gonna let that slide...

I dont have to quote you directly if I dont want to., and you can take it as you like it, like as if I really at all care you feel insulted at not having your ID being directly mentioned when I commented, and like as if, I spoke ill of you in my comment. This is the last time I'll ever again mention or quote the moniker anyway.

Dantedasz:
And another one...have fun.
h t tps://youtu.be/qahB7mYhLxs

Your life is alreay the car you want to test run and/or see first Dantedasz,
and hey, did ever mention to you, that you didnt even put anything up front or down payment talkess paying for your life before you started using and having it
This guy always entertain with the many holes more than in a Swiss cottage Youtube video.
He is only churning them out for the money anyways

HappyPagan:
What mess? If reason and logic is unreliable, that's on you. Check for bias.

The imperfect world you mentioned below is the mess

HappyPagan:
True, he takes on whatever attributes his believers love.

Amen

HappyPagan:
How could an imperfect world come from a perfect being?

Because He didnt want to create human beings that are glorified robots

HappyPagan:
Indeed, heaven seems to have no mind of its own. compelled to create, compelled to destroy, compelled to exist. God might be a prisoner to his powers.

I very much doubt God is a prisoner to His powers. I believe God has more integrity than you'll sincerely and truthfully ever would credit Him with

LordReed:
I didn't ask for a story, I asked for evidence or demonstration.

How clever of you to notice the story!. There just is no pleasing some people sha.

OK, CAPSLOCKED said: "... YOU NEED FAITH TO BE ABLE TO ENCOUNTER AND FEEL HIM IN YOUR HEART..." but then there's no point of having faith, if or when someone like you LordReed, insists on asking for evidence.

I admit, it's hard to trust and have faith, when all you have from the past is evidence why you shouldn't believe and to have faith, but in fairness LordReed, you can't be going about asking believers for evidence or demonstration of anything, because their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep seated mandate to believe and after all, how you see God, is evidence of what you believe anyway. There's also the fact that, there are two kinds of people, those who believe and those who don't, but then I think "many drips carve a rock", not sudden change.

LordReed, there no absolute evidence or demonstration to point to, except for clues abounding, that God is a Spirit and human beings are created in God's image and according to His likeness

Now, for the one asking "read what?". Well there are two sides to every coin. There is no such thing as a one-sided piece of paper, so I travel a lot and visit many good, bad and ugly books, but live in the Bible.

Dantedasz:
How dare you compare the omniscient, omnipotent God to a pair of dusty shoes?
Do you not know our God is a mystery and his ways are not your ways?
How dare you??
You better read your Bible to understand God better
and go down on your knees and beg for forgiveness lest you get cast into the lake of fire that burns forever and ever.....
Bewarned.....

Slow applause. I honestly was expecting to see a nonstampcollector YouTube video there. What a killjoy

HappyPagan:
Worship in "reason and logic" could have been a better alternative. Less prone to make-belief and keeps the fraudsters away.

"Reason and logic" pass "reason and logic".
Worship with and/or in unrealiable "reason and logic" is how we got into the right fine mess the world got into. It is through and from it that make-belief and fraudsters got a leg in and entered the world

HappyPagan:
Daddy needs to stop claiming Alpha and move to Beta

Smell the coffee, forget Beta, as Daddy is Alpha and Omega.

HappyPagan:
Times have changed, humans too.

Humans change by the day while God never changes, simply because, God is perfect.

HappyPagan:
"spirit and truth" is vague and ambiguous, at least enough to let in crooks, vampires and old men with Messiah complex.

Life started really simple, with only just one rule or comman, do not eat but we insisted on brighter ideas, see where it got us

HappyPagan:
Wow... I'm literally doing a life live stream to Heaven, like Spotify on two feet. Wow... Whoever's recording must be having a swell time.

Heaven must be a really jobless place.... Like Big Brother on steroids, ganga and fresh leave from the Utkubamba river.

No one recording is having a swell time, as it is true, it really is a jobless place because of automation.

Ihedinobi3:
Please see above.

Where, what is there above for me to see?
Are you saying the Nephilim werent already existing before the sons of God started fairking the daughters of men?
Is that your position and how you understand Genesis 6:4?

Ihedinobi3:
To begin with, I am quite confident that what I have said about everything here is what the Bible actually teaches. Your attribution of ignorance to me is your business. I know what I know.

Because you are ignoring the obvious, but I am so pleased you answered those 6 questions. You dont know how much it means to me you answering them. It permits me to better understand you, better understand yor station(s), better know why and how you come to be in the position(s) you reveal about yourself, topic and whatnot. That is the objective, thery arent trick questions, and there are never nothing malicious intents with my questionings. Thank you.

Ihedinobi3:
1. Jude was the same as John concerned about Gnostic heresies. Peter also addressed them. Paul was not as concerned with them as far as I know. But if you mean something else by "sources", I don't know what you are asking.

Well, I know you cant deny that part of Jude is very similar to 2 Peter, hence my "what do you know about the source(s) of Paul, Peter and Jude letters that got them concerned to write about myths and heresies"

First, I am going to show you here next, evidence of Jude quoting Peter, before talking of other sources, or "sources" as you put it, Jude and Peter quoted from. There are more of Jude quoting Peter, but this just one, as it is, is enough and factual. More can be provided upon request

¹⁷But you, beloved, remember what was foretold by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ
¹⁸when they said to you, "In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow after their own ungodly desires"
- Jude 1:17-18

"Most importantly, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires."
- 2 Peter 3:3

Ihedinobi3:
2. Jude wrote under the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit same as Peter did.

You at times can be so predictably suspicious of my questioning, that it makes you go on a defensive and tangent

My question was: "Do you know that Jude references and quotes from Peter when he writes?", which required at most a Yes or No binary answer, at worst I dont know. Anyway I never doubted the inspiration under which Jude wrote, but I have shown with the above that Jude references and quotes from Peter when he writes, which was the question asked.

Ihedinobi3:
3. I am confident that they made no such references. The Book of Enoch to which I think you refer is a recent hoax.

Well, I am sorry to be the one bursting the bubble and letting you know that they both made references to non apocrypha and/or pseudepigrapha books, that rightfully are rejected to be in the bible, case in point The Book of Enoch

Ihedinobi3:
The Book of Enoch to which I think you refer is a recent hoax.

"See the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone and to convict the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done"
- 1 Enoch 1:9

¹⁴Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them:
“See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones
¹⁵to judge everyone, and to convict all of them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”
- Jude 1:14-15

How can you, in light of the above, say The Book of Enoch is a recent hoax, where it is clear as day shows Jude 1:14-15 echoing 1 Enoch 1:9?

Ihedinobi3:
4. I said in both my response to the thread and to you that the identity of the sons of God as angels was confirmed by Jude and Peter. You insisted that they were speaking of myths.

Absolutely and backed with scripture

Ihedinobi3:
5. Have you yourself read all the books in the world that you should be sure of anything at all?

You are, sometimes, like just here, too quick to protect yourself from a harmless and innocent question. All I merely asked was
"how many apocrypha, non apocrypha and/or pseudepigrapha books have you so far read, that you are cocksure Paul wasnt referring to the Genesis 6 story and the heresies surrounding it". The question had nothing to do asking about reading all the books in the world

I dont need to have read all the books in the world that I should be sure of anything at, but if you read like I do, you would have read the book of Enoch, as a non apocrypha and/or pseudepigrapha book, or read any of the apocrypha books

Ihedinobi3:
6. If you have, produce the list of all the books in the world as well.

I only stop reading when I am six foot under but for sake of this thread, I can tell you I have read the book of Enoch along with some other good, bad and ugly books.

Ihedinobi3:
Please see above.

Whats the meaning of this.

Ihedinobi3:
Please see above.

Whats the meaning of this.

Ihedinobi3:
So you interpreted a silence. That is always bad theology.

On the contrary. It is just that, I haven't yet read anywhere in the bible of a celestial popping out and physically appearing looking like a human being on its own accord and without been sent on an errand by God or not in an official capacity and so that it a precedent that shows and can be used as a reason whywe dont see celestial beings popping out and physically appearing looking like a human being on their own accord and without been sent on an errand by God or not in an official capacity

Ihedinobi3:
The Greek word translated "myriad" is an actual number.

C'mon now Ihedinobi3, it's me, please stop pulling my leg.
"Myriad" used in those bible context is not used as an actual or fixed number. "Myriad" means a unit of ten thousand, but the bible says they are myriads, effectively a countless or extremely great number of celectial beings or angels
10,000

Ihedinobi3:
You said that I was close to the truth, not that I had spoken the truth.

This is a quiet truth, that is not a version of anything widely known, as it is an original knowing. Some people fall victim to dogma and ill-informed teaching. There is nothing more damaging to a discovered truth than attachment to an old error and closeness to the truth, because the thing about the truth is, not a lot of people can handle it. You can be standing right in front of the truth and not necessarily see it, and people only see and get it when they're ready to see and get it. The only people who are and are going to be mad at you for speaking the truth are those people who have been believing a lie

Ihedinobi3:
I see now what you meant. Well, I would only be slandering angels if I was accusing them of doing something that the Bible did not say that they did. So far, I see no reason to believe that I am. So I don't believe either that I am slandering them.

".Again the Lord said to Raphael, Bind Azazyel hand and foot; cast him into darkness; and opening the desert which is in Dudael, cast him in there."
- Book of Enoch 10:6

"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;"
- 2 Peter 2:4

I always any day, will take Peter and Jude's words on any matter first before taking yours on board Ihedinobi3, no disrepect or insult intended.

When Peter in 2 Peter 2:4 above, used that hypothetical "if" in his letter, he was quoting from the Book of Enoch 10:6 shown above and talking about how out of place as to be amusing, it is to believe in all that fantasy of angels humping human beings and further on, in 2 Peter 2:11, he denies that angels were accusing other angels, saying they (i.e. meaning angels Michael, Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel) wouldnt bring such a slanderous accusation against these supposedly angels having sex with human beings before God

Ihedinobi3:
As I said before, your feelings about this are of no consequence to me. I seek to follow the Bible. That means that I do my best to read it and interpret it as it is without adding a thing or taking a thing away from it. That is what I strive to do. That you feel strongly that I am misrepresenting the Bible does not mean that I am. I am certain that you are but it is something that I would leave you to figure out as you strive to follow God since I am equally certain that you will not listen to me.

Your best is not good enough

Ihedinobi3:
Anyone who wishes to know the Truth will yield to it when they hear it. It all depends on how much they want it. Some want it bad enough to take it faster than others. As for me, I keep pushing forward as the Lord helps me to learn what He teaches me and apply it to my life and help others as He strengthens me to. It is a duty that I owe to Him, MuttleyLaff, not to you.

Brilliant deduction, however, the thing about the truth is, not a lot of people can handle it because the greater the ignorance, the greater is the dogmatism, but there certainly are different paths of learning and growth anyway, so I say may you continue to abound in His grace

I will asap reply to your other post with the comment about "The KJV translated wrong in Genesis 6:4. The Nephilim were not giants" and I still havent forgetting replying to kkins25.

Hermes019:
How did you get to know all these ?

The more you read, the more you get to know all these