₦airaland Forum

vooks:
Acts 10:1-30

Allow me not to quote it.
Cornelius
1. One day at ~1500H in Caeserea he has a vision. He is to send to Joppa his servants to pick Peter. He does that immediately after the vision
2. The NEXT day the servants arrive in Joppa just as Peter is having a vision, and lodge with Peter for the night
3. The NEXT day they leave for Caeserea
4. The NEXT day they arrive at Cornelius'

Cornelius utters these profound words
Acts 10:30 (KJV)
And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing

FOUR DAYS AGO.....

Now please do me a favor and attempt to calculate how many hours passed between his vision and Peter's arrival. Thank you

Am currently on the road, moving around will come back to you on this but for now:
One day = 1 day
Next day = 2nd day
Next day = 3rd day
Next day = 4th day

There you have your 4 days on the next day on the 5th next day

vooks:
My brother,
You need to ACQUAINT yourself with Biblical reckoning od days, which is as commonsensical as any other. Am about to show you an EXACT time period of 72 hours in the scriptures called FOUR days. Clock OK once ready

I am salivating already, literally, in anticipation and at the prospect

vooks:
Humanity as a matter of fact will develop behaviors and routines and habits and traditions.
Traditions that void the word of God are the ones that conflict or contradict it, otherwise traditions can and have coexisted with the Word of God.

For instance,
Nigeria's traditional attire. Is it Christian to don it? The answer is simple; it is irrelevant.

And so you cancel the word of God in order to hand down your own tradition.
And this is only one example among many others.
- Mark 7:13

vooks:
What part of scripture does Christmas contradict?

¹⁷Then he took a cup of wine and gave thanks to God for it. Then he said,
“Take this and share it among yourselves.
¹⁸For I will not drink wine again until the Kingdom of God has come.”
¹⁹He took some bread and gave thanks to God for it. Then he broke it in pieces and gave it to the disciples, saying,
“This is my body, which is given for you. Do this to remember me.”
²⁰After supper he took another cup of wine and said,
“This cup is the new covenant between God and his people
—an agreement confirmed with my blood, which is poured out as a sacrifice for you.
- Luke 22:17-20

vooks:
I know you will say you are doing something nobody commanded.
Very true but, did Jesus command Nigeria national garb?

Strawman argument

vooks:
You can do stuff never commanded with a clean conscience except they contradict or conflict with the express commandment

That exactly, is it.
Except it contradicts or conflicts with the express commandment

You can burrow your head in the sand as long as you want
or delude yourself by putting on the ''Emperor's New Clothes'' woven by those two weavers in that short tale by Hans Christian Andersen
waiting until a child cries out, "But he isn't wearing anything at all!"

Highcuerayte:
You are right it's not my post and I didn't have the intention to say so

When you leave out the author or source then you are leading the readership to believe the post was authored by you

Highcuerayte:
Am a busy person and time is not easily sorted out,
I read the post online and decided to post it here having the knowledge of these things by myself.

What a lame excuse as who is not a busy person here.
What need to improve on is your time management.
Leave matter on the back burner, if you're unable to judiciously give it your time
alternatively lift and copy the whole article like you earlier did here
but leave a disclaimer crediting author and stating you agree with the contents of the article

Highcuerayte:
Sorry if the copying offends you.

Saying sorry is not good enough,
as you copied it in its entirety, if/when next time if you're going to repeat same, just post the reference or source to give the original author the credit

Highcuerayte:
Give them

That was I said, and am hoping he'll do in toto

thorpido:
Purpose.................end of story

thorpido:
Dates and time are for men (human beings).The bible says with God,a day is like unto a thousand years and a thousand years like unto a day.

Non sequitur

thorpido:
Why sweating yourself over trivial matters and giving less attention to deeper things?

Exactly trivial matters of celebrating Jesus' birth
as opposed to giving serious attention to deeper things
like the partaking of the Last Supper command, which Jesus Himself, ordered, ONLY, to do, in remembrance of Him.

itstpia8:
is the monkey or chimpanzee not considered the animal with the closest dna to humans?

Even if they are,
monkey or chimpanzee isnt and wasnt the serpent

Highcuerayte:
Biblical proof that he did

Yeah, biblical proof and everything else necessary that Jesus died on Friday evening

vooks:
If you have a teachable spirit I can school you through the foolishness of denying Friday-death-Sunday-resurrection

This will be interesting to watch and read

vooks:
Just request nicely and we will exorcise ignorance in seconds

Sure hope you will dot all the i's and cross all t's whilst doing the exorcism

vooks:
Because Jesus died on Friday evening and resurrected on Sunday morning.

In light of the ''Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days'' remark
how mathematically correct is this your ''Jesus died on Friday evening and resurrected on Sunday morning'' assertion

''We heard him say,
'I will destroy this Temple made with human hands,
and in three days I will build another, made without human hands''
- Mark 14:58

"Look at you now!" they yelled at him.
"You said you were going to destroy the Temple and rebuild it in three days.
Well then, if you are the Son of God, save yourself and come down from the cross!"
- Matthew 27:40

Note, I've deliberately left out Matthew 12:40, and for now, not referenced it.

thorpido:
Yes He wasn't born in December but the celebration of His birth in December has come to stay.
It takes nothing away from the main purpose of His coming.

What else has to come to stay

thorpido:
You're getting yourself confused

I dont buy that the bro is confused

thorpido:
Is the problem with men who fixed the birthday in December

Yes, it is the problem with men who fixed the birthday in December.
It is misleading, and makes one wonder.
Why? What else, is misleading, what else is misinformation, what else is false infromation

thorpido:
or Jesus Himself Who never ordered that His birthday be fixed for December?

Exactly, as Jesus Himself never ordered that His birthday be fixed for December
What Jesus Himself, ordered, ONLY, to do, in remembrance of Him, is the partaking of the Last Supper

¹⁷Then he took a cup of wine and gave thanks to God for it. Then he said,
“Take this and share it among yourselves.
¹⁸For I will not drink wine again until the Kingdom of God has come.”
¹⁹He took some bread and gave thanks to God for it. Then he broke it in pieces and gave it to the disciples, saying,
“This is my body, which is given for you. Do this to remember me.”
²⁰After supper he took another cup of wine and said,
“This cup is the new covenant between God and his people
—an agreement confirmed with my blood, which is poured out as a sacrifice for you.
- Luke 22:17-20

thorpido:
The most important thing is that Christ has come and fulfilled His purpose on the earth.
Whether July or December does not matter as much.

That fulfilled purpose on the earth, is Christ's sacrifice of Himself, once and for all, on the cross at Golgota or Calvary

vooks:
Please,
Since Reformation and before it had been widely known that Jesus was born elsewhere and not in December. So this is stale news.

His date of birth is IRRELEVANT, it is an idle academic exercise
and celebrating it is a mere Christian tradition which you may or may not partake in

Partaking of the Last Supper is the ONLY sacrament Jesus specifically adjured believers to do

Its ''The Last Supper'' (i.e. Holy Communion aka Eucharist)
which is the ONLY practice ordained by Christ to be permanently observed by believers
and not some man made practice of celebrating Jesus' birth or ''the remembering Jesus' birth'' tradition of men

We cancel what is glaringly evident in Luke 22:17-20, going in pursuit of Mark 7:13

And so you cancel the word of God in order to hand down your own tradition.
And this is only one example among many others.
- Mark 7:13

Highcuerayte:
Its all about Truth.

Most scholars agree that Jesus was thirty-three and one-half years old when He died at Passover (Abib). He, therefore, had a birthday six months earlier in the month of Tishri (September-October). This is the month in which the Feast of Tabernacles is observed. TABERNACLES - His Birthday Celebration!!

Jesus Christ, Himself, once uttered a very profound, yet simple statement pertaining to the worship of our Heavenly Father in St. John 4:23,24: "But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the father in spirit and in truth: for the father seeketh such to worship him. God is a spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

No sincere believer would deny that part of our worship of God should be in honoring the birth of His Son, our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. This glorious event, to all believers, is certainly the most outstanding manifestation in all human history of God's love toward man, His creation.

Solomon tells us in his words to the wise, "To everything there is a season and a TIME to every purpose under heaven. A time to be BORN and a time to die . . . " Ecclesiastes 3:1-2. Jesus, therefore, had a specific time, both to be born and to die. In the case of His death, it was Passover; in the case of His birth, the scriptures indicate that it occurred during the Biblical festival of Tabernacles.

The following is a scriptural account of the birth of Jesus Christ. The reader is invited to examine and consider these facts very carefully:

Luke (the Physician) has given us the most thorough birth record and declared that he "had perfect understanding of all things from the very first," therefore our source of information is reliable.

It is necessary that we start with John the Baptist since his birth and that of our Saviour are so closely related. In Biblical days there were twenty-four priests, or governors, who served yearly in the temple, two for each month. (I Chronicles 24:7 - 10) Zacharias, the father of of J ohn the Baptist, was of the eighth course called Abijah. Luke 1: 5; 1 Chronicles 24: 10. So Zacharias' ministry in the temple was in the fourth month, Tammuz (June). (The first of the Jewish months is Abib, Exodus 12:1,2; 13:4.)

Immediately after those days in the beginning of the fifth month Ab, Zacharias returned home to Elizabeth and John is conceived in Elizabeth Nine months later in the next yeah he is born in the month Abib (near our March).

The Scripture teaches us that Jesus was six months younger than John the Baptist. Luke 1:26,36. Therefore, Jesus was conceived at the beginning of the eleventh month Sebat (JanuaryFebruary) and born nine months later in the month Tishri (September-October). From January to October would be a normal gestation period of 280 days.

The Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated annually during the month of Tishri. It was during this Feast that the Jews traditionally dwelt in booths made of tree boughs, etc., and gazed toward the east hoping to see the star, or phenomenon, that would herald the birth of their Messiah (Leviticus 23:34,41).

The prophet Isaiah also bears witness to the occasion of the birth of Jesus Christ during the Feast of Tabernacles when he said, "They joy before thee according to the joy in harvest." Isaiah 9:3. This feast was in the fall of the year at the time of ingathering, or harvesting of all things out of the field (Exodus 23:16). Isaiah explains this joy in the sixth verse of this ninth chapter when he declared, "For unto us a child is born, and unto us a son is given indicating that the "joy of harvest" was actually the birth of Yahshua, Jesus Christ, at the time of harvest, or Ingathering.

Another small scriptural clue which has been overlooked and lends credence to this thought is found in John 1:14, which translated literally declares, "And the Word became flesh; and tabernacled among us," (Gr.-ho logos sarx egeneto, pai eskenosen en hemin.) Here we have a key which reveals to the alert eye that the time at which the Word was made flesh and tabernacled among men was in the Feast of Tabernacles (Isaiah 9:2,3).

So we see that it can be logically concluded that the date of the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ was undoubtedly during the Feast of Tabernacles in the Jewish month Tishri (SeptemberOctober), probably on Tishri 22, the great day and solemn assembly of the Feast (Leviticus 23:39; John 7:37). In this deduction, every event and circumstance seems properly reconciled. WHY NOT HONOR THE BIRTH OF OUR LORD AT THIS FEAST TIME?

Since God never changes (Malachi 3:6), this might well -tell us something about His second coming, also.
"And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives . . . and it shall come to pass, that all the nations . . . shall go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. " -Zechariah 14:4,16 (See Chronology)

Its time to stop being a lazy poster & stop this habit of copying originals
(i.e. stop the duplicative publication of some ones work without giving credit where credit is due)

It's an abuse of another’s original work, lifting and pasting it here in toto without acknowledging source

I am pretty sure Robert Somerville (i.e. author of Feast of Tabernacles Messiah's Coming ''A Time To Be Born'') deserves a shout out on this your Nairaland thread & post
You didnt give a shout out to the real author of this article, you left him and/or the source, out in your post and make believe it is your own

''Its all about Truth.'' is the only thing in this post that is originally your own,
everything else (i.e. as in, word for word) is Robert Somerville's, the Director of Awareness Ministry.
SMH. Not cool bro.

sportsmaster:
are you here Muttleylaff !!!.
cc winner01, Goshen360, Anas09
that will be all for now.
but wait what of 1cor13:1, I will explain that later.

Ensure you read through and get the information here. before you ask any questions.
i will ignore any question that i have already answered in this post.
it took me time to write this up.
cc WinsomeX, vooks, An2elect.
SELAH

I am here, keenly reading all
Though delayed, the continuation from where I stopped and rebuttals to WinsomeX, vooks,
and DoubleDeeX (i.e. he's mentioned here, as he shared similar strong sexist sentiments on another thread) is forthcoming.

I can throw something together and write a slapdash post
but it will be preposterous and unfair to people's sensibilities

The continuation from where I stopped and the rebuttals to WinsomeX, vooks, you, et al will resume asap
but is currently on a back burner, this from losing place or position to others jumping the priority queue

itstpia8:
you folks will probably soon say eve and adam bred with a monkey or chimpanzee.

And yes, the next conclusion after that is something we're already aware of.

No, folks wont ever soon say monkey or chimpanzee
If you had said ''folks will probably soon say Eve and Adam bred with with a monkey or chimpanzee serpent'', you'll be right
as the serpent, is the ''missing gap'' which has since forever been non-existent
(i.e. no matter the efforts, the serpent's never to be discovered, found or unearthed)

DoubleDeeX:
After fornicating with the serpent, Eve went back home and slept with her husband the same day,
so it was a clear case of twins with different fathers

Case of heteropaternal superfecundation or superfetatation

DoubleDeeX:
Google similar cases online; thanks for science we've come to the knowledge of things like that. Not all twins, triplets etc are from same parent. Sometimes they come from different parents when the woman sleep with more than one man in a day or two

Like inferred earlier, it's HS, (i.e. scientifically or medically known as heteropaternal superfecundation) and/or superfetatation
https://www.nairaland.com/2706264/man-already-knowledge-good-evil/1#39796974

Highcuerayte:
Fortunately fortunate, historical and Biblical analytical evidence are not easy to thwart.

The man Emmanuel is different from King James Jesus.

Highcuerayte:
The name of the Only begotten Son of God is Emmanuel.
However, to answer your unasked questions,
you can call him any name in your own language provided your heart refers to the Son of God that died on the cross
and resurrect the third day.

This is repeating what you said:

Fortunately fortunate, historical and Biblical analytical evidence are not easy to thwart.
The man Emmanuel is different from King James Jesus - © Highcuerayte

So please respond to the questions one after the other

#1 Who is Emmanuel?
#2 Who is Jesus?
#3 Is Emmanuel = Jesus or Emmanuel ≠ Jesus?
#4 Is Emmanuel = ''God is with us'' or not?
#5 Is it impossible for God to be in 2 places at the same time?
#6 Why did God had a dire need of a human body? (i.e. as in the form of God the Son, after becoming God the Father)

and not give that your measly response

Natasha2:
lol, watching in 3D, This thread is something else

Certainly isnt mainstream
Certainly is bad news for ideologues, bad news for the faint-hearted, bad news for any not yet taken off milk feed, bad news for the list-goes-on

Natasha2:
What is your take on it?

My take on it?
Thats what the link was for,
I tried to preempt this question with the FYI link (i.e. I beforehand volunteered the link because of enquiries like this)

Natasha2:
BTW don't understand you on the secret behind...

Never mind that anymore.
Thought you were going bald. Year was 2012 'twas,
but I've now realised it was one of those Naomi Campbell's type bald patches thing going on there, brought on by the ''Curse of the Attachment''

Highcuerayte:
Yes dear, you heard right. Lucifer slept with Eve, he deposit the seed in her.
Its true Adam knew Eve but the DNA of Lucifer killed the sperm of Adam giving birth to Cain.

Cain and Abel were both Lucifer's seed because he was called Cain's brother.

Only Seth was recorded to be Adam's image.

Should I tell you that the first sodomity took place in Eden between Adam and Lucifer

Natasha2:
this is rather funny, DD said Abel is Adams seed, you're saying otherwise
but you agree with the sexual sin part, what are we to believe?
and if Abel was from the evil seed why was God pleased with him?

I dont blame anyone for finding Highcuerayte funny,
especially his rash & unguarded statement that an invisible, celestial being (i.e. which no one has ever seen) had it on with human beings

Highcuerayte is muddling the water up with a few of his gaffes, (e.g. the misleading notion of ''Lucifer'' sleeping with Eve and etceteras)

Even calling Satan (i.e. Devil) Lucifer is a misnomer and laughable

Obviously, Highcuerayte is yet to know about HS or has no knowledge of HS (i.e. HS as in ''heteropaternal superfecundation'')

https://www.nairaland.com/2706264/man-already-knowledge-good-evil/1#39796974

PS: For the benefit of all my womenfolk,what was the secret behind growing the hair back

Sanfranka:
A Jehovah witness came to my house
and I accepted to hear the world but immediately she told me that "Jesus Christ is Angel Gabriel" I felt like REALLY

It must have been a spoken mistake or she is a new recruit JW,
as Jehovah Witness believe Jesus Christ is Angel Michael and not Angel Gabriel
It doesnt matter which they believe He is,
as Jesus is neither Angel Michael or Angel Gabriel

Highcuerayte:
Check Hebrew context of the Bible before quoting me again

You do that yourself
and whilst at it, if bold enough, respond to those questions asked

kestolove95:
Why shouting Jesus?
Is it the jesus dat couldn't save him sef from bin nailed or what?

Jesus wasnt born to save Himself from being nailed.
Jesus dying on the cross is ''mission accomplished''

Highcuerayte:
The man nailed to cross is not Jesus but Emmanuel

Here we go again

qreem231:
Sir/Ma, the person nailed to the cross was Jesus and also he bears Emmanuel.
Was it not the same man nailed to the cross blind bartholomew called Jesus, son of David?
so don't go about confusing people, Good day.

Word up

Highcuerayte:
Fortunately fortunate, historical and Biblical analytical evidence are not easy to thwart.

The man Emmanuel is different from King James Jesus

You're treading on thin ice
with all these your ill-thought-out notions which unfortunately lack good & solid biblical footing

Who is Emmanuel?
Who is Jesus?
Is Emmanuel = Jesus or Emmanuel ≠ Jesus?
Is Emmanuel = ''God is with us'' or not?
Is it impossible for God to be in 2 places at the same time?
Why did God had a dire need of a human body? (i.e. as in the form of God the Son, after becoming God the Father)

Highcuerayte:
Yes dear, you heard right. Lucifer slept with Eve, he deposit the seed in her.
Its true Adam knew Eve but the DNA of Lucifer killed the sperm of Adam giving birth to Cain.

Cain and Abel were both Lucifer's seed because he was called Cain's brother.

Only Seth was recorded to be Adam's image.

Should I tell you that the first sodomity took place in Eden between Adam and Lucifer

Goshen360:
SMH

@DoubleDeeX, @sholay2011, @Dnacode
I dont blame Goshen360, for shaking his head at Highcuerayte's, especially at the red bolded rash statement up there

Highcuerayte is muddling the water up with a few of his gaffes, like the red bolded one
and the misleading notion of Lucifer sleeping with Eve etcetera

Obviously, Highcuerayte is yet to know about HS or has no knowledge of HS (i.e. ''heteropaternal superfecundation'')

DoubleDeeX:
The things of God cannot be explained by worldly and carnal wisdom.
There is no logic behind it; you must humble yourself like a child to understand the mysteries and truths therein!
Seek God's truth with honesty through prayers and your spiritual eyes would be opened and activated to see and understand...

Luke 10:21
At that moment, Jesus rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said,
"I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because You have hidden these things from the wise and learned,
and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was well-pleasing in Your sight

Word up. Applicable to all antagonists

DoubleDeeX:
...people like you hate studying the Bible! Study to show yourself approved unto God my dear friend!

...BTW,
I'm not on this thread to win an argument. I'm here to pass a message across to other viewers who are interested in knowing the truth
Shalom!

Word up. Applicable to all antagonists

DoubleDeeX:
Have you ever wondered why Jesus Christ called the teachers of the law "a generation of vipers' (Matthew 23:33)? and also told them that they are of their father (Cain, the first murderer) when they insisted that they were not born of fornication but are children of God (John 8:41-44)? Smh! The lineage of Seth son of Adam were all godly seed (Children of God) until humanity got mixed up with Cain's descendants (Children of Men) in Genesis 6.

You are still a babe in the things of the spirit of God. And I repeat, this doctrine is not foreign to the scripture.
Every Jew knows the truth about this, I don't understand why it's difficult for Nigerians understand this simple truth!

Humble yourself before God brother, if not you won't be able to walk out of the error you've fed yourself and your followers!

Highcuerayte:
Humble yourself and learn bro

Goshen360:
It's not about humbling one's self or not.
It's about saying what scripture didn't say. If you like also, you can as well open the thread so we can discuss it.

It's all about humbling one's self
and especially, having that enquirying mind, questioning everything to a void

Some of us arent ready for certain truths,
Some of us havent advanced our understandings or skills in some areas, so yet able to handle certain truths
Also certain truths, are sizzling red hot, to handle for some of us,
so, we quickly drop it because of being too hot to touch, talkess handling

DoubleDeeX, I wouldnt waste my breath explaining, as sharing knowledge with ideologues as it were,
ends up to be activities with no real purpose.
They'll choke, gag on it, vomit and throw up a right mess of the information transfer & knowledge rethink

Digestion, its said, begins in the mouth but believe it or not, the digestive process actually starts even before one puts food in the mouth.
It begins, when one smells something irresistible (e.g. like Dnacode just did) or when one sees a favorite food one knows is going to taste good (e.g. again, like Dnacode did)
The sheer smell of the sweet aroma of that homemade assorted stew and/or the thought about how delicious the cooked ''swallow'' with stew is going to taste, makes one begin to salivate — and so the digestive process kicks in, anxiously preparing for that first scrumptious bite.

With all due respects and without malice or offense,
cant say Goshen360, sholay2011 etcetera palates are sophisticated enough to appreciate biblical gastronomy of this particular sort

Goshen360:
The way you butcher scriptures baffles me!
The serpent theory in Eden is satan inspired messages and I know the source

Depends on which source you know and/or which source you're talking of

Goshen360:
The serpent theory in Eden is completely foreign to the Christ's church and the Apostolic message.

King James Bible
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Romans 5:19

He didn't say by "sexual sin" but "by disobedience" to God. Sin entered the world when Adam disobeyed because all human race (including Eve) was in Adam as a seed of God. That's why every one also "in" Christ is reversed back to from the "sin nature".

Quit promoting the serpent seed in Eden, it is satanic and unscriptural!

Genesis 2:24-25 and Genesis 3:7 are the first and second SUBTLE bible recording of sexually-suggestive absence of clothing when or after ''getting down for business''

²⁴Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
²⁵And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
- Genesis 2:24-25

At that moment their eyes were opened, and they suddenly felt shame at their unclothedness.
So they sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves
- Genesis 3:7

Now before you start thinking of butchering Genesis 2:24-25 and Genesis 3:7,
think and mull over Mark 9:3 and Matthew 28:3 first and equate them to what Adam & Eve lost.
Equate them to what they first had on, before it got lost (i.e. disappeared) and was replaced with the animal skin covering

Also consider, in the context, ''not ashamed'' and ''ashamed''
Will leave it as it is, as most arent really interested in ''buying the truth'' but are only doing ''window shopping''

sholay2011:
You dey mind am? Butchering the scriptures in a bid to interpret what is so clear.

Dont let on that you really expect to pick this up at the surface

sholay2011:
Adam also ate out of the forbidden fruit.
Does that mean he slept with the serpent too (if the serpent is the forbidden fruit)?
Or Eve was the forbidden fruit? After same God told them to be 'fruitful and multiply'.

But there's always a first time for everything
The SUBTLE first recorded incident of sodomy
Mind you, sodomy could be either anal sex, ooral sexx AND bestiality.
- so take your pick

Goshen360:
DoubleDeeX,
I don't have time for unscriptural interpretation too.
Let scripture interpret scripture and let's not try destroy scriptures with our own philosophies.

You're so special that the same Holy Spirit never revealed this same serpent theory to Christ nor the Apostles.
Again, quit promoting the serpent theory, it is completely foreign to the early church and Apostles' doctrine.

At the above bolded: WHAT!

Apart from the latter part of the above bolded,
the crass remark (i.e. You're so special that...)
and the followed crab mentality ''if I can't have it or if I dont know it, neither can you'' display, is equally disturbing and worrying SMH.

The Jews had no qualms about being called brood of vipers by Jesus and/or John in Matthew 3:7, Matthew 12:34, Matthew 23:33
- they gladly took it on the chin.

Ignorance of the understanding of the HISTORICAL implication behind the meaning of brood of snakes, vipers or serpents
and evidently, the lack in knowledge or awareness in general of the adjective hasnt change now from back then

vooks:
A single blow to this theory is verse 33

Did you say single blow?
You extrapolated to 1 Corinthians 14:33, in order to punch a blow below the belt to score an illegal point

1 Corinthians 14:33 is not part of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35
1 Corinthians 14:33 is the conclusion to having prophesy in turns, so that everyone may be instructed properly and encouraged clearly

vooks:
1 Corinthians 14:33 King James Version (KJV)
33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

1. Paul is giving UNIVERSAL and not a local solution or rules. Note the highlighted

Of course, its a universal guideline to any gathering of believers, however up till this point has to do with prophesying and nothing to with what will unfold in the next verses (i.e. 1 Corinthians 14:34-35)

vooks:
2. These are HIS words and not Q&A

1 Corinthians 14:33 is his own words
however 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is repeating another's statement (i.e. the antagonists' statement)
before making one's own comment (i.e. before Paul is making his own response/reply to that statement)

vooks:
1 Corinthians 7:17 King James Version (KJV)
17 But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.
IN ALL CHURCHES shows that is a standard

Here, on an extrapolating excursion you go again.

vooks:
3. There is no contradiction; teaching is not prophesying not is it praying

This is a long letter addressing several issues,which you've muddled up

Orderliness was the theme of this letter.

Paul in the letter, was addressing the confusion and disorder emanating from how the Corinthians were conducting themselves in believers' gatherings
Part of the chaos, confusion and disorder were created by those bent on maintaining the marginalisation of women status quo
hence the reason how 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 crept into Paul's comments or responses in his letter to the Corinthians

vooks:
I can guess what that thread is saying

and I can guess whatever your presumptions were, they all be wrong

vooks:
women got ecstatic, rowdy, disrupted public worship......and Paul was against this

Totally off the mark, nah nothing remotely of the sort

vooks:
Paul is writing 2000 years before you and to a different culture than yours.

You got the 2000 years ago and different culture than ours bit right.

2000 years ago was a fiercely male dominated misogynistic man's world.

vooks:
Get those mixed up and you will be bending and twisting his words to your perdition

We all have flaws, whether male or female, as confirmed in 1 Peter 3:7
so all I'll say to this ''bending and twisting his words to your perdition'' remark is getting understanding of the message in that Paul letter, is a precursor to getting widsom

Wisdom is of utmost importance,
therefore get wisdom,
and with all your effort work to acquire understanding
- Proverbs 4:7

In the same way, you husbands must give honor to your wives.
Treat your wife with understanding as you live together.
She may be weaker than you are, but she is your equal partner in God's gift of new life.
Treat her as you should so your prayers will not be hindered
- 1 Peter 3:7

vooks:
If there is any consolation, you won't be the first. You are not alone.

Of course, am not alone
Jesus is the first, who upset the applecart of male dominated, mistrust of women, undermining women, relegating women, misogynistic man's world

vooks:
Now let me prove me by checking out your thread

FYI, I dont personalise threads,
I dont call threads ''my thread'' in to make it ​obvious that it ​belongs to me or comes from me
I research for threads, I comment on threads and thats exactly what I did on that thread

vooks:
Women labored with Paul right
but he would not suffer them to teach men
and they were to keep silent and learn from men

SMH. Paul belittling women?
Nah, not the case and/or never was the case.
Cant believe reading vooks too, propagating this twisted & distorted version of what Paul wrote, meant and addressed
Must think of Paul as a misogynist or someone plagued with a dislike of women

Extra! Extra!! Read all about it here!!!
https://www.nairaland.com/2563021/yes-bible-supports-women-preachers#37502822

johnw74:
full of bull to the last

False premise

johnw74:
and you cannot admit your contradictions

Whatever is a complication (i.e. difficulty) for you to get round the head, you class and/or brand as contradiction(s)

johnw74:
first you want to discuss: God being an angel

No, not about God being an angel
but God being an Angel
(i.e. about God sending Self on errand(s) to earth, God doing/going on errand(s) to earth, God turning up on earth as Messenger etcetera)

johnw74:
then you say: Angels are created beings who never create anything

You fail to realise there is a distinguished distinction between the identity of an angel and that of the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)

Celestial beings, who can be angels (i.e. messengers), are created beings who never create anything
meanwhile the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord) is not a created being

The Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord) is not a created being, just as God is not a created being

johnw74:
duh, that means that God is not an Angel

You err because you do not know the Scriptures and/or you don't know the power of God.

johnw74:
but you can't see it

I see it, clearly see and see more
I see the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord) in various verses in the Bible
I see the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord) with Abraham, Hagar, Moses, Gideon, Manoah etcetera
I see the Angel of God(i.e. the Angel of the Lord) in the wilderness leading the Israelite to the Promised Land

I see that the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord) is different to an angel of the Lord
I see one is an uncreated Being and the other is a created being

johnw74:
yeah get out of here, and don't slam the door behind you

I understand the motivation behind the tantrum(s) hence why I earlier towed the line of pacification to our courteous and polite interaction

You wont, to your understanding/knowledge, say who the Angel of God(i.e. the Angel of the Lord) is
You wont, to your understanding/knowledge, say what the identity of the Angel of God(i.e. the Angel of the Lord) is
that's why am leaving you to have the last word,
but if it'll make you feel better, have the last word, and continue lacing it with the now ''familiar with'' & ''accustomed to'' grudge(s)

Blessed are the peacemakers, for it is they who will be recognized as sons of God
- Matthew 5:9

johnw74:
@red, well you now want to debate that God is an Angel

If the thread is titled:
Was Satan By Default An Angel? Prove It If You Think Jesus Never Exist As Angel
If you agree that, Jesus is God,
If you agree that, the word rendered ''angel'' in our English Bibles is the Greek word Angelos or the Hebrew word Malakia,
and angel means ''one who is sent'' or ''a messenger'' or ''any being on an errand'' etcetera
then the thread from the beginning is debating if God ever existed as Angel
As in, has God sent Himself to earth before,
has God appeared before man on earth before,
has God been on an errand to earth before,
has God sent self to earth before etcetera

johnw74:
and then you say in the same post: Angels are created beings who never create anything

Is the Angel of the Lord (i.e. the Angel of God) a created being? Yes or No?

johnw74:
you are constantly all over the place and with contradictions
like a drunkard swaying to and throw

You're lagging behind, step up your game, brush up your bible, to keep truth decay at bay
I once told you, we are on the same train, and that you happen to be in a middle or rear carriage of me.
Not like a drunkard swaying to and throw but one who is sober, steadfast and clearly filled with the Spirit

What do we do now, as you seriously need weaned off milk, but the meats on the platter seemingly are giving you contradictions complications
I understand your point and current position, so let agree to disagree.
Thank your for your time and for tenaciously fighting your corner. Am out

johnw74:
i mean exactly what i said

Yes, you do mean what you said
You meant Jesus is not an Angel according to you
but I and others are in the camp of Jesus is/was an Angel

johnw74:
scriptures showing that Jesus Christ is not an Angel
but is God are not all over the place scriptures just because you don't believe them
and are relevant to the OP

If God can be man, why cant God be an Angel
What is stopping God being an Angel johnw74

johnw74:
common ground among non believers
let me tell you again, the Angel of God is an Angel

Is that your final answer or you would like to call a friend
You can do better than that, as obviously the Angel of God is an Angel
but the question is/was:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)?
What is the identity of the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)?

johnw74:
and an Angel never created anything

Of course, angels are celestial and invisible beings
They are created beings who never create anything, who never forgives sin, who never you know the drill and rest
Angels and the Angel of God have this one and only common denominator, they both are sent by God
Same manner, God came down to earth, when God the Father, sent Jesus, God the Son, to earth

johnw74:
@red, Haha when you accuse which is often, you are actually talking about yourself

As all you can reveal is the Angel of God is an Angel and dont know the identity of the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)
then I have no further questions to ask you, you can step off and leave the witness box

freecocoa:
Smh.

He mplied that the pastor was wrong and the idea is that anything wrong is considered "sin" in Christianity, hence the question so you don't have a point here.

He said the chap should know better advising something evidently wrong and only permissible in OT Judaism
but you went bellicose on him, twisting up his comment with a ''Since when is polygamy a sin?''

Levirate marriage has no place with believers, it was prescribed for the benefit of the Israelite widows to safeguard their future and inheritance

freecocoa:
So God's walk with David, Abraham and the rest of them wasn't beautiful? Talk about not knowing the meaning of words, wonderful!

So the bible talking about a man treating his wife right, should he decide to take another, isn't God endorsing polygamy? Shame unto you if you come back asking me where that is in the bible

As I earlier requested:
Why DONT you put the devil to shame, by showing where God ENDORSED polygamy
I can bet you've mistaken God endorsing the Levirate Marriage for Him endorsing polygamy

freecocoa:
I couldn't care less whether you decide to judge or not

Fine, as I dont give a Foxtrot Uniform Charlie Kilo either

freecocoa:
I only need you to know your judgement on the matter is bull, seeing as it's not your place to do so

There is nada coming from you that needs knowing about on the matter
and it sure isnt out of my place not to make observations and post comments when or as deemed fit

freecocoa:
plus it doesn't affect me in any way, there's totally nothing to suck up.

Yeah right, sleep well and tight then

johnw74:
you, like dolphin are foreign to the truth, you don't believe these verses,
because they go against your belief that Jesus Christ is an Angel:

What do you mean by the bolded
Can you for clarity sake, come again please

johnw74:
Dan 10:13
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days:
but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.

Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

Michael is one of the chief Princes

Jesus Christ is the head of all principality and power

God the Word-the Lord Jesus Christ, created everything that was created

Joh 1:1 ....and the Word was God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

God is the creator

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth

There is no need for all these all over place scriptures now.
All I want to hear from you is:
as far as johnw74 understands or knows, who is the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)?
Only after answering the question then you may/can throw all and whatever missiles scripture you have at me
Until then back off

johnw74:
An Angel has never created anything

^^^
although you did recently agree with me on that

An angel from among the angels
is not the same as the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)
- that agreement has always from the onset been our common ground

johnw74:
but you also said that the Father called an Angel My son
so even you don't know what you believe
you are all over the place

You can only know if am all over place or not,
when and only, if you just will kindly answer:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)

chrisbaba1:
ur a pastor, you should know when a womans husband is dead she is free from the bond they shared and can remarry at will.
you were not christian like asking your brother to marry his brothers wife thereby advicing him to practise polygamy.
if you dont think you are wrong, the church was right by demoting you cos you dont practise the basic ethics of christianity sir, sad but true

freecocoa:
Since when is polygamy a sin?

MuttleyLaff:
Whatever misses the mark is sin
Adam had one rib taken out for an only
not two ribs or more taken out for a poly

freecocoa:
Dude I don't understand why you feel the need to give unnecessary explanations, ain't nobody asking you all that, moving on.

Same as ain't nobody said anything about whether or not it being a sin
except you shooting from the hip responding to with: ''Since when is polygamy a sin''

freecocoa:
Please Where have I implied that I'm all for no rules or structure? God doesn't condone polygamy yet the greatest men of the bible were polygamists who walked gracefully with God, he not only condones it, he endorsed it so tell me something I don't know

SMH, you dont know what gracefully means
Considering the circumstances, we all, at certain times, let roll what isnt acceptable or dont condone
Why DONT you put the devil to shame, by showing where God ENDORSED polygamy
I can bet you've mistaken God endorsing the Levirate Marriage for Him endorsing polygamy

freecocoa:
You are judging, talking about mark, one rib and whatnot, nigga please.

I am sharing information, talking about mark, one rib and whatnot, Nubian Queen please
Even if I were to be judging, suck it up, judging is part of life, we do it every day, you soon before hitting the bed tonight will make a few judgement calls

johnw74:
anyone who is reading this thread can see that MuttleyLaff is not answering anything
but as i have said before he is just saying a lot of bull again and again

he doesn't know who the Angel of the Lord is and because no one will tell him,
he says you don't know who the Angel of the Lord is, duh mutt

Yeah right
The below are past interactions between you and I
Read and see yourself ducking and diving, avoiding giving a response to:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)?

johnw74:
@ bold and red and underlined, you can obviously fool yourself, and your fellow non believers

but you cannot fool Christians

you don't believe the bible and you preach the opposite to it:

Let God and posterity be the judge of whether or not I believe the bible and preach the opposite to it

johnw74:
Heb 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Heb 1:13 But to which of the Angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?

You're becoming like a broken record,
instead of answering the question, you're unnecessarily repeating yourself

All these efforts of yours to squirm out of responding to the question is useless
so just answer the question asked earlier above about who is the Angel of the Lord
then as previously said, I too will give you something scripture(s) to really ponder on or writhe at

freecocoa:
Aren't you funny?

No ma'am, am not funny or trying to. Would have warned you if I were
That essentially is what sin is all about
Sin means missing the mark

The original Hebrew word that is used most frequently for sin is ''hamartano'' and it means to miss.

Examples of ''to miss'' could be misconduct, misbehavior, miscalculate, misdemeanor etcetera

Eve was deceived
but Adam wasnt, he, Adam, deliberately decided to mis-behave

freecocoa:
Who made you judge of the supposed mark?

You'll like a free-for-all, lacking rules or structure, I suppose
Anyway, who is paranoid and thinking I am judging

freecocoa:
especially when your God has no qualms with the matter.

God not having any qualms with the matter, doesnt mean God condones it or accepts it as normal