₦airaland Forum

freecocoa:
Since when is polygamy a sin?

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

orunto27:
No!!!!
Jesus means Anointed!!!!
Christ means Savior!!!!
He didn't save anything until He became Christ. At Jesus, He remains the Son of Man. But in Christ, He regains His Son of God's status and becomes Heir to the Throne of Grace. These names further explain the Miracle of His Trinity.
Jesus was not a Pagan symbol. He came as the Character that God needs to rede us and to wipe out pagan memory of a symbol god

vooks:
Jesus is the same yesterday today and forever. His nature remained the same BEFORE, DURING and AFTER incarnation.
Check your theology sir, it is fatally flawed

And she will have a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."
- Matthew 1:21

And He continued by questioning them,
"But who do you say that I am?"
Peter answered and said to Him,
"You are the Christ" (i.e. ''You are the Messiah'' or ''You are the Anointed One'')
- Mark 8:29

The work of the Holy Spirit has been so totally misrepresented.
There are essentially three forces in Christianity. This is called the third force: Roman Catholicism, Protestantism, and Pentecostalism.

And we have said much through the years, the church has, about the errors of Roman Catholicism.

We have said a whole lot less about the errors of Pentecostalism because they threaten us with accusations of being divisive, and that causes some people to be silent.

I’m not defending the truth for the sake of my own church or the sake of my own opinion.
I’m eager to defend the truth for the sake of the Holy Spirit, not that He needs me as a defender,
but He needs me to not grieve Him and not quench Him and not insult Him and certainly to recognize what dishonors Him.
I feel like the psalmist who said, ''The reproaches that fall on you have fallen on me''

When the Holy Spirit is dishonored, I feel the pain, and it seems to be a very popular sport to do that.

This is one of the most abused texts in the New Testament by the Charismatics.
I always expect my Bible to bleed here because it’s been wounded so many times.

They want us to believe that this is an advocacy for – advocacy text for speaking in tongues, this “groanings too deep for words.”
They want us to believe that what this verse is saying is that when you don’t know how to pray in words that you do understand, launch off into glossolalia in words that you don’t understand and this is the Holy Spirit doing what you can’t do.

That is not what this verse means, as you will see in a moment. It’s utterly foreign to the reality of the meaning of this text to impose that on it.

- culled from
Groanings Too Deep for Words by John MacArthur

---

---

@Ubenedictus @Squad4 @sportsmaster, @ABDULADINO, @gombs, @An2elect2, @Goshen360
WinsomeX is 110% correct in saying that gibberish is what is espoused as talking in a different language among modern day believers

By the way, though old habit are difficult to die, its close to 11 years now that I've managed to curtail doing this gibberish or nonsense
and I deliberately said, managed, because it sometimes wants to subconsciously rear its ugly head and slip back in
Mind you, I do groaning in the spirit (i.e. that's where & when applicable) but dont anymore do gibberish
- aside the different kinds of groaning out of pain, out of despair, out of pleasure etcetera,
there is a distinction (i.e. particularly in regards to when praying) between groaning in the spirit and talking gibberish
Jesus groaned in the spirit (i.e. John 11:33 and John 11:38)
but it wasnt the sort of gibberish thing we have and see in modern believers settings or gatherings

As said, I, too, when praying intensely do experience groaning in the spirit
- it usually is making deep inarticulate sound(s) or grunts during praying, out of pain, anguish, desperation or some strong emotion
Want to believe, its similar to, if not on par with that, Hannah style of praying (i.e. 1 Samuel 1:10)

No one should allow anyone to label and box them.
I dont suffer labelling gladly or lightly.
If it were I, instead of accepting a label,
I would've asked what, to the questioner's understanding, is a cessationist and what is cessationist all about, for anyone to be called such

As from the little familiarity I know of WinsomeX, he shouldnt have easily succumbed to the veiled combative question
namely because
#1 he believes prophecy hasnt stopped,
#2 believes healing hasnt stopped, and
#3 believes speaking in different tongues hasnt stopped

The above are in one shape or the other still very much around and are presented below as:
#1 Prophecy - now in form of word of wisdom and/or the word of knowledge (i.e. 1 Corinthians 12:8')
#2 Healing - gifts of healing and various kinds of tongues (i.e. 1 Corinthians 12:28)
#3 Different tongue(s) - Apart from the gift of various kinds of tongues in 1 Corinthians 12:28,
FLS, is another form of the gift of speaking in a different tongue,
albeit some here, like our always on form vooks, might class it as tongue in cheek for referencing it here

The thing is, a lot of the time, we read the Bible and take it at face value only,
without bothering looking under the hood to find hidden meanings in passages such as 1 Corinthians 14
Also, the desire to understand the bigger picture or motive behind what the person (i.e. Paul) was actually saying in 1 Corinthians 14, is usually not there.
In addition, the curiosity to know, what brought the saying about in 1 Corinthians 14,
why the saying had to be said the manner/way it was said, the circumstances, the setting, background etcetera is most times absent.

It is an unhidden fact, that with the exception of Ephesus, Paul stayed at Corinth longer than any other city in the NT times we know of.
Ancient Corinth was a sailing port, hence a cosmopolitan city, where one expects to hear diverse languages spoke,
see imported & different customs etcetera and so the believers at Corinth wouldnt be an exception to this
as they too would have been exposed to varied external influences, habits etcetera of people from region different to their individual origins

Paul, understandably, albeit without having to need two tablets, like Moses needed for his headaches with the Israelites,
had his fair share of headaches with the church at Corinth than any other of his Bible recorded visiting place

This obviously is due to the diversities in culture, languages, habits, practices etcetera from the wide range of congregating ''outsiders'' in Corinth

I have to pause here but will asap continue from where I've temporaily stopped

PS: By the way Jude 1:20 has nothing to do speaking in tongues but means what it says out of the tin
(i.e. means literally pray in the Holy Spirit, as in like one of those ''thy will be done'' prayers)

johnw74:
muttley, just a couple of posts from this short page that you didn't reply too:

https://www.nairaland.com/1491321/satan-default-angel-prove-it/8#39569610

https://www.nairaland.com/1491321/satan-default-angel-prove-it/8#39569753

Try for once to be honest
I replied non-sequitur to both of them
and further said, only if you would respond to:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord)
https://www.nairaland.com/1491321/satan-default-angel-prove-it/8#39574509

johnw74:
by the way, according to the Greek Interlinear Bible, Acts 12:7 is "the Angel of the Lord"
the Bibles that say diffrently are wrong translation off that verse
but you like to use wrong translations, and you change Bible verses yourself, don't you
even saying the exact opposite to the Bible, don't you

Act 12:7 And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands.

I had already with the below responded to this with:
You're a right character and a half,
so you're trying to palm off an angel sent by the Lord to be same as the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord), abi? SMH

98% of the all Bible translations or versions out there,
used an angel of the Lord, one used a messenger of the Lord whilst the 2% erroneously, like you, preferred and used the angel of the Lord

Do you at all know when the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord) stopped making appearances in the Bible?
This angel of the Lord you tried palming off as the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord) is the same angel in the same account in Acts 5:19
It is also the same angel in Matthew 2:13 warning Joseph to flee to Egypt with baby Jesus

The point is, the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord) is not the same as, an angel of the Lord as in Act 12:8-11, Acts 5:19, Matthew 2:13 or other similar verses

You really, must be a jokester, if your aim was to pull this off this manner
What an epic fail this is, trying to switch an angel of Lord to be the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)

PLEASE, who, as far as johnw74 understands or knows, is the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)?

johnw74:
muttley and others believe the Angel of the Lord is the Word-Jesus Christ

Instead of making conjectures about what muttley and others believe the Angel of the Lord is,
please do yourself and everyone a favour of answering the question:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)?

johnw74:
Act 12:7 And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands.
Act 12:8 And the angel said unto him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals. And so he did. And he saith unto him, Cast thy garment about thee, and follow me.
Act 12:9 And he went out, and followed him; and wist not that it was true which was done by the angel; but thought he saw a vision.
Act 12:10 When they were past the first and the second ward, they came unto the iron gate that leadeth unto the city; which opened to them of his own accord: and they went out, and passed on through one street; and forthwith the angel departed from him.
Act 12:11 And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent his angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews.

Peter knew the Lord very well, but he did not recognise the Angel of the Lord
and the Angel of the Lord did not say to Peter, it's me Jesus

Peter realised that the Lord had sent His Angel to rescue him.

https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
You're a right character and a half,
so you're trying to palm off an angel sent by the Lord to be same as the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord), abi? SMH

98% of the all Bible translations or versions out there,
used an angel of the Lord, one used a messenger of the Lord whilst the 2% erroneously, like you, preferred and used the angel of the Lord

Do you at all know when the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord) stopped making appearances in the Bible?
This angel of the Lord you tried palming off as the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord) is the same angel in the same account in Acts 5:19
It is also the same angel in Matthew 2:13 warning Joseph to flee to Egypt with baby Jesus

The point is, the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord) is not the same as, an angel of the Lord as in Act 12:8-11, Acts 5:19, Matthew 2:13 or other similar verses

You really, must be a jokester, if your aim was to pull this off this manner
What an epic fail this is, trying to switch an angel of Lord to be the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)

PLEASE, who, as far as johnw74 understands or knows, is the Angel of God (i.e. the Angel of the Lord)?

johnw74:
another one for you muttley:
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

non-sequitur, only if you would respond to:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord)

johnw74:
and another one for you muttley:

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.

An Angel has never created anything

non-sequitur, only if you would respond to:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord)

johnw74:
muttley, you said to BERNIMOORE that you won't respond to him again
because he is ignorant and clueless

I keep hinting you that context is king
but obviously reading things in context isnt your one of your strong points

It is evident I had extensively engaged with BERNIMOORE
however the rapport we had fizzled out, the minute he started posting in pantomime style and responding back with sly innuendoes
I cut him enough slack because I like him and so ignored the ignorance and cluelessness
and kept on chipping at them
but then, there comes a point in time when enough sneering from him,
is enough sneering, and curtains needed getting drawn

johnw74:
that's the same reasons why I don't respond much to you and some others also

Your reason is not the same as mine. They are chalk and cheese
I dont expect any response from you, except for the simple question you've been asked:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord)

johnw74:
do you understand now?

You've been asked a simple question:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord)
so what I understand, is, you're pulling every little trick you in the book to evade giving an answer or responding

johnw74:
but mainly, the reason I don't get into discussions with you

I dont need discussions with you
I am simple and content person, all I want of you, is to, answer the question:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord)

johnw74:
and some others is because you and those others are Bible disbelievers,
that change what the Bible says, and even say the opposite

Here is the cure for your misperception:
I am 110% Bible believer, that doesnt change what the Bible says, and nor even say the opposite

johnw74:
i don't help those or get into discussions with those who oppose the Bible

This is how an ideologue thinks and/or talks

johnw74:
but i will sometimes show up your wrongs, as you know, but deny smiley

Wishful thinking is permitted

johnw74:
above two posts
what a load of bull mutt talks

also these are contradictions:

I am helping you with the sequence of the remarks
showing the order of the comments and counter responses between you and I and then BERNIMOORE and I
which you are trying to too hard to take out of context, fabricate and twist around:

---

---

johnw74:
Father God has never called an Angel "His Son".

MuttleyLaff:
Yes, He, God the Father has called an Angel ''His Son''

johnw74:
Father God has never said to an Angel "sit at my right hand"

MuttleyLaff:
Yes, He, God the Father, has/had said to an Angel ''sit at my right hand''

---

---

BERNIMOORE:
What is the Nature/form of God? spirit?
Supernatural or flaming fire, Angels too share that,
you are hard pressed to provide answer that special nature that angels dont share with God!
you cannot say what you dont know, so relax

MuttleyLaff:
It doesnt take away the truth and fact that there is one God
The crux of your problem is, you cant see that, it is possible for God to be in more than one place simultaneously
(i.e. God be in more than one place, at the same time)

You and your sophomoric questions
Without you trying to twist these or take it out of context:
Angels dont create, angels dont know all, angels arent God, no angels died for man

---

---

johnw74:
in the first instance, the Bible verse you say the opposite too, is speaking off Jesus Christ
you implied Jesus is an Angel

and then in the second instance you say: "Angels don't create"

Spare us all this, save us time and just answer this:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord)

johnw74:
well as the Word-Jesus Christ created everything He cannot be an Angel
and that's just one instance where you contradict yourself again

Once you muster the courage to bite the bullet and answer the question, then posterity can judge if I contradicted myself or not:
Who is the Angel of God (i.e. Angel of the Lord)?

johnw74:
what a load of bull you talk

Yep, as for some of us, it can be tough a meat for the teeth to chew on
Some of us really need weaned of milk

BERNIMOORE:
What is the Nature/form of God? spirit?
Supernatural or flaming fire, Angels too share that,
you are hard pressed to provide answer that special nature that angels dont share with God!
you cannot say what you dont know, so relax

You and your sophomoric questions
Without you trying to twist these or take it out of context:
Angels dont create, angels dont know all, angels arent God, no angels died for man

johnw74:
while i'm at it, why were you saying: God did say to an Angel thou art my Son etc
and then say: an Angel never created anything etc

why all the contradictions?

The above is my original post on the angel(s) matter, in response to BERNIMOORE's
Of course, first letter of a starting word in a sentence is capitalised (i.e. Angels)

Context is king... I am consistent, there arent contradictions in my post

Skilled readers use context to construct meaning from words, to understand as they are read
but you obviously careless about context, and so instead, prefer to malign, fabricate and twist

On top, you, still are yet to spot the distinction between angel(s) and Angel of the Lord in the context

johnw74:
duh, you must think that is a hard question

It certainly, from all symptoms seems to be a hard question for you,
which up on to now and tomorrow, you're yet to boldly, confidently and unashamedly answer
You've been avoiding answering that unterrifying question like its Ebola

Looks like you're beginninng to realise and know something
but fearing to admit and/or acknowledge it
hence it becoming, a hard question for you to unashamedly respond to

johnw74:
for the umpteenth time I don't get into discussions with jw and the likes

We know about the ''I don't get into discussions with jw and the likes'' Get-Out-of-Jail-Free card
Thats what they all say and use, especially, when caught stucked in uncomfortable, unmanoeuvrable and tight corner(s)

johnw74:
why don't you tell the people if you think you have something to say
then i might show you where you are wrong
i don't mind doing that

https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
Pull the other leg
- it's got bells on
How are you intending to go about showing, when:
#1 You havent answered the question, and
#2 I am yet to show my hand

You've got to bite the bullet, be brave, answer the question and put the devil to shame:
Who is the Angel of God?

johnw74:
i don't agree with that about MuttleyLaff, he said that God called an angel His son,
that God said to an Angel sit at my right hand
going against verses i posted and saying the exact opposite

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?

and in his last post he agreed with my view: "Angels dont create, angels dont know all, angels arent God, no angels died for man"

he changes what he says all over the place

I am not going to bother uttering much, except say:
You should by now know the distinction between angel(s) and Angel of the Lord
and for the umpteenth timel ask you again:
Now who is the Angel of the Lord?

orunto27:
Hebrew don't have vowel sound.Yeshua has three vowels and that is too many for a word in Hebrew. Issve is simply issue in English language and means "Jesus is the Issue in Christianity". Issv in Hebrew is pronounced Yeshua in Greeks, Joshua in Aramaic and Jesus in KJV. These are just tribal tongues and pronunciation s for a word that simply means "anointed".

orunto27:
Hebrew name is ISSVE. Greek is Yashua. Italian is Joshua and English is Jesus. They all translate to Anointed.

vooks:
Great contribution

Why didnt you correct him that Jesus doesnt mean nor translates to ''Anointed''
He's said it twice when it actually it's Christ that means ''Anointed'' where Jesus means Saviour.

BERNIMOORE:
@Muttleylaff, please more and more of your response will be duly replied Asap, thanks

Dont bother because so far, you've impressively and repeatedly missed so many points on the thread.

You're ignorant of or clueless about most of the simplest information given on the thread
and so this has now removed the pleasure you previously had, of me addressing or responding you back.
Sayonara.

BERNIMOORE:
again you are forcing another concept on a plain and direct bible verse

''that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they (believers) also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me''.

Is this difficult to comprehend? o ma seo!

It doesnt take away the truth and fact that there is one God
The crux of your problem is, you cant see that, it is possible for God to be in more than one place simultaneously
(i.e. God be in more than one place, at the same time)

BERNIMOORE:
What is the Nature/form of God? spirit?
Supernatural or flaming fire, Angels too share that,
you are hard pressed to provide answer that special nature that angels dont share with God!
you cannot say what you dont know, so relax

You and your sophomoric questions
Without you trying to twist these or take it out of context:
Angels dont create, angels dont know all, angels arent God, no angels died for man

BERNIMOORE:
I actually followed, but thought I wasnt concerned since it was not directed at my post!

Well you ought to have been concerned because both the Isaiah's (i.e. yours) and Ezekiel's (i.e. Tjayjosh's) verses were respectively referring to the Babylonian and Tyre kings and not Satan

BERNIMOORE:
The only mistake i knew you did was that you actually went through the back to source for imformation that thwarted bibles concept recorded in isaiah about lucifer

Here we go again, dont be paranoid.
Why would I need to go through the back to source for information,
when the Bible categorically and bluntly mentions these two kings (i.e. Babylonian and Tyre) as the persons in the narration?

BERNIMOORE:
Again i dont think i need that Advice, sorry pelle ehn!

Thanks for the display of gratitude

BERNIMOORE:
the concortion you spew up there when i read it was too childish, in a bid to show your intelligence you went off the rail totally! ah o ga o!

Just admit you didnt know Lucifer is a double entendre
Morning star, which is what Lucifer is translated from, is used for Jesus and persons deemed evil or self-conceited
and really hasnt anything to do with Satan or the Devil

BERNIMOORE:
again you need to flush out some virus off your system, its not helping at all! you just create your own story which nobody is interested grin

The seed has been sown, it's now a matter of maturity and time before the interest kicks in

truthislight:
@Muttleylaff

This is not politics section, but rather, it is called RELIGIOUS SECTION for a reason

Up the ante, instead of RELIGIOUS, think RELATIONSHIP

truthislight:
Here you don't speak to fancy and desire a clap

It will be shallow-mindedness, to believe I speak or post here to receive ovation(s)

truthislight:
Here you show evidence for all you say

Where and when applicable, I provide biblical verses and/or disclose when it is a Jewish custom, tradition, practice or idiom

truthislight:
What we should be debating here in religious section should be Scriptural application and meanings

That's exactly why I keep asking what so-so and so means or what so-so and is all about.
How can one apply things they dont know what it means, things they dont understand or things they dont know what it's all about

truthislight:
and not Hullabaloo

You're doing the hullabaloo,
trying to shut me up out of nervousness and fear of not used to hearing these things

truthislight:
Enjoy! Peace.

Ironically, you arent enjoying. Peace

BERNIMOORE:
Respect? i , maybe your defination of respect in this case cannot stop me

When one twists another's post, to get a leg up and gain some advantage, then that shows lack of respect

BERNIMOORE:
oh, you even turned to be an instructor? good for you!

Things I do for Kingdom sake

BERNIMOORE:
ehn hen? aah! i cant wait ooo!

Dont waste the faux enthusiasm on me

BERNIMOORE:
It doesnt hold a drop of water because 'the concept is a self made concortion put together like ewedu and gbegiri plus Amala combination just meant to divert attention away from topic, while the concept itself is not found in and alien to the bible o ma seoo

It isnt alien, not a self made concortion but it is reality. It like so many other concepts not found in the Bible is true

BERNIMOORE:
Which God? , the father or son? be specific and stop thinking that you can force an unverified concept on my thread and have a loud ovation, Nibo lo tin njabo ti oo de ni okun lorun,

You want dolphinheart on my case, with another, there isnt anything like God the Son in the Bible

BERNIMOORE:
E ku inawo Aramaic, aah, epelee! who ask you that information

It was volunteered without being under duress

BERNIMOORE:
ehn hen, diversionary niyen i dont need that info, but pele funra re.

Actually you do need the info, so that next you're studying the Bible, you'll remember to do it with the mindset of a Jew
and not from an English, Naija etcetera perspective or background

BERNIMOORE:
so scriptures are not inpired again or God Breath again 2 Tim 3:16,
but are based on Jewish idioms, customs, practices etcetera, Abi, maa soo lo jare

Whether you like or not like to hear it, 2 Tim 3:16 doesnt take away the fact and truth that all scriptures are based on Jewish idioms, customs, practices etcetera (i.e. scripture is not are based on English/Naija idioms, customs, practices etcetera)

BERNIMOORE:
eee! okaare omo yi!

Keep the hollow praise to yourself

BERNIMOORE:
Ah more now, are you tired? o ti su e

Sarcasm doesnt get one anywhere

BERNIMOORE:
You lost this one! as you are trapped to supply further scriptural evidence to butress your point, you have often relied on your own straw analogy all this while!

It's only the unlearned that doesnt know that in Jewish ancient customs or Jewish biblical times, it is when the groom’s father decides that the mansion is completed to his satisfaction that he sends his son to go and bring his new bride home

BERNIMOORE:
Wow, ok let yourself loose on me, i mean show yourself, show me your swaga and let me see your superior weight, not this directionless posts that you are just spewing here!

You arent ready, you're, as it is, already swamped with information you're not used to and/or overwhelmed with information you're unable to properly handle

BERNIMOORE:
lets see how you will draw the line by using what is contained in the sacred scriptures

Already done

BERNIMOORE:
you are a disapointment even to Jesus himself! where is this concortion/story you spew written in the whole holy scriptures? Nowhere! you see your life? you are merely following humans traditions like the Pharisees whom Jesus reprimand with warnings that the kingdom of God will be taken away from them!

My dear fella, if you have a better explanation on John 14:2, then put up, by kindly proffering an exegesis (i.e. what did it mean?) and also a hermeneutics (i.e. what does it mean for us?) on it, if not and/or until then, forever shut up on the matter

BERNIMOORE:
Again is that word (''≤'') 'less or equal to' a biblical or sacred scriptural word or an imposed concept?

The substance is in the Bible so if's biblical or sacred scriptural word
It is not an imposed concept, if you like take it as an epexegesis

BERNIMOORE:
Oh I apologise, are you okay with that!

Apology accepted, just dont fall into the habit of twisting other people's post in order to just score cheap points

BERNIMOORE:
Are you denying that you said that even in Humans form that Jesus 100 percent Omiscient God, it seems that you are hard pressed to prove it you now resort to trying to withdraw your statements

''Ti ogun eni, ba dani loju, a ma fi gba ori''. I stand by all my posts 100%
Jesus is 100% Omniscient, less knowing the time and hour of the day, as previously explained

BERNIMOORE:
Did Jesus die as a spirit or as a human? You are hard pressed now to tell us the limitations in phil 2:7 you remembered that you have already commited your statements

It has been answered immediately above and elsewhere

BERNIMOORE:
You failed Badly, and i have to say that your analogy is unscriptural and unacceptable without justifiable basis, sorry about !

Nothing to worry about. As you like it.

BERNIMOORE:
Post (C*2)
Again you fail to tell us the very Nature/form of God, you actually ran-out of the idea grin

I didnt run out of the idea or steam so wipe the smirk off your face
If by now, you dont know the nature, features, character or qualities of God
then I am praying with you, so God, via the Spirit of Truth, help you out.

BERNIMOORE:
yes we knew that God of all flesh, Nothing is too difficult for Him?
is this an answer to my question that you should tell us the Form/Nature of God?
and very funny you will say that you have supllied an answer which does NOT tell us the Nature of God! are you saying God is anything? grin grin na wa o!

Sorry, I can't take this and the above seriously.
Dont worry, if not now or today, in the future, you will know willingly or by force of necessity the nature/form of God

BERNIMOORE:
yes!
lets see That Nature of God called Gods glory; same with that of Angels=flaming Fire

Exodus 24:17
And the sight of the glory of the LORD was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel.

Psalm 104:4
Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:

Here we go again, understandably you ask sophomoric questions
but I do feel like am walking on eggshells, filling in your information gaps

BERNIMOORE:
Even humans too share the 'image and Glory' of God

1 Corinthians 11:7
A man ought not to cover his head, since he(man) is the image and glory of God
SMH at these immediate above.

Please try to be serious, sincere and honest.

Dont do eisegesis with Hebrew 1:3 and 1 Corinthians 11:7

Is the import in Hebrew 1:3, the same as that, in 1 Corinthians 11:7? No!

Jesus is implied to be the exact nature of God in Hebrew 1:3
does 1 Corinthians 11:7 imply that humans too share the exact nature of God? No!

Are humans the exact representation of God? The very character of God? The exact imprint of His nature?
The express image of His Person? The exact expression of His nature? No, no, no, no and No, plus bonus extra of, give it a rest!

BERNIMOORE:
post (C*1a)

Of course the way believers/desciples are one part of the oneness, just exacly the way Jesus rendered the phrase ''Father, are in Me, and I in You they also may be one in Us

John 17:21 (NKJV)
''that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they (believers) also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me''

No, not so fast Waston
It means, there is one God. There is one Lord. The Lord is one
You might have one family, however, there always is one BENIMOORE. Capisce! Comprende?

dolphinheart:
I could not have replied better!

abeggy make we hear word jaare. Wetin?

dolphinheart:
Ive found out that the use of words is very important when discussing scriptural issues,
hence why I asked about "god the son " statement that has been coming up in the thread

Maybe you asked because due to legalism you were in a mood of bellicose jingoism and aiming to try to deny that Jesus is God?

dolphinheart:
But I was accused of "nit picking".

If remarks of yours like:
''Not "god the son", that sentence does not exist in the scriptures''
over a tiny detail, isnt nitpicking, I wonder you you'll accept as nitpicking
Afterall, isnt Jesus, God? Equal to God?

Refer to below for more of your details
https://www.nairaland.com/1491321/satan-default-angel-prove-it/3#39115805

BERNIMOORE:
post (C*1)
Really!

Yes, really.
It's either that or you havent bothered following and reading all posts on ''your thread''
''Your thread'' as you like to call it
People learn from first-hand mistakes or from mistakes others have done

BERNIMOORE:
i think this is a childish way of evading question, i did not mention ezekiel

You think I didnt know, you did not mention Ezekiel?
Somemone else, previously had, at which that notion was responded to and the bad idea corrected
(i.e. it was Tjayjosh, but you too were quoted in my response to him)
So, my dear bro, it actually was a mature way of stopping you in your track and preventing you from going down the proverbial rabbit hole

BERNIMOORE:
and i am making a case for lucifer who was a cherub who also 'does not see equality with God as a robbery;
read again if you have big lenses put them on now grin

Everything in this remark (i.e. especially lucifer & cherub) is totally wrong and misappropiated
If you have big lenses put them on now and catch up with what you missed below here:
https://www.nairaland.com/1491321/satan-default-angel-prove-it/3#39113830

BERNIMOORE:
Again
isaiah 14:12-14 Actually was talking About Lucifer ''fallen from heaven'' not from Earth
12“How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer,son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground,
You who weakened the nations!
13For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation On the farthest sides of the north;
14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High.

This has previously been amply responded to.
Both passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel are referring to & about earthly and human kings
Look above for a more recent response on it. Pftt. SMH

BERNIMOORE:
dont divert our topic to evade the point established here that 'Lucifer from heaven, did not see it as a roberry to be equal with God!
you can create another thread for that topic(who else apart from satan has been translated to be Lucifer), so dont derail my thread with this as the point is already made

The truth(s) got you nervous and fidgeting ?
ROTBL, bro doesnt know that "Lucifer" (i.e. morning star) in Isaiah 14:12 isnt the Devil

BERNIMOORE:
post (B*2)
It seems that you knew what Jesus himself honestly deny having a knowledge about!
(that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son)
or
you Mutleylaff wrongly calling Jesus a Liar that he actually knew 'the day and hour'
But was held back with respect to jurisdictional respect, and its unfair, very unfair to call Jesus a liar.

Please, please, please, get a grip of yourself.
Please respect yourself by posting with decorum and stop twisting what I wrote

Listen, if you abide by these few guidelines,
you're on the road of gradually taking off the straitjacket
and it won't be long before you really begin to understand mysteries of the Bible
- remember the Holy Ghost 3-piece-suit & shoes picture I earlier shared on this thread

#1) As a first port of call, always remember that God came to earth as a Jew
#2) and as such all Jesus' preachings and teachings were done in Aramaic
#3) that Jesus' preachings, teachings, story telling, parables etcetera were done from Jewish perspective
#4) these preachings, teachings, story telling, parables etcetera also often are based on Jewish idioms, customs, practices etcetera
#5) which is why it is vital to be familiar with them, recognise this and have in the back of the mind when reading, trying to understand or interpret the Bible
#6) Though more, the former will for now do

BERNIMOORE:
Again we read the verse and its clearly about
(1)Not possesing a knowledge about a 'particular day and hour at all'
(2)When the knowledge about a 'particular day and hour' was'nt there at all,
we cannot be talking of Jesus exercising respect in jurisdiction over NOTHING that he posses knowledge about...

Yes, and that is what the jurisdiction means or is all about.
Knowing the ''particular day and hour'' is not within God the Son's mandate
Who sent who?
Will the Messenger know more than the Sender? Of course not

BERNIMOORE:
let me worry jare dont care about my wory but to answer the question

I have to care because you've just proven over and over again, especially with your recent posts, that, you truly are punching above your weight

BERNIMOORE:
Mark 13:32
“But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father

John 14:2 'Jesus admit having knowledge of something' but it has no bearing or connected in anywaywhatsoever with Mark 13:32 where he outrightly deny knowledge and even ignorant like humans and angels on the issue of day and hour

It does. You dont know how to draw the line between John 14:2 and Mark 13:32 to see the bearing and connection, that's all

BERNIMOORE:
May be you should feed me with spoon now or draw a straight line for me now ? grin

I might, if you promise you wouldnt dribble or drool over my hand

BERNIMOORE:
Question B*(2a): Can you come out to connect how these two verses(John 14:2, Mark 13:32) relate to the issue of not possesing knowledge of Day and hour?

"mansions", this is a very interesting one.
It actually has to do with a Jewish custom prevalent in just before, around and maybe a bit after Jesus' time,
I am not sure if the practice is still done in Israel or still now continued with present Jews
The groom is expected to prepare or build an extension in his father's estate,
the extension (i.e. mansion) serves to accomodate the intended bride.

The wedding does not take place until when the groom's father is satisfied with the progress
and work done by the groom in preparing the extension or building the "mansion"

It is not for the son to know the date fixed for the wedding. The father decides
That is the correlation between John 14:2 and Mark 13:32
and there you have it, you've just now have learnt something new

BERNIMOORE:
I am surprised that you are still talking of limitations 'in knowledge again'
when you have already said that 'Jesus was 100percent God
That is (God is Omni-Know-All. God is Omniscient) in human skin! with a resounding yes!
https://www.nairaland.com/1491321/satan-default-angel-prove-it/4

You dont understand or dont know what ''≤'' means? Is that it?

You will however need to apologise for deliberating misquoting me though.
Whats your game? What are you up to with this twisting-what-I-originally-responded-to cheating?
Reproduce where and what I did a ''a resounding yes!'' to
Tell the truth and let the devil be a liar
You ought and should be surprised because you've just said a porkie

You asked: ''So when Jesus Died for Good three days, even at Death in those three days he is still God! Yes or No!''
to which, I replied ''Make that a resounding Yes!''
https://www.nairaland.com/1491321/satan-default-angel-prove-it/4#39121195

BERNIMOORE:
Question B*(2b) kindly in your own words tell us priviledges evidence in Philippians 2:6 that Jesus gave-up!

This has already been addressed and answered to, above in Question B*(2a)
Sons dont decide the day of wedding, the Father does. It is the Father's prerogative

BERNIMOORE:
post coded (B*1)
now lets read them;
Believers as part of the alledged 'oneness of (God, jesus, Believers + Holy spirit) John 17:21 = Trinity? could not be sustained

John 10:30 (NKJV)
30 I and My Father are one.” lets see the same use of oneness below

John 17:21 (NKJV)
''that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they (believers) also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me''.
(Note that this verse imply that all believers are also part of the alledged 'oneness of (God, jesus and Believers + Holy spirit)= Trinity?
im i right?

SMH. Remember am watching you, so you ought to be mindful how you tread, as I am seeing you already slip up there a few times to many.
SMH you're living in a fool's paradise with all those grins and waving trinity at the wrong person

BERNIMOORE:
Deuteronomy 6:4 (NKJV)
“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one!

Good to know you believe that the LORD is one

BERNIMOORE:
Really? ok lets see;

Philippians 2:6 a and b;
6a, who, being in the form of God did not consider it robbery to be equal with God

B*(1a) question; Mutleylaff, kindly Tell us 'in Affirmation' the Form/Nature of God in your reply,

I proffer Jeremiah 32:27 and Hebrew 1:3,

''Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh; is anything too difficult for Me?''
- Jeremiah 32:27

His Son is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of God's being.
He holds everything together through his powerful words.
After he had cleansed people from their sins,
he received the highest position, the one next to the Father in heaven
- Hebrew 1:3

BERNIMOORE:
But in the Absence of that we shall consider Gods form/nature that he exist or known to be existing according to the Bible
lets start with Nature of God
God's supernatural Nature=jesus supernatural Nature = Angels supernatural Nature that is 'Existing in Flaming Fire'
Form/Nature of God
Hebrews 12:29
for our "God is a consuming fire."

Deuteronomy 4:24
24 For the Lord your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God

Form/Nature of jesus
2 Thessalonians 1:7
This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels
Form/Nature of Angels
Psalms 104:4
“Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:”

SMH at these immediate above.
I am a patient person, so I am comfortable with just watching and waiting for you to finish and exhaust yourself.

BERNIMOORE:
lucifer himself is a cherub 'in flaming fire'
Does Lucifer consider it 'robbery to be equal with God?
Philippians 2:6 a and b;
6a, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
Isaiah 14: 14.
“For thou hast said in thine heart, … I will be like the most High.”

You're so incorrigible, keep telling you that Isaiah 14: 14 and the other Ezekiel verses are about an earthly king and not about any celestial being.
Let's hear you, who else apart from satan has been translated to be Lucifer?
Do you know? Yes or No.

truthislight:
@Muttleylaff

It is when you "take notice of Yahweh in all your ways" that is when one can be said to have "acquired wisdom" from the standpoint of Yahweh.

Non-sequitur, as you dont know what wisdom is and/or what wisdom is about

truthislight:
Again, On your statement on Satan fall before Adam fall is an issue we have not addressed yet due to your not answering questions directly, but prefer glossing over issues.

I showed Rev. 12:9 to you and ask you if that Satan being casted out took place before Adam sinned, did you gave an Answer, no, you glossed over the question.

Such has been your lot on issues here. are you will to take a stand on your statement now?
I doubt. but still, if you wish, go ahead and provide verification to your statement on Satan haven fallen "from time immemorial".

Turn a new leaf for once. Give a direct answer to question

You're are not yet ready for direct answer(s) because as I earlier said, you're knowingly or unknowingly an ideologue
I do think, you're punching above your weight, that's the reason why you're struggling to keep up,
and are bemused to the point of thinking, the labour of love is glossing over the question

If you're currently choking and throwing up on pieces of information
what do you think will happen when/if an whole information or direct answer is slung at you?
The body will spasm violently from trying to shift the heavy or weighty information loads without help
(i.e. without ''dancing about'' - a phrase you loaned from BERNIMOORE, the feet would buckle)

Permit me to jolt your memory, from:
https://www.nairaland.com/1491321/satan-default-angel-prove-it/5#39194204

I've nowhere on this thread made any insinuations about Rev 12:9
I havent yet made any reference to Rev 12:9
You brought up Rev 12:9, not me
but since you want and are corralling me into Rev 12:9,
would you now, please advise, what the action carried out by serpent/Satan in Genesis 3:1 is called

Now the Shining One was more clever than any animal of the field that the LORD God had made.
It asked the woman,
"Did God actually say, 'You are not to eat from any tree of the garden'?"
- Genesis 3:1 ISV

Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the wild animals that the LORD God had made.
He said to the woman,
"Did God really say, 'You can't eat from any tree in the garden?"
- Genesis 3:1

What is that kind of behaviour in the garden displayed by serpent/Satan called?
Is that behaviour a sin or not? (i.e. as in, is it missing the mark or not?

truthislight, please dont fall into the trap of playing eisegesis with Rev 12:9
What I would suggest, is to read the whole of Rev 12, to:
#1 establish the dinstinction(s) between heaven and Heaven
#2 establish what occurred in Rev 12:7 before Rev 12:9 came to pass

truthislight:
Have a look at some words that you believe can address questions, they are words that are not found in the Bible. eg:

=, >, <, "God the son".

Bro, there are a lot of words, symbols, signs etcetera not in the Bible
but are however, all true and are facts

truthislight:
You have employed such none biblical words above as a tool to address a Bible based question, you best know the reason why. Is it for lack of bible of sufficient words from the Bible I don't know, but you know

Remember the cake picture above with explanations?

truthislight:
Why you expect us to take such kind of none biblical words you pulled from (you know where) Your.... to the bank, beats my imagination.

I get the ''...you pulled from (you know where)''
and thank you for sparing me the blushes

truthislight:
don't you think, if you want us to get Gods blessings, that we will be safer relying just on the word of God and not on those your "dancing tools"?

Trust me, nothing beats standing on the word
Even with all the ''dancing tools'' in the world, I have the gumption to stand on the word and Word

truthislight:
how and why should we accept = <? Just because Muttleylaff said so?

No, not because Muttleylaff said so.
Please dont spread any harboured ignorance and try not to encourage hating on Muttleylaff.

Besides the truth and fact is that, we all, learn something new every day,
so please boldly accept the ''≤'' status because the Bible says so

truthislight:
@Muttleylaff

You don't give answers to questions when directly given to you, what you do is play around the question and hope that the issue has been glossed over and you accuse the questioner of "nit picking".

You, my dear sir, know that you havent been fair with that allegation
Please sir, tell, how many of my questions of mine, has the original poster and/or our common bro friend answered?
I'll save you answering that. None!

truthislight:
The above attititude does not encouraged assimilation and knowledge sharing.

The attitude of BERNIMOORE - the original poster, our common bro friend and possibly you, is that of a closed mindset
The three of you, have a fixed mental attitude or disposition
which prevents you from being receptive to information that otherwise gels or supports your stance
You three and maybe et al, knowingly or unknowingly are ideologues

truthislight:
If you imagined that you can blind fold human, can God be blind folded?

Ask the orignal poster that, not me

truthislight:
Stop dancing around questions and learn to allow the Bible to speak.
That is, let all those plenty words of yours that cannot give life nor change the color of human hair be quoting directly from the word of God.

You allow your playing with words which you do a lot to override seriousness on serious matters, which should not be, but priority should rather be given to the Word of God and not on your own words.

https://s3.postimg.org/fhvbg15xv/cakes.jpg
SMH. Which is better, wolfing down the whole cake or cut the cake up into pieces before eating

Have you ever seen the birthday boy or girl wolf down the whole birthday cake?
No, the cake is sliced up in bits, then passed around to be eaten
This way, there's no danger of choking, smearing the face with cake etcetera

You see, life, as it is, is complex already and enough, without needing complicating it further
so the reason why certain basics and background info,
need to be understood and mastered before delving into exploring and/or learning more complex things

As a matter of fact, life is more of, knowing when and where to, crawl, stand up, stoop down, walk or run,
but Sir, you, original poster and maybe et al are trying to run before even having ever to crawl
and at the rate you all want me to set off and go about it, efrebor, efrebor, you all go wound ooo
I had and have to slow down the pace, break things up, point out these missed, point out things not before noticed.
throw some lights on shadowy matters, beam light on hidden subjects,
bring about an appreciation Jewish idioms and/or familiarity to Jewish customs etcetera

truthislight:
Read your post here again and see which you projected the most:
God's word or your own words

This is answered immediately above
but thank God you've noticed the uphill task and donkey work effort I had to put in
Well, I take great delight in it because God is not unrighteous to forget the work and labour of love

truthislight:
Prov. 3:5-7
Trust in Jehovahe with all your heart,
And do not rely on your own understanding.
6In all your ways take notice of him,
And he will make your paths straight.
7 Do not become wise in your own eyes.
Fear Jehovah and turn away from bad.
.................................................................

SMH. You need getting understanding...
as it seems you're unfamiliar with Proverbs 4:7 and Proverbs 25:2

Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom:
and with all thy getting, get understanding
- Proverbs 4:7

It is the glory of God that hides the word, and the glory of the King that seeks for the word.
- Proverbs 25:2 Aramaic version

It is God's privilege to conceal things and the king's privilege to discover them
- Proverbs 25:2 NLT

BERNIMOORE:
you have not answered the question sir!

I have answered you sir!

BERNIMOORE:
you only dance and dance and dance around the issue

You say I only dance and dance and dance around... sir, because I am not dancing to your tunes

Who pays the piper calls the tune.
Since you dont pay me, you cant call tunes and expect to see me dance to any of them.
So far, I have been dancing, am dancing and will continue always to dance to God's tune.

BERNIMOORE:
and gave answer to a wrong question

I generously gave answer(s) to the original question
this despite thinking that too much information can be bad to the health.
I gave extra with the background and surrounding information

Recall you were told, to note that, God the Father ≥ God the Son
and that, God the Son ≤ God the Father?

Remember the above arithmetic operators and about studying John 10:30, John 17:21 and Deuteronomy 6:4 to let the pennies drop?

Also remember I said you are ignorant of Philippians 2:5-8? (i.e. ignorant particularly of Philippians 2:6)

What more do you want? Blood, out of stone?

BERNIMOORE:
for clarity sake here is the question again which is about 'having a knowledge of a particular future day and hour' which ''(1) no one knows,
(2) not even the angels in heaven,
nor (3)the Son,
As you can see now its not a jurisdictional issue as you are trying to force on this issue but issue of
a, God the son alledgedly Jesus whom you said was 100 percent God even in human skin, which means that his knowledge remains 100 percent intact thus:
b, Alledged God the Son, is not a human being offspring
c, Alledged God the Son, hasnt inherited any of Adam's nature

yet, you are yet to tell us the reason why only 'the father was the only entity that posses the knowledge of the day and hour' if Jesus posses the knowledge he will tell us except you want to tell us that Jesus lied

It is a jurisdictional issue!

I have told you in many & different ways less one
but you want someone to put the dots between two points, so you can draw the straight line.
SMH. Sir, you're bright enough, not to be spoon fed.
Without me having to put in the dots for you to trace through, just draw the frigging straight line sir!

BERNIMOORE:
so here is the unanswered question again;

Then why is Jesus alledgedly reffered to as 'God the Son' is ignorant of what his father God knows if truly he is equal with his father, and 100 per cent God in human's skin with no brain-short-circuit but full of same knowledge as the father,
Mark 13:32
“But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father

This is a matter of not knowing how to stop worrying about something not fully understood

I will take you back to Philippians 2:6, the verse unappreciated and undervalued by you.

In my Father's house are many mansions:
if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you
- John 14:2

You do realise, the gloves have always been on?
There you go, John 14:2 up there, is another verse that ought to bring this into perspective as in, why, apart from the giving up priviledges evidence in Philippians 2:6, God the Son doesnt know
and why the Father is the only entity that possess the knowledge of the day and hour'

Be careful handling John 14:2, as you will drop it because its flaming hot
If after all these vital pieces of information, you still are unable to get matter together and wrapped up
then I suggest you humbly just let it go bro

BERNIMOORE:
Then why is Jesus alledgedly reffered to as 'God the Son' is ignorant of what his father God knows if truly he is equal with his father, take note of the verse below;

Mark 13:32
“But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father

You're making an indefensible assumption to say God the Son, is not one, as God the Father
This I know, is what you're implying and/or trying hard to drive at

The Jews too couldnt take it in or understand it too,
so because of it, in John 10:31, picked up stones again to stone Him.
Dont be like that or be like them bro, picking up stones, to stone God the Son

Note that, God the Father ≥ or >= God the Son
and that, God the Son ≤ or <= God the Father

With the above arithmetic operators in mind, study John 10:30, John 17:21 and Deuteronomy 6:4 to let the pennies drop

You definitely are ignorant of Philippians 2:5-8,
so it isn't surprising, you asking question in such manner
and trying hard to make a phantom point out of Mark 13:32

⁵You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had.
⁶Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to.
⁷Instead, he gave up his divine privileges,
he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being.
When he appeared in human form,
⁸he humbled himself in obedience to God
- Philippians 2:5-8 NLT

⁵In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
⁶Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
⁷rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
⁸And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
- Philippians 2:5-8 NIV

Remember, God will be, whatever God will be.
God will be, whatever God needs to be. God will be, whatever God wants be.
God will be, whatever God can be. God will be, whatever God has to be.
and that this is a prerogative, us human beings, dont have?
Well, God the Son, when and/or where necessary gave up priviledges such like this one
Giving up this particular priviledge,
is, as usual, in line with subjecting to God the Father's will
and/or to the decision of God the Father who sent Him
It's a matter of jurisdiction bro (i.e. the Father has the final say in that matter, not the Son)

BERNIMOORE:
maybe you need to also know that the issue here is not about the distinction in ''the son of man'' and ''Son of man''(diversion from topic ) i thinkBut the distinction between the nature of God who is the father whose nature cannot lie(not need to lie or whatever) allegedly said to transform to a nature whom every person in that nature is by defaulf 'a liar' and 'a sinner' Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (so as to suit a pre-conceived idea that suggest that God the father was the same person in human nature 'a liar by default' or need to be a liar, (by your analogy) read again Romans 3:4: “Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.”

Hmm, I see you're going to make a right meal of this.
Can you please reload and reflect on the below remark (i.e. earlier statement) as it seems it flew over your head

note that Adam (i.e. as in, Man or human beings) is a product of, necessity is the mother of invention
And also note that, a need and/or problem(s) encourages creative efforts to meet the need and/or solve the problem(s)
God will be anything necessary or will do anything necessary, and that's anything necessary within the rule to meet a need(s) and/or solve a problem(s)

For our sake, God made Him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.

Now grab the following ''ogbona feli-feli, bi amala to jina''.
God the Son, did not come from Adam
God the Son is the second or last Adam (i.e. He is a another or different template)
God the Son, is not a human being offspring
God the Son, hasnt inherited any of Adam's nature
God had a human body but no sin was found in Him
God the Son committed no sin, and no lie or deceit was found in His mouth

SMH. Why? why? why? Why are taking after our bro friend now
You're quoting bible verses out of context and/or misappropriating bible verses such as Romans 3:23 etcetera like our bro friend does

BERNIMOORE:
one thing i dont like is to stylishly withdraw statements or play down on statements expecially when answers are needed:

SMH, I want to know who's being stylishly withdrawing statements or playing down on statements

You dont want answers, you are nitpicking

BERNIMOORE:
you actually said this below in affirmation without giving conditions;

God will be,whatever God will be.
God will be, whatever God needs to be.
God will be, whatever God wants be.
God will be, whatever God can be.
God will be, whatever God has to be.

Yes and I stand by it
You ought to know, it was said within the nature and character of God

BERNIMOORE:
then i only help you to apply the human nature 'not just as something to be pulled on and off' but what bible says about it in

Romans 3:4: “Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.”

hence

God will be,whatever God will be. (i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin
God will be, whatever God needs to be.(i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin
God will be, whatever God wants be.(i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin
God will be, whatever God can be (i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin
God will be, whatever God has to be.(i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin

this is not a question of 'why would God need to lie,okay! so can you answer pls?

That is help which is unneccesary
Do you know the origin of Romans 3:4?
Do you know where Paul pulled that remark from?
Do you know the context and circumstances behind that remark originally said by King David?

Trust me, I am watching you and watching every move you make or about to make

Now, for comprehension sake and to save you a lot of bother, this is how Numbers 23:19 should be or can be read

God is not a ''human being'' that He will lie, neither a ''human offspring'' that He will change His mind
- that verse is just confirming that God is not of an Adam material or make-up

BERNIMOORE:
one by one let me start by this very opening post,

Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

Malachi 3:6: “For I am the Lord, I do not change.”

Romans 3:4: “Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.”

sir, can God be a liar, or even lie, when he(in an event eventually pulled on a human skin) and as such under a perceived limited circumstancies of human limitation (so to say) that is because he is said to be limited by human nature or command...he eventually lie/lied/ became a liar, i need a simple answer to harmonise these below as truly what you really mean; that

God will be,whatever God will be. (i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin
God will be, whatever God needs to be.(i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin
God will be, whatever God wants be.(i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin
God will be, whatever God can be.(i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin
God will be, whatever God has to be.(i.e a liar) in an event that he eventually pulled on a human skin

My defination of a liar is already alluded to Numbers 23:19
''God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it''

https://s8.postimg.org/dab0wz4hx/Watching_U.jpg
Be careful in responding back
Stop being petty
Why would God need to, want to or have to lie bro?
Whats all this straw man approach about?. What you driving at, hmm?

Do you really follow and understood the context of that verse (i.e. Numbers 23:19)
Did you at all grasp what both ''God is not a man'' and ''neither the son of man'' means?
Did you notice there is a sharp distinction in ''the son of man'' and ''Son of man''?

johnw74:
how you think i would want to have a discussion with you with all your bad mouthing is amazing

All I simply need from you, is to just honestly answer an easy and straightforward question or two

I am not necessarily after a discussion with you bro
and it really is amazing how you're try to pull off this ''a-tete-mu-ole-ole-mu-oloko'' fast one bad mouthing allegation

As said earlier, I am not into insults or bad mouthing.
I am 100% sure there is no evidence or proof anyone on this thread insulting or bad mouthing you
however there are ample evidences and quotes of you doing this to others

johnw74:
you said the opposite to scripture and you have been avoiding it since,
and you accuse me of what you are doing, squirming away from it

Unlike some, I know, who avoid questioning or are shy of probing,
I have never had cause to worry or be uncomfortable about how I stand on the word and/or scripture,
My conscience is clear, that I study to present myself to God as a proven worker,
one who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

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?

Bro are you trying hard to be annoying or what?
You'll have to try harder, if you're trying to be annoying with this ploy of yours
as I have the grace to soak them all up

But really, what is with you continually repeating these verses, over and over again?
Dont you know the answer?
Is that why you're repeating those two verses without responding to the question?

Those verses have been responded to and you simply are expected to answer the question asked earlier above about them:
Who is the Angel of the Lord?

johnw74:
who is that liar and accuser that you take after

Joh_8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Non sequitur