₦airaland Forum

Bonapart:
Who said sex is pleasurable...
Sex is overrated that's why many fall into fornication all because of curiosity...
The most pleasurable thing in life is knowing God, living a life that please God and knowing where you're going after life which is Heaven.... that's what i call pleajoy

Kay17:
I never dragged the issue of natural consequences with you, my concern was the ability to choose whatever value system one wanted. I was concerned with the content and extent of freewill.

SalC:
Isn't it surprising you don't know Luther isn't against honouring Mary and even preached her immaculate conception even as a protestant?

Kay17:
I don't disagree that our choices and actions have natural occurring consequences, if fact when we makes choices, we accept the consequences. But your idea of freewill does not allow me to choose the value system I want and take the consequences I meet with it.

Papist:
He said all this and more, after becoming a Protestant. Should I give you more Protestant Luther quotes?

BIBLESPEAKS:
Did you know that numerous Bible scholars, yes even some trinitarian scholars agree that based on Bible injunctions, Michael is the same as Jesus?

Papist:
Which Christians were persecuted "during the dark ages around 500 AD?" Can you name them for us please? Also which Bibles were withheld from the laity around 500 AD? I didn't know they had printing presses back then! I am sure you dont know that it took St Jerome, for example, 18 years to translate the Bible from Greek to Latin. Because everything was done by hand by Catholic monks who spend their entire lifetimes writing Bibles. But some Protestants see no need to be grateful to these Catholics. Now listen to what Martin Luther whom you idolise says about Mary:
No woman is like you. You
are more than Eve or Sarah,
blessed above all nobility,
wisdom, and sanctity.
(Sermon, Feast of the
Visitation, 1537)
More:
[She is the] highest
woman and the noblest gem
in Christianity after Christ . .
. She is nobility, wisdom, and
holiness personified. We can
never honor her enough. Still
honor and praise must be
given to her in such a way as
to injure neither Christ nor
the Scriptures.
(Sermon, Christmas, 1531)
More:
The Virgin Mary remains in
the middle between Christ
and humankind. For in the
very moment he was
conceived and lived, he was
full of grace. All other human
beings are without grace,
both in the first and second
conception. But the Virgin
Mary, though without grace
in the first conception, was
full of grace in the second …
whereas other human beings
are conceived in sin, in soul
as well as in body, and Christ
was conceived without sin in
soul as well as in body, the
Virgin Mary was conceived in
body without grace but in
soul full of grace. (H. George
Anderson, 238.)

I could paste many more such Luther quotes.

Anas09:
Funny enough, Abraham is not the father of Islam. Its a fabrication by Muslims to give Islam credibility. They tried to trace the Arabic geneology to Abraham, they failed. So, Abraham is not responsible for their wickedneSs. That said, I believe God permitted Islam in other to fulfil His prophecies, abt His people being persecuted. Jesus said to his followers, "A time will come that men will kill you believing they r doing a service to GOd" If the Muslims are not here, who will fulfil that prophecy. Other religions r not killing christians and Jews nah.so, do ur Math.

Kay17:
Now if there are overarching and superseding authorities over me namely the State and God why then call it freewill?! isnt that an abuse of language? if freewill doesn't mean all that i mentioned why falsely paint my actions as such. I know fully well that in Christian theology, man is held responsible for his actions on the basis of free will

Oluwason:
Beautiful!

Emusan:
This is another place you will be lying at the face of the scriptures, he didn't say Jesus can't be called CHIEF PRINCE haba...

The verse says [size=14pt]"ONE[/size] of the chief prince" which means there are many Chief prince and Micheal happened to be ONE of them this negate Jesus being [size=14pt]ONLY begotten[/size] of the Father.

See how you keep twisting someone's statement.

Emusan:
I didn't just know how JWs can reconcile those two @bold statements.

You can see how far they can go just to limited Jesus Christ.

davien:
I guess when you also test a Buddhist/Muslim/hindu,etc and he/she passes,that means we're automatically justified to follow them...

Kay17:
So what is freewill to a layman like me. Initially, freewill appears as a free reign and full control of my life and destiny (note I said destiny). By extension, includes my concepts on good and evil/right and wrong. But Christians say no, that free will isn't a free reign. You people say I am unable to create my own pyramid of values, I cannot serve whatever God I wish to serve, I cannot choose my destiny or alter the direction it goes, I cannot rebel in my freedom, I cannot live as long as I desire! What then is this free will you talk about that has the most little degree of freedom?!

JMAN05:
So you are saying that Jesus can't be called chief prince?

JMAN05:
Sir, you understand the word "angel" as used in the Scriptures to mean "ministering spirit for us"? did I get you right?

JMAN05:
Your position is respected sir, even if I disagree with your points. We all have our rights to a belief, however, What do u understand by the word "angel" as used in the scriptures?

JMAN05:
I dont get u sir.

XBLadez:
http://www.vanguardngr.com/2015/04/pastor-docked-over-n390000-anointing-oil-for-private-parts/

JMAN05:
Sir, Jude quoted an OT scripture where the divine name appeared. The correct thing should be "YHWH rebuke you". consult cross references.



What occurred here is " princes", not archangels. Have you seen where the word "archangels" (emphasis on plural) occurred in the bible before?

There could be more than one princes, but not more than one archangels.

PastorOluT:
U are very very wrong with the example u gave about the apostles, their knowledge wernt adjusted but increased; they had little knowledge before they saw more light, not changing to n fro. Now u might want to argue semantics, maybe I shouldnt have used adjusted but change, u guys have been changing ur doctrines over the years even with ur so called scriptural backings. Even this issue of Jesus being Michael, u guys only recently came back to it. It was never on record that the desciples were changing the truth of the scriptures (except the false ones anyways), even when they dont have enough light in an area they are silent. Take for instance Peter, he said Paul wrote some things which where hard to understand that some unlearned had twisted to their own peril 2Peter3:15-18.

If Jesus was an angel why didnt d scripture say but rather it says otherwise?

Oluwason:
God bless u sir

vfactor:
I'd like to point out a flaw in your explanation.

Pls read the following scriptures;
Gen 6:2 and compare it with Jude vs 6.
Also read Job 1:6 & 38:7.

But for convenience sake I'll quote Gen 6:2 (KJV).

From the scripture above, angels are sons of God. Calling Jesus the archangel doesn't make any less the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON of God.

vfactor:
My dear Pastor, we do not have point to prove other than what the scriptures say. If Jesus is Michael the archangel, then we have much to learn about him during his life in heaven before coming to the earth. This knowledge only add to our appreciation of how humble and faithful our saviour has been thru out his existence.

True the witnesses have adjusted their understanding of the scriptures over the years. We do not twist our believes to suit the scriptures but rather believe what we understand from the scriptures and adjust this believes when our understanding increases. This has enabled us to discern the will of God concerning matters such as christian neutrality, use of tobacco, spiritual and moral cleanliness, etc.

Adjustment to understanding is not new. Jesus had to adjust the understanding of his disciples just before going to heaven Act 1:6-8. Apollos' understanding of the scriptures had to be adjusted by Priscilla and Aquila. So it not new. Its better than holding on to dogma that have no scriptural proofs and bending the scriptures to suit them. Don't u agree? Dogmas like immortality of the soul, the trinity, etc, has been shown to be false when considered in the light of the entire bible. Yet in other not "change" such teachings has continued to be taught and scriptures bent to suit them, even when they have cause much confusion to those who believe and teach them.

johnw74:
Michael the archangel and Jesus Christ (kurios) are diffrent persons.

Jud 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord (kurios) rebuke thee.

Michael asked the Lord the Word Jesus Christ to rebuke the devil.



Michael is not the only archangel:

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

johnw74:
There isn't any.

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person ...

And so He isn't an Angel, also:

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?

A dog begets a dog,
a human begets A human,
God begets God, He cannot beget an Angel,
He can create an Angel, and He did.