₦airaland Forum

Thanks to gohf and our inquiry into God's Laws in the thread https://www.nairaland.com/8312606/pastor-funke-adejumo-set-ordained/1#133655375

And there we get to see that there are Laws older than The Laws God gave Moses, one of which is what Christ followed as we get to see in Hebrews 7:12.

gohf:
Hebrews:7

[12] And when God sends a new kind of priest, his law must be changed to permit it. As we all know, Christ did not belong to the priest-tribe of Levi, but came from the tribe of Judah, which had not been chosen for priesthood; Moses had never given them that work.
[15] So we can plainly see that God’s method changed, for Christ, the new High Priest who came with the rank of Melchizedek,
[16] did not become a priest by meeting the old requirement of belonging to the tribe of Levi, but on the basis of power flowing from a life that cannot end.
[17] And the psalmist points this out when he says of Christ, You are a priest forever with the rank of Melchizedek.

Now this is another place where you see Jesus is God!

For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king; he will save us(Isaiah 32:22)

And Jesus, is The Lord and He came to save us!

So, a Lawmaker is always above The Law He makes and He can elect to abide by it as He did in coming as a baby or can override it as He did by walking on the sea, exactly how you can make a law that everyone in your house must be home by 10pm. And you can choose to be home by that 10pm yourself or 1am as you need.

You the lawmaker are greater than the law you make and you are only under it as pleases you.

Thus the Law is for those who are lesser than the Lawmaker.

So here you see Jesus acting above The Law, because He is The Lawmaker.

And that is why you see even though He is not a Levite, He could be a High Priest Like Melchizedek was not a Levite, yet received tithes.

So, this is an act of God (force majeure) and every act of God is always Law Full, which is why you see the verse shows the priest was changed first which prompts Paul to say that the law has changed in his observation that God did not follow The Law.

But as already stated, Paul knows that a Lawmaker is above His Law, which is why he said the law changed which is to the effect that we now have 2 Laws instead 1, on appointment of priests that is
1) Appointment from Levite males and
2) The Melchizedek Law (Appointments made by God Himself)

And with respect to the topic, they are even all Males, and the biggest blow to female priesthood is that Melchizedek never died and has not died, so no vacancy for females.

Of which I would remind everyone, that the 2nd Law (Melchizedek Law) is actually the first Law for Melchizedek was the First Priests and yet He was not a Levite.

So, Christ followed a Law that even Superseded The Laws God gave to Moses to give us

So Christ followed a Law that is even Older than the Levite Law!

Dtruthspeaker:
Now this is another place where you see Jesus is God!

For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king; he will save us(Isaiah 32:22)

And Jesus, is The Lord and He came to save us!

So, a Lawmaker is always above The Law He makes and He can elect to abide by it as He did in coming as a baby or can override it as He did by walking on the sea, exactly how you can make a law that everyone in your house must be home by 10pm. And you can choose to be home by that 10pm yourself or 1am as you need.

You the lawmaker are greater than the law you make and you are only under it as pleases you.

Thus the Law is for those who are lesser than the Lawmaker.

So here you see Jesus acting above The Law, because He is The Lawmaker.

And that is why you see even though He is not a Levite, He could be a High Priest Like Melchizedek was not a Levite, yet received tithes.

So, this is an act of God (force majeure) and every act of God is always Law Full, which is why you see the verse shows the priest was changed first which prompts Paul to say that the law has changed in his observation that God did not follow The Law.

But as already stated, Paul knows that a Lawmaker is above His Law, which is why he said the law changed which is to the effect that we now have 2 Laws instead 1, on appointment of priests that is
1) Appointment from Levite males and
2) The Melchizedek Law (Appointments made by God Himself)

And with respect to the topic, they are even all Males, and the biggest blow to female priesthood is that Melchizedek never died and has not died, so no vacancy for females.

Of which I would remind everyone, that the 2nd Law (Melchizedek Law) is actually the first Law for Melchizedek was the First Priests and yet He was not a Levite.

So, Christ followed a Law that even Superseded The Laws God gave to Moses to give us

So Christ followed a Law that is even Older than the Levite Law!

Well for starters Jesus is not God, and I didn't find Isaiah 32:22, but I did find Isaiah 33:22
Isa.33.22 For the LORD is our judge, our lawgiver, and our king. He will care for us and save us.

Now YHVH is God and the purpose of the Law is to reveal our sins and tell us not to do the things that will bring us death. So being a lawmaker isn't about being above the law though God is above the law for He is Holy and doesn't follow the law, he gave Moses a shadow requirement out of His mercy and so the law was made for sinful man and when I quoted Hebrews 7, was to explain that the laws that came from Moses were no longer in effect and one of the reasons being that God had finally established the priesthood he originally intended the eternal priesthood of the covenant of peace, one that purifies sin perfectly from people's heart and enables them to genuinely love and serve God.

So a new covenant with new commands, so we are no longer under the old. For the new is a fulfillment of the purposes of the old and a fulfilling of it's promises even with better promises. So God fulfilled the old covenant and made a new everlasting one, one with God's word or law of life which empower Jesus to be our high priest.


And yes Jesus follow a command from God that is higher than the old requirements from Moses.

gohf:
And yes Jesus follow a command from God that is higher than the old requirements from Moses.

So this one is settled

gohf:
Well for starters Jesus is not God.

Let us re argue this reasonably, again

If Jesus is not God, how then and why then is He called, Lord?

And based on your Isaiah 33. Did Jesus not confirm that He is coming to Judge?

gohf:
Isa.33.22 For the LORD is our judge, our lawgiver, and our king. He will care for us and save us.

Your bible is adding to God's Word. "saving" is an act and proof of care. So this is clearly a tautology and proof that someone has added to the bible to bend it as it may please them.

And this is another reason why you cannot appreciate that Jesus is God. The bible you are using is misleading you.

Isaiah 33:22
22 For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king; he will save us.

Dtruthspeaker:
So this one is settled



Let us re argue this reasonably, again

If Jesus is not God, how then and why then is He called, Lord?

And based on your Isaiah 33. Did Jesus not confirm that He is coming to Judge?

if you can't understand from what I wrote why Jesus the son of God is not God, which violates even the commands God gave which predates the laws of Moses as you said, I can't help you.

Go and find the difference between YHVH said to Adonai

For Jesus the Messiah is our Adonai not YHWH God.

Dtruthspeaker:
Your bible is adding to God's Word. "saving" is an act and proof of care. So this is clearly a tautology and proof that someone has added to the bible to bend it as it may please them.

And this is another reason why you cannot appreciate that Jesus is God. The bible you are using is misleading you.

Isaiah 33:22
22 For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king; he will save us.

if that was the point of my post, this response would have been relevant don't you think

gohf:
if you can't understand from what I wrote why Jesus the son of God is not God, which violates even the commands God gave which predates the laws of Moses as you said, I can't help you.

Go and find the difference between YHVH said to Adonai

For Jesus the Messiah is our Adonai not YHWH God.

Now you are confusing me even more and it seems like you are running from properly settling this.

I do not understand the connection are you saying Jesus the son of God is not God, which violates even the commands God gave which predates the laws of Moses?

And this is another issue which is going to confuse things, since we already disagree on the issue of Jesus being God.

So, if you truly believe you are right let us focus on this sole issue and I started first by asking you

1) if Jesus is not God, how then and why then is He called, Lord?

2) And based on your Isaiah 33. Did Jesus not confirm that He is coming to Judge?

So if you could settle these questions, then we can see who is right or wrong

Dtruthspeaker:
Now you are confusing me even more and it seems like you are running from properly settling this.

I do not understand the connection are you saying Jesus the son of God is not God, which violates even the commands God gave which predates the laws of Moses?

And this is another issue which is going to confuse things, since we already disagree on the issue of Jesus being God.

So, if you truly believe you are right let us focus on this sole issue and I started first by asking you

1) if Jesus is not God, how then and why then is He called, Lord?

2) And based on your Isaiah 33. Did Jesus not confirm that He is coming to Judge?

So if you could settle these questions, then we can see who is right or wrong

1. Lord does not mean God, even Sarah called Abraham lord. Jesus is Lord and husband of the church, his bride.

2. You made a mistake, and quoted the wrong verse but instead of taking correction, you attacked the verse I wrote. Do you think such a person is worth speaking to?

gohf:
1. Lord does not mean God, even Sarah called Abraham lord. Jesus is Lord and husband of the church, his bride.

See, even you know spelt it "lord" with small letters and not Lord/LORD as is usually used in reference of Jesus.

So, you already know that this answer is invalid as Sarah was not referring to Abraham as Jesus Christ.

gohf:
2. You made a mistake, and quoted the wrong verse but instead of taking correction, you attacked the verse I wrote. Do you think such a person is worth speaking to?

O this offended you! I apologize. I thought you overlooked it knowing I was trying to say verse 33.

And in my eagerness to get to the Truth of the matter I overlooked that you could be offended by my query.

I respectfully apologize.

gohf:
if that was the point of my post, this response would have been relevant don't you think

Ok.

I was just taking note of the fact that your bible was different and that being different it would mislead you in thinking that Jesus is not God

Dtruthspeaker:
Ok.

I was just taking note of the fact that your bible was different and that being different it would mislead you in thinking that Jesus is not God

doing worry about that I have and have read multiple versions and translation, also with Greek and Hebrew texts as well, and the Septuagint.

Dtruthspeaker:
See, even you know spelt it "lord" with small letters and not Lord/LORD as is usually used in reference of Jesus.

So, you already know that this answer is invalid as Sarah was not referring to Abraham as Jesus Christ.



O this offended you! I apologize. I thought you overlooked it knowing I was trying to say verse 33.

And in my eagerness to get to the Truth of the matter I overlooked that you could be offended by my query.

I respectfully apologize.

apology accepted...

There's a difference between some translations use of LORD and Lord, LORD is actually YHVH while Lord is a title not a name, a title like King

If I write jesus you still know he's Jesus and I used Sarah as an example of the usage of the word Lord not LORD.

Now YHVH can be called Lord-Adonia but any Lord cannot be called YHVH.

That's why it says in Psalm 110: YHVH said to my Lord...

gohf:
apology accepted...

There's a difference between some translations use of LORD and Lord, LORD is actually YHVH while Lord is a title not a name, a title like King

If I write jesus you still know he's Jesus and I used Sarah as an example of the usage of the word Lord not LORD.

Now YHVH can be called Lord-Adonia but any Lord cannot be called YHVH.

That's why it says in Psalm 110: YHVH said to my Lord...

You are talking off point and dodging the question I asked

When Sarah called her husband lord you know she was not referring to Jesus Christ.

So I ask again
1) if Jesus is not God, how then and why then is He called, Lord?

2) And based on your Isaiah 33. Did Jesus not confirm that He is coming to Judge?

Dtruthspeaker:
You are talking off point and dodging the question I asked

When Sarah called her husband lord you know she was not referring to Jesus Christ.

So I ask again
1) if Jesus is not God, how then and why then is He called, Lord?

2) And based on your Isaiah 33. Did Jesus not confirm that He is coming to Judge?

Are you okay? Is this not what you asked
"See, even you know spelt it "lord" with small letters and not Lord/LORD as is usually used in reference of Jesus.

So, you already know that this answer is invalid as Sarah was not referring to Abraham as Jesus Christ."

Look it's like you have issues, let me speak to you in your disrespectful tone as well, if you had common sense why would you assume every one called a Lord is Jesus?

gohf:
Are you okay? Is this not what you asked
"See, even you know spelt it "lord" with small letters and not Lord/LORD as is usually used in reference of Jesus.

So, you already know that this answer is invalid as Sarah was not referring to Abraham as Jesus Christ."

Look it's like you have issues, let me speak to you in your disrespectful tone as well, if you had common sense why would you assume every one called a Lord is Jesus?

Now you are resorting to the use of anger in your attempt to dodge the very clear questions I put to you.

And this is of course you know that response was my counter to your "Sarah called Abraham lord."

But now you are trying to use it to scatter the discussion so that you would use it to run away from answering the questions I have been asking since yesterday which you are still not answering today which is

1) if Jesus is not God, how then and why then is He called, Lord?

2) And based on your Isaiah 33. Did Jesus not confirm that He is coming to Judge?

So please answer the questions asked, the bold was not even a question.

gohf:
Are you okay? Is this not what you asked
"See, even you know spelt it "lord" with small letters and not Lord/LORD as is usually used in reference of Jesus.

So, you already know that this answer is invalid as Sarah was not referring to Abraham as Jesus Christ."

Look it's like you have issues, let me speak to you in your disrespectful tone as well, if you had common sense why would you assume every one called a Lord is Jesus?

Ah, ah! You have not answered his questions, rather it is looking like you are dodging answering them.

Dtruthspeaker:
Now you are resorting to the use of anger in your attempt to dodge the very clear questions I put to you.

And this is of course you know that response was my counter to your "Sarah called Abraham lord."

But now you are trying to use it to scatter the discussion so that you would use it to run away from answering the questions I have been asking since yesterday which you are still not answering today which is

1) if Jesus is not God, how then and why then is He called, Lord?

2) And based on your Isaiah 33. Did Jesus not confirm that He is coming to Judge?

So please answer the questions asked, the bold was not even a question.

1. Lord does not mean God, even Sarah called Abraham lord. Jesus is Lord and husband of the church, his bride.

2. Isa.33.22 For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us. LORD is YHVH

Are you asking if Jesus is coming to Judge the world at the second coming?
Or that Jesus said somewhere he is coming to judge and then he confirmed that he is coming to judge?

And come how did Isaiah 33:22 become my verse, is that not the correct verse of what you misquoted as Isaiah 32:22. And your original conversation is it not something about lawmaker.

FayaBall:
Ah, ah! You have not answered his questions, rather it is looking like you are dodging answering them.

you didn't read this answer or you skip through all of it?
1. Lord does not mean God, even Sarah called Abraham lord. Jesus is Lord and husband of the church, his bride.

gohf:
you didn't read this answer or you skip through all of it?
1. Lord does not mean God, even Sarah called Abraham lord. Jesus is Lord and husband of the church, his bride.

Come on, your response came after my post

FayaBall:
Come on, your response came after my post

are you sure about that, so I wrote this after you response?

gohf:
1. Lord does not mean God, even Sarah called Abraham lord. Jesus is Lord and husband of the church, his bride.

2. You made a mistake, and quoted the wrong verse but instead of taking correction, you attacked the verse I wrote. Do you think such a person is worth speaking to?

It just shows you just jump from space without reason nor reasoning at all.

Now will you consider yourself wise or foolish

People are so very easy to deceive because they are so lazy to verify anything because jumping into conclusion.

Dspeaker is confusing or believing that LORD which is YHVH is Jesus, one ball is now bouncing in from someone without even reading.

You won't read, you won't study, the little you hear you run with it even when they try to tell you you're wrong, you are still running

gohf:
1. Lord does not mean God, even Sarah called Abraham lord. Jesus is Lord and husband of the church, his bride.

2. Isa.33.22 For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us. LORD is YHVH

Are you asking if Jesus is coming to Judge the world at the second coming?
Or that Jesus said somewhere he is coming to judge and then he confirmed that he is coming to judge?

And come how did Isaiah 33:22 become my verse, is that not the correct verse of what you misquoted as Isaiah 32:22. And your original conversation is it not something about lawmaker.

Even you saw the lord in small letters for Abraham as different from the Lord which is used in reference to Jesus, so your ground does not hold you.

So the op's question still stands.

Then onto your response to op's second question: "did Jesus not confirm he is coming to Judge?"

And here you are not answering the very clear question but dodging it still.

gohf:
are you sure about that, so I wrote this after you response?

It just shows you just jump from space without reason nor reasoning at all.

Now will you consider yourself wise or foolish

This is not an answer to the op's question which is why I spoke.

I saw your trial to respond thereafter.

It is clear you are quick to resort to abuses when you don't like what you see

FayaBall:
Even you saw the lord in small letters for Abraham as different from the Lord which is used in reference to Jesus, so your ground does not hold you.

So the op's question still stands.

Then onto your response to op's second question: "did Jesus not confirm he is coming to Judge?"

And here you are not answering the very clear question but dodging it still.

Look don't think you can come accuse someone falsely and think you can waive it off and have a conservation with them. You are even been more disrespectful, are you sure you're okay.

If you can't clearly admit your own mistake is it scripturally mistake you want to admit. Please don't mention me again.

gohf:
People are so very easy to deceive because they are so lazy to verify anything because jumping into conclusion.

Dspeaker is confusing or believing that LORD which is YHVH is Jesus, one ball is now bouncing in from someone without even reading.

You won't read, you won't study, the little you hear you run with it even when they try to tell you you're wrong, you are still running

Is this how hard it is to answer a clear and direct question that you resort to speaking to the air?

FayaBall:
This is not an answer to the op's question which is why I spoke.

I saw your trial to respond thereafter.

It is clear you are quick to resort to abuses when you don't like what you see

What I see is someone that is incorrigible and unrepentant you probably feel in your heart there is no God, so how you behave doesn't matter, because if it does you wont come here thinking you can accuse anybody falsely and get away with it if you are not a brood of viper and an unrepentant accuser like the devil. Because after seeing it like you claim, you still choose to accuse me. Go and look for people like that and discuss with them

gohf:
Look don't think you can come accuse someone falsely and think you can waive it off and have a conservation with them. You are even been more disrespectful, are you sure you're okay.

If you can't clearly admit your own mistake is it scripturally mistake you want to admit. Please don't mention me again.

Proof you can't and won't answer the clear and direct question put to you but would quickly resort to diversions, distractions, abuses, insults and any other thing.

Of course, we already know what that means.

FayaBall:
Is this how hard it is to answer a clear and direct question that you resort to speaking to the air?

as long as you know you are the air, are you expecting a better treatment are you that delusional

gohf:
What I see is someone that is incorrigible and unrepentant you probably feel in your heart there is no God, so how you behave doesn't matter, because if it does you wont come here thinking you can accuse anybody falsely and get away with it if you are not a brood of viper and an unrepentant accuser like the devil. Because after seeing it like you claim, you still choose to accuse me. Go and look for people like that and discuss with them

More diversions, distractions and any other thing but to clearly and directly answer the questions.

What a pity.

gohf:
as long as you know you are the air, are you expecting a better treatment are you that delusional

Insults as is your way but answer the questions, iro ooo

FayaBall:
Proof you can't and won't answer the clear and direct question put to you but would quickly resort to diversions, distractions, abuses, insults and any other thing.

Of course, we already know what that means.

continue it's not the first time a child of the devil is an accuser.

Children of God are quick to o, I did this wrong I apologize but to expect such from a unrepentant brood of viper who now wants to speak about God. You started with a foul and a false spirit