₦airaland Forum

Boomark:
Bye bye

Boomark:
Stop pretending as if you don't understand simple english.

I have agreed to answer your question. Do you agree to answer my own question also after answering your own? You will have to reciprocate my gesture.

Someone that doesn't understand this thing cannot understand anything.

Chibuezem:
bye finally I can rest
Remember the scripture you quoted are correct 😁😘

Gabrielshow24:
when have I shied from your questions? Bring it on, brother. It will be a nice distraction from your infamous clause😂!

Gabrielshow24:
Agree to what question exactly 🤦🏾‍♂️? What manner of deceit is this?
Alright, I will use the exact words of Jesus, I will quote the verse so that you have no excuse! 😂

Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? John14:9

Boomark:
Answer to your question.

John 14:9-11, 16, 28 NKJV
[9] Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? [10] Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. [11] Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves.
[16] And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever—
[28] You have heard Me say to you, ‘I am going away and coming back to you.’ If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, ‘I am going to the Father,’ for My Father is greater than I.

Jesus is not the author of confusion. He also said this below about God who he calls the Father.

John 6:46 NIV
[46] No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.


From every other scripture we know that Jesus is not the Father. He also toid them that no one has seen the Father.

Jesus gave reason why he said he who has seen him has seen the Father in verses 10 and 11. He said this because everything he tells his disciples comes from the Father. He doesn't say anything from his own authority. The Father commands him on the things to say, John 12:49-50. If you don't have authority of your to say anything apart from what your mother tells you to say, whoever sees you will likened to haven seen your mother at home because what your mother will use her mouth to tell them is exactly what you will tell them. But you are not your mother.

In verse 16, he said he will pray to the Father. He is not praying to himself. In verse 28, he told them clearly that he is going to the Father and that the Father is greater than him. He is not the Father whom he told them is greater than him. He told them all these still in this same chapter so they don't go and start assuming he is the Father.

So what Jesus said in John 6:46 above is the same thing I tell you that no one has seen God (The Father) according to John 1:18 and 1 Timothy 6:16. Jesus died but the only true God cannot die and no one has seen him, 1 Timothy 6:16.

Do you disagree?

Gabrielshow24:
Even in science the human mind can't process more than three dimensions except through mathematical abstractions and yet you want them to be able to parse an infinite dimensioned God. Jesus saying that is True because he is the 3-D depiction of God that the brain can parse. No one can see God in the infinite-D form we can't parse it!

What aspect of this don't you understand? When the biblical writers wrote such they expected the audience to understand the context and not sell cheap scripts online!

Chibuezem:
lol I will keep on with my revelations from God as seen in the scriptures. Holyspirit thank you for giving me understanding.
Glory to the God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy spirit. You don't need the wisdom of men to describe your existence.
Bookman have a wonderful night.

Janosky:
;
Oga, stick to the scripture.

This is holy scriptures- 2 Corinthians 11:31, Ephesians 3:14-15 & Psalms 107:1 thanking ONLY Yahweh the Almighty God our heavenly Father.

Gabrielshow24:
Your write-up is flawed as Jesus gives his reasons and he understands the context and your reconciliation falls short in this regard. No one was saying the Father and the son were the same in identity, trinity affirms they are same in Nature not identity perhaps if you had defined your problem statement along with other related terms you won't have put yourself in this confusion!

[/b]

Gabrielshow24:
Janosky, second to Max.😁
One of your brothers-in-the-Lord is on the hot seat, unlike you he managed to give a shabby reply to my question.
🤔It should be going to 4 months now which you haven't provided a response to a plethora of questions posed towards you by intellectual minds, myself included🤨.

Master of Airbending, Janosky—Tenzin LOK should be learning from you, the way you evade and avoid is top-notch 😂!

Janosky:
Father meaning Senior
John 17:22 Jesus said God the Father, the disciples and Jesus are one,sharing the same nature in heaven.

The same point that Peter emphasized @ 2 Peter 1:4

Sharing the same nature does not confer equality.

Are equal to your Senior ( Father)?

Boomark:
Answer to your question.

John 14:9-11, 16, 28 NKJV
[9] Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? [10] Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. [11] Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves.
[16] And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever—
[28] You have heard Me say to you, ‘I am going away and coming back to you.’ If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, ‘I am going to the Father,’ for My Father is greater than I.

Jesus is not the author of confusion. He also said this below about God who he calls the Father.

John 6:46 NIV
[46] No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.


From every other scripture we know that Jesus is not the Father. He also toid them that no one has seen the Father.

Jesus gave reason why he said he who has seen him has seen the Father in verses 10 and 11. He said this because everything he tells his disciples comes from the Father. He doesn't say anything from his own authority. The Father commands him on the things to say, John 12:49-50. If you don't have authority of your to say anything apart from what your mother tells you to say, whoever sees you will likened to haven seen your mother at home because what your mother will use her mouth to tell them is exactly what you will tell them. But you are not your mother.

In verse 16, he said he will pray to the Father. He is not praying to himself. In verse 28, he told them clearly that he is going to the Father and that the Father is greater than him. He is not the Father whom he told them is greater than him. He told them all these still in this same chapter so they don't go and start assuming he is the Father.

So what Jesus said in John 6:46 above is the same thing I tell you that no one has seen God (The Father) according to John 1:18 and 1 Timothy 6:16. Jesus died but the only true God cannot die and no one has seen him, 1 Timothy 6:16.

Do you disagree?

That guy won't study John 6:46 & 1 Timothy 6:16.
His answer wont be from Timothy or John.

Janosky:

You have no proof.
Stop making false claim.

Janosky:

That guy won't study John 6:46 & 1 Timothy 6:16.
His answer wont be from Timothy or John.

Gabrielshow24:
We have been through this bridge before, it always results in you running away!
"one" - ehad has different meanings, oneness in purpose, in nature to say a few.

No matter whatsoever you choose it doesn't help your case at all. Now to bring it home, we claim in nature Jesus is equal to the Father but in identity different, likewise we too have our end result in being like him but in identity and pre-eminence we are not the same! How hard is this to understand?

Janosky:


Thank you very much.
Your claim is not in your own Bible.

Hebrew 6:13, no Spirit any where is equal to God.

Gabrielshow24:
Your write-up is flawed as Jesus gives his reasons and he understands the context and your reconciliation falls short in this regard. No one was saying the Father and the son were the same in identity, trinity affirms they are same in Nature not identity perhaps if you had defined your problem statement along with other related terms you won't have put yourself in this confusion!

Probably, you also missed the definition of fullness of the Father! And this reply of mine to something similar posed by gohf is also sufficient.



You also need to actually define the context of the "seeing" which you failed to as there are records of prophets seeing the Ancient of days, even Stephen saw God before his death.

Thus you need to provide the framework which you haven't done! In conclusion, you affirm Jesus words to be True! Which negates your previous conclusions.

Also the analogy of the Mother you gave is terrible, if I say my mother's words it doesn't mean any one who has seen me has seen my mother😂—that special waec centre you attended is showing here!

Gabrielshow24:
Really? the last person that said that, gohf, got a shocker! I have evidences, lot of evidences from your definition of spirit of trees as angels, to your inability to answer whether or not God is capable of doing anything by himself! I have loads of screenshots.

Don't try me brother, I back my conversation with facts that's how I have lived all my life!

Gabrielshow24:
Define God? 😂

Boomark:
That you agreed that Jesus is not the same person as the Father is all we needed to confirm that I am correct. The Disciples didn't see God the Father himself when Jesus made that statement.

Fullness of the Father doesn't mean they saw the Father himself which Christ himself also said no one has seen, does it?

John 6:46 NIV
[46] No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.

Unless you want to tell us that Jesus lied about what he said in the scripture above and the one below. Only the antichrist will paint Jesus as a lier.

John 14:9-11, 16, 28 NKJV
[9] Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

You have 2 options here.

1. To tell the world that Jesus lied about what he said in those scriptures.

2. To agree with me that Jesus used figure of speech and the disciples never really saw the Father himself.

If you cannot agree with any of these, know that I still defeated you.

Janosky:

You don't have any proof .
Abeg rest jare

Gabrielshow24:
Fear, contrary to your opinion.
I asked a simple question.

And you have provided me no answer🤕.
Substance - what aspect of substance don't you understand.

You have your usual concord use it.
The question isn't about any verse of substance but about Angels having the substance of God?

A simple yes or no will suffice 🤣.
So far you have been slithering like a snake trying to evade and avoid the question.

How pathetic

Gabrielshow24:
If you had been paying attention from the beginning, the term "angel" is rather vague as it can fit both divine and mundane!

But simple biblical wisdom seem to suggest that there is a set of supernatural beings in heaven - the ones properly and universally termed angels. The bible even gave categories to them - your initial statement is just a fallacious conflation of the meaning of the word "angel".

And you and I both know what you plan to attain - by concluding that Jesus is Michael.

But you hide under the generic meaning of the word!

Like I said we all know he is a messenger.
I even pointed out, you and I are messengers.

Now my main question.

Is he only a messenger because he is sent of God or he is a messenger because he also belongs to a set of supernatural beings perhaps cherubims or seraphim or some even unknown-ims?

Gabrielshow24:
You have still not answered my question.

Or maybe you lack comprehension?

Assess the logical implications of your statements before spewing them out.

You still prove the conflation I talked about.

Appealing to the different meanings of one word.

Maybe I should rephrase it for your sake.
Is Jesus a messenger, Angel, because he was sent of God; Although being the word of God or he is just a part of a set of beings?

Once again think wisely 🙃

Gabrielshow24:
In the generic usage of the word, Jesus is an "angel" but as an identity "he is not".

But Janosky thinks he's wise and plays dishonestly, refusing to set a boundary and even when I finally got him to settle for "divine messenger"; he's yet to answer whether indeed Jesus as an identity, was a seraph, cherub or other 'ims that might exist in the kingdom which we aren't aware of.

Hence the word angel is actually quite vague.
And even Satan fits right in.

Don't bother with him, he is creating confusion to himself and infact commits fallacy of false equivocation!!!
[sub][/sub]

Gabrielshow24:
So according to you: " Jesus coming with an archangel's voice" is a strong indication that he is archangel, the same way I can say he is Chinese🤔 because he comes with a fan anyway🙃 -

Now you are using the well known fact that Jesus is the son of God and by this using the law of transitivity. You arrive at Michael is the son of God or rather put son of God is Michael 🤨.

I have mentioned and dealt with all this already, it's nothing but false equivocations👀.

Gabrielshow24:
You are dealing with a baby's intellect, so I will break down everything into its basic form and from there we will indeed see who is foolish!!!

This is your wisdom: Jesus is senior over head of principalities, Jesus is the defender of the elect/Israel!, Jesus is the seed of man that must defeat Satan, Jesus is coming in with Archangels voice, now on the other hand Michael was the one that cast out Devil and his Angels, Michael is the one that will rise up for Israel in that day, Michael is the only mention of an Archangel hence by simple equivocations Michael should be Jesus🤧

But it's not that simple my dear, what your feeble mind failed to accommodate is that the self same verses condemn your conclusion.

I don't even need to go far, your favorite verse condemns you, this phrase!!!
"One of the chief princes" !!!
Now I ask you what is the literal meaning for archangel🤔?

And if it means what I suppose it means, I see no difference between it and chief prince🤧
And if indeed Michael is one of the chief princes then indeed as a consequence there are more Archangels!!!

Now you run into the same problem your good ol' friend Max ran in, How to reconcile Christ superiority over other Angels?

Perhaps you will continue from where he left off by finishing his work - primus conventus!!!(First set)

I remember your friend in his treatise gave a rather incredulous explanation by saying "these were the first angels to engage with God directly" which begs the question, were they not all created at the same time? Which he had no answer to!!! 🤔

I can give you all the slippery slopes of your posits!!!
And in all, you will fall into a dilemma🤧.
This is a foolish doctrine, for those that can't think deeply and analyze all its implications from 🤔 scriptures.

And as a consequent of this, you have done nothing but bring forth false equivocations!!! and leaning on correlation to infer causation 🥲!!!

Gabrielshow24:
Here is Janosky's definition of an Angel😊



So you can see how everything/everyone fits/can be made to fit this definition!!!

All humans theoretically are angels, same for all spirits.

And by induction and extrapolation, all members of creation including birds, insects, donkeys, whatnots and extraterrestrials are all angels🤤.

Hence theoretically, only God is not an angel!!!

The question in no wise answers the question of identity!!!

Also Can God send himself on an errand?
Or willfully do something he intends to do?

Gabrielshow24:
As a conclusion,
The argument presented here(Quoted above and elucidated below) makes some valid points against the idea of equating Jesus with Michael, especially in light of the apparent differences in behavior and attributes between the two figures. Let's break down some key ideas in my message:

1. The nature of Michael and Jesus: My exegesis contrasts how Michael is often depicted with a sword, a symbol of confrontation and violence, while Jesus is portrayed as one who uses words — his teachings and the "sword" of truth — rather than physical violence. This suggests a significant difference in their roles and nature, reinforcing the idea that they should not be equated.

2. Consistency with God’s nature: My previous exegesis emphasizes the consistency in God’s nature — "the same yesterday, today, and forever" — affirming that Jesus, as part of the Trinity, would not act in ways that contradict His teachings. If Jesus were Michael, it would imply a shift from violence to pacifism, which would be inconsistent with the nature of God as revealed through Jesus.

3. Hypocrisy argument: The claim that Jesus, if He were Michael, would be a hypocrite for wielding a sword in heaven and then advocating peace on earth is a strong point. The Christian understanding of Jesus is that He is perfect and without sin, and therefore,[b] He would not exhibit contradictory behavior. [/b]This creates a theological inconsistency if one argues that He is the same being as Michael.

4. Theological implications of Michael as Jesus: I argue that the idea of Jesus being Michael from the Jehovah's Witness perspective leads to a view of Jesus that could be seen as inconsistent with the character and mission of Jesus as portrayed in the New Testament. Michael is a warrior angel, while Jesus is the embodiment of peace, love, and reconciliation, so these roles are irreconcilable.

In conclusion, the argument is a theological response to the idea of Jesus being equated with Michael. It brings attention to the distinctions between the two figures and asserts that these differences reflect their roles within the broader narrative of God's revelation.

it’s important to note that the Jehovah's Witness perspective differs significantly on the nature of Jesus, Michael, and God’s overall plan. Nevertheless, this text makes a compelling case for why equating Jesus with Michael creates contradictions in the understanding of both figures.

Although, I don't have the luxury of time to do a deep analysis but this is enough to show all that Jesus can never be Michael!!!

All are free to add other points 👀!!!

Gabrielshow24:
Come and answer my question.
There are numerous ones you haven't answered but I will make it easy for you, knowing how dumb you are:

Is God the Father, a messenger of himself, if he wills to do something by himself? 🤨

Or can he motivate/resolve to send himself on a message/errand?
Or is he a messenger of his own spirit 👀?
Or perhaps he doesn't have the ability to do things of his own will? 🤧

After all he is a localized point in the universe 👀 and not transcendental 🤕.

Think wisely and assess the implications of your posits🙃

Gabrielshow24:
Now the question I ask you is, can God send anyone/anything/spirit on an errand? 🤨

If truly God can, then all of creation are "angels"

Gabrielshow24:
[quote author=Gabrielshow24 post=134343452]I wonder how someone will say this and another person will still be arguing about the implication of such a simple statement!!!


Now answer for the world to see, can God send animals on errands?🤨

If he can then why can't simple reasoning tell you that God can send anyone/anything/any spirit on an errand!!!🙄

Or is your own God so powerless that he can't send what he created on an errand!🤨

I won't dignify your "exact words fallacy" when the very concept is an implicit implication of his statement!!!

You can't wriggle your way out😁

Gabrielshow24:
when have I shied from your questions? Bring it on, brother. It will be a nice distraction from your infamous clause😂!

Janosky:
Do you believe Hebrew 6:13?

If you believe Hebrew 6:13 you will understand what Jesus taught you @John 17;3

Boomark:
.

Answer this question.

John 17:3 NIrV
[3] And what is eternal life? It is knowing you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

Revelation 3:12 NIV
[12] The one who is victorious I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will they leave it. I will write on them the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on them my new name.


1. From the scriptures above, do you believe that the Father is the only true God and that the Father is the God of Jesus Christ?

Boomark:
Go to page 3 at 3:39 pm and see where I answered you in plane language. That was more than 4 days now. And you can't answer my own.

I don't have time for deceitful people.

Chibuezem:
Jesus Christ is the son of God, the wisdom of God, the Word of God made flesh. He is my messiah, the soon coming king.
He is not lesser or greater than the Holy spirit
The holy spirit is His spirit and also the spirit of God the Father
Remember there is on God who's essence is the same in the Father Son and holy spirit
Did you watch the YouTube video I sent?
If no
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f4BJgaOStI?si=qlbiNMV2qLek0qm4

Gabrielshow24:
It doesn't answer the question on ground. You are just looking for diversionary tactics. You failed to understand context. If you failed in just one verse imagine the rest where you have mis-intrepreted!

The scriptures well explains this that he took the form of God, He became flesh. He honored his Father in flesh and the Father honored him just as himself. What more do you want?

He gave indirect evidences not just claiming "I am God" for his divinity and equality with God!
It's even well documented that Jesus spoke in parables intentionally to obscure meanings exemplifying it later to his disciples!

As usual, you are selling cheap script! We take the fullness of scripture not just cherry-picking.

gohf:
what kind of god cannot directly state that he is God 😂😂, "he gave indirect evidence". 🤣 Jesus was very direct about who he is when he needed to be, and kept quiet about it for much of the time as he wasn't announcing himself and when he did he was VERY CLEAR, I AM THE SON OF GOD. GUY JESUS WASN'T AFRAID TO CLEARLY SAY THE TRUTH REPEATEDLY.

Stop this your failed here and failed there when you are clearly ignoring the verses and claiming it doesn't answer the question on ground 😀😁😁 you don't even know the question on ground you just want to feel like some examiner testing people and telling them they failed just like Lucifer does😀😁 🤣

Gabrielshow24:
This is false special waec centre reasoning. The disciples understood seeing Jesus meant seeing the fullness of the Father in flesh not whatsoever slippery slope you predefined for yourself 😂.

Jesus implied that no man has seen the infinite-D God not withstanding they have seen the 3-D representative of him, Jesus!

You didn't defeat me brother, you just showed your ignorance, from inability to comprehend English to false slippery slope and lack of deep understanding!

Ken4Christ:
I don't have any issue with your submissions.
My issue is with Boomark