OkCornel:


They rejected Moses? but still administered Israel according to the Laws of Moses?

Why are you asking me? It was the Lord Jesus Who said it. I doubt that even the poster would "quarrel" about this one too.

Ihedinobi3:

Let me post the whole thing here:

[8]Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. [9]For we know in part and we prophesy in part; [10]but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.
1 Corinthians 13:8-10 NASB

That is, all the gifts given to help communicate and confirm the Truth to believers at the time would remain until the Truth was perfectly witnessed to in a complete, that is, perfect Bible that the Apostles and other special messengers of the Lord, like Mark, Like, James, and Jude were putting together. Once their testimony was complete, none of those gifts were necessary or reserved anymore. They were removed from the Church, so that all believers will focus on the Written Word and not be swayed or seduced by signs of power, just as human beings so very easily are.

When the Antichrist and his prophet come, those signs of power will be a major means of seduction for many so that even many believers will fall away because of them. Even now that he is not here, the spirit of antichrist is very much evident and there are all kinds of lying wonders seducing believers today. This is why Peter warns us to stay with the Bible and not fall into the trap of following visions that stand against the Certain Word of God (2 Peter 1:16-21; 1 Peter 1:21-2:2).

That means Jesus was wrong to say these concerning signs and wonders?

Mark 16 v 17-18;
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.


And that the gift of prophecy is no longer granted by the Holy Spirit abi?

OkCornel:


That means Jesus was wrong to say these concerning signs and wonders?

Mark 16 v 17-18;
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.


And that the gift of prophecy is no longer granted by the Holy Spirit abi?

Mark 16 ends at verse 8. The rest of the chapter (and it has different endings with some longer than others in different Bibles) is an addition to what was originally written.

Ihedinobi3:

Why are you asking me? It was the Lord Jesus Who said it. I doubt that even the poster would "quarrel" about this one too.

Help me with the Bible reference so we can see it in context.

Was Jesus referring to Saducees and Pharisees, or their ancestors who lived in time of Moses and other Prophets?

OkCornel:


Help me with the Bible reference so we can see it in context.

Was Jesus referring to Saducees and Pharisees, or their ancestors who lived in time of Moses and other Prophets?

It was in the post you quoted. You do read the things you respond to, don't you?

Ihedinobi3:

Mark 16 ends at verse 8. The rest of the chapter (and it has different endings with some longer than others in different Bibles) is an addition to what was originally written.

Which version(s) of Bible omitted the parts from 9-20?

OkCornel:


Which version(s) of Bible omitted the parts from 9-20?

Pretty much all versions that I have read (KJV, NIV, NASB, The Amplified, etc) have a note saying "the most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-..." or something similar in that chapter. My NIV even has a break in the chapter where it inserts the note above.

Then when you go into manuscript and original text scholarship, it is pretty much undeniable.

Ihedinobi3:

It was in the post you quoted. You do read the things you respond to, don't you?

That same scripture shows the Saducees do believe the writings of Moses, but they never believed nor saw Jesus as an embodiment or fulfillment of Jesus in that context.

Look at verse 45 and 46 closely;

John 5 v 45-46
45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

Can you see that?

Ihedinobi3:

Pretty much all versions that I have read (KJV, NIV, NASB, The Amplified, etc) have a note saying "the most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-..." or something similar in that chapter. My NIV even has a break in the chapter where it inserts the note above.

Then when you go into manuscript and original text scholarship, it is pretty much undeniable.

I have checked the earliest versions of the English Bible e.g. 1599 Geneva Bible, and it's in there.

So are you saying that portion of the Bible is not the word of God?

And signs & wonders would not follow those who believe in Jesus? That believers cannot pray for healing of others like the Apostles and likes of Stephen did?

OkCornel:


That same scripture shows the Saducees do believe the writings of Moses, but they never believed nor saw Jesus as an embodiment or fulfillment of Jesus in that context.

Look at verse 45 and 46 closely;




Can you see that?

Wow. Is it I who needs to see what you just quoted, or is it you? If the Lord meant that they truly trusted Moses, would He go on to say that they did not believe Him?

NIV1984 translates it like this:

"Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set."

The idea here is that they think that, just like the many who keep saying of the Lord Jesus, "Lord, Lord," if they claimed association with Moses, then they were okay with God even if they completely denied everything that Moses taught.

That is the point. They didn't care what Moses said. They only cared that they could be associated with him.

@ihedinobi3, I think we're derailing this thread. I'm enjoying our discussion. Can you mention me on a thread for this purpose? Perhaps a thread of yours you've created in respect to what we are currently discussing.

Thanks

OkCornel:


I have checked the earliest versions of the English Bible e.g. 1599 Geneva Bible, and it's in there.

So are you saying that portion of the Bible is not the word of God?

And signs & wonders would not follow those who believe in Jesus? That believers cannot pray for healing of others like the Apostles and likes of Stephen did?

No kidding. The English Bibles were the earliest manuscripts?

I'm saying that some foreign elements that are not truly part of the Bible were inserted into the text over the time that we have had the Bible.

And I'm saying that everything after verse 8 in Mark 16 is not part of the Bible.

Ihedinobi3:

Wow. Is it I who needs to see what you just quoted, or is it you? If the Lord meant that they truly trusted Moses, would He go on to say that they did not believe Him?

NIV1984 translates it like this:

"Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set."

The idea here is that they think that, just like the many who keep saying of the Lord Jesus, "Lord, Lord," if they claimed association with Moses, then they were okay with God even if they completely denied everything that Moses taught.

That is the point. They didn't care what Moses said. They only cared that they could be associated with him.

My goodness.

Did the Saducees believe the writings of Moses? The books of the Law? Capital YES!

Did they see Jesus as the fulfillment of such? Capital NO!


It's straightforward. Ok please, what is your understanding of having "your hopes set" or as KJV puts it "Moses, IN WHOM YE TRUST"

Does it make sense for them not to believe the writings and authority of Moses and yet still obey the Laws of Moses?

What Jesus was pointed out was the fact that they were blind to Him being a fulfillment of the Law and Prophets.

OkCornel:
@ihedinobi3, I think we're derailing this thread. I'm enjoying our discussion. Can you mention me on a thread for this purpose? Perhaps a thread of yours you've created in respect to what we are currently discussing.

Thanks

I typically don't create threads, and I think that this conversation belongs here as more reason not to trust claims of visions that are inconsistent with the Bible.

But if you want to move the conversation elsewhere, I would be happy to join you at any thread you call me to.

Ihedinobi3:

I typically don't create threads, and I think that this conversation belongs here as more reason not to trust claims of visions that are inconsistent with the Bible.

Till you have an encounter, seek solace in the words of God limited edition a.k.a. 66 books of the Bible.

Ihedinobi3:

But if you want to move the conversation elsewhere, I would be happy to join you at any thread you call me to.

Cheers bro.

Perhaps later this weekend then. But I really enjoyed our discussion.

Have a blessed day...

OkCornel:


My goodness.

Did the Saducees believe the writings of Moses? The books of the Law? Capital YES!

Did they see Jesus as the fulfillment of such? Capital NO!


It's straightforward. Ok please, what is your understanding of having "your hopes set" or as KJV puts it "Moses, IN WHOM YE TRUST"

Well, if the Writings of Moses said that Jesus was their fulfillment, how can you say that they believed them That is notwithstanding what the Lord Himself said.

I already explained what it means. It's exactly the same thing as Luke 3:8 and John 8:39. Pretending that they were in the same category as Moses because they handled the Law did not mean that they believed Moses at all. Calling Jesus Lord does not necessarily mean that the caller believes in Him. That is why there are wolves in sheep's clothing, that is, unbelievers who pretend to believe.

OkCornel:


Cheers bro.

Perhaps later this weekend then. But I really enjoyed our discussion.

Have a blessed day...

I'm glad you did. I hope that it makes a good difference with you.

Have a good one too.

Ihedinobi3:

I'm glad you did. I hope that it makes a good difference with you.

Have a good one too.

Cheers

Ihedinobi3:

Well, if the Writings of Moses said that Jesus was their fulfillment, how can you say that they believed them That is notwithstanding what the Lord Himself said.

I already explained what it means. It's exactly the same thing as Luke 3:8 and John 8:39. Pretending that they were in the same category as Moses because they handled the Law did not mean that they believed Moses at all. Calling Jesus Lord does not necessarily mean that the caller believes in Him. That is why there are wolves in sheep's clothing, that is, unbelievers who pretend to believe.

Then that means the Pharisees never had their hopes set on Moses in the first place, and they were fools for obeying the Law...hmm?

Later then

Cheers

OkCornel:


Then that means the Pharisees never had their hopes set on Moses in the first place, and they were fools for obeying the Law...hmm?

Later then

Cheers

I don't see how it means at all that they obeyed the Law. It certainly meant that they were deluding themselves that Moses would identify with them and save them.

Sure.

Cheers to you too.

Ihedinobi3:

No kidding. The English Bibles were the earliest manuscripts?

I'm saying that some foreign elements that are not truly part of the Bible were inserted into the text over the time that we have had the Bible.

And I'm saying that everything after verse 8 in Mark 16 is not part of the Bible.

But the early believers performed signs and wonders, as codified in the Acts of Apostles...

Mark 16 v 9 - end is very much the Truth.

Anyways, later this weekend we'll see...

Ihedinobi3:


I actually would rather not repeat my posts unnecessarily, but I'll do it here just once for what good it might do you.

First, I did not say that it's not that important to see the Lord Jesus. I asked you why it is important to see Him.

Second, I went on to say that I have the Bible in my hands right now that I'm alive so that I have a good idea what He looks like, and I know that I will see Him either at the point of my death or when He returns at His Second Advent if I am still alive then, so I can wait. If you read that, it means that I do want to see Him, but I won't pretend that I have when I haven't, since I know from the Bible what He looks like, and I will see Him soon enough anyway.

Third, I told you right at the beginning of my conversation with you that Revelation 1 describes the appearance of the Lord Jesus. That is how I know what He looks like and that is why I can reject these spurious ideas that He looks anything like these weird pictures you're posting here.

Fourth, I said, "one and a half thousand years." You know what that is, don't you?

Fifth, you say I find it difficult to say yes or no to your question, but you should see from my second and third points above that I have answered you multiple times. In fact, I told you before you asked how I know what the Lord looks like. In other words, this is me repeating myself yet again.

From your comments and responses here thus far, first you've shown that you are not straightforward, at least not in your conversations.

And secondly that your coming here was ulterior motivated, and has nothing to do with God, hence your denouncement of the pics of Jesus posted using the excuse of the Bible, even though according to you, it has nothing to do with your coming here.

So I'd advice you not to allow Satan use you to distract from the God-centred purpose of this thread which is to draw men to Him, but look for any thread of mine related to any issues you have with me and present your case there.

But even you don't, this is my last response on this thread concerning the issues you've raised.

The reason I asked you to tell me when the Bible came into existence, was because the church I belong to existed before the Bible, hence they didn't need to look into the Bible to get the Words of Jesus, because they heard It directly from the Master's mouth, for those were the Words He used to built the church, not the Bible.

Nonetheless they are yet the most powerful church till date, for no church built on the Bible has been able to match their exploits needless say surpass it, to show that they didn't need the Bible and probably suggest that they were better off without the Bible.

And even the Words of Jesus inside the Bible, came from their own personal accounts and writings, for that was where the compilers of the Bible got the Words of Jesus from. So without it the Words of Jesus would not be inside of the Bible in the first place.

The point I'm trying to make is that despite that I emphasize the Words of Jesus over the Bible and yet quote from the Bible, that I could yet get it directly from the original manuscripts of the writers instead of getting it indirectly from the Bible which got it directly from the original manuscripts of those who wrote the gospels.

So your point is a result of your limited understanding and knowledge of the Truth, which is due to present traditions and customs of the church and not the Truth, hence you now worship the Bible as your Lord and Savior in the church despite that before the Bible the Church was.

And you actually remind me of the Pharisees who all they knew was the law of Moses, not knowing Jesus the Word of God was before the law of Moses ever came into existence, hence their uninformed view and consequent opposition of Jesus just as you are doing to me here.

This is the second time I think you're doing this, after a long while, but I was expecting that by now you ought to have seen enough to have changed your view concerning me, because if Jesus was truly your Lord, Savior and Master, shouldn't it please you that I'm lifting His Words up above all other?

And even what you accuse me of, you are obviously guilty of, if not, tell me that you observe every teaching and instruction in the Bible, and don't ignore some despite your emphasis of it?

I have much more to say concerning this but this response should suffice for this thread.

p.s. Remember when Michelle apologized to you concerning your acrimonious argument about high/kindergarten school stuffs, I was the one that was behind it even though you were supposed to be my enemy, so you should be grateful that I emphasize the Words of Jesus instead of the Bible for that was what you benefited from.

OkCornel:


But the early believers performed signs and wonders, as codified in the Acts of Apostles...

Mark 16 v 9 - end is very much the Truth.

Anyways, later this weekend we'll see...

As I said, many of those gifts stayed relevant until the Bible was completed. After that, the Spirit retired them from the Church. That wouldn't have happened if anything after verse 8 in Mark 16 was true.

But this is not a meaningful discussion to pursue, since if you reject the witness of the translators themselves to their own error in adding that part to the Bible, you probably will not listen to anything at all that demands that you not consider that portion as part of the Bible. I could even argue doctrinally, as I have already done to some extent, that that part conflicts with the rest of the Bible, and it would still make no difference with you. So, I don't think it is worth pursuing further.

Ihedinobi3:

As I said, many of those gifts stayed relevant until the Bible was completed. After that, the Spirit retired them from the Church. That wouldn't have happened if anything after verse 8 in Mark 16 was true.

But this is not a meaningful discussion to pursue, since if you reject the witness of the translators themselves to their own error in adding that part to the Bible, you probably will not listen to anything at all that demands that you not consider that portion as part of the Bible. I could even argue doctrinally, as I have already done to some extent, that that part conflicts with the rest of the Bible, and it would still make no difference with you. So, I don't think it is worth pursuing further.

Lol, that means the Holy Spirit has withheld his gifts from the church after the Bible era according to you...


Perhaps that also means the biographies of various men and women doing wonders in the books called God's Generals might be faking it as well...

Okay ooo

OkCornel:


Which one? The Bible with only 66 books? or the one with the Apocrypha...

Since the Bible was written and compiled, Has Jesus stopped showing Himself to people?

Why does it seem you are the one arguing Cornel?

budaatum:

Why does it seem you are the one arguing Cornel?

Am I?

Was asking questions there...not forcing my view point on him though.

See how the whole conversation played out eventually...

Ihedinobi3:

Mark 16 ends at verse 8. The rest of the chapter (and it has different endings with some longer than others in different Bibles) is an addition to what was originally written.

Hold on! You do know there were other additions, omissions, and edits in todays Bibles, right? Kind of makes believing suspect, won't you say? One might believe in a corrupted version!

buda is derailing! As far as op is concerned, thou shalt not create graven images and bow down to worship them.

OkCornel:


Am I?

Was asking questions there...not forcing my view point on him though.

See how the whole conversation played out eventually...

Oh Cornel, you were preaching to him even with your question, while Ihe was having an argueconversation with op.

PenGriffey:
This picture almost looks like the man I saw
Remember I told you he had beards. The background was as dark as the background in the second picture and it made Him look like he had a darker complexion that this .. It wasn't very clear but when the picture, the image I saw just flashed through my mind

More testimonies from nairalanders;

https://www.nairaland.com/5353610/much-respect-all-those-put#81413460

jesusjnr:

From your comments and responses here thus far, first you've shown that you are not straightforward, at least not in your conversations.

And secondly that your coming here was ulterior motivated, and has nothing to do with God, hence your denouncement of the pics of Jesus posted using the excuse of the Bible, even though according to you, it has nothing to do with your coming here.

So I'd advice you not to allow Satan use you to distract from the God-centred purpose of this thread which is to draw men to Him, but look for any thread of mine related to any issues you have with me and present your case there.

But even you don't, this is my last response on this thread concerning the issues you've raised.

The reason I asked you to tell me when the Bible came into existence, was because the church I belong to existed before the Bible, hence they didn't need to look into the Bible to get the Words of Jesus, because they heard It directly from the Master's mouth, for those were the Words He used to built the church, not the Bible.

Nonetheless they are yet the most powerful church till date, for no church built on the Bible has been able to match their exploits needless say surpass it, to show that they didn't need the Bible and probably suggest that they were better off without the Bible.

And even the Words of Jesus inside the Bible, came from their own personal accounts and writings, for that was where the compilers of the Bible got the Words of Jesus from. So without it the Words of Jesus would not be inside of the Bible in the first place.

The point I'm trying to make is that despite that I emphasize the Words of Jesus over the Bible and yet quote from the Bible, that I could yet get it directly from the original manuscripts of the writers instead of getting it indirectly from the Bible which got it directly from the original manuscripts of those who wrote the gospels.

So your point is a result of your limited understanding and knowledge of the Truth, which is due to present traditions and customs of the church and not the Truth, hence you now worship the Bible as your Lord and Savior in the church despite that before the Bible the Church was.

And you actually remind me of the Pharisees who all they knew was the law of Moses, not knowing Jesus the Word of God was before the law of Moses ever came into existence, hence their uninformed view and consequent opposition of Jesus just as you are doing to me here.

This is the second time I think you're doing this, after a long while, but I was expecting that by now you ought to have seen enough to have changed your view concerning me, because if Jesus was truly your Lord, Savior and Master, shouldn't it please you that I'm lifting His Words up above all other?

And even what you accuse me of, you are obviously guilty of, if not, tell me that you observe every teaching and instruction in the Bible, and don't ignore some despite your emphasis of it?

I have much more to say concerning this but this response should suffice for this thread.

p.s. Remember when Michelle apologized to you concerning your acrimonious argument about high/kindergarten school stuffs, I was the one that was behind it even though you were supposed to be my enemy, so you should be grateful that I emphasize the Words of Jesus instead of the Bible for that was what you benefited from.

I hear your accusations of me, but I don't see any proof of what you say. How have I failed to be straightforward?

As for my coming here, I said that there was more reason than just for the pictures and your claims, but I never said that my reason did not include the pictures and your claims. It was because you made this wild claim here that I showed up. I'm only further taking advantage of the opportunity to do what I can to help you, if I can, and to save others from your error, if they want to be.

I don't believe that the purpose of this thread is God-centered at all. And I don't believe that you are drawing anyone to God at all. I believe that you are confusing some true believers and misleading others. As for discussing on any of your other threads, this one is the right one because if you did see the Lord Jesus, how are we to know if it was true? Only because you say so? Or perhaps because the Bible agrees that you did? Are we to accept you as a great spiritual authority that we must not question, but believe completely? Why are we to?

I consider it fair if you choose to not speak to me. I don't always expect people to. I say the things I say in hopes that they will be saved out of trouble, and, barring that, that at least others who read what I say might be saved out of trouble too or encouraged in the Truth.

As for being enemies with you, I have never said that I am or decided that I am. I am still not sure what you believe about the Lord Jesus Christ. If you accept Him as God Who became Man to die for our sins, then we cannot be enemies, even if we are not necessarily friends either.

I do believe that you live in very dangerous error, and that you are leading others into it, but I typically prefer to leave you to your own devices. When I interfere as I did here, it is usually for want of something to do and in the hope that there might be some chance of getting through to you. Otherwise, I really can't afford to spend my time monitoring you and hounding you. Your choices are yours to make and answer for.

As for the church you speak of, as I said, I don't know what it is, but since the Church is built on Jesus Christ Himself, and since the Bible is the Revelation of Him, I cannot see how it is the Church of Jesus Christ that you mean. Those whom you say heard directly from Jesus were commissioned by the Holy Spirit to write what they had seen and heard so that it would be preserved to guide the Church until the return of the Lord. That is what they did, thus we have the Bible. So, if you reject the Bible, how can you claim to have any knowledge of what Jesus said? But you don't really reject the Bible since you believe that what you read of the words of Jesus out of it is really what Jesus said. But do you not? It's a confusion. You both believe and disbelieve the Bible. That really adds up to not believing in it at all. In other words, you are merely making things up to believe.

The original manuscripts you speak of, are they not the same ones from which the English translations were made? Are they not the Bible that we all speak of? Do you not still cut things out of them when you claim to receive and follow only the words that the Lord was quoted to say while leaving everything else out?

As for compilers, what do you mean? The Bible was not compiled by anyone. It was written and preserved by believers. Some people claim that they created the Canon, but what a lie that is. Nobody created any Canon of the Scriptures. The Old Testament was known in its completeness before even the Lord Jesus arrived on the human scene. The New Testament was known as it was being written. Peter, while alive, recognized that what Paul, also alive at the time, wrote was Scripture. Paul himself knew that he was writing Scripture as he wrote it, just as the prophet Jeremiah long before. What then is this madness that some people centuries later had some kind of special ability to identify what was and what wasn't Scripture? Scripture was Scripture as it was being written, and those who believe have always known what is and what isn't Scripture the same way that a baby knows mother's milk by instinct.

So when you talk of compilation, and possibly rejecting the Bible because of the politics of it, consider that you may be entirely wrong about what the Bible is.

As for worshiping the Bible as my Lord, I have heard such madness before too. But, as I said, it is madness. If I treasure what a person says, it is the person himself that I treasure. The same is true of the Bible. I receive it as God's Own Word. As such, I treasure the God Who speaks what I read in it, and worship Him. The Bible is not any kind of idol any more than words can supplant the person speaking them. And if this weren't true, are you not then worshipping the "Words of Jesus" that you make so much of instead of the Lord Jesus Himself?

As for the Pharisees, I already answered that with your friend in our conversation above. Anyone who cared about the Law of Moses would have believed in the Lord Jesus. So, the Pharisees are more like you than me.

It would please me vastly if you were lifting up the Lord and believing His Word. But you are not. You are making things up and wearying and misleading many others into error. I cannot celebrate that, unfortunately.

As for following the Bible in every point, I certainly try to. That is my ambition: to be found complete and perfect in the Truth and helping others to be the same. I may not reach that goal in total perfection, but I mean to strive for it with everything in me.

Feel free to say whatever you wish to say wherever you wish to say it. If it is prudent for me to respond, I will.

As for the issue that you referenced, I'm sure that you didn't need to interfere at all. I have been around on social media for a while now. Getting insulted and abused comes with the territory. It's only worse when you're a believer gifted in apologetics and participating in it.

OkCornel:


Lol, that means the Holy Spirit has withheld his gifts from the church after the Bible era according to you...


Perhaps that also means the biographies of various men and women doing wonders in the books called God's Generals might be faking it as well...

Okay ooo

The gifts of pastor-teacher and evangelist remain along with a vast multitude of other support gifts for the Ministry of the Truth in the Church (Ephesians 4:11-16).

Lots of people are faking lots of things.

Ihedinobi3:

The gifts of pastor-teacher and evangelist remain along with a vast multitude of other support gifts for the Ministry of the Truth in the Church (Ephesians 4:11-16).

Lots of people are faking lots of things.

But the gift of prophecy has been withheld by the Holy Spirit according to you...

And we have no genuine prophets with the gift of prophecy from the Holy Spirit in our time ba?

I've heard you ooo...