DappaD:

What I gave is just a brief demonstration that will appeal to a honesthearted individual who's seeking truth.



Right now, I believe you're just acting cynical because whatever I say is not of any concern to you since you don't have any regard for the Bible.
No problem, just go and worship your Yahveh the way you know best.

The bolded is what is giving them great concern because they're not even sure of the form of worship they are practicing!
Notice how they'll flare up whenever they found a JW, well it's because they keep wondering what exactly is making this people relaxed and contented with their beliefs? because they can run from MFM to RCCG to Deeper to Chosen for revival, vigil and convention but JWs will never consider any of their nonsense and ingredients!

DappaD:

What I gave is just a brief demonstration that will appeal to a honesthearted individual who's seeking truth.



Right now, I believe you're just acting cynical because whatever I say is not of any concern to you since you don't have any regard for the Bible.
No problem, just go and worship your Yahveh the way you know best.

I don't use the word 'bible' to refer to the Word of my Daddy in the sky, Yahveh Almighty. I use the word 'Scripture.' Why did you find that difficult to understand?

So, where did I say that I don't have regard for the Scriptures of my Father in heaven?

Emusan:

Yes Ooo ma se fun ee oo

You people didn't address that verse but throwing tantrums.

Did YAHWEH say "I YAHWEH, searches mind and heart?

Did Jesus in Revelation say "I AM THE ONE searching mind and heart"?

Even primary school pupils will understand that simple English.

Yahweh granted Jesus his son, that ability . Agree ??

Acehart:

Maybe I am confused. But I leave you with these definitions (in pictures).

For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with an order, accompanied by the proclamation of the archangel and then the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.

The Greek text says Voice . You are in a dillema right ? U clearly started a conversation topic u can't handle.

Barristter07:


The Greek text says Voice . You are in a dillema right ? U clearly started a conversation topic u can't handle.

You should have checked the etymology of that word. But I guess you are very busy doing more important things. And perhaps you are too busy to confirm this truth of this exposition on this verse in Revelations chapter 14.

Acehart:


Yes, it is I. That was my view for the last few years. But I am not stagnant. I studied to know the truth and this is the truth: Michael isn’t Jesus.

has dappad has exposed you now, tell me this, those pictures is that why you refused to answer the questions I asked you.

because you clearly said THERE IS ONLY ONE ARCHANGEL so you knew the truth, what the deceived you. Because this your new stand is so weak even you know it

BlueAngel444:
has dappad has exposed you now, tell me this, those pictures is that why you refused to answer the questions I asked you.

because you clearly said THERE IS ONLY ONE ARCHANGEL so you knew the truth, what the deceived you. Because this your new stand is so weak even you know it

Children say childish things; so I spoke as a child. Thank God I repented and the blood of Christ still flows for me. Now I know that there isn’t one archangel and Christ Jesus isn’t Michael.

Acehart:


Children say childish things; so I spoke as a child. Thank God I repented and the blood of Christ still flows for me. Now I know that there isn’t one archangel and Christ Jesus isn’t Michael.

since you still refuse to answer those questions, let me ask you this.

Now the question is, how did you come about a knowledge that told you there isn't one archangel?

BlueAngel444:
since you still refuse to answer those questions, let me ask you this.

Now the question is, how did you come about a knowledge that told you there isn't one archangel?

I asked you to restructure your questions and you questioned my knowledge with snide remarks. Which is easier: restructuring your questions or me telling you about my revelation regarding Christ?

Acehart:


You should have checked the etymology of that word. But I guess you are very busy doing more important things. And perhaps you are too busy to confirm this truth of this exposition on this verse in Revelations chapter 14.

So how does it change the Fact that it's the voice of arch angel ?

Barristter07:


Yahweh granted Jesus his son, that ability . Agree ??

Your brain is still paining you!

Yahweh says "I YAHWEH, searches the minds and tests the hearts..."

Jesus Christ says "I AM THE ONE who searches the minds and tests the hearts..."

Does this statement look like someone claiming being granted ability or claiming to be the actual person

Barristter07:



So how does it change the Fact that it's the voice of arch angel ?

Yes it is the voice of an archangel. I would like you see Revelation 8 to 11 (the clearest exposition of 1 Thess 4:16) you would realize none of us is wrong. While you look at the periphery, I’m looking more are center of what was proclaimed. But if you are speaking for superiority sake, what joy would the inferior of us have?

Barristter07:
So how does it change the Fact that it's the voice of arch angel ?

So if to you "with a voice of archangel" makes Christ the Micheal, why "with trump of God" didn't make Christ God?

Didn't Christ Himself say, He will come with ALL HIS ANGELS, which Michael is part of?

Funny thing is, none of this happened in your failed prophecy of 1914

Your own Christ come without a shout, no voice of archangel nor Trump of God! Yet you still believe Christ has come.

Acehart:


I asked you to restructure your questions and you questioned my knowledge with snide remarks. Which is easier: restructuring your questions or me telling you about my revelation regarding Christ?

I asked you were the questions not straight forward enough?

I ask you again what in that question needs restructuring?

Your revelation regarding Christ, , as what, a prophet or what? Is that personal revelation that agrees with the written record of others or one that contradicts it?!

BlueAngel444:
I asked you were the questions not straight forward enough?

I ask you again what in that question needs restructuring?

Your revelation regarding Christ, , as what, a prophet or what? Is that personal revelation that agrees with the written record of others or one that contradicts it?!

In agreement with records? yes. I said write your questions in an orderly manner. No one as learned as you asks questions that way.

BlueAngel444:
the term angel means messenger of God, yes. Is Jesus not a messenger of God. Is he not sent by God. Is it not in the bible where an angel speaks to another about what should or is to be done.

But you are right to believe his existence is like none of the other angels and his glory and position far exceeds theirs but still He like every other angel of God that does God's will.

to answer your question God made Jesus, Lord and Christ, God honored him and glorified him, Yes he had exclusivity but then He is the prince of Israel, the commander in chief of God's army, the Angel of the Lord, the one who came, obeyed and was glorified. The one called, who is like God, the only one who is like God. Micha-el. The one with many names, Wonderful, Counsellor, prince of peace. A prince all demons have feared and still fear.

Yes the term Angel means messager, which can be applied to both spirits and men but the book of hebrews was specific.
The Angel's mentioned in hebrews are the ministering spirits, so Jesus cannot be an angel.
Secondly, Jesus became a manager because he tool up that role just as he chosed to be a man.

Acehart:


He is my brother; he is yours too. His real name is Boanerges.

You seem like one with a good head on his shoulders; it would be nice if you posted a lot of good things in this section. [b]It’s horrifying seeing what the mods post on front page as Christian topics. [/b]It would be nice if someday “WoundedLamb” flooded this section with topics of divine concern that there wouldn’t be any reason for those men employed as mods to post airheaded topics that have nothing to do with Christian living.

I hope you begin today and surely, if it is nice, I would comment without any air of aggression, sneering or opposition.

@bolded would probably be the continued trajectory as long as you have people like MuttleyLaff who thrive on spreading toxicity and strife under the banner of Christainity on threads; and people like you sir, who rationalize and enable such behaviours, as you've done here.
Kindly compare Mark 3:17 to Luke 9:54-55(specifically 55) sir.
Unconditional love doesn't necessarily equate to unconditional acceptance of conduct sir.

WoundedLamb:
Heartwarming response

You might want to take out time to educate your friend above on how to engage people with decorum. His/her responses don't make room for non fallacious conversations.

MuttleyLaff:
You think too highly of your sanctimonious moralising on love self, who do you think has valuable and precious time to want to have a fight with you.

You think OP that opened the thread did so out of a dearth of love ni, hmm? Have you any idea what Matthew 28:19a means and is all about, erhn? That thread was purposely created so interested and curious minds could learn from it, but all you did was to waltz in to pooh pooh and piss on the fella's thread, strutting upandan all over the post, as if like an overpriced and over feathered peacock and ṣhitting on the post

If you dont want to know, then keep it to yourself, dont shoot down another man's innocent and harmless effort, with your defeatist, despondent dispirited and low self-esteem comments. It's posters like you with toxic comments like you made about someone's else post that stifles their gifting.

If you dont know things, you lack knowledge/wisdom, you're expected to God, who liberally, abudantly, and generously gives to all without finding fault (i.e. James 1:5) What's your problem sef? Who do you? Why pissing on another man's parade?

Go and dont slap the door after you

Acehart:
He is my brother; he is yours too. His real name is Boanerges.

You seem like one with a good head on his shoulders; it would be nice if you posted a lot of good things in this section. It’s horrifying seeing what the mods post on front page as Christian topics. It would be nice if someday “WoundedLamb” flooded this section with topics of divine concern that there wouldn’t be any reason for those men employed as mods to post airheaded topics that have nothing to do with Christian living.

I hope you begin today and surely, if it is nice, I would comment without any air of aggression, sneering or opposition.

---

---

---

jamesid29:
[s]@bolded would probably be the continued trajectory as long as you have people like MuttleyLaff who thrive on spreading toxicity and strife under the banner of Christainity on threads; and people like you sir, who rationalize and enable such behaviours, as you've done here.
Kindly compare Mark 3:17 to Luke 9:54-55(specifically 55) sir.
Unconditional love doesn't necessarily equate to unconditional acceptance of conduct sir.[/s]

"Hahaha... my posts do to you, what salt does to earthworms. It's entertaining watching you wriggle helplessly "
- WoundedLamb © copyright

It really is true that when a shoe is flung into an open air market place, the person who yelps out, is the one who got hit by the thrown shoe, lmso.

On many occasions, the person you'd take a bullet for, ends up being the one behind the smoking gun, smh lmso

jamesid29, I almost PMSL, reading your glowing and praising comment, lmso. The irony is that, I don't piss off very easily, excuse the word play here, lmso, I'll rather bite my tongue instead, but when I start tasting my own blood, you better look the fairy out. You seem to have it in you, to take me for someone, to put up with yours and any others' fairking bullshit.

There is a time and place for handing out a carrot or wield/use a big straight stick. Excuse my wordplay please, lmso, but you jamesid29, dont understand and do not know what it is to stand for truth in the midst of a crooked generation. jamesid29, if a crooked stick is before you, you need not explain how crooked it is. Just, lay a straight stick one down by the side of the crooked stick, and the work is well done, lmso. Laying down a straight stick, is exactly why I am on here jamesid29 and it does two things to posters, piss posters off and make posters smile. Which lucky one, are you jamesid29, lmso?

If ever their was a time to rightly divided the Word of truth, the time is now. Satan has a church for christians, for everyone, lmso, I can see that darkness is what you prefer. We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark, but the real tragedy of life is when supposedly grown men in the faint, are afraid of the light. It reminds me of the Ursula K. Le Guin: quote: "When you light a candle, you also cast a shadow.”

To light a candle or to cast a shadow, that is the question, lmso. Careful though there, don't shine too bright, as you may remind the jamesid29 people of their own darkness, lmso. To raise penis nobi by force. The devil has no power over you/anyone ... except in the dark or you're in the dark, lmso.

It's just heart breaking to watch and see that the light of the truth, can be harsh to those that have been far too long in the dark. Smh, brings mist to my eyes, all this. There are two kinds of light, the glow that illuminates, sheds light upon something for people to clearly see and the glare that obscures because people squint and shut their eyes, as the truth is too harsh for their eyes to see with, lmso.

I hardly attack the messenger, I dont kick at the foot. I kick the ball, but I sometimes, do give as good a kick back, as I get. Come on, with a nail, I come after you, nail for nail, with a hammer bonus for good and max effect, lmso, especially, if you are one of those who take pride and delight in their ignorances, others I will suffer gladly, and overlook however they carry themselves on threads

Double post

BlueAngel444:
the term angel means messenger of God, yes. Is Jesus not a messenger of God. Is he not sent by God. Is it not in the bible where an angel speaks to another about what should or is to be done.

But you are right to believe his existence is like none of the other angels and his glory and position far exceeds theirs but still He like every other angel of God that does God's will.

To answer your question God made Jesus, Lord and Christ, God honored him and glorified him, Yes he had exclusivity but then He is the prince of Israel, the commander in chief of God's army, the Angel of the Lord, the one who came, obeyed and was glorified. The one called, who is like God, the only one who is like God. Micha-el. The one with many names, Wonderful, Counsellor, prince of peace. A prince all demons have feared and still fear.

"Who is like God" does not equate to "who is God", the two dont have the same meaning, they are mutually exclusive. He is either God or He isn't God. He cant be like Himself, God.

Besides, of course, the name Michael, means "who is like God", and we are told that Micheal is a person who looked like a human in appearance, though has spiritual characteristics like God

livingchrist:
Yes the term Angel means messager, which can be applied to both spirits and men but the book of hebrews was specific.
The Angel's mentioned in hebrews are the ministering spirits, so [b]Jesus cannot be an angel[/b].
Secondly, Jesus became a manager because he tool up that role just as he chosed to be a man.

You spoiled a good response with saying "Jesus cannot be an angel". Why did you have say that when you know what an Angel/messengers means, hmm?

---

---

---

MuttleyLaff:
"Mal'ak" or "malaika", is the Hebrew, while the angel word, comes from the Greek word, which is "angelos" Each words, whether Hebrew/English/Greek, simply means someone sent on an errand or sent to give a messenger. Case in point, Angel Gabriel, lmso.

Angels, in short, actually and simply just means messengers, and vice versa.

As a matter of fact, in the Bible, angels can be either human beings on earth or extra-terrestrial beings from the heavens on earth, lmso, (i.e. angelic beings) and so both human being messengers and extra-terrestrial beings messenger are often described using the same word angels.

Now, all non human beings MESSENGERS are extra-terrestrial beings, but not all extra-terrestrial beings are MESSENGERS. Same way, as a flesh and blood messengers are human beings, but not all human beings are messengers, lmso

In fact, interestingly enough, Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, appeared on earth at least four times, as the Angel of the Lord, lmso.

"And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge,
and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none
(i.e. I looked for someone who might rebuild the wall of righteousness that guards the land.
I searched for someone to stand in the gap in the wall so I wouldn’t have to destroy the land, but I found no one.)"
- Ezekiel 22:30

"He saw that there was no man—He was amazed that there was no one—to intercede;
so His own arm brought salvation, and His own righteousness sustained Him."
- Isaiah 59:16

"I was amazed to see that no one intervened to help the oppressed.
So I Myself stepped in to save them with My strong arm, and My wrath sustained Me
(i.e. I looked, but there was no one to help; I was shocked because there was no one offering support.
So My right arm accomplished deliverance or achieved salvation for Me, my raging anger drove Me on)"
- Isaiah 63:5

Of course, Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, is an Angel, Malachi 3:1 confirms Him being a Messenger. This is God, à la carte Ezekiel 22:30, Isaiah 59:16 and Isaiah 63:5 verses above, sending Himself on an errand. Praise God! Alleluia!!

“Behold, I will send My messenger, who will prepare the way before Me.
Then the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to His temple
—the Messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight
—see, He is coming,” says the LORD of Hosts.”
- Malachi 3:1

“The LORD says,
"The time is coming when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah.”
- Jeremiah 31:31

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, too is an Angel, lmso, albeit is not He is not Archangel Michael. He made various visits to earth, in the capacity of the Angel of the Lord, (i.e. as Messenger of God/Yahweh/YHWH) prior to the incarnation circa 4000 years ago.

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, according to Malachi 3:1, seen above, is the Messenger/Angel of the Jeremiah 31:31 promised covenant

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, too is an Angel, lmso, albeit is not He is not Archangel Michael. He made various visits to earth, in the capacity of the Angel of the Lord, (i.e. as Messenger of God/Yahweh/YHWH) prior to the incarnation circa 4000 years ago.

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, according to Malachi 3:1, seen above, is the Messenger/Angel of the Jeremiah 31:31 promised covenant. He is a Messenger/Angel but He isn't Archangel Michael.

jamesid29:

@bolded would probably be the continued trajectory as long as you have people like MuttleyLaff who thrive on spreading toxicity and strife under the banner of Christainity on threads; and people like you sir, who rationalize and enable such behaviours, as you've done here.
Kindly compare Mark 3:17 to Luke 9:54-55(specifically 55) sir.
Unconditional love doesn't necessarily equate to unconditional acceptance of conduct sir.

Rationalize MuttleyLaff’s behavior? Must I use harsh words or derogatory words on him before I drive home my point? If you have observed my responses in this thread and some others, I would reply anyone in gentleness; and rebuke wisely or simply ignore.

Do you know the meaning of the word “Boanerges”? If you knew, you would know that I rebuked MuttleyLaff by giving him that name; MuttleyLaff knows that was a subtle rebuke, I am sure of that. I also made him and all those inclined to toxicity to know that when you acquiesce that someone is your brother in Christ, you do away with such behavior.

Maybe you wanted me to use a lot of words to align him with decency; but there is wisdom in speaking as little as possible. The way you have spoken about him and his unfriendly responses, show you have to learn conflict resolution; it also shows you have something against him. God has given you NL to learn how to be a better person; MuttleyLaff is just a tool of refinement in the hands of God.

With respect to the trajectory you have spoken of, who would you rather have on threads that show the power of God through writings: kobo!junkie or MuttleyLaff? I am sure you would pick the latter. The trajectory is the way it is because people like both of you don’t write. If you did, your temperament would get better, ask I!bhaga!di. By now, MuttleyLaff’s bite would be like that of a sandfly.

So I place a challenge to you: write, and we would see that the trajectory would glide down to the glory of God.

MuttleyLaff:
"Who is like God" does not equate to "who is God", the two dont have the same meaning, they are mutually exclusive. He is either God or He isn't God. He cant be like Himself, God.

Besides, of course, the name Michael, means "who is like God", and we are told that Micheal is a person who looked like a human in appearance, though has spiritual characteristics like God

You spoiled a good response with saying "Jesus cannot be an angel". Why did you have say that when you know what an Angel/messengers means, hmm?

---

---

---

“Behold, I will send My messenger, who will prepare the way before Me.
Then the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to His temple
—the Messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight
—see, He is coming,” says the LORD of Hosts.”
- Malachi 3:1

“The LORD says,
"The time is coming when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah.”
- Jeremiah 31:31

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, too is an Angel, lmso, albeit is not He is not Archangel Michael. He made various visits to earth, in the capacity of the Angel of the Lord, (i.e. as Messenger of God/Yahweh/YHWH) prior to the incarnation circa 4000 years ago.

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, according to Malachi 3:1, seen above, is the Messenger/Angel of the Jeremiah 31:31 promised covenant

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, too is an Angel, lmso, albeit is not He is not Archangel Michael. He made various visits to earth, in the capacity of the Angel of the Lord, (i.e. as Messenger of God/Yahweh/YHWH) prior to the incarnation circa 4000 years ago.

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, according to Malachi 3:1, seen above, is the Messenger/Angel of the Jeremiah 31:31 promised covenant. He is a Messenger/Angel but He isn't Archangel Michael.

Yes Jesus was the messager ordained by God to bring in the new covenant so in a way he is an Angel but not an angelic creature which hebrews was talking about.
Also, humans can also be Angels too but you would agree with me that hebrews was not referring to an angelic office but rather the angelic creatures themselves.

livingchrist:

Yes Jesus was the messager ordained by God to bring in the new covenant so in a way he is an Angel but not an angelic creature which hebrews was talking about.
Also, humans can also be Angels too but you would agree with me that hebrews was not referring to an angelic office but rather the angelic creatures themselves.

"Behold, I will send My messenger, who will prepare the way before Me.
Then the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to His temple
—the Messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight
—see, He is coming,” says the LORD of Hosts.”
- Malachi 3:1

1/ What does the word the "Messenger" used in Malachi 3:1 above say in the original Aramic/Hbrew text please?
2/ What is the meaning of that word in English?
3/ Who is the word referring to or mentioning?

Acehart:
Rationalize MuttleyLaff’s behavior? Must I use harsh words or derogatory words on him before I drive home my point? If you have observed my responses in this thread and some others, I would reply anyone in gentleness; and rebuke wisely or simply ignore.

Do you know the meaning of the word “Boanerges”? If you knew, you would know that I rebuked MuttleyLaff by giving him that name; MuttleyLaff knows that was a subtle rebuke, I am sure of that. I also made him and all those inclined to toxicity to know that when you acquiesce that someone is your brother in Christ, you do away with such behavior.

Maybe you wanted me to use a lot of words to align him with decency; but there is wisdom in speaking as little as possible. The way you have spoken about him and his unfriendly responses, show you have to learn conflict resolution; it also shows you have something against him. God has given you NL to learn how to be a better person; MuttleyLaff is just a tool of refinement in the hands of God.

With respect to the trajectory you have spoken of, who would you rather have on threads that show the power of God through writings: kobo!junkie or MuttleyLaff? I am sure you would pick the latter. The trajectory is the way it is because people like both of you don’t write. If you did, your temperament would get better, ask I!bhaga!di. By now, MuttleyLaff’s bite would be like that of a sandfly.

So I place a challenge to you: write, and we would see that the trajectory would glide down to the glory of God.

Are you minding the accuser of brethren, when that WoundedLamb came from nowhere to start pissing on your comment he didnt read to see that

livingchrist:

Yes the term Angel means messager, which can be applied to both spirits and men but the book of hebrews was specific.
The Angel's mentioned in hebrews are the ministering spirits, so Jesus cannot be an angel.
Secondly, Jesus became a manager because he tool up that role just as he chosed to be a man.

Well my take is Jesus is the lamb that was slain. Not saying Jesus is a spirit or an angel. But who Jesus was protrayed in the old testament or his designation then.

Besides the Son of man came to minister, serve, and save and not necessarily to be ministered to.

MuttleyLaff:
"Who is like God" does not equate to "who is God", the two dont have the same meaning, they are mutually exclusive. He is either God or He isn't God. He cant be like Himself, God.

and Lord Jesus Christ is not LORD God Almighty, the Father and Creator. Jesus who is the image and in the LIKENESS of God. Simple scriptures.

Besides, of course, the name Michael, means "who is like God", and we are told that Micheal is a person who looked like a human in appearance, though has spiritual characteristics like God

Gabriel was called the man Gabriel, safe to say he looked like a human but his designation was different.

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, too is an Angel, lmso, albeit is not He is not Archangel Michael. He made various visits to earth, in the capacity of the Angel of the Lord, (i.e. as Messenger of God/Yahweh/YHWH) prior to the incarnation circa 4000 years ago.

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, according to Malachi 3:1, seen above, is the Messenger/Angel of the Jeremiah 31:31 promised covenant

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, too is an Angel, lmso, albeit is not He is not Archangel Michael. He made various visits to earth, in the capacity of the Angel of the Lord, (i.e. as Messenger of God/Yahweh/YHWH) prior to the incarnation circa 4000 years ago.

Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour of the whole wide world, according to Malachi 3:1, seen above, is the Messenger/Angel of the Jeremiah 31:31 promised covenant. He is a Messenger/Angel but He isn't Archangel Michael.

I love your take above but disagree with that he was the first and only archangel. Who is like God.

BlueAngel444:
Well my take is Jesus is the lamb that was slain. Not saying Jesus is a spirit or an angel. But who Jesus was protrayed in the old testament or his designation then.

Besides the Son of man came to minister, serve, and save and not necessarily to be ministered to.

Jesus is the lamb that was slain, is figurative not talking of his nature.
@bolded, kudos atleast you are sincere enough not conclude yet.
The book of Hebrews declare all Angels to be ministering spirit, The word 'archangel means chief angel or in this case cheif ministering spirit.
But since Christ is above all ministering spirits (angels) atleast we can comfortably say that Jesus is not an angel.

Again, Jesus was portrayed in many different ways in the old testament.
He was portrayed as
1.The suffering servant
2. The prophet after moses (yes Jesus had a prophetic ministry)
3.God's anointed king
Amongst many. These offices are what bible scholars call the messianic offices.

The true identity of Jesus was not hidden in the old testament.

Micah 5:2
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

The book of micah clearly identified Jesus the one who has being proceeding from eternity see John 1v1.
Isaiah called Jesus Mighty God, remember in the bible only Yahweh is called the mighty God.
David called Jesus Lord.
If Jesus is not an angel, then Jesus is yahweh, the God of Israel in the old testament.

Jesus took a servant ministry to work salvation for mankind but that does not mean Jesus was a servant, he only took that position to fulfill the will of the father.

livingchrist:

Jesus is the lamb that was slain, is figurative not talking of his nature.
@bolded, kudos atleast you are sincere enough not conclude yet.
The book of Hebrews declare all Angels to be ministering spirit, The word 'archangel means chief angel or in this case cheif ministering spirit.
But since Christ is above all ministering spirits (angels) atleast we can comfortably say that Jesus is not an angel.

let's not get comfortable. Saying Jesus is not a Spirit is because he has physical body. Not he had, he still has it. Now God made that Jesus Lord and Savior, my responses as concerning Jesus being archangel is in reference to old testament scripture. Jesus is still commanded in chief but with higher honor and glory.

I know quite a bit about angels and there is no bad thing in calling Jesus an angel of the LORD GOD because that was his service before he came as a man. He was the message and the word of God.

Again, Jesus was portrayed in many different ways in the old testament.
He was portrayed as
1.The suffering servant
2. The prophet after moses (yes Jesus had a prophetic ministry)
3.God's anointed king
Amongst many. These offices are what bible scholars call the messianic offices.

The true identity of Jesus was not hidden in the old testament.

it was not completely revealed, but in parts and you have to see that those portrayal speak about his ministry on earth not his before earth. Though the prophets knew he exists before his manifestation on earth.

Micah 5:2
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

The book of micah clearly identified Jesus the one who has being proceeding from eternity see John 1v1.
Isaiah called Jesus Mighty God, remember in the bible only Yahweh is called the mighty God.
David called Jesus Lord.
If Jesus is not an angel, then Jesus is yahweh, the God of Israel in the old testament.

wrong YHVH is called El-shaddai a quite complex term, which in english could be ALmighty, it connots one who provides all, like a mother's succulent blossom to the child.

Jesus is not Yahweh, Gabriel said his name will be Yahweh Saves. Yasha. The one used for causing deliverance and salvation. Jesus was not God of Israel and will never be, even he didnt and wont claim so. He from eternity, God is eternity, the One who was before the beginning, the Almighty God.

Jesus took a servant ministry to work salvation for mankind but that does not mean Jesus was a servant, he only took that position to fulfill the will of the father.

Jesus was always and will always be a servant and a son of God. Even the Holy Ghost is at the service of the Almighty.

BlueAngel444:
let's not get comfortable. Saying Jesus is not a Spirit is because he has physical body. Not he had, he still has it. Now God made that Jesus Lord and Savior, my responses as concerning Jesus being archangel is in reference to old testament scripture. Jesus is still commanded in chief but with higher honor and glory.

Jesus is not a Spirit because he said it himself. A Spirit do not have flesh and bones which Jesus possesses.
God made Jesus both Lord and saviour yes, because would not honor himself.
As a servant and a man Jesus needed his father to honor him with that position he didnt take any position by himself but as a good servant he waited for the father to do it.

There is no scripture basis for insinuating that Jesus is the archangel.
Angel Michael is still an angel right? Whether old or new testament he is still an angel but yet hebrews just told you Jesus is higher than the Angel's but Michael remains the same archangel michael.

I know quite a bit about angels and there is no bad thing in calling Jesus an angel of the LORD GOD because that was his service before he came as a man. He was the message and the word of God.

actually it is a Blasphemy calling God angel.
Can you show me an evidence of Jesus being in service before coming to the earth?

it was not completely revealed, but in parts and you have to see that those portrayal speak about his ministry on earth not his before earth. Though the prophets knew he exists before his manifestation on earth.

but this is contradicting to your initial reply that Jesus was a servant even before coming to the earth

wrong YHVH is called El-shaddai a quite complex term, which in english could be ALmighty, it connots one who provides all, like a mother's succulent blossom to the child.

Jesus is not Yahweh, Gabriel said his name will be Yahweh Saves. Yasha. The one used for causing deliverance and salvation. Jesus was not God of Israel and will never be, even he didnt and wont claim so. He from eternity, God is eternity, the One who was before the beginning, the Almighty God.

Jesus was always and will always be a servant and a son of God. Even the Holy Ghost is at the service of the Almighty.

Yasha is Jesus earty name not his revealed name in the old testament. Many times Jesus pronounced himself as the I AM which is yahweh's name.
The prophet Isaiah Identifies Jesus as mighty God a title that solely belongs to Yahweh.

DappaD:

What I gave is just a brief demonstration that will appeal to a honesthearted individual who's seeking truth.



Right now, I believe you're just acting cynical because whatever I say is not of any concern to you since you don't have any regard for the Bible.
No problem, just go and worship your Yahveh the way you know best.

I don't use the word 'bible' to refer to the Word of my Daddy in the sky, Yahveh Almighty. I use the word 'Scripture.' Why did you find that difficult to understand?

So, where did I say that I don't have regard for the Scriptures of my Father in heaven?

Acehart:

Rationalize MuttleyLaff’s behavior? Must I use harsh words or derogatory words on him before I drive home my point? If you have observed my responses in this thread and some others, I would reply anyone in gentleness; and rebuke wisely or simply ignore.

You do not have to use derogatory words to let someone know where you stand.
Did I use derogatory words with you sir; I do not believe I did, but I did say it clear enough for you to give a detailed reply.

Do you know the meaning of the word “Boanerges”? If you knew, you would know that I rebuked MuttleyLaff by giving him that name; MuttleyLaff knows that was a subtle rebuke, I am sure of that. I also made him and all those inclined to toxicity to know that when you acquiesce that someone is your brother in Christ, you do away with such behavior.

I don't see how "Boanerges" is letting someone know their behaviour is not right; You and I have a different understanding of the word.

The way you have spoken about him and his unfriendly responses, show you have to learn conflict resolution; it also shows you have something against him. God has given you NL to learn how to be a better person; MuttleyLaff is just a tool of refinement in the hands of God.

Its quite interesting, that you would say I have something against him personally.
I've been on NL on and off for over a year. I've had interesting conversations with a good number of people; some of them great conversations and some, not so much. What's interesting is, In all my conversations on NL(both good and not so good) , you are the second person to say I have a personal grudge against someone on here. I'm guessing you can guess who the first person is. Funny enough, I was so oblivious to what he was talking about that we eventually found out he read something totally different to what I was saying and held on to it for quite a while.
Anyway I'll tell you what I told him. I would rather go off NL for good than to get to a point where I would be carrying a grudge up and down for someone I do not even know. Its hard enough to hold a grudge against someone you know physically talkless of someone you don't even know what he/she looks like, what part of the world they are in, what is their real name etc.
Adulting takes enough energy on its own for one to start adding unnecessary online grudges to it.
So no, I do not have anything personal against him.
I say what I believe to be right without crossing the line and that's it.

With respect to the trajectory you have spoken of, who would you rather have on threads that show the power of God through writings: kobo!junkie or MuttleyLaff? I am sure you would pick the latter. The trajectory is the way it is because people like both of you don’t write. If you did, your temperament would get better, ask I!bhaga!di. By now, MuttleyLaff’s bite would be like that of a sandfly.

The first issue here is, you are looking at it from a lesser evil perspective. I've had the opportunity to have a couple of conversations with kob!ojunkie and yes he still has a lot to learn just like the rest of us but that doesn't mean you get to rationalize away muttley's behaviour since you prefer his theology over another persons own. They are not the only two people on nairaland. Without or without either of them, there would always be people with good heads on their shoulders in this section.

Secondly, the power and what God is like shines more brightly through the Christain character than in any words of wisdom or knowledge.
I am mainly an history person(secular and religious) so I tend to always look at the world from a historical perspective.
What made early christainity blossom in a world of conquest and philosophy, was not the writings of Origen or Tertullian but because of mainly two things; the cross and the christain character.
This two things were so counter culture to the Roman ethos that even the emperors took notice of these band of unlikely communities. Things that we take for granted today e.g, the intrinsic value of all humans, standing up for the weak and marginalized, believing all humans deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, weakness as a form of strength and so on. All this were foreign to the Roman conception of how the world works, but these and many more, were the very things that pulled people in, through the power the Spirit.
Don't get me wrong sir, I do not think apologetics and biblical scholarship are not important; They have there place. But in the grand scheme of things, this things pale in comparison to actually living the christain life and how we treat others. I would take a community that only knows 1% of the gospel (the death and resurrection of Christ and free gift of salvation - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4) and that embodies the christain character over a community that can dissect the word left to right but do not embody the love of God- 1 Corinthians 13.
As I said earlier, your conception of a trade off is incorrect and in this case ,unnecessary.

So do I have anything against MuttleyLaff personally? No I do not. Has he done anything to me personally that I'm trying to settle a score? Nope. Matter of fact, the couple of times me and him have been in a conversation, as soon as it tilts to him doing his anger speech, I just stop reading whatever he writes from that point onwards. I skip through it and give a one liner reply or ignore. There's too much to think about in the real world.

This is about a pattern of behaviour, not about any personal slight. I remember when this section used to be flooded with threads and comments from the radical wing of Atheistism and the tactics was always to belittle and attack religious folks at every turn. For some reason, this radical wing sort of disappeared from the section and now with the opportunity to show how a predominantly Christain section can be even in with our differences and theology, people like muttley and co just slide right in and took thier places. Problem in today's world is, we live in a culture where if you speak against your own whether right or wrong, you will be termed a hater just as I'm apparently being called here(I think)

Lastly, my post wasn't even about muttley. It was about your post and your enabling of his behaviour. I only tagged him because I do not believe in speaking behind people's back and since he's a subject in the conversation in this particular instance, he deserved to be privy to the conversation. What I have to say to him, I have done that personally on FOLYK!AZE's thread and that's that.
As I alluded to earlier, I usually view the world through the eyes of history. The thing about history is that, there's always a pattern(as they say, there's nothing new under the sun). I'll keep this short since I've written too much already.
Just as you have rationalized here, by saying you would rather have a muttley with his strife over letting some other person with a less desirable theology run wild, is the very same types of compromise people have made over the centuries and it's always a slippery slope. The men of God you see today didn't become the gods of men overnight. The Catholic church didn't become the big bad wolf in the middle ages overnight. The evangelicals in the states didn't loose all credibility overnight and trump didn't get this embolden by them overnight. Alot of factors and people contributed to it bit by bit; some were actually doing what they think was best at the time.
There's no time to expanciate on these things but the point is, there's always a point you have to say " This is not okay", "This should not be left unchecked".
The alternative is usually not what anyone can predict

I think what I've said would have to suffice to pass a cross my point even though you might not agree with them

[quote author=jamesid29 post=94514361]

You do not have to use derogatory words to let someone know where you stand.
Did I use derogatory words with you sir; I do not believe I did, but I did say it clear enough for you to give a detailed reply.

You didn’t use any derogation; I meant you think I didn’t chide MuttleyLaff the way you expected me to - in a harsh, derogatory manner. You know what? I have a couple of times written to MuttleyLaff that he is abrasive, and he should speak with decorum to everyone who ‘jars his nerve‘. I wish he would be a gentleman in every situation. I wish that he would be a martini shaken, not stirred, when he feels roughed up by someone’s comment.

I don't see how "Boanerges" is letting someone know their behaviour is not right; You and I have a different understanding of the word.

The psalmist said: “I am for peace, but when I speak, they are for war”; o! the contrast that exists in many of us. We mean well but the methods we employ are cruel.

I called him “a son of Thunder”; should not he get the idea that I meant he takes pleasure in startling people? Who enjoys a thunderstorm? Definitely not me. I know he got the point, and if I didn’t do enough to rebuke him, I’m sorry. I have a feeling that you think of me highly to deliver such a thing; the problem is: I don’t esteem myself, whatsoever. Though the opportunity for reprimanding presented itself, I feel unqualified to do such a thing.

Its quite interesting, that you would say I have something against him personally.

I don’t think you have something against him. I said you response showed either of two things - you are unskilled in conflict resolution or you have an ox to grind.

What's interesting is, In all my conversations on NL(both good and not so good) , you are the second person to say I have a personal grudge against someone on here. I'm guessing you can guess who the first person is.

I don’t know who the first person is o. So I am not the second person if what besets you is your inability to resolve conflicts amicably.

Funny enough, I was so oblivious to what he was talking about that we eventually found out he read something totally different to what I was saying and held on to it for quite a while.

Eyah. MuttleyLaff, see yourself.

The first issue here is, you are looking at it from a lesser evil perspective. I've had the opportunity to have a couple of conversations with kob!ojunkie and yes he still has a lot to learn just like the rest of us but that doesn't mean you get to rationalize away muttley's behaviour since you prefer his theology over another persons own. They are not the only two people on nairaland. Without or without either of them, there would always be people with good heads on their shoulders in this section.

I said what I said on a light note. However, the issue here isn’t MuttleyLaff’s theology but his behavior. Not many would fault his theology. The other man has issues with his behavior and his theology. This was my perspective when I asked you choose one.

MuttleyLaff taint is his behavior. He bullies and speaks with an air of arrogance; but a reprimand would only work on him if he respects you; I don’t think I have got to that place yet.

Secondly, the power and what God is like shines more brightly through the Christain character than in any words of wisdom or knowledge.

You said “more brightly”; yes, but it doesn’t mean that words of wisdom or knowledge don’t shine. Gods power would shine if ones words are laced with godly wisdom and knowledge. Isn’t the power of life and death in the tongue? Does the tongue not speak what dwells in the mind? Is the mind not transformed through words anymore? If you say “nay”, Christian character would transform the wicked rather, then I ask you this: didn’t the scriptures say that when grace is shown to the wicked, they do not learn righteousness; even in a land of uprightness they go on doing evil and do not regard the majesty of the Lord? When you downplay righteous words in favor of righteous display, you are setting the stage for an unbalanced doctrine.

As I said earlier, your conception of a trade off is incorrect and in this case ,unnecessary. So do I have anything against MuttleyLaff personally?

I believe you.

Problem in today's world is, we live in a culture where if you speak against your own whether right or wrong, you will be termed a hater just as I'm apparently being called here(I think)

I am not referring to you and a hater. A hater is someone who hates the progress of another man. If he is your own, you would speak against him in the pattern of Galatians 6:1-10.

It was about your post and your enabling of his behaviour.

Hmmm. There is a lady from the US who MuttleyLaff bashed; I was shocked to see the things he wrote. I rebuked him and he didn’t seem to see what I saw. He used the scriptures to back his actions. When one uses scriptures to enable bad behavior, it is quite difficult for me to continue correcting because I don’t find pleasure typing for long periods on phones and I am not argumentative.

I learn something from God’s relationship with David, the King: that’s, God will deal with his own in an almost brutal way so that they stop many bad behavior.

There is a limit to what man can do with respect to correcting. Please pardon what you see as my shortcoming; I am also work-in-progress.