₦airaland Forum

mubrex:
Aramaic continued in wide use
until about AD 650, when it was supplanted by
Arabic. The present day Bible is not, however,
based on the Aramaic manuscripts, but on Greek
and Latin versions.

Well Greek was the lingua franca in the Roman Orient just like English is in Nigeria and French in Cote d'Ivoire. Remember that Rome was the World Power then.

The Awaited Prophet
Pre-Islam Jews and Christians of Arabia were
awaiting a prophet. Before the appearance of
Muhammad, Arabia was home to Jews, Christians,
and pagan Arabs who, on occasion, went to war
with each other.
The Jews and Christians would say: "The time has
come for the unlettered prophet to appear who will
revive the religion of Abraham. We will join his
ranks and wage fierce war against you."
The Jews of Madinah were anxiously awaiting the
arrival of a prophet. The third and fourth witnesses
were their two famous Jewish rabbis, Abdullah ibn
Salam and Mukhayriq.
The sixth and seventh witnesses were also Yemeni
Jewish rabbis, Wahb ibn Munabbih, and Ka’b al-
Ahbar (d. 656 CE). Ka’b found long passages of
praise and the description of the Prophet

concerning the Jews, that period was when this judgement was on them:Isaiah 29:10,11
10 For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep,
and hath closed your eyes:
the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.
11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed
Normally, no Jew will speak words (such as the highlighted) without clear and obvious prophecies from the Scriptures.

Bible Prophecies about the Advent of
Muhammad
Abraham is widely regarded as the
common father of the Jews, Christians and
Muslims.
Through his second son, Isaac, came all
Israelite prophets including such towering
figures as Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David,
Solomon and Jesus (peace and blessings
be upon them all).
The advent of these great prophets was in partial
fulfillment of God’s promises to bless the nations
of earth through the descendants of Abraham
(Genesis 12:2-3). Such fulfillment is
wholeheartedly accepted by Muslims whose faith
considers the belief in and respect of all prophets
an article of faith.
Blessings of Ishmael and Isaac
Was the first born son of Abraham (Ishmael) and
his descendants included in God’s covenant and
promise?
A few verses from The Bible may help shed some
light on this question:
- Genesis 12:2-3 speaks of God’s promise to
Abraham and his descendants before any child was
born to him.
- Genesis 17:4 reiterates God’s promise after the
birth of Ishmael and before the birth of Isaac.
- In Genesis, chapter 21, Isaac is specifically
blessed but Ishmael was also specifically blessed
and promised by God to become “a great nation”
especially in Genesis 21:13-18

Genesis 17:19-21
19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name[b] Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.[/b]
20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
21 [size=13pt]But[/size] my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year

Clarifies who was to be the perpetrator of that covenant, not both of them, and through whom He in Whom all the nations of the earth will be blessed will come.

- According to Deuteronomy 21:15-17 the
traditional rights and privileges of the first born son
are not to be affected by the social status of his
mother (being “free” women such as Sarah, Isaac’s
mother, or a “Bondwoman” such as Hagar,
Ishmael’s mother). This is only consistent with the
moral humanitarian principles of all revealed faiths.

That is as far as inheritance was concerned but for blessings, it could take any pattern: Jacob was preferred to Esau the eldest; Ephraim was preferred to Manasseh etc

Muhammad: The Prophet Like unto Moses
Long time after Abraham, God’s promise to send
the long-awaited Messenger was repeated this time
in Moses’ words.

Likeness not in mundane aspects like length of beard, use of rod, parentage, learning etc. Moses came as the messenger of the Old Covenant while Jesus came with the New Covenant and both Covenants are premised on God's promise to Abraham!

In Deuteronomy 18:18, Moses spoke of the prophet
to be sent by God who is:
- From among the Israelite’s “brethren” a reference
to their Ishmaelite cousins as Ishmael was the
other son of Abraham who was explicitly promised
to become a “great nation”.

The same Deuteronomy 17:15 speaks of selecting a king from brethren. Now no foreigner/Ishmaelite ever became king. Why will brethren mean only Israelites in chapter 17 and mean Ishmaelites in chapter 18?!

- A Prophet like unto Moses. There were hardly
any two prophets who were so much alike as
Moses and Muhammad. Both were given
comprehensive law code of life, both encountered
their enemies and were victors in miraculous ways,
both were accepted as prophets/statesmen and
both migrated following conspiracies to
assassinate them. Analogies between Moses and
Jesus overlooks not only the above similarities but
other crucial ones as well (e.g. the natural birth,
family life and death of Moses and Muhammad but
not Jesus, who was regarded by his followers as
the son of God and not exclusively a messenger of
God, as Moses and Muhammad were and as
Muslims belief Jesus was).

These earthly aspects was not the likeness intended! Moses was sent with the miraculous, was Mohammed? Moses came with reference to God's promise to Abraham, did Mohammed? Moses had the Spirit of God upon him(Num 11:25 and at a time God took of the Measure on Moses and imparted to 70 men), was Mohammed?

The Awaited Prophet Was to Come From Arabia
Deuteronomy 33:1-2 combines references to
Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. It speaks of God
(i.e. God’s revelation) coming from Sinai, rising
from Seir (probably the village of Sa’ir near
Jerusalem) and shining forth from Paran.
According to Genesis 21:21, the wilderness of
Paran was the place where Ishmael settled (i.e.
Arabia, specifically Makkah).

In NO place does the Bible liken men to mountains!!!

'The short answer to our title question is that the Mountain of God, Mt. Horeb, Mt. Sinai and Mt. Paran are all names for Mt. Sinai, and Mt. Seir is important for determining the location of Mt. Sinai. The long answer, which is the subject of this article, is that each of these names provides important clues for determining where Mt. Sinai is located...'
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/11/What-Do-Mt-Horeb2c-The-Mountain-of-God2c-Mt-Paran-and-Mt-Seir-Have-to-Do-with-Mt-Sinai.aspx#Article

Isaiah 42:1-13 speaks of the beloved of God. His
elect and messenger who will bring down a law to
be awaited in the isles and who “shall not fail not
be discouraged till he have set judgment on earth.”
Verse 11, connects that awaited one with the
descendants of Ke’dar. Who is Ke’dar?

Isaiah 42 speaks of Christ during His first and second advent!
Isaiah 52:13-15 through chapter 53 goes further in describing the Servant:
13 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently,
he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.
14 As many were astonied at thee;
his visage was so marred more than any man,
and his form more than the sons of men:
15 so shall he sprinkle many nations;
the kings shall shut their mouths at him:
for that which had not been told them shall they see;
and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

Describing the crucifixion of Christ and the redemptive benefit to all who believe from all nations

Habakkuk 3:3 speaks of God (God’s help) coming
from Te’man (an Oasis North of Madinah according
to J. Hasting’s Dictionary of The Bible), and the
holy one (coming) from Paran. That holy one who
under persecution migrated from Paran (Makkah)
to be received enthusiastically in Madinah was
none but Prophet Muhammad.

Habakkuk 3:3
God came from Teman,
and the Holy One from mount Paran. Selah.
His glory covered the heavens,
and the earth was full of his praise.

Attributing this to man simply because familiar places are mentioned, is blasphemy!

Was it a coincidence that the Prophet “like unto
Moses” from the “brethren” of the Israelites (i.e.
from the Ishmaelites) was also described as one in
whose mouth God will put His words and that he
will speak in the name of God. (Deuteronomy
18:18-20).

Was it a coincidence that Jesus said:
John12:49 etc
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

Was it also a coincidence the
“Paraclete” that Jesus foretold to come after him
was described as one who “shall not speak of
himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he
speak . . .” (John 16:13)

And that One thus foretold was to abide IN the disciples forever?
John 14:15-17
15If ye love me, keep my commandments.
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you
Moses was not said to be abiding in them by his words hence this was not referring to words but a Personality!

Was it another coincidence that Isaiah ties between
the messenger connected with Ke’dar and a new
song (a scripture in a new language) to be sang
unto the lord (Isaiah 42:10-11).

Rather that the passage describes the Millenial reign of Christ during His second advent when,"... he shall speak peace unto the heathen:
and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea,
and from the river even to the ends of the earth." Zechariah 9:10.
Then all the nations of the world will rejoice as Isaiah 42:10,11a approves:
Sing unto the Lord a new song,
and his praise from the end of the earth,
ye that go down to the sea, and all that is therein;
the isles, and the inhabitants thereof.
11 Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voice,

More explicitly,
prophesies Isaiah “for with stammering lips, and
another tongue, will he speak to this
people” (Isaiah 28:11). This latter verse correctly
describes the “stammering lips” of Prophet
Muhammad

Let's see the context:
Isaiah 28:7-13 Verse 7 describes the offence of the people, verse 12 showed their rejection of God's admonition, verses 13 the judgement and verse 11 the means!
7 But they also have erred through wine,
and through strong drink are out of the way;
the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink,
they are swallowed up of wine,
they are out of the way through strong drink;
they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.
11 for with stammering lips and another tongue
will he speak to this people.
12 To whom he said,
This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest;
and this is the refreshing:
[size=13pt]yet they would not hear[/size].

13 But the word of the Lord was unto them
precept upon precept, precept upon precept;
line upon line, line upon line;
here a little, and there a little;
that they might go, and fall backward,
and be broken, and snared, and taken.
[/b

Up to the time of Jesus (peace be upon him), the
Israelites were still awaiting for that Prophet like
unto Moses prophesied in Deuteronomy 18:18.
When John the Baptist came, they asked him if he
was Christ and he said “no”. They asked him if he
was Elias and he said “no”. Then, in apparent
reference to Deuteronomy 18:18, they asked him
“art thou that Prophet” and he answered: “No”.
(John 1:19-21)

No point referencing those who had among them those who expected two Messiahs at the same time; one to fight, the other to reign when the normal believers who were inspired by the Holy Spirit knew He was Just One (Luke 1:67-80, Luke 2:25-34 etc)

In the Gospel according to John (Chapters 14, 15,
16) Jesus spoke of the “Paraclete” or comforter
who will come after him, who will be sent by Father
as another Paraclete, who will [b]teach new things

NOT TRUE

which the contemporaries of Jesus could not bear

Which was revealed to the holy apostles and prophets when the True Paraclete came on the day of Pentecost and onwards!

.
While the Paraclete is described as the spirit of
truth, (whose meaning resemble Muhammad’s
famous title Al-Amin , the trustworthy), he is
identified in one verse as the Holy Ghost (John
14:26). Such a designation is however inconsistent
with the profile of that Paraclete. In the words of
the Dictionary of The Bible, (Ed. J. Mackenzie)”
These items, it must be admitted, do not give an
entirely coherent picture.”

John 15:26,27
26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
27 and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning
Showing that the Comforter will be working at the same time the apostles will bear their witnesses! Besides did Mohammed bear witness of Jesus like Peter, James and John, Stephen etc did? Sealing their witness for Jesus with their Blood as martyrs??!

Indeed history tells us that many early Christians
understood the Paraclete to be a man and not a
spirit.

Not really! Jesus did not leave them in doubt:

Acts 1:5 were His words
For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

fulfilled as from Acts 2:1-4

Out of Context Coincidence?
Is it possible that the numerous prophecies cited
here are all individually and combined out of
context misinterpretations?
Is the opposite true, that such infrequently studied
verses fit together consistently and clearly point to
the advent of the man who changed the course of
human history, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon
him)?

Indeed! Nice way to conclude!

One of the signs of the Prophet to come from
Paran (Makkah) is that he will come with “ten
thousands of saints” (Deuteronomy 33:2 KJV).
That was the number of faithful who accompanied
Prophet Muhammad to Paran (Makkah) in his
victorious, bloodless return to his birthplace to
destroy the remaining symbols of idolatry in the
Ka’bah.

Rather it was Moses description of the events in Exodus 19:16,18
16 And it came to pass on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the [size=13pt]voice of the trumpet exceeding loud[/size]; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled.

Angels blow the trumpets, not God!

18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it [size=13pt]in fire[/size]: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly.

The thick cloud in relation to God is a collective word used to describe Myriads of Heavenly personalities eg see Hebrews 12:1

Well I am not holding brief but the same thing happens when you type Jesus with a lower case j you get an upper case J after submitting. Likewise it's not possible to type allah in upper case, after submitting, only A will be upper case.

Conclusion: This aspect is fair to both parties.

Indeed God has made provisions and it is left to our free will to choose what we do with them. However, once such choices are made whether good or bad, it should be realised that the consequences (which could be very far reaching either positive or negative) are part of whichever alternative we select. Hence we become responsible for the choices and their consequences.


Obviously ever since He gave man dominion over the earth, He has always recognised (or respected?) that order hence even redemption could only be possible through a Man (the Word became Flesh)!

^^^Noted.

Op,just one question. God said to Abraham, and to Isaac after Abraham was dead:

that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; 18 and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.Genesis 22:17,18

and I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;Genesis 26:4

Who is this Seed?

ABDULADINO:
Ofcos you cannot have assurance without "goodworks". The repentant thief went to heaven and there was no good works following him.

That's because he died on the day he believed. Besides, he ceased to revile Jesus like his fellow.

A believer does not lose his salvation by the sin of omission or commission.

why then is he commanded to watch and pray, take heed, hold fast, be sober and vigilant?

If it is Spiritual death, then Paul wouldn't have been confident to say deliver such one for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.( 1 cor 5:5). And we know that spirits do not die, they only suffer eternal torment.So which death are you talking about?

spiritual death:separation from God! Paul issued the same discipline on Hymenaeus and Philetus. Did they repent? Did they not persist in their faith wrecking teachings and Paul said to avoid them? Were they still saved while overthrowing the faith of others? Before you claim they were not saved initially, remember Paul's principle in 1 Corinth 5:12,13

Please do rightly divide the word of truth. The gospel is in dispensations. If you believe in rapture you will agree that the context of Matt 24..is tribulation, the time of great judgement on earth. Those enduring to the end are delivered out of tribulation into the millenial reign of Jesus Christ. It is not salvation.

The churches in Revelations were on earth and a similar charge was given them

I still maintain my stand that some of God's elect live barren lives without fruit..

Do earnestly consider 2 Peter 1:8-12

Faith works does not equal salvation, that is an invention of the roman catholics. Salvation is Faith minus works.

But true faith that produces salvation will be revealed by newness life. Titus 1:15,16, Titus 2:12,13

Yet he didn't die because God knows the end from the beginning. If God were to count believers who sin as dead then the blood of Jesus is powerless and has no efficacy, what you are advocating is that Jesus has to go back and hung on that cross every time a believer commits the sin of omission or comission. Very hilarious indeed.

Define Grace using relevant scriptures

ABDULADINO:
No role. They were pricked in their heart. It is the work of the Holy Spirit to convict sinners and bring them to repentance.Man is to receive. Man has no role in the gift of salvation. He is just to believe and accept it.

He believes and accepts and he must continue in that faith with the evidence of the fruits of love, holiness else he becomes a reprobate 2 Corinth 13:5

Fall in to what?

sin

Which death actually?

I am sure you are not mistaking the death James mentioned to be the physical one; that lives us with one option!

Endure what and to what end?

Bro read your Bible ? I didnt write those did i?

12 And the love of [f]the great body of people will grow cold because of the multiplied lawlessness and iniquity,
13 But he who endures to the end will be saved.
Matthew 24:12,13

Endures and cleaves to the Lord in spite of the declension (per the highlighted) of some," And he... overcomes (is victorious) and ... obeys My commands to the [very] end [doing the works that please Me], I will give him authority and power over the nations;
Revelations 2:26 So if he indulges in those things, he is not among those that endures to the end!

Are you teaching that you can lose salvation by sinning after your free will decision got salvation started? Lol. True arminianism from Jacobus arminius.Smh! Just like your father.

Grace does not violate our free will at any time.

All of these are works. They have no role to play in salvation. Holiness is not by the effort of man. It is a gift at new birth.

Yes they are works of faith that prove that our faith is genuine else we are reprobates!

The prodigal son still remained a SON..he was never dis inherited. That is what you arminians fail to SEE.

But he could have died outside the Father's house. By the way, the Father already counted him DEAD till he came back!Luke 15:24,32

lexiconkabir:
scholar8200, your answer was noted, but why was it not translated as God and god respectively in the english verson of the bible as it is in the old greek manuscript?

Becasuse to do so would not be correct. Besides, John 1:18 quoted shows that the distinction used in vs 1 will not be necessary where the word, 'God' wont be recurring in one sentence. Other parts of the Gospels substantiate this.

about philo, from a non-islamic site(wikipedia) i got this "Some scholars hold that his concept of the Logos as God's creative principle influenced early Christology.

Like I said I don't know much about him but for one who lived btwn 25 BC-50 AD and perhaps witnessed Christ ministry first hand and met some of His disciples and many followers, I believe will be wrong to say he influenced them; rather he was influenced by that which was revealed. And scholars have always held divergent views and we can only prove or refute them from the Word! Besides, I found this of him in wikipedia:

"Philo regards the Bible as the source not only of religious revelation, but also of philosophic truth; for, according to him, the Greek philosophers also have borrowed from the Bible: Heraclitus, according to "Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres Sit" § 43 [i. 503]; Zeno, according to "Quod Omnis Probus Liber," § 8 [ii. 454]. "Philo Judaeus: His Methods of Exegesis". Jewish Encyclopedia. 1901–1906."

Meaning he neither authored nor influenced the Word.

In spite of this, we dont know of his stance towards Christ hence I take the above with a pinch of salt.Why? Many pharisees/judaists held similar position but by the time Jesus came, they were more commited to their traditions than the Law and prophets.

Other scholars, however, deny direct influence but say both Philo and Early Christianity borrow from a common source." you can get this at the fourth paragraph, when you search for philo alexandria's biography on wikipedia, which implies he used that style of writing(word 4 word) before the advent of jesus or john himself, how come john was "inspired" in writing the same thing?

Any quotable proof of the highlighted?

ABDULADINO:
The audience were unbelievers not believers.

I know! But they had a role to play in appropriating God's provision!

God preserves the elect by His grace and integrity in Jesus Christ but does not guarantee their perseverance in holiness and righteousness. You can be saved without works. Conversion and fruitbearing by God's elect vary from none to much, from lot to Abraham from demas to Paul. Some of the elect even ministers would have their works burned up but they would be saved( 1 cor 3:15).

Read again:
confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.
True no one can pluck them from His Hands but they also must cleave to Him with determination meaning if they do not cleave, they will fall!

Read from verse 12..James is talking about perseverance. And Paul has balanced it that you can be saved without works. Salvation is a free gift of God without works. ( Rom 3:24). God will not share His glory with another and salvation by works puts Him in a position of debt to sinners which He is not at all( Romans 4:1-.

Yes we are saved without works but after we are thus saved, our works prove the existence or not of the faith by which we are saved:
Faith works by love Galatians 5:22,23 and love is what you get when you walk in the Spirit. Besides James 1:12-16 talks about the need for Perseverance part of which involves victory over temptation because yielding thereto leads to sin which results in death!

The devil is always in the business of tempting from time immemorial. But there is one he tempted who knew no sin.The man Jesus Christ became sin for us that we might the righteousness of God in Christ. Our basis for eternal security is the faithfulness and power of God and perpetual intercession of Jesus Christ( Romans 5:10, 8:34.

And our purpose of heart to cleave to Him and hold fast and endure to the end!

1 cor 1:8-9..He will keep you strong to the end,so that you will be blameless on the day of our lord Jesus Christ..emphasis on "HE"

Yes HE does but not against a purpose of heart to cleave to Him while resisting temptation, denying the flesh, bearing the cross enduring trials and depending on Him for grace to," Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord"Hebrews 12:14

You have answered yourself that it is indeed a work of faith by depending on the Holy Spirit which we are sealed until the day of redemption. If a child of God plays with sin, he grieves and quench the witness of the Holy Spirit but that doesn't mean the Holy Spirit departed. He is still in there waiting for the prodigal son to come to himself. The prodigal son realise his mistakes..he never even reached the father before the father ran to him from a distance. And that is why "once saved always saved" is used because it is applied to the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ.Read John 19:30, Heb 9:12).

But the prodigal son had to recall himself, humble himself and, though hungry, tired and tattered,take the long journey back home! If he had not swallowed his pride, he will perish in the far country,outside his Father's house where the mansions are!

vooks:
Excellent.
This implies the disciplining exercise is supposed to procure life. Could we say this if these guys ALREADY had eternal life? If they already they possess eternal life, what value does the punishment add?

Exactly!

johnydon22:
Actually i could still be a pastor now if i want to the only thing holding me is that i am empathic and compassionate towards others and i find it better to give to the masses than extort their hard earned money in the name of a God..


"[b]Believe me or burn in hell" that is abuse, [size=16]force[/size], sadistic and all round ludicrous... [/b]

But that is not a command in the Bible! It's like this there are two rooms, one is illuminated and the other is dark with just a dim lantern and somebody says come to the illuminated room or remain in dark room and spoil your eye sight. We dont accuse the speaker of being sadistic for stating the obvious!?

Now hell was prepared for the devil and his angels;who were the latter? Those who followed him in his aspirations and were all partakers of the expulsion he got; same way, if we choose to follow the devil, it will be injustice to be denied his destination!

P.S.: You appear to believe all believers are so because of the fear of hell?!!! Not true. I am not and from my knowledge of church history I can say this applies to thousands to put it mildly. In fact, how many OT saints were saints because of the fear of hell? Did Abraham obey God because he feared hell? Did Daniel live the way he did because of hell? Did Joseph refuse sin for the same reason? Or was Elijah fearing hell when he put his life on the line to confront the enemies of God? who died as a martyr simply because he feared hell? Was Stephen martyred as a result of being a nuisance as a hellphobia-induced preacher? Or were Peter, Paul etc acting on hellophobia they and the rest rejoiced after being scourged and even expressed a willingness to die in His service?

How about the ones that were,"tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: 36 and others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: 37 they were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; 38 (of whom the world was not worthy they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. Hebrews 11:35b-38 ? Was all this for just, 'the fear of hell"

But vs 13

These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

What I find in all these is a love for God, the honour of His Name and commitment to His purposes!

And if reason is defined as
' the capacity for consciously making sense of things, applying logic, establishing and verifying facts, and changing or justifying practices, institutions, and beliefs based on new or existing information' (wikipedia) then it means the op has a different use and meaning for the word because what I find is personal positions marked by understandable subjectivity:
1. you already have taken a position; and
2. you focus premises that substantiate your position ( i.e. picking and choosing which information you want to use in the reasoning process hence it's no longer reasoning but expressing an opinion) eg i)there is no GOD, ii)if there is a GOD then in the spiritual, there is no satan hence I accuse God, iii) and if there is God and satan, then I reason not by Who God is but what I think He should be meaning if HE cannot satisfy MY expectations then He is not!!!

lexiconkabir:
@scholar2800, good morning! the answer you gave to the previous question has been noted, maybe i should number the following questions pls address them as they are numbered, they are related. (1)Christians claim that Jesus was God as they quote in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God". This is John speaking and not Jesus. Also, the Greek word for the first occurrence of God is HOTHEOS which means "the God" or "God" with a capital "G", while the Greek word for its second occurrence is "TONTHEOS", which means "a god " or "god" with a small "g". Isn’t this dishonesty and inconsistency on the part of those translating the Greek Bible? ?...............(2) Isn’t such quotation in John 1:1 recognized by every Christian scholar of the Bible to have been written by a Jew named Philo Alexandria way before
Jesus and John?

Good morning!
1.No it isnt. I am not an expert in Greek but I perceive that style of writing was used to differentiate since a single sentence viz John 1:1 was going to have the word,'God' and there was need to differentiate from the One first mentioned. Now in the same John 1 in verse 18 Father was used hence that differentiation was no longer necessary: Consider the bolded

Theon
18 Θεὸν
18 God
18 N-AMS
3762 [e]
Adj-NMS
3708 [e]
heōraken
ἑώρακεν
has seen
V-RIA-3S
4455 [e]
pōpote
πώποτε ;
ever yet
Adv
3439 [e]
monogenēs
μονογενὴς
[the] only-begotten
Adj-NMS
2316 [e]
Theos
Θεὸς ,
God
N-NMS
3588 [e]
ho
ὁ
the [one]
Art-NMS
1510 [e]
ōn
ὢν
being
V-PPA-NMS
1519 [e]
eis
εἰς
in
Prep
3588 [e]
ton
τὸν
the
Art-AMS
2859 [e]
kolpon
κόλπον
bosom
N-AMS
3588 [e]
tou
τοῦ
of the
Art-GMS
3962 [e]
Patros
Πατρὸς ,
Father
N-GMS
1565 [e]
ekeinos
ἐκεῖνος
he
DPro-NMS
1834 [e]
exēgēsato
ἐξηγήσατο .
has made [him] known
V-AIM-3S http://biblehub.com/greek/eis_1519.htm

2. I am hearing that name for the first time however, Philo, born 25 BCE, does not have the Book of John listed among his works. Besides, te style of writing and mystical emphasis used by John in the gospel resonates in his later epistles 1,2&3 John and those were written to specific people mentioned by name at a time when Philo, died 50 BCE, was no more!

ABDULADINO:
My brother don't put yourself into the error that you are better than anyone here. You are not Jesus. He is the wisdom and the power of God and we all drink from that living water and cistern. Even a babe in christ and a mature believer are all equals before Him. I believe you are a christian but you are a critic of the eternal security of a believer and this is where we disagree.

Man has no role to play in the new covenant. It is between God and Christ.Christ is the mediator of the new covenant that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance. Christ sacrifice is once and for all.

Man has to repent and believe the Gospel and afterwards cleave to the Lord with purpose of heart and continue in the faith!

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.

Acts 2:38 and Acts 14:22, Acts 11:23

And the new covenant is not by the effort of man for he says that He himself will PUT the laws in our hearts and write them in our minds and the sins and lawless acts HE will remember no more.

So you cannot lose salvation because of sin, whether past, present and future.Christ forgives sins in advance that is not to say we are advocating licentious living here. It is scriptures. Our sin in the new covenant do not separate us from God. God has already judged sin in the flesh of His Son...so we are justified.
( just as if i have never sinned) by grace.

James makes it plain that there is no small or big sin( James 2:10-11). So it is not about fornication or any thing imaginable your mind can list or conceive. The scripture says what it means and means what it says. It is either Jesus is the saviour of ALL or not your saviour at all.

Then explain James 1:15,16
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: [size=13pt]and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death[/size]. 16 [size=13pt]Do not err, my beloved brethren[/size].

Why then does the devil tempt believers to sin if it takes nothing away from them whatsoever? Note that he tempts to sin!

And why would Peter exhort to be sober and vigilant against the adversary who must be resisted?
Or why would John admonish that :
1 John 5:18
18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
Of course it's a work of faith done in dependence on the Spirit through Whom we mortify the flesh but He wont do it sans our active cooperation in faith and willingness!

lexiconkabir:
sorry! i was banned yesterday. let me proceed with my questions. how can a christian tell that holy spirit is in a person? cuz some claimed they had the spirit in them, and later on converted to other religion. your views pls

No problem!
1. Note that no level of grace/gift received from God renders our right to choose redundant. Meaning, a person with the Holy Spirit can still yield to the temptation to forsake Him.

2. The surest test of the Presence of the Holy Spirit in a person is to check if the word such a person preaches/ believes and practices agrees with God's Word and purposes. This was the measure given in both OT (Isaiah 8:20 and NT 1 John 4:1-3)

vooks:
I have been meditating on this particular verse. Let's look at it

1 Corinthians 5:4-5 King James Version (KJV)
4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

I had indicated that Paul employed PROBABILIY and not CERTAINTY, but this is not apparent from some translations.

New thoughts;
Regardless of the version you use, there is a clear relationship in v5 between 'delivering such to Satan for destruction of the flesh' and 'the spirit may be saved'

Delivering causes salvation. If this man was a believer whose salvation could not be lost, his spirit would be saved on the day of the Lord Jesus regardless of whether they handed him to the devil or not.

Why then is this subsequent (after he had believed and fallen) act of handing him over associated with his salvation?

We don't have to agree on whether salvation can be lost or not but we can laying our biases and doctrinal shades derive all the truth communicated in this verse.


Cc Ayoku777, Scholar8200,5solas

I believe it is based on probability; if you consider some on which a similar discipline was meted for example Hymenaeus and Alexander:

1 Timothy 1:19b,20
19 Holding fast to faith ([c]that leaning of the entire human personality on God in absolute trust and confidence) and having a good (clear) conscience. By rejecting and thrusting from them [their conscience], some individuals have made shipwreck of their faith.
20 Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan in order that they may be disciplined [by punishment and learn] not to blaspheme.


But did they learn from their sufferings and change their ways? NO! And subsequently, they were to be avoided:

2 Timothy 2:16-18
16 But avoid all empty (vain, useless, idle) talk, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness.
17 And their teaching [will devour; it] will eat its way like cancer or spread like gangrene. So it is with Hymenaeus and Philetus,
18 Who have missed the mark and swerved from the truth by arguing that the resurrection has already taken place. They are undermining the faith of some.


Meaning such disciplines are meted out with the hope that such an one repents but if they persist...

ABDULADINO:
Lol@ all these irrelevant long epistles. Who saves from SIN? Man or God? There is no middle ground here.

There was a time folks came to Jesus with a yes or no question on tribute but He saw their motive hence answered with wisdom. Your yes or no question bears semblance with the intention of those folks!
However, as regards your question,If I say:
God, you will say then man has no part
Man, you will say that's law of works
But if you will appreciate why it is called NEW COVENANT, you will understand the role of mutual action in getting saved and remaining saved.
If man has no part then it's no longer a covenant

ABDULADINO:
Lemme come from a diff angle.

1.Who saves from the penalty of sin? Man or God?

2.Who saves from the Power of sin? Man or God?

3.Who saves from the presence of sin?(glorification) Man or God?

1. God made the Provision in Christ for our salvation but we must appropriate that Provision by repentance and faith Mark 1:15, Acts 3:19, Acts 2:38

2. God made Provision for us in Christ, by the Power of the Spirit, but we must appropriate that also by faith:

For if you live according to [the dictates of] the flesh, you will surely die. But if through the power of the [Holy] Spirit you are [habitually] putting to death (making extinct, deadening) the [evil] deeds prompted by the body, you shall [really and genuinely] live forever.
Romans 8:13

12 Let not sin therefore rule as king in your mortal (short-lived, perishable) bodies, to make you yield to its cravings and be subject to its lusts and evil passions.
13 Do not continue offering or yielding your bodily members [and [a]faculties] to sin as instruments (tools) of wickedness. But offer and yield yourselves to God as though you have been raised from the dead to [perpetual] life, and your bodily members [and [b]faculties] to God, presenting them as implements of righteousness. Romans 6:12,13

The highlighted establishes a role being played by both Parties to the Covenant.

3. Explain further! Temptations to yield to sin continue till we die. Temptation is not sin but yielding to temptation is sin and leads to death.

Gombs:
[img]www.media0./media/N5ggKzJteVtGE/giphy.gif [/img]

God bless you for the above bold... I hope some folks take notes... Cheers

Amen, God bless you too.

sportsmaster:
@Gombs.
Gal2:20:-
Paul is not saying he gave his life to Christ here.
What he is saying is that Christ lives in him.and he(Paul) lives by the faith of the Son of God.
Where is vooks,scholar8200,jiggaz.?i need ur comment concerning what Gombs is saying here.
Cc Bingbagbo

He that will receive Life must surrender his life that his life may be hid/swallowed up with Christ(Who is The Life 1John1:2)in God!

For whoever is bent on saving his [temporal] life [his comfort and security here] shall lose it [eternal life]; and whoever loses his life [his comfort and security here] for My sake shall find it [life everlasting].
Matthew 16:25 AMP

We give our lives to Christ when we surrender to His Lordship and Control. This is a very necessary part if we are to be truly saved. Remember Paul when he encountered Christ,"Lord What wilt thou have me to do":that's the language of surrender.

9 And, [His completed experience] making Him perfectly [equipped], He became the Author and Source of eternal salvation to all those who give heed and obey Him,
Hebrews 5:9

Also in Romans 10:9 talks of confessing with the mouth the LORD Jesus, suggesting that the faith in God's raising Him from the dead must be backed by a surrendering to, and confessing Him as your Lord.

ABDULADINO:
Like i said already addressed. I quoted Paul earlier about a young man inbreeding yet Paul was confident his spirit will be saved. You are going around in circles really. IS THE SCRIPTURE HERE TALKING ABOUT SALVATION?

Going around in circles? James was telling a couple of brethren that temptation should not be yielded to else sin comes in and with sin death?

ABDULADINO:
Already addressed. Fornication or any other sin for that matter does not LEAD TO LOSS OF SALVATION. If it does even you won't be saved. He that is without sin should cast the first stone.Except you are telling us here you are PERFECT.

Kindly re-read that quote!
Bible:
15 Then the evil desire, when it has conceived, gives birth to sin, and sin,when it is fully matured, [size=14pt]brings forth death[/size].
16 [size=13pt]Do not be misled, my beloved brethren[/size].
James 1:15,16

ABDULADINO:Fornication or any other sin for that matter does not LEAD TO LOSS OF SALVATION

Who do we follow?

An2elect2:
Ayoku777, vooks, Jiggaz, Scholar8200

If ten murderers are convicted and all sentenced to life imprisonment and the president exercises his prerogative right to pardon a prisoner and he orders for the release of lets say five of them, is he responsible for the remaining five who will have to stay with their life term jail? No. The are completely responsible for their evil deeds.

However, the remaining who received mercy will forever be grateful to the President.

Apply this analogy to what we are saying.

You guys who believe in man's choice will not accuse the President of unfairness. Why? because He is not responsible for the crimes of all them and would have simply allowed all to rot in jail, but out of his constitutional right/power he pardoned five.

It is the same for the sinner and salvation. All of us are by nature children of wrath but God because of His love according to His sovereign will decided to have mercy on those whom he had chosen.

We speak the truth, and you attack us? May you see.

God's mercy is offered to all some accept others reject. That's why Bible says, "as many as RECEIVE Him..." and ,"WHOSOEVER believes in Him", "Grace ... that brings salvation has appeared to all men". John 1:12, 3:16, Titus 2:11-12


Let's say the president offered pardon to all but some rejected! Will those that reject die because they were not chosen for pardon or because they were prisoners?NO. They will die because they rejected the president's offer.

Now going by your analogy, will it be just for the President to kill those that were not offered mercy on the grounds that they rejected His offer of mercy?!Will that be fair?
John 3:18
18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God.

Mark 16:16
15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 The one who believes and is baptized will be saved, but the one who does not believe will be condemned

Why preach to every creature if mercy will be withheld from some? Why send the servants to call everybody for the supper only to make some watch while others are served? And then chase them away for rejecting a meal they were never offered?


And if those who received the pardon commit a heinous crime and get caught will they be imprisoned? YES. Meaning their freedom after pardon is conditioned on the fact that they avoid crime!

An2elect2:
Ayoku777, vooks, Jiggaz, Scholar8200

If ten murderers are convicted and all sentenced to life imprisonment and the president exercises his prerogative right to pardon a prisoner and he orders for the release of lets say five of them, is he responsible for the remaining five who will have to stay with their life term jail? No. The are completely responsible for their evil deeds.

However, the remaining who received mercy will forever be grateful to the President.

Apply this analogy to what we are saying.

You guys who believe in man's choice will not accuse the President of unfairness. Why? because He is not responsible for the crimes of all them and would have simply allowed all to rot in jail, but out of his constitutional right/power he pardoned five.

It is the same for the sinner and salvation. All of us are by nature children of wrath but God because of His love according to His sovereign will decided to have mercy on those whom he had chosen.

We speak the truth, and you attack us? May you see.

God's mercy is offered to all some accept others reject. That's why Bible says, "as many as RECEIVE Him..." and ,"WHOSOEVER believes in Him"

Let's say the president offered pardon to all but some rejected! Will those that reject die because they were not chosen for pardon or because they were prisoners?NO. They will die because they rejected the president's offer.

And if those who received the pardon commit a heinous crime and get caught will they be imprisoned? YES. Meaning their freedom after pardon is conditioned on the fact that they avoid crime!

ABDULADINO:
Yes Paul admonishes to flee, a mature believer attacks such thoughts with the word of God before it becomes full blown. But for a babe in Christ who falls into such temptations, does that lead to his loss of salvation?

The blood of Jesus cleanses us from ALL sin. Preaching and teaching condemnation is a deadly and demonic doctrine.

Fornication doesn't lead to loss of salvation.

James 1:14-16
14 But every person is tempted when he is drawn away, enticed and baited by his own evil desire (lust, passions).
15 Then the evil desire, when it has conceived, gives birth to sin, and sin, when it is fully matured, [size=14pt]brings forth death[/size].
16 Do not be misled, my beloved brethren.

The wages of sin remains death.

italo:
What if the Bible is silent on a teaching or practise...

...does that make it a false teaching or practise?

As it relates to our salvation/redemption, spiritual life and practices in worship, relationship with God, destinations when life is o'er, any teaching on these that has no Biblical bases should be rejected!

Coming to my defense for intercession of Saints:

1. I believe you consider yourself a saint. The bible asks you to intercede for me. Yes or no?

2. The bible say that Saints will live forever. Yes or no?

3. Can Angels intercede for us? Yes or no?

4. Saints in heaven are like angels. Yes or no?

*please don't leave any of the 5 question unanswered. It's just yes or no. It won't hurt.

Our focus here is on seeking intercession from departed souls. Now to your questions:
1. Yes. As long as I'm on earth and the Bible is my guide. Over there, we wont need the Bible as our guide. Just as the saints in heaven dont need to ,"hold fast to the faith", "preach the gospel", they do not mediate/stand in the gap for others etc

2.After death, they live on a plane much different from ours; they become a cloud of witnesses but not a team of prayer warriors.

3. NO! Neither did ANYBODY in the Bible intercede to/through them!

4. Yes. The more reason why they would no longer be under the command to pray one for another.


Now we all know that Abraham while on earth interceded for Lot; why did the Israelites, in all the prayers recorded in the OT, never implore him to do same for them after his death?

Moses interceded while on Earth for Israel; why did the Israelites, in all the prayers recorded in the OT, never implore him to do same for them after his death?

Samuel while on Earth interceded for Israel and Saul;why did the Israelites, in all the prayers recorded in the OT, never implore him to do same for them after his death? Saul sought to get a prophecy from Samuel but that had to be through witchcraft/necromancy! What then?

italo:
1. Can we agree that you cannot provide a verse in the bible that says saints cannot intercede for christians?

YES. Because none exists!

2. Please let me know your belief. Does every Christian belief have to be explicitly written in the Bible...and is any teaching that is not explicitly written in the Bible a false teaching?

You shouldn't be afraid to clarify these is your mind is clean.

As long as the definition of whatever concept/word is used agrees with the christian teaching in the Bible.

italo:
Let's be clear.

You cannot provide a verse where the Bible says saints don't intercede for others. Agreed?

Then I can show you why intercession of saints is a Christian practise.

*and pls let me know if you believe that all Christian teaching must be explicitly stated in the bible...and anything not explicitly stated in the bible is a false teaching. It is very important.

Present the christian teaching in the Bible as it is in agreement with the definition of whatever concept/word is used to describe it

italo:
You're the one who made assertions that no one ever asked the intercession of those people. And you can't show where the Bible says so. Do you still believe in sola scriptura or not.

And if you claim someone did then show us proofs from scripture!

You didn't quote one single passage to support your assertion that anyone asking a saint to pray for him has given Jesus' role to the saint...and is guilty of idolatry.

There is only One High Priest named and identified as Intercessor/Advocate before the Father! No other one was thus mentioned! If you know of any, give proofs! Why pray to a departed soul to do for you what Jesus is declared to be already doing in Heaven? And since Bible says:
4 And no man taketh this [size=13pt]honour[/size] unto himself, but [size=13pt]he that is called of God[/size], as was Aaron.
5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
Hebrews 5:4,5
The honour given to Jesus as High Priest is being shared with the souls He saved! God will never share His Glory with man. Did you notice Who selects High Priest,as per the highlighted?

There is nowhere in that passage that says Saints don't intercede.

And there is no where that say they do? Hence it's safer to stop where the Bible stops!

Stop trying to force your man-made doctrine into the passage.

Praying to/through Mary etc is a man-made practise bereft of scriptural antecedence whatsoever! If you have one, give it!

italo:
How did you conclude the bold? 1. What proof do you have of that assertion?

2. Where did Jesus tell you that anybody asking a saint to pray to Jesus the High Priest is assigning the role of High Priest to the saint...and that it is idolatry?

3. Did the bible say these things or they are your own man-made doctrines?

1. What proof to the contrary do you have?

2. Where did He enjoin intercession to God through saints/angels? I quoted three passages on this, give us your own too?

3. The man-made doctrine here is intercession to saints for which not a faint hint is given in the Bible! What? Have ye never read:

14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.
Hebrews 4:14-16

19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
20 by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
21 and having an high priest over the house of God;
22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, ...
Hebrews 10:19-22a

lexiconkabir:
well, its very clear that mary was not mentioned in any of the two accounts, its just an assumption and some hocus bogus to back the assumptions, and guess what! it worked . well can i ask more questions, that was the aim of this thread.

Assumptions that were backed with antecedents! You may proceed!

lexiconkabir:
are you saying they came up with the geneology?

No! I mean from what you have studied so far. Let me refer you to this thread:
https://www.nairaland.com/2494362/why-jesus-genealogy-matthew-luke#36590310

Matthew gave the genealogy of Joseph while Luke gave the genealogy of Mary to save time, read through this thread:

https://www.nairaland.com/2494362/why-jesus-genealogy-matthew-luke#36590310