₦airaland Forum

Debater, no amount of twisting and pending of scriptures can show Mary as either a queen in heaven, sinless (blasphemy) etc. Maybe fellow Catholics will buy your inventions.

The earlier you come to term with the fact that the only Queen of Heaven is Ishtar or Easter, the better for you. And this queen is an evil goddess worshipped by the world then and now, with serious consequences.

You claimed in ignorant that your Catholic Church wrote the Bible. Then own up with your full chest that your church said the Queen of Heaven is both:

1. A goddess, that the people worships. (Your church actually confirms the worships of Mary, Queen of Heaven).

2. God condemns this goddess and her worships in the strongest of terms.

Your church must be very wise to write the bible and still indicts herself in the process. Isn't it? So please, stop trying to deny or twist what your own church said. You're going against the church.

Debater:
So now honouring someone is a sin
What of during funerals, don't you honour your loved ones that are deceased

I don't think anyone, a supposed Christian, have deceased loved ones that they honor by praying through to them. Of course except Catholics.

Do you also honour your deceased loved ones this way, or is it only those made saints by the Vatican?

Debater:
But you dare say that the Mother of your Lord is abominable
Are you trying to say that an Abominable woman begat the Son of God

Mary I know. Who is the Queen of Heaven if not an abominable goddess?

Jesus was not bornt by the Queen of Heaven. It's obvious that the Catholic Mary is not the same as the one who carried Jesus. Of course, even classical history attests to it.

Debater:
And I firmly believe what my church teaches because Peter in the Bible was given authority by Jesus over my church, the first church,not some RCCG.or Jehovah Witness or Protestants

The same lies Catholics have been telling. Which Peter? I do not know of apostle Peter in the bible who was a Pope in Rome. It never happened.

To help you, find out about Simon Magus who was Christened Simon Peter, the only Peter in Rome and your first Pope. This Simon was a Samaritan and a Magician, who after having an encounter with the true apostles pretended as a convert, thinking the power or gift of God is something that could be bought with money (Acts 8:9-24).

It's then of no wonder why the Catholic Church is full of teachings and practices of the Samaritans, and not what the Bible actually teaches. Simon Magus founded the Catholic Church.

Debater:
WHY IS MARY HONORED?
Simply put, Mary is the only creature to have ever lived with perfect obedience to God and His divine will. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

And the evidence of this bogus claimed is the "Catechism of the Catholic Church"? One was hoping to see the Bible or scriptures. But alas, it's a mere manual of the Catholic Church.

Even if one was to look at the ridiculous claimed, scriptures is filled with faithful servants of God who steadfastly obeyed God. Genesis 26:5 says:

Because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws

Abraham obeyed God in every way and manner. Fact.

Jesus, speaking of Nathanael said, "Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him, and said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!" (John 1:47).

So what's really the fuss about Mary? Did she obey God more than Abraham or Nathanael in whom Jesus found no fault?

Debater:
This is possible because, through the merits of Jesus Christ, Mary was the only person ever to be preserved from the stain of original sin.

Yet another baseless claimed from the stable of Catholic Catechism. This is what happens when one don't read his/her bible but some funny booklet called Catechism.

The scripture says, "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). It does not say some but all. All means ALL. Everyone have sinned, Mary inclusive.

In fact, Mary herself rejected your claimed or that of the Catholic Church when she said, "My soul magnifies the Lord,
And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior" (Luke 1:47). A Savior is for sinners in need of salvation. If Mary was sinless, what is God her Savior saving her from?

Debater:
^{This dogma has been recognized since the early Church and is revealed in scripture. When the angel visits Mary to announce that she will bear Jesus, he addresses her as “full of grace…Blessed art thou among women” (Luke 1:28). Mary responds, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy word” (Luke 1:38).
The angel wouldn’t have called Mary “full of grace” if he hadn’t meant it}.

And same grace that was upon Mary then has appeared to ALL men, bringing salvation just the same way it was offered to Mary (Titus 2:11). There's nothing like special grace. Grace is grace; unmerited favor of whom no one is worthy of.

Now, if the phrase, "Blessed art thou among women" was anything, then Mary is of secondary importance. Speaking of Jael, another woman, the scripture says, "Most blessed among women is Jael" (Judges 5:24). Mary is blessed among women but Jael is the most blessed of all among women.

So again, what is it with the Catholic and Mary?

Debater:
Finally, at the end of her earthly life, Mary is taken up body and soul into heaven in the Assumption and “crowned Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son” (CCC #966).

I know of a certain "Queen of Heaven" (Jeremiah 7:18, 44:17-19), who is Ishtar or Easter, or Ashtoreth, the pagan goddess of the heathens. Solomon worshipped and followed this goddess (1 Kings 11:5-13) and we know the consequences that befell him.

What is a true worshipper of God doing with an evil goddess?

Debater:
Dulia refers to simple veneration. For example, Catholics venerate saints because they are “more closely united to Christ” by their model life on earth (CCC #956). We do not pray or worship saints.

What does the bold even mean? Who is a saint if not a Christian, dead or alive? (Romans 1:7, 1 Corinthians 1:2, 2 Corinthians 1:1, Colossians 1:2.

Does the Catholic Church also turn to each of the laity and offer veneration to them? Has any member venerated you before? Oh I see, y'all are not saints. It's only dead saints that the Catholic Church have.

Debater:
So honor Mary. Ask her for help. You can start with a simple Hail Mary and move on to the Holy Rosary. Do it today. Do it right now.

God forbid that I should render honor, worship or veneration to anyone or anything as a religious service, other than Him. He forbids me to have any dealing with the "Queen of Heaven" and her abominable acts.

I think you have your answer already.

The scriptures certainly teaches the resurrection but not anything like so-called rapture. Rapture, like the Trinity, is another blatant invention of man. Their mode of invention is the same: take a few bible verses here and there and twist them out of context or simply make them say what you want. Boom! Rapture and Trinity is born.

For Rapture, verses like 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and Matthew 24:40-41 comes handy for rapturists. Both chapter certainly speaks of the same event but not so-called rapture. The start of the event is the arrival of Christ which ultimately heralds the resurrection. So then, it is safe to say that rapturists simply replaced the truth of the scriptures, i.e, resurrection, with their own fabrication, rapture.

As for the Trinity, 1 John 5:7-8 is perhaps the strongest supposed proof. It reads:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one

Trinitarians either do not know that the bold part was added, pure fabrication by transcribers who believed in the doctrine, or they know but not bothered since it serves their interest. The passage appears to prove Trinity directly but of course, it's just an invention.

Here's what Adam Clarke, an avowed Trinitarian said in his commentary:

<sup>But it is likely this verse is not genuine. It is wanting in every MS. of this epistle written before the invention of printing, one excepted, the Codex Montfortii, in Trinity College, Dublin: the others which omit this verse amount to one hundred and twelve.

It is wanting in both the Syriac, all the Arabic, AEthiopic, the Coptic, Sahidic, Armenian, Slavonian, c., in a word, in all the ancient versions but the Vulgate and even of this version many of the most ancient and correct MSS. have it not. It is wanting also in all the ancient Greek fathers; and in most even of the Latin.</sup>

Clark, after admitting that those words are missing in the original manuscripts, also went further to show what is contained in the authentic Text:

<sup>The words, as they exist in all the Greek MSS. with the exception of the Codex Montfortii, are the following:-

"1 John 5:6. This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness because the Spirit is truth.

1 John 5:7. For there are three that bear witness, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree in one.

To make the whole more clear, that every reader may see what has been added, I shall set down these verses, with the inserted words in brackets.

"1 John 5:6. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

1 John 5:7. For there are three that bear record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one. 1 John 5:8. And there are three that bear witness in earth,] the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and these three agree in one</sup>.

There you have it. The italicized words in verse 7 is the authentic Text whilst the words in bracket is an invention. So how does these three elements (Spirit, Water & Blood) bear record or witness that one is a Christian? Saves for another day.

So that's it. Rapture and Trinity; pure fabrication by men.

Nicenancy:
Did the early church teach a 3 persons but one God?

Answer is clearly NO. The three persons or Trinity is simply of pagan origin.

The early Church, even till now, teaches God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 1:7). The holy Spirit is what it is: the Spirit of God, for God is Spirit (John 4:24), not a supposed third person in the Trinity. In Genesis 1:26, God is Elohim, a family or team. And in John 1:1, we are told that in the beginning, TWO Personage existed. One is simply called God and the other is called the Word, and both of them are equally GOD. In verse 14, the Word became the One we know today as Jesus, the Son of God. Obviously, whilst Jesus was on earth, He had to relied on the other half of the family who has now become both His Father and God. Why? Because Jesus, though He was God, relinquished His position as God in order to become a man. He was not forced but did it of His own will that He may take it back. And finding Himself in form of a man, He humbled Himself before Him who is now His Father and God (John 10:18, Philippians 2:6-8 ). It's only normal, isn't it? Jesus couldn't have come and start parading Himself fully as God who created the universe. That would have greatly sidelined and insulted His Father. Why? Because it would have rubbish their relationship which is built on LOVE:

Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil (1 Corinthians 13:4-5)

Of course, Jesus knew better.

Nicenancy:
Did the early church teach a ONE God?

Yes. God, though made up of TWO Personage is a family and a family though made up of father, mother and sometimes children, is still considered as ONE. This is how it works:

For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh (Mark 10:7-8 )

In the same vein, just like the husband and wife are no longer two but one, a family, God too is ONE.

To further show how God is ONE, consider, "I and My Father are one" (John 10:30). It must be understood that the ONENESS of God does not mean that the One we know as God the Father is Jesus and vice versa. Rather, it means that both God the Father and Jesus are of the same mind and character; on the same page perfectly. There's nothing like quarrel or disagreement in the God family but perfect UNITY. Interestingly, Jesus prays for this kind of unity for His Church (John 17:21). The Jews understood what Jesus meant which was why they said, "because You, being a Man, make Yourself God" (John 10:33).

So yes, God is a family made up of TWO Personage but yet, ONE.

I've been using Kuda successfully with no problem whatsoever.

It's been of great help. Can't avoid it.

Same Paul that the commandment haters or so-called grace preachers, actually, carnal people (Romans 8:7), always used as the grace teacher, also said:

What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid! (Romans 7:7)

With this alone, any rational thinker or lover of truth will certainly think twice before making an erroneous claims of Paul as a grace preacher who taught that the Law is sin, brings death or unrighteousness.

Paul can't say the Law has been abolished, is sin or brings death and in the same breath also say that it is not sin, i.e, death. Is that not contradiction and confusion? But we know that God is not the author of confusion ( 1 Corinthians 14:33). So an informed christian already know who is confusing those teaching damning things, like God abolishing His holy, righteous and good Law (Romans 7:12). Why will God do away with the same qualities that defines His very essence and Person, that what may abide, the opposite?

Here's the problem: carnal people don't think or they simply don't want to. I'd give a very good example. In Galatians 2 & 3 for instance, one will see key statements like:

1.

^{Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified (Galatians 2:16)}

2.

for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain (verse 21)

3.

Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them (Galatians 3:10)

To the unlearned in scriptures, the above means the Law is a cursed and sin. But of course, they simply do not know what the bold parts of the quotes means. What exactly does Paul meant by, "works of the law" and which law? Of course, the law as written in the "book of the law". The book of the law is a manual or guide that is written for instance, how to build the temple (the type of timber, sizes, length, breadth, width etc), the Levitical priesthood and its conducts, animal sacrifices, judgments, ordinances etc (Joshua 8:30-31). And the works of the law or the law, specifically, that the Galatians tried to keep, of which Paul called them "foolish" (Galatians 3:1), is the law of circumcision. How do I know? Simple. All one need to do is to read the whole of Galatians 2.

Now we may ask: Is there anyone seeking to be circumcised in the flesh as a Christian? Is anyone seeking to keep that law as written in the book of the law, thereby warranting either the scriptural injunction against it or the cursed? I am not aware of any! Do you? What about the Levitical Priesthood and the system as a whole? The animal sacrifices, washing etc? Do you know of anyone doing those things as a Christian? Again, I don't! Do you?

Indeed, the book of the law and its practices has been abolished. But of course, there's a Law that remains forever, which was never part of the book of the law or the Mosaic law, and that Law is the Ten Commandments. Paul calls it holy, righteous and good (Romans 7:12). James made it clear that Christians will be judged by the Ten Commandments , and also calls it the "Law of Liberty" and "Royal Law". Furthermore, anyone who keeps the Ten Commandments, "does well" (James 2:8, 12). And Jesus? The Lord says that He did not come to abolish the Law but to keep. Also, that till heaven and earth pass away, not even a tiny part of the Law will be abolish but all will be keep. In other words, the Law remains forever just the same way the earth is established. Christ went further to say that whoever breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so, shall be called "least" in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever teaches them, shall be called "great" in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17-19, Psalm 104:5). And lastly, the Law is spiritual (Romans 7:14). In other words, the Law is not something that is merely written on tablets of stone. The Law is spiritual just like God who gave it is Spirit (John 4:24).

Those teaching an end of the Ten Commandments are either ignorant or workers of unrighteousness, who simply tries in vain to clear their conscience of wrongdoing when they commit their wicked acts, hiding under the banner of grace. But shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?

So the truth remains; A Christian is judged by the Ten Commandments. Of course, whilst he/she exercises faith in the sacrifice of Christ.

livingchrist:
Jerusalem that is from above is taking literally while mother of us all is taking figuratively

But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all

Jerusalem is what here? A mother. And the mother is what? Jerusalem: one and the same thing; a location on earth. Paul simply used the word "mother" to figuratively described another figurative phrase, "Jerusalem above". All figurative.

Having tested the depth of your knowledge, as one who went as far as creating a thread to teach those that are supposedly wrong, I've realized that you have almost zero knowledge of what you ironically seek to teach others. You know, one was hoping that with your threads littered everywhere on this section, of course, useless threads, the least expected of you is at least to know the basics. But alas, you're even worst than those you seek to teach.

Here's an advice for you. If you have any shred of integrity and honor, apologize to JWs for the unprovoked and unwarranted attack.

Living Christ indeed.

I'd make it simple for you:

livingchrist:
Jerusalem which is above and is the mother of us all
@ bolded can simply be changed into literal meaning when "mother of us all" is changed to "where we all belong".

Since those phrases are not figurative, why are you changing the phrase "mother of us all" into a literal meaning so-called "where we all belong"? You said they are not figurative, so why the change to a literal meaning?

livingchrist:
Kindly show where I said that heavenly Jerusalem that is above is figurative.

MaxInDHouse:
So
is it true that human's spirit perish at death?

It's obvious the Op created a thread he has not even the slightest idea about, only wrongly quoting scriptures. Funny enough, he even bears a blasphemous name or designation as a moniker: Living Christ.

I have a lot of free time at hand. I'd help him as much as it last.

livingchrist:
you are the one that said heavenly Jerusalem is figurative, so answer the questions.

That is right. Just like it is a "mother".

livingchrist post=104425774:
Jerusalem which is above and is the mother of us all
@ bolded can simply be changed into literal meaning when "mother of us all" is changed to "where we all belong". In the same way children of Jerusalem can simply be changed to inhabitant of Jerusalem in these cases, the subject describe real person and places.

You're not listening to yourself at all.

I thought I was the one saying Zion or mother, heavenly Jerusalem are all figurative, with actual meaning being places here on earth? How then are you changing "mother of us all" into literal meaning? Does that not mean it was figurative before?

You're confused, and it is a great one.

How does what is up here of any correlation with the confusion you have down?

You see, it's a great confusion.

livingchrist:
confused splinz, these are you words.
@ bolded you are one that said Jerusalem in heaven should not be taken literally because "mother of all" should not be taken literally.
Going by your logic since God is called a rock and an upright God therefore "God is upright" is figurative since "God being a rock is figurative" or there is no unrighteousness in God is figurative not literal.

Psalms 92:15
To shew that the LORD is upright: he is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in him.

Blind man.

livingchrist:
you are the one that said heavenly Jerusalem is figurative, so answer the questions.

That is right. Just like it is a "mother".

livingchrist:
Jerusalem which is above and is the mother of us all
@ bolded can simply be changed into literal meaning when "mother of us all" is changed to "where we all belong". In the same way children of Jerusalem can simply be changed to inhabitant of Jerusalem in these cases, the subject describe real person and places.

You're not listening to yourself at all.

I thought I was the one saying Zion or mother, heavenly Jerusalem are all figurative, with actual meaning being places here on earth? How then are you changing "mother of us all" into literal meaning? Does that not mean it was figurative before?

You're confused, and it is a great one.

livingchrist:
Did Zion literally birthed children? So because zion having children is figurative so zion must also be figurative?

The questions are meant for you. Why throwing it back at me? Answer.

Oh, so Zion, as a mother, is figurative? If yes, how come that phrase is figurative but "heavenly Jerusalem or Jerusalem above" is literal?

MaxInDHouse:
Sorry Sir, OP like his brethren in da lord "livingChrist" has been misinformed!
He thought only JWs disagree with his TRINITY dogheads, that's why i introduced you as a Jehovah witness perhaps he can deal with you by forcing TRINITY dogheads into your brains!

The truth is not of JWs but God who passes it through the scriptures. Whoever preaches the pagan doctrine of the Trinity should first of all let Paul know that he was not inspired and therefore knows nothing about God, for not recognizing the third person of the Trinity.

MaxInDHouse:
Please dig it down with him, his god is TRINITY!

No, I'm not here to dig anything with anyone. Whoever is able to accept the truth does well for his or her soul.

MaxInDHouse:
Freshboi88 please come and deal with this Jehovah witness!

Maximus, what's up with you and this meme? It's as humorous as it is disgusting.

God is not a Trinity, neither the teaching of the scriptures.

God is Elohim, a team or family (Genesis 1:26). And this family according to John 1:1 is made up of TWO Personage equally called God.

I don't know why anyone should be confused about the holy Spirit, the supposed third person in the Trinity. Who is God by the way if not a Spirit (John 4:24)? So how then can someone say that the holy Spirit is an independent Person with a consciousness of its own?

Now, let's pretend it is true, that there's a third person as the Trinity teaches. How come Paul, in all his salutations and greetings to the Church of God, never deem it necessary for once, to greet the Church in the name of this third person? In all his epistles, Paul always greet the Church in the name of the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 1:7, 1 Corinthians 1:2-3, 2 Corinthians 1:1-2, Galatians 1:1-3, Ephesians 1:1-2, Philippians 1:1-2, Colossians 1:1-2, 1 Thessalonians 1:1, 2 Thessalonians 1:1-2, 1 Timothy 1:1-2, 2 Timothy 1:1-2, Titus 1:1-4, Philemon 1:1-3).

In all these greetings, not even for once did Paul recognized the so-called third person in the Trinity. Just what manner of disrespect is that? How could he have done such a terrible thing! Or shall we excused Paul on grounds that the third person was not revealed to him? Perhaps it could be that the third person in the Trinity is simply inconsequential. Yes, let God be true and every man a liar (Romans 3:4).

Of course, I'm aware of so-called scriptural proofs for the Trinity. But when dissect, it is evident that they are nothing but a result of carelessly reading the scriptures, conjectures and fabrication. The history of the Trinity is out there in the open for anyone to see how it was invented. In fact, a simple google search can help a lot.

God is not a Trinity.

livingchrist:
where did I say the body doesnt matter?
The grave is where the body is buried, it doesnt matter if the body has decayed.

And the spirit is buried where, heaven?

livingchrist:
you are actually very ignorant, In the bible Zion is a city which contains people, the citizens of zion are actually the children of zion.

Oh, you now suddenly know that Zion is a city which contains people? Do you then accept that you were either ignorant or trying to deceive undiscerning minds when you passed off Hebrews 12:22 as Zion, a city "in heaven"?

Of course, was the city supposed to housed terrestrial spirits? So Mount Zion is a city in Jerusalem, right here on earth and not "in heaven".

So how are citizens or inhabitants of Zion "children"? Since your understanding of the phrase "Jerusalem above" or heavenly Jerusalem means there's Jerusalem in heaven, of course interpreted literally, then also interpret Jerusalem as a "mother" literally.

Are you seeing who is ignorant.

livingchrist:
Psalms 149:2
Let Israel rejoice in him that made him: let the children of Zion be joyful in their King.
The Jerusalem in heaven is the mother of all Christians because that is where they belong.

How do they belong there, how did it birthed these children? Did Jerusalem gave birth to them literally just like there's a literal Jerusalem in heaven?

livingchrist:
your comprehension problem not mine.

Now you know that your invention is useless to me. Glad you're learning.

livingchrist:
It doesnt matter so far it is where the body was buried,

All of a sudden, the body doesn't matter anymore.

livingchrist:
you are ignorant and yet think you know anything.
see how you are confused, you saw heavenly Jerusalem and you are still asking if Jerusalem is in heaven?
Galatians 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Galatians 4:26 does not mean a literal Jerusalem is in heaven, but should be understood and interpreted the same way it is the "mother of us all".

Was it Jerusalem that gave birth to you? So how is Jerusalem a mother? See, now we know who is ignorant and confused.

Like I said earlier, you read carelessly.

livingchrist:
There is Jerusalem in heaven already, it is this jerusalem that will come to the new earth.

Yes, just like our mother is in heaven.

livingchrist:
then it is your loss.

It appears you have problems with comprehension. How will I tell you that your blatant invention profits me nothing, for you to understand?

livingchrist:
it is the body that is in the grave not the spirit.

You mean the body of David for instance, if his grave is dug today, will be found inside?

livingchrist:
vv 22 confirmed that they are in heaven
Hebrews 12:22-23 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

Careless reading.

Keywords here are: 1. Mount Sion 2. Heavenly Jerusalem. Where is Mount Sion and Jerusalem? Are they in heaven? Even babies in the faith knows that these are physical locations right here on earth.

Here's help:

Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband (Revelation 21:2)

The heavenly Jerusalem, Mount Sion or city of God will be right here on earth. It's "coming down" in the sense that Christ is the One bringing it at His coming. Bible prophecy has it that when Christ appeared, He will sit on the throne of his father, David, of which throne is in Jerusalem, the city of king David.

So Hebrew 12:22 does not confirmed that the dead are in heaven. Again, that is you carelessly reading scripture.

livingchrist:
you cannot understand spiritual things so it's your loss.

You mean that fabrication of yours is a spiritual thing? You're very funny.

I repeat, your fabrication profits me nothing.

livingchrist:
I have answered you. What are they doing in heaven? They are waiting for their reward.

Since the resurrection has not occurred yet, it means the dead are still what? Dead and in their graves (John 5:28-29, Daniel 12:2, Psalm 6:5).

The Hebrews you quoted does not say the spirits of just men made perfect are "in heaven" but rather they are, "written in heaven". The names of these saints are written in heaven, not that they themselves are there. Another good example showing that the saved have their names written in the book of life which is obviously in heaven, is Revelation 20:15.

Furthermore, both the names of the saved and their rewards or inheritance are "reserved or kept in heaven" (1 Peter 1:4), which Christ will bring at His appearing (Revelation 22:12).

Paul expounded on the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:12-58. In 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, at the appearing of Christ, the dead are the first to rise followed by those still alive. This further supports the fact that the dead, all along, were in their graves waiting for the resurrection.

This was what I expected of you, to explain in details so that viewers or listeners can better appreciate it.

livingchrist:
It does not. Resurrection has to do with restoring spirit and body back together.

livingchrist:
then it is your loss.

On the contrary, your fabrication profits me nothing.

livingchrist:
Human spirit is not same as angelic spirit.

Sorry, that doesn't answer the question asked. Let me repeat it:

What are the "spirits of just men" doing in heaven? Are they living as spirit beings, angels or humans? Are they conscious? Just, how are they in heaven?

livingchrist:
The evidence was in God making a garment for them to cover their unclothedness It has a spiritual meaning of them being saved.

This doesn't even fall under 'conjecture'. What you're saying here is pure fabrication.

Shocking evidence.

livingchrist:
the souls of the wicked remains in hell but the righteous goes to heaven to be with christ.

If there's a resurrection of the dead and you're claiming that the righteous are with Christ, does that mean that the resurrection has occurred already?

BritishAirways:
Spirits are indestructible. That's why hell fire comes in to question. Fire can't burn not kill a Spirit

False. Here is Jesus speaking:

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell (Matthew 10:28)

The "spirit in man" or souls can be destroyed.

To claimed spirits are indestructible means they're immortals. But here's the truth:

Who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light (1 Timothy 6:16)

Only God is immortal and indestructible.

Hello,

livingchrist:
Hebrews 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

The writer of hebrews is literally saying the spirits of just men are in heaven having being perfected.

So these spirits of just men, how are they in heaven? Like spirit beings or angels? In other words, are they conscious? And lastly, what are they doing in heaven?

livingchrist:
Who are these just men? They are people who dies in faith before the coming of Christ, people like Adam, Abel, Noah, Abraham, sarah david, Solomon, deborah etc

Adam, died in faith? This is certainly strange, a new one.

At what point did Adam repent, was forgiven and died saved?

livingchrist:
When they died their soul was in hell not hell fire. Hell was the general abode of the dead before the coming of Christ

So where is the abode of the dead today?

livingchrist:
Some of them appeared to many people when Jesus rose from the grave, having being made perfect they are in heaven.

Please provide scriptural proofs.

HardMirror:
So if things are so messed up as they are today, what should we learn from that?

Simple. Hardmirror, learn why things are the way they are and who is responsible. It could even be that you're part of the rot the world is facing.

HardMirror:
God does not exist.

If you don't even know that God exist, how then did you know that He has not been keeping His promises?

Can't you see that you don't have the right to speak on the subject because you know nothing about it?

HardMirror:
Think about it and contribute

I've thought about it and come to the conclusion that you're completely ignorant of what you're saying.

It's quite a shame.

Beautiful piece.

In God's own relationship or marriage as a model, He was willing to give as much as giving His only begotten Son for the greater good of His bride, the Church.

And Christ, even after the ultimate sacrifice was still willing to continue giving through the holy Spirit, with its inherent fruits like joy, peace, love, goodness etc. And of course, real power.

So yes, God's way is the 'give-away' kind of life which is the successful path. Whilst man walks the 'take-away'. Sadly, this latter way only brings failures, tears and sorrows.

Like you said, to make it work, everyone MUST give! And of course, unceasingly.

MaxInDHouse:
Of course you're not my enemy, at least we do chat sometimes to pass time. So you're my neighbour just like everyone else.
The only barrier between us is difference in beliefs which distinguish between my brothers and my neighbours.
As my neighbour i must love you the the same way i love myself {Mark 12:30} but my brothers in the faith i must love the same way Jesus loves me! John 13:34-35

So you're not my enemy Splin.z the one and only enemy is Satan the devil!

Good. Now you're talking.

MaxInDHouse:
Thanks for being one of his friends, he REALLY needs you people now!

I don't understand why you're being all emotional now.

Everyone is my friend by virtue of the fact that I am to love my neighbor. That I don't agree with you on your teachings or that of JWs does not negate this obligation. If I am your enemy or you see me as one, well, that's your business.

So Maximus, get a grip of yourself. You're beginning to sound like a broken record.

MaxInDHouse:
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, and you are the same person who have been pretending you have LOVE shey?

I have done no harm to you in anyway. So I don't understand this your sad or crying face, and accusation.

MaxInDHouse:
Can't you see he's suffering from mental imbalance?

Any proof? Are you the psychiatrist who carried out the examination?

MaxInDHouse:
Well each of us will surely reap what we sow may God let your own son or daughter become like RussellRutherfo!

Meaningless emotional blackmail. You ought to know.

RussellRutherfo:


I tire my brother oh!

You talk am well.
I wan laugh die as you talk am.
E fit be say for Genesis 18. Na Angel Michael send Jehovah. These JW puppets. They never think for themselves.

When Jehovah "leave" him throne. E fit be say as na Angel Michael "sit down on Jehovah throne's" as Jehovah travel go vacation for Abraham's house

Now, MaxD or Janosky come take over duty of Angel Michael as the next Archangel. Na definitely MaxD because that one get sense small pass Janosky. That Janosky na correct mugu. Na god of this world (Satan role) make them dey give am to play for all that their JW Convention propaganda videos. Their Governing Body are currently even employing "Worldly" actors to star in their brainwashing clips.

What a comic relief.

Daniel058:
Am not sure if the above is true

Why?

RussellRutherfo:
Now, go back to your 8-Men gods/mediators on earth who will be the 144,000 in Hell and ask them to tell you what you will come back to lie to me. When Jehovah left heaven to come down and eat 3 measures of bread prepared by Abraham's wife. Who was on the throne then?!! Did the Heavens collapse then?!

Perhaps when Jehovah left his throne then, angel Michael took charged and sat on it. And yes, the heavens would have collapsed if not that Jehovah had to run back to heaven, as satan was trying to push Michael out.

musicwriter:
You too! That's the whole concept of free speech and democracy. That's the gift of Satan to you. Enjoy!!

But I have no business with your Satan? Ironically, you used "free speech and democracy" in the same sentence and still managed to push 'your' satanic gift down my throat.

Are you sure your Satan is a democrat? Perhaps you're confused.