₦airaland Forum

asuustrike2009:
The holy spirit isn't inspiring you at all. I know when he speaks but yours is far from it

Refute all my claims with Biblical evidences and stop being "god" be humble you know nothing about me. Doctrine of Trinity was man inspired and I have shown you the origin yet you are still adamant to believe what you created from your fantansy as inspired by the Bishops Constantine gathered together in AD 325 at Nicea. What else do you want me to say. Jesus Christ never called himself God and never equate himself to be God so what are you saying?

asuustrike2009:
Mr man you write all these based on your understanding. When the holy ghost teaches things, you way of thinking will change. Stop reading the Bible like literature in English because all you wrote are not inspired by God

You need the Holy Spirit to teach and guide you whatever I put up there were supported with Holy Bible references and are clearly not my interpretations. Stay in the Bible saying and imbibed the divine teachings and doctrines of Christ and not doctrines of men that confuse you more. I will rather say try to study the Bible more ain't no shame in that.

asuustrike2009:
You need the help of the holy ghost to teach you deeper things. There are things that are hidden from humanity which he reveals.( 1 Cor 2:10)

You lied bro, there is nothing needed for our exaltation and spiritual growth that had not been revealed in the Holy Scriptures if only you allow the Holy Spirit to teach you things that are difficult to understand in the Bible. Those things that you can't understand are the secret things Bible talked about in Deuteronomy 29:29; "The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." the issue of Trinity was never a mystery because the Bible never said so. Address this;

I keep wondering why the issue or debates of "Jesus Christ Equal God Almighty should be debated" when Jesus Christ already addressed that issue in John 10: 30-38; 

30. I and my Father are one.
31.  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33. The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35. If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36. Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37. If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Looking at Christ's own defense here is just ok for anyone who wants to learn that Christ never addressed himself as "God" but always call himself "Son of God" as seen in verse 36 where he countered the wrong insinuation by the Jews when they wrongly accused him of making himself "God" in verse 33.

I have heard some Pastors and teachers of the Holy Scriptures saying Jesus Christ was the same as "I AM THAT I AM" and even linked that to what Jesus said before the Jews in John 8: 58 when he said, "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." which to me is barbaric and unscriptural. 

Some even take John 1: 1-5 as meaning Jesus Is God the Father when it is very clear here the word God here is what Jesus Christ said in John 10: 34; "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" here Christ was quoting Psalms 82:6; "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." here Jesus was trying to make the Jews realized that if mere men (mortals) are referred to as god then how much him that came from God, sanctified and ordered to be the Word of God to mankind cannot address himself as "Son of God"? (John 10: 35-36). 

If you are going with the Doctrine of Trinity as saying Jesus is of equal status as God Almighty then you are rewriting the Bible which should not be seen with someone professing Christ as his personal Lord and Saviour. Reflect on this, if Jesus is of equal status and form with God then why does the Bible say this; "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" (Deuteronomy 6:4) and you wondered why Jesus said the followings; 
"You have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If you loved me, you would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (John 14:28); "16. And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17. And he said unto him, Why do you call me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if you will enter into life, keep the commandments. (Matthew 19: 16 -17) you can study; Mark 10: 17-18, Luke 18: 18-19. It is very simple Jesus Christ gave all respect to His Father in Heaven as the only God that is Good and not even Him for he always "reverence His Father". I don't think it would be appropriate to say "a God is showing reverence to another God" which is clearly what you are insinuating. Jesus also said this about His God, my God, your God whom we worship; "But of that day and hour knows no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." (Matthew 24:36). Even the book of Mark 13: 32 was deeper in this; "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."! As you can see if Jesus is God of equal power and form with God he wouldn't have said only God is good nor him accepting the fact that not even him as the "Son" knows the hour when the last days judgment shall come.

I can go on and on where Christ was speaking and not his Apostles now but him talking about his status with God which I believe you can relate to but let me stop here because I know as an Holy Spirit- filled reader of the Bible you can be guided by the Spirit of Wisdom and Truth to know more about Jesus Doctrine which is Divine and Doctrines of Men which is sensual. Take care and God bless you.

Jacksonville:
Jesus is God in flesh. The mystery of Christ will be forever hidden to mankind and the event that occurred at Gethsemane 2000yrs ago, unless you know the mind of God you can't know...

The first Adam, the bringer of death disconnected man from God, hence there was no means to commune with God except a prophet with hand of God or by his mercies through dreams to individuals... The spirit of God could no longer strive with man.

But the second Adam, the Seed of God whose blood was most sacred to cleanse the sins of man came to bring life(the spirit) and restore the communication link and also to bring men unto God. He walked the streets as a man.
6.who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

[7] But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: (Philippians 2:6-7)


in verse 6 n 7..It says he had the form of God. This simply means he was God but he wasn't gonna make it obvious yet because he was embodied in flesh. A man cannot be equal with God almighty and he shouldn't be seen as flesh. So he humbled himself and made himself of less importance and glorified God's name(his name in disguise). In verse 8, the Bible says he was humble even unto death on the cross.

All this he did was to draw all men unto to God to worship in spirit n in truth ..." If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto me(God)" (John12:32)
..
His greatest temptation wasn't in the wilderness but at Gethsemane , the point where he would have chosen to save himself or not.,,His choice would determine the faith of mankind still, just like in the garden..

To cut the story short.... After he died and resurrected the 3rd day.. He was seen by Mary madaglene after her persistence in asking and crying after the messiah despite the angelic visitation. John20:12-17...
when she recognised him and called him master, she tried to touch him but Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. ...

He had not yet presented his blood in holies of holies..because when an animal is slain for sacrifice in the old testament, it's slain outside the Holy Temple and the blood is taken to the Holy ground by the priest for acceptance... Notice the emboldened.. He had not ascended; He hasn't been lifted up according to (john12:32)

By revelation Peter called Jesus the Christ. But when he appeared to Thomas in the closed room with everyone present, he touched the wounded places by his side and the nail holes.. "And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."

This was after he had ascended and he had been given the Glory he had before creation began and Thomas eyes were opened to see that he was God.. If it was Thomas's God, then it's also Madaglene's God and my God...

Jesus is Lord and God. If two things are one, then its automatically considered to be equal ..According to John 10:30 "I and the father are one".

He said the father was greater than he is in the sense that he was embodied in flesh (he took the form and likeness of man) and his mission wasn't to draw men to worship a man but God. So he denied his divine reputation to Glorify the name of God, And in turn he was Glorified...


Besides, Yesterday was fools day for those that say "there's no God"..

Shalom..

I keep wondering where the issue or debates of "Jesus Christ Equal God Almighty should be debated" when Jesus Christ already addressed that issue in John 10: 30-38; 

30. I and my Father are one.
31.  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33. The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35. If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36. Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37. If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Looking at Christ's own defense here is just ok for anyone who wants to learn that Christ never addressed himself as "God" but always call himself "Son of God" as seen in verse 36 where he countered the wrong insinuation by the Jews when they wrongly accused him of making himself "God" in verse 33.

I have heard some Pastors and teachers of the Holy Scriptures saying Jesus Christ was the same as "I AM THAT I AM" and even linked that to what Jesus said before the Jews in John 8: 58 when he said, "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." which to me is barbaric and unscriptural. 

Some even take John 1: 1-5 as meaning Jesus Is God the Father when it is very clear here the word God here is what Jesus Christ said in John 10: 34; "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" here Christ was quoting Psalms 82:6; "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." here Jesus was trying to make the Jews realized that if mere men (mortals) are referred to as god then how much him that came from God, sanctified and ordered to be the Word of God to mankind cannot address himself as "Son of God"? (John 10: 35-36). 

If you are going with the Doctrine of Trinity as saying Jesus is of equal status as God Almighty then you are rewriting the Bible which should not be seen with someone professing Christ as his personal Lord and Saviour. Reflect on this, if Jesus is of equal status and form with God then why does the Bible say this; "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" (Deuteronomy 6:4) and you wondered why Jesus said the followings; 
"You have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If you loved me, you would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (John 14:28); "16. And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17. And he said unto him, Why do you call me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if you will enter into life, keep the commandments. (Matthew 19: 16 -17) you can study; Mark 10: 17-18, Luke 18: 18-19. It is very simple Jesus Christ gave all respect to His Father in Heaven as the only God that is Good and not even Him for he always "reverence His Father". I don't think it would be appropriate to say "a God is showing reverence to another God" which is clearly what you are insinuating. Jesus also said this about His God, my God, your God whom we worship; "But of that day and hour knows no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." (Matthew 24:36). Even the book of Mark 13: 32 was deeper in this; "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."! As you can see if Jesus is God of equal power and form with God he wouldn't have said only God is good nor him accepting the fact that not even him as the "Son" knows the hour when the last days judgment shall come.

I can go on and on where Christ was speaking and not his Apostles now but him talking about his status with God which I believe you can relate to but let me stop here because I know as an Holy Spirit- filled reader of the Bible you can be guided by the Spirit of Wisdom and Truth to know more about Jesus Doctrine which is Divine and Doctrines of Men which is sensual. Take care and God bless you.

Fredmatic:
What are u saying ? Didn't u ready that part of the bible where Jesus said baptise them in the be of the fsther , son and holy spirit? Forget those your history just follow the simple part of truth.
Also read john1, 1-5 your will kn while Jesus is God

I keep wondering where the issue or debates of "Jesus Christ Equal God Almighty should be debated" when Jesus Christ already addressed that issue in John 10: 30-38; 

30. I and my Father are one.
31.  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33. The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35. If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36. Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37. If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Looking at Christ's own defense here is just ok for anyone who wants to learn that Christ never addressed himself as "God" but always call himself "Son of God" as seen in verse 36 where he countered the wrong insinuation by the Jews when they wrongly accused him of making himself "God" in verse 33.

I have heard some Pastors and teachers of the Holy Scriptures saying Jesus Christ was the same as "I AM THAT I AM" and even linked that to what Jesus said before the Jews in John 8: 58 when he said, "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." which to me is barbaric and unscriptural. 

Some even take John 1: 1-5 as meaning Jesus Is God the Father when it is very clear here the word God here is what Jesus Christ said in John 10: 34; "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" here Christ was quoting Psalms 82:6; "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." here Jesus was trying to make the Jews realized that if mere men (mortals) are referred to as god then how much him that came from God, sanctified and ordered to be the Word of God to mankind cannot address himself as "Son of God"? (John 10: 35-36). 

If you are going with the Doctrine of Trinity as saying Jesus is of equal status as God Almighty then you are rewriting the Bible which should not be seen with someone professing Christ as his personal Lord and Saviour. Reflect on this, if Jesus is of equal status and form with God then why does the Bible say this; "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" (Deuteronomy 6:4) and you wondered why Jesus said the followings; 
"You have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If you loved me, you would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (John 14:28); "16. And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17. And he said unto him, Why do you call me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if you will enter into life, keep the commandments. (Matthew 19: 16 -17) you can study; Mark 10: 17-18, Luke 18: 18-19. It is very simple Jesus Christ gave all respect to His Father in Heaven as the only God that is Good and not even Him for he always "reverence His Father". I don't think it would be appropriate to say "a God is showing reverence to another God" which is clearly what you are insinuating. Jesus also said this about His God, my God, your God whom we worship; "But of that day and hour knows no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." (Matthew 24:36). Even the book of Mark 13: 32 was deeper in this; "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."! As you can see if Jesus is God of equal power and form with God he wouldn't have said only God is good nor him accepting the fact that not even him as the "Son" knows the hour when the last days judgment shall come.

I can go on and on where Christ was speaking and not his Apostles now but him talking about his status with God which I believe you can relate to but let me stop here because I know as an Holy Spirit- filled reader of the Bible you can be guided by the Spirit of Wisdom and Truth to know more about Jesus Doctrine which is Divine and Doctrines of Men which is sensual. Take care and God bless you.

ShadowFighter:
Isaiah's prophecy also affirms to this. Isa. 9:6,7 accords to Christ all titles of God including the ''The Mighty God''.

Now, why will Isaiah call Christ ''The Mighty God'', if He isn't? Was Isaiah insane?

The Bible doesn't starts and ends in Isaiah we have 66 books in all, why are you picking one or two that supports your claim because you were told it is. Did you bother to read up the origin of trinity at all. Christ quoted Pslm 82:6 that's yes, "ye are gods (talking about us humans)" . Christ gave a perfect debates on why he is God in John 10: 30 -38 which is quite different from your Trinity doctrine yet you don't wanna learn. I wish you safe journey

ShadowFighter:
Well according to you, it isn't bible based, so arguing with you is a lost course.

Ok then farewell

@ShadowFighter this is not the time to be quiet please educate me. Lalasticlala, OAM4J kindly help us push this to front page

ShadowFighter:
Several parts in the bible talks about the Trinity. You can't just dismiss it b'cause you don't like it or it doesn't suit you.

The baptisimal formula in Matt. 28:19, ''Go ye therefore, and teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is a clear indication of the Trinity.

Even the Creation of man uses plural tearms. Gen 1:26, '' And God said, Let US make man in OUR own image....

I ask you again did you care to know the origin of trinity and what it stands for? I guess you don't know, let me help you:


"What occurred at the Council of Nicea?"

Answer: The Council of Nicea took place in AD 325 by order of the Roman Emperor Caesar Flavius Constantine. Nicea was located in Asia Minor, east of Constantinople. At the Council of Nicea, Emperor Constantine presided over a group of church bishops and other leaders with the purpose of defining the nature of God for all of Christianity and eliminating confusion, controversy, and contention within the church. The Council of Nicea overwhelmingly affirmed the deity and eternality of Jesus Christ and defined the relationship between the Father and the Son as “of one substance.” It also affirmed the Trinity—the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were listed as three co-equal and co-eternal Persons.

Constantine, who claimed conversion to Christianity, called for a meeting of bishops to be held in Nicea to resolve some escalating controversies among the church leadership. The issues being debated included the nature of Jesus Christ, the proper date to celebrate Easter, and other matters. The failing Roman Empire, now under Constantine’s rule, could not withstand the division caused by years of hard-fought, “out of hand” arguing over doctrinal differences. The emperor saw the quarrels within the church not only as a threat to Christianity but as a threat to society as well. Therefore, at the Council of Nicea, Constantine encouraged the church leaders to settle their internal disagreements and become Christlike agents who could bring new life to a troubled empire. Constantine felt “called” to use his authority to help bring about unity, peace, and love within the church.

The main theological issue had always been about Christ. Since the end of the apostolic age, Christians had begun debating these questions: Who is the Christ? Is He more divine than human or more human than divine? Was Jesus created or begotten? Being the Son of God, is He co-equal and co-eternal with the Father, or is He lower in status than the Father? Is the Father the one true God, or are the Father, Son, and Spirit the one true God?

A priest named Arius presented his argument that Jesus Christ was not an eternal being, that He was created at a certain point in time by the Father. Bishops such as Alexander and the deacon Athanasius argued the opposite position: that Jesus Christ is eternal, just like the Father is. It was an argument pitting trinitarianism against monarchianism.

Constantine prodded the 300 bishops in the council make a decision by majority vote defining who Jesus Christ is. The statement of doctrine they produced was one that all of Christianity would follow and obey, called the “Nicene Creed.” This creed was upheld by the church and enforced by the Emperor. The bishops at Nicea voted to make the full deity of Christ the accepted position of the church. The Council of Nicea upheld the doctrine of Christ’s true divinity, rejecting Arius’s heresy. The council did not invent this doctrine. Rather, it only recognized what the Bible already taught.

The New Testament teaches that Jesus the Messiah should be worshipped, which is to say He is co-equal with God. The New Testament forbids the worship of angels (Colossians 2:18; Revelation 22:8, 9) but commands worship of Jesus. The apostle Paul tells us that “in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Colossians 2:9; 1:19). Paul declares Jesus as Lord and the One to whom a person must pray for salvation (Romans 10:9-13; cf. Joel 2:32). “Jesus is God overall” (Romans 9:5) and our God and Savior (Titus 2:13). Faith in Jesus’ deity is basic to Paul’s theology.

John’s Gospel declares Jesus to be the divine, eternal Logos, the agent of creation and source of life and light (John 1:1-5,9); "the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (John 14:6); our advocate with the Father (1 John 2:1-2); the Sovereign (Revelation 1:5); and the Son of God from the beginning to the end (Revelation 22:13). The author of Hebrews reveals the deity of Jesus through His perfection as the most high priest (Hebrews 1; Hebrews 7:1-3). The divine-human Savior is the Christian’s object of faith, hope, and love.

The Council of Nicea did not invent the doctrine of the deity of Christ. Rather, the Council of Nicea affirmed the apostles’ teaching of who Christ is—the one true God and the Second Person of the Trinity, with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

"Who was Constantine the Great?"

Answer: Constantine the Great (AD 280—337) was one of Rome’s most powerful and successful emperors and the first to self-identify as a Christian. He is known for his economic, political, and military achievements, as well as his religious reforms. Medieval writers praised him as the ideal ruler, against whom all kings were measured. Over time, his reign was viewed with waning enthusiasm. Historians also began to debate how committed Constantine was to Christianity or how devoutly he actually followed it. Constantine was influential in Christian history for his personal faith, religious politics, issuing the Edict of Milan, and calling the Council of Nicea.

Constantine was the son of a Roman official and his Christian concubine. This placed him in line to succeed the throne of the Western Roman Empire. At age 31, he prepared to attack his chief rival with an army outnumbered 4-to-1. Before the battle, Constantine claimed to have seen a vision of Jesus, with a specific symbol, telling him, “By this sign, conquer.” Constantine ordered his troops to mark their shields with this symbol, the Chi-Rho, then a symbol commonly representing Christianity. The Chi-Rho combines the first two letters in the Greek word for “Christ” and resembles a capital P with an X drawn through the spine. Constantine’s forces routed the enemy, and he became emperor. The Chi-Rho symbol would be part of Constantine’s personal signature for the rest of his life.

As emperor, Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, which declared Roman citizens free to worship whatever gods they chose. The Edict of Milan ended longstanding persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire. At that time, Constantine did not (yet) claim to be a Christian himself, nor did he advocate for an official state religion. Based on his continued use of certain pagan symbols, scholars believe Constantine’s early religion was generally theistic, rather than specifically Christian. His boldness in using Christian language grew during his reign. After assuming control of the entire Roman Empire, he built lavish churches and came to openly espouse Christianity.

During Constantine’s reign, controversy arose over the teachings of Arius, who denied the full divinity of Jesus. Constantine called a meeting of Christian bishops, the Council of Nicea, to settle the dispute. Contrary to popular myth, this meeting did not discuss the canon of the Bible, nor was Constantine influential in the council’s decisions. Emperors saw themselves as responsible for promoting “correct” forms of worship; Constantine’s interest was not to declare orthodoxy but to let the bishops determine it so that he could enforce it. Further, Constantine was not known for his philosophical ability and found himself lost in deeper discussions of theology. Rather, he acted as the council’s mediator and host, roles at which he excelled.

Constantine’s Christian faith has frequently been critiqued, if not questioned outright. On one hand, he made great strides in securing political and social rights for Christians and initiating general humanitarian reforms. He poured time and money into building churches and publicly supporting Christianity. Particularly toward the end of his reign, Constantine vocally professed faith in Christ and credited his success to God. He was baptized shortly before his death, according to the common practice of his time.

On the other hand, Constantine continued many pagan practices, including veneration of the sun. His interest in Christian orthodoxy was motivated primarily by a desire to maintain social order. There are also reasons to suspect that Constantine was as ruthless toward rivals as prior emperors had been. One of his sons, a brother-in-law, and his second wife were executed for reasons still unknown. He freely blended pagan practices with Christian beliefs, leading scholars to suggest his public adoption of Christianity might have been a savvy political move, linking him to a rising social force in the Roman Empire.

Ultimately, whether Constantine was a committed Christian, a shrewd, Christian-friendly politician, or something in between is an open question. Without doubt, he ended centuries of persecution and greatly enhanced the social standing of Christianity. He committed resources to churches and Christian education, and his leadership helped to clarify important Christian doctrines. However, Constantine’s actions resulted in some negative complications. Free from persecution, the church naturally attracted more false converts. The melding of Christian themes with secular politics set a pattern that contributed to later disasters such as the Inquisition and the Crusades. Constantine’s blending of pagan, building-and-priest-centered worship with Christianity also contributed to the rise of Roman Catholicism.

Constantine’s legacy is complex and not wholly understood, but he stands as one of the dominant figures in Christian history. Without doubt, his influence transformed Christianity from a persecuted minority into the eventual state religion of the Roman Empire and the most widespread faith in history.

ShadowFighter:
No, not only John 1:1, several other scriptures talks about the Trinity. Col. 2:9 for example.

I guess you should study more on the origin of the Doctrine of Trinity and please stop those verses in the Bible supporting it, what you have are more if linking verses in the Bible to support the Doctrine but no where will you see any verses supporting TRINITY

ShadowFighter:
I asked you a question and you are refering me to John 14:28?
John said, the Word (Jesus) was with God (Yaweh) in the beginning and the Word (Jesus) was God (Yaweh). So can you explain this or not?

Did John 14: 28 looked like an occultic verse to you? Is it not from the same Bible? You pick a verse out of thousands to argue when in actual sense the John 1:1 you cited never equate God as Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ have a Father you and I called God (Yahweh) whom only requires worship and whatever Jesus Christ enjoyed on earth as form of worship was exposed and foretold to us in Revelations chapter 5. Read and understand.

ShadowFighter:
Then maybe you should try and explain John 1:1 to me.

And did John equate Christ as God (Yahweh) in equal measure? May be you need to understand and read John 14: 28. While at that, try to explain what Jesus Christ was saying here when he was defending his Relationship with God here to the Jews in John 10: 30-38 and tell me the final answer Jesus gave especially when he quoted Psalms 82 verse 6 to support while he said he and his Father are one also read up the whole book of Revelations chapter 5 to understand the simple analogy in this topic. May God help us not rewrite the Bible.

Fredmatic:
You need the help of the holy ghost to understand the deep things of God, is not sth u go to theological school or mere reading it.

Jesus is God the son not God the father and both are equal in status, but Jesus don't count on it( just like twins childrend that you can hardly differentiate).

Also while on earth heade it clear as a father and son relationship, which are clear in all the example he gave and domonstrated.

What is the origin of the doctrine of the Trinity and trust me it's not Biblical. The Nicene Creed under Ceaser Flavinus Constantine gave you trinity doctrine and not the Bible. How come Jesus is God?

God is Supreme and He Alone Is One but how come some Christians call Jesus God When the Bible never said so. Below is my take with references from the Holy Scriptures;

I Saw In The Night Visions, And, Behold, One Like The Son Of Man (Jesus Christ) Came With The Clouds Of Heaven, And Came To The Ancient Of Days (God Almighty Father, Yahweh), And They Brought Him Near Before Him. (Daniel 7: 13)
The Revelation Of Jesus Christ, Which God (Yahweh, Jehovah) Gave Unto Him, To Shew Unto His Servants Things Which Must Shortly Come To Pass; And He Sent And Signified It By His Angel Unto His Servant John: (Revelation 1:1)

Jesus Said Unto Them, If God Were Your Father, Ye Would Love Me: For I proceeded Forth And Came From God (Yahweh); Neither Came I Of Myself, But He Sent Me. (John 8: 42) How Come Trinitarians Are Preaching Three Gods With Equal Powers And Strength When The Bible Never Said So. What Do You Believe? Bible Never Calls Jesus As God Almighty But Calls Him Only Begotten Son Of God Who Is Subservient To God Almighty And Was Sent By God To Redeem All Mankind To God Almighty By The Shedding Of His Precious Blood As Instructed By The Ancient Of Days.

alBHAGDADI:
It is common these days to see people posing a question to Christians on social media and even in debates with the question always in one same manner. The question usually comes from Atheists, Jews, Muslims and even heretic Christians. They wonder why we see Jesus as God and worship him.

So they ask "Show me Where Jesus said "I am God worship me?" in those exact words.

You might become confused at this moment if you are not smart. Yes, you know you can't find anywhere in the Bible where Jesus said such in those exact words, so you might be quick to quote some classical verses that show Jesus Christ is God.

Well, the person asking that question has been trained in such a way that no matter the amount of verses you quote, he won't believe you unless you show him where Jesus said "I am God worship me" in those exact words. Now he has boxed you in the "exact words" corner. The only way you can get out is to pull him into the corner to make him see how stupid it is dealing with exact words. I bet you, he will be the one to open the door for the both of you to leave the corner once he realises how stupid it is. How do you do that? You flip the question back at him. You say...

"I'll be willing to show where Jesus said 'I am God worship me' in those exact words only if you can show me where he said 'I am only a prophet, do not worship me' in those exact same words. At that moment, he will start to realise the error of requesting for exact same words. To stamp it on him, if he's a Muslim that believes according to the Quran that Jesus was born of a virgin, then ask him to show you in the Quran or Bible where Jesus said "I am born of a virgin" in those exact same words. If he can't, then it means his belief that Jesus was born of a virgin is false.

The idea behind the above is to ensure you are not dealing with exact words. If the Jew, atheist, Muslim or heretic Christian can't show you anywhere in the Bible or Quran or any book where Jesus said these exact words "I am only a prophet, do not worship me" or "I am born of a virgin", then it means he shouldn't require of you to show him where Jesus said the exact same words "I am God worship me".

Once you have passed that, you can now ask a more reasonable question.

WHERE AND HOW DID JESUS CLAIM TO BE GOD?

According to the Jews, Christians and Muslims, there are certain claims only God can make. All 3 religious beliefs hold the same view about God in that regard. That is why I am going to use the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Quran to see if Jesus made claims that only God can make.

1. Who is the "First and the Last"?

Let's start by quoting the Quran

Sura 57:3
He is the FIRST and the LAST, and the Outward (His signs appear on all His creatures) and the Inward (Hidden). And He is the All-Knower of everything.

Now let's read from the Old Testament

Isaiah 44:6
New International Version
"This is what the LORD says-- Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the FIRST and I am the LAST; apart from me there is no God.

Since both the Quran and the Bible agree that God is the First and the Last, should a prophet refer to himself as such? But that is what Jesus Christ did in the verse below.

Revelations 1:17-18
When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the FIRST and the LAST. I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

Can you tell us what Jesus meant when he took a title that can only be applied to God and applied it to himself? If he wasn't claiming to be God, then what was he doing?

I Saw In The Night Visions, And, Behold, One Like The Son Of Man (Jesus Christ) Came With The Clouds Of Heaven, And Came To The Ancient Of Days (God Almighty Father, Yahweh), And They Brought Him Near Before Him. (Daniel 7: 13)
The Revelation Of Jesus Christ, Which God (Yahweh, Jehovah) Gave Unto Him, To Shew Unto His Servants Things Which Must Shortly Come To Pass; And He Sent And Signified It By His Angel Unto His Servant John: (Revelation 1:1)
Jesus Said Unto Them, If God Were Your Father, Ye Would Love Me: For I proceeded Forth And Came From God (Yahweh); Neither Came I Of Myself, But He Sent Me. (John 8: 42)
How Come Trinitarians Are Preaching Three Gods With Equal Powers And Strength When The Bible Never Said So. What Do You Believe? Bible Never Calls Jesus As God Almighty But Calls Him Only Begotten Son Of God Who Is Subservient To God Almighty And Was Sent By God To Redeem All Mankind To God Almighty By The Shedding Of His Precious Blood As Instructed By The Ancient Of Days.

adadike:
Happy Easter dear! I will give u a call as soon as I can. we need to talk

Same to you dearie! Easy with the turkey though

seunowa:
U take too much of alcohol dat could have damaged ur sense of reasoning

Seun, I have never been drunk in my life and never taken too much of alcohol, I hope all is well lately with you.

2019: Saraki to run for president, he’s considering Ekweremadu as running mate – Dele MomoduPublished on March 31, 2018 By Fikayo Olowolagba 

Media mogul, Dele Momodu has disclosed that Senate President Bukola Saraki will join the 2019 presidential race.

Momodu said this in a lengthy statement on his ‘Boss Newspaper’.


It read in part: “The Boss can exclusively reveal that Senate President, Dr. Abubakar Bukola Saraki has joined the 2019 Presidential race.

“There is no doubt that he would be a formidable force that should not be ignored because only few politicians in Nigeria today have the pedigree, the experience, the clout and the connection of Senator Saraki.

“Impeccable sources reveal that as he plots his move for the Presidency, he is said to be considering building alliances with all Nigerians of like minds.

“He is also considering using the Deputy Senate President, Senator Ike Ekweremadu as his running mate. Having already exhibited the ability to work seamlessly with politicians from the two main political parties, it is a path he can easily thread.


“Having risen to the enviable position of the number three citizen, the only place to go for the two-term Senator and former two-term governor is up! Indeed, Saraki is not new to the dynamics of power politics, he is the scion of a political dynasty that is well-known across the nation.

“He has all the criteria that a modern Nigerian president should have, he is tall, urbane, suave, charismatic, cool and collected. But behind this charm, is a man of steel who is never afraid to pursue causes that he feels are right and just.

“Saraki is one of those rare breeds who is street smart as well as book smart. This was evident when he steered his political path away from his father, and triumphed without breaking up the family or the people’s faith in his leadership abilities.

“Those who know, say he is counting on his youthfulness and ability to connect with the youths and his strategy will be to spread the “I am one of you” message and show his track record of working with young technocrats and turning them into prolific achievers.


“Of course, like everything in life, Saraki would have to navigate through thorny paths to reach the Presidential Villa, he surely has many challenges ahead.

“The most important challenge, according to our source, is the perception that he is corrupt This has been a damaging blow to his profile, little wonder that Saraki has not taken this allegation lying down.”

http://dailypost.ng/2018/03/31/2019-saraki-run-president-hes-considering-ekweremadu-running-mate-dele-momodu/

adadike:
Yes PDP, I am one of those that accepted your apology. He who hath no sin should cast the first stone!

God bless you dear for choosing to be different. Nice one

seunowa:
I don't mind if u will continue to cry like u are doing now...
I know u are surprised by d extent of work done

You are very cheap, that I can tell from the way you reason. Raise the bar of your worth please. Buhari is going back to Daura come 2019 you may choose to follow him down and be what you wanna be to him.

In a bid to impress you ended up belittling yourself with unfinished pictures of some Mumu projects when he promised 10 times what you are showing us when he was campaigning. Continue your lies peddling you hear. Finish ko, furnish ni

The truth is, anywhere these miserable tax collectors are seen near any house they deserved to be thoroughly beaten. Most times I wonder if truly Lagosians are some set of smart folks or bunch of overhyped clowns one man had been sodomizing you since 1999 till date and these clowns (especially those on Nairaland) will be forming sophisticated personalities when in actual fact they are sufferisticated dummies I mean, how do you explain this thievery in the full glare of the public yet clownish Lagosians are on mute mode

See who dey talk sef the original thief himself forming elder statesman

BankeSmalls:
Are you this slow, if anybody start taking pictures of Ekweremadu projects, you cannot finish the shots in a week, please ask questions before you embarrass yourself further.

I have to conclude that you are a wicked sombori see as you dey torture somebody's father. That guy is unhappily married so go easy on him. I understand him too much that is why I hardly quote him watch him dance on your thread, he is that bad a dancer that you hardly notice him

Ekweremadu: Demonizing A Dog To Hang It

Perspective

The recent travails of the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, may not be unconnected with his position as the Senate’s second highest ranking officer under the All Progressives Congress-led government,‎ writes Malachy Chuma Ochie

“The long-established and noble rule of law, one of the greatest products of the character and tradition of British history, has suffered a deadly blow. Blackmail has become respectable”- Robert Menzies

Nothing is more common in the affairs of men than the despicable act of smearing and blackmailing another in order to destroy him/her. History is replete with examples of innocent men, who have been subjected to such harrowing experiences by constituted authorities simply to get them out of the way. Among my people, this infamy is regarded as giving a dog a bad name merely to hang it. The story of Martin Luther King Jr. is both illustrative and instructive here.

When in August 1963, the revered Martin Luther King Jr. mounted the Lincoln Memorial Steps on the National Mall to deliver his famous “I Have a Dream” speech before a mammoth crowd; the FBI took notice of him and his activities. In truth, the FBI had never been comfortable with Martin Luther King Jr. He was critical of the government and never pulled a punch in delivering his message. Watching King deliver his earth-moving speech, William Sullivan, the chief of FBI Domestic Intelligence felt this was the height of it. Martin Luther King Jr. must be destroyed!

Two days after Luther King’s speech, Sullivan wrote in a memo, “We must mark him now, if we have not done so before, as the most dangerous Negro of the future in this nation from the standpoint of communism, the Negro and national security”. Following Sullivan’s memo, a massive surveillance operation on Martin Luther King was quickly approved, and the then FBI Director, Edgar Hoover, became increasingly fixated on proving that King had communist ties and discrediting him generally.

The surveillance failed to show that Martin Luther King was a communist, but it did result in many cloned tapes of extra-marital sexual liaisons allegedly committed by King. So in 1964, Sullivan sent an unsigned letter to King’s home. An un-edited version of the letter was only recently unearthed by Yale historian, Beverly Gage, and published in the New York Times in November 2014. According to Tim Weiner’s history of the FBI, Sullivan “had a package of the cloned King sex tapes prepared by the FBI’s lab technicians,” and sent it along with this letter to King’s home. King’s wife opened the package.

The unsigned letter purportedly written by a fellow Negro reads: “You have been on the record – all your adulterous acts, your sexual orgies extending far into the past. This one is but a tiny sample. The public will know you for what you are – an evil, abnormal beast. Your ‘honorary’ degrees, your Nobel Prize (what a grim farce) and other awards will not save you. King, I repeat you are done. You know you are a complete fraud and a great liability to all of us Negroes. There is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is. You have just 34 days to commit suicide”.

Unfortunately for the blackmailers, Martin Luther King Jr. did not back down and he paid the ultimate price. And his experience is a terrifying reminder of what government surveillance agencies are capable of, especially about a person the government sees as a threat.

There is no doubt that Ike Ekweremadu has been a marked man since the beginning of the present administration. His ordeal began when, against all odds, he ‘breached’ the Fourth Protocol by emerging as the Deputy President of the 8th Senate. How could Ekweremadu be so brazen? Was he not afraid to thread where angels dreaded? The southeast voted massively for the PDP and why should the Deputy Senate President go to them? Basically, this is Ekweremadu’s sin.

The first salvo was a frivolous allegation that he, alongside others, doctored the rules of the Senate to ensure that he emerged as the Deputy Senate President. He was subsequently dragged to court, along with the Senate President, Dr Bukola Saraki. The government had no case against them and had to withdraw it.

Unknown assailants also attacked his convoy in broad daylight in Abuja. We are yet to hear the police report on the incident. Not even a word was heard from the security agencies.

Sometime in 2017, Ekweremadu raised an alarm that he was tipped-off on government’s (specifically EFCC) to plant huge sums of money in various currencies in his house in Enugu. The EFCC denied. But, not long, the police raided his Abuja guesthouse in a Gestapo style, but found nothing.

At the floor of the Senate, recently, Ekweremadu again stirred the hornet’s nest when he spoke fearlessly against the high-handedness and dictatorial tendencies of the executive, the angst, despair and nadir that have become the signposts of our existence and warned that we were creating fertile grounds for another military adventure into politics. Rather than address issues raised, he was promptly accused of suggesting a military coup, but Nigerians were not fooled. The government felt threatened. However, Ekweremadu’s fiery contribution at the floor of the Senate was the height of it. He must be destroyed at all cost.
Ekweremadu had raised alarm on this latest plot when he went public to accuse a former Chief Judge in Enugu State and some other persons of stealing his will and doctoring it by adding fictitious properties. They started churning out baseless petitions to government agencies and officials. He accused the Chairman of the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property, Okoi Obono-Obla of a grand smear campaign.

Acting true to their script, the federal government ignored the alarm raised by Ekweremadu and moved swiftly to apply to the Federal High Court in Abuja for an order of temporary forfeiture of about 22 imaginary properties allegedly owned by Ike Ekweremadu in Abuja, London, the United States, Dubai and United Arab Emirates. And this they did without digging into the root of the matter. The panel’s lawyers, Festus Keyamo Chambers personally mailed the Motion Ex-parte and appendixes to the press to unjustly subject Ekweremadu to biased media trial- which was its aim in the first place. This is typical of this government.

I am not bothered about such premeditated action on the part of the Buhari administration or the media trial; rather I am ashamed, but not surprised at the low level Umuzulike, Barrister Tagbo Ike, and cohorts descended. It is instructive that Ekweremadu’s maligner in chief, Umezulike has been sacked by the National Judicial Council and is standing trial in several courts. He can now be likened to a drowned, disgraced man looking for whom to sink with.

In contrast to the demonizing narrative, which the government and its journeymen are striving so hard to create, Ekweremadu has blazed the trail in repositioning his constituents and beyond. He has turned Enugu-west Senatorial district and beyond into one huge construction site. He has provided succour to the needy through his foundation, which he established long before he became a senator. He is the pride of Nigerian youths; a man of integrity, whose towering standing cannot be tarnished by the smears of hatred and political diatribes. Ekweremadu has brought energy, verve and intellectual depth to lawmaking in Nigeria. He is indeed the beacon of the Senate. He is a global statesman, respected for his robust commitment to and application of the dictates of democracy.

We cannot destroy our very best in the name of politics. People like Ekweremadu are generational thinkers. They do not come very often. If for any reason you destroy such people, you destroy the destiny of a nation, essentially because in such men God has writ large the destiny of millions. This blundering government should focus on addressing issues of insecurity, collapsing economy, hunger, etc. rather than wasting precious time chasing shadows in the bid to bring down an innocent man simply because 2019 is near. Ekweremadu is bigger than that; and that is why this latest onslaught on him will fail like others.

By the way, What has become of Abdulrasheed Maina and those who recalled him back into civil service with double promotion? What has become of the MTN fine saga? What has become of the $25 billion NNPC contract? What has become of the Ikoyi dollars, and infamous multi-million grasscutter himself? See how lucky some people can be. Yet we wonder why Transparency International survey scored us so low or why the world don’t take us seriously when we make all the noise about fighting corruption?

Quote

At the floor of the Senate, recently, Ekweremadu again stirred the hornet’s nest when he spoke fearlessly against the high-handedness and dictatorial tendencies of the executive, the angst, despair and nadir that have become the signposts of our existence

https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2018/03/27/ekweremadu-demonizing-a-dog-to-hang-it/

Cc; Lalasticlala

This is one of the reasons Wike will always have my support. Call him cultist, murderer and all sorts, well that's your headache, this man knows when to stand for his people. As elections date draws closer I will suggest Nigerians to defend their votes and resist rigging from APC/INEC as we can see now they are planning to use their compromised army to intimidate us but they shall be firmly resisted.

This is the beginning of the end of APC, you replace Board of Trustees with an Elders Council? when it's not a village forum I am loving this confusion. Many factions within will soon spring up openly

I must confess Nigeria is one huge Jokeland with circus actors to entertain us as spectators. This should be the worst government in the history of this Country. Too useless to be useful to Nigerians! Go get your PVCs people

This is the beginning of the end of APC, you replace Board of Trustees with an Elders Council? when it's not a village forum I am loving this confusion. Many factions within will soon spring up openly

Kobicove:
This 70 something year old man should go and sit down

We need young blood to lead us in this country

You are young, naive and still growing so I will forgive your ignorance.

Alhaji Atiku Abubakar Is The Real Deal!

seunowa:
Sorry 4 ur case...I didn't know I was talking to someone who has cognitive deficiency

What more can I say to you "Miss Sorry"