₦airaland Forum

Board i.diot,
Please would you be kind enough to embarrass your puny brains for the umpteenth time?

Gombs:
Smh..ask once more, in a polite manner! You saying Jesus never exercised dominion over wild beasts? Right?

Mumu,
Show me where Jesus 'exercised dominion over wild animals'

if the snake bit and took off HOW was it fastened to his hand according to your moronic theory?
They bite and remain stick because of that's how they are created to maintain a grip on the prey. Note the fangs face inwards
https://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh160/AstroGeo/smoothsnakebiting.jpg

Gombs:
Bobo, get sense na... Please

So the viper bit him and was trying to bite out flesh? When a snake bites, the take off, to get enough time to summon another venom. You seriously thought it bit Paul as a dog would bite anybody? ?

Go ahead kid, make my day

Gombs:
Another bait, you really don't know the Bible! You really are scripturally inept!

Now go study, if you want to know, since reading is a major challenge for you, quote this post, and I shall show you...as I always do

M.oron,
Do you know anything about fangs?
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1129/5101695344_48fe2388e9.jpg
Can you imagine all that inside your flesh and you just shake the viper off

You need deliverance

Gombs:
Reading and Comprehension deficiency syndrome. Are you suffering from congenital hypothyroidism?

No wonder they sid the miracle happened by God stopping the mouth of the viper, yet the foolish Maltans there were still expecting a man who was not bitten to swell and die. They assumed he was bitten! Hmmmmm... no wonder the shifting of goal post. Now, since it incredibly impossible for a viper to fasten the hand without biting, the miracle then happened before the bite, God shut the mouth of the viper. Ok o



It's a viper, not a big cat, or an alligator or a hyena!

Dumbo,
WHEN did Jesus 'exercise dominion with wild animals'?
Miracles are not hobbies you engage in when bored which is why Jesus sent his disciples to buy food instead of multiplying nothing into a hearty meal. He shook it into the flame for the same reason you wear seatbelts.

Whether he was scared or not we are not told but he clearly had no business keeping the snake on his hand

Gombs:
Baba how far na!

Why didn't God stop The 3 Hebrew children from being thrown in the furnace? So, the miracle now was God stopping the mouth odf the Viper, shey? Why then, Paul, who had enough Holy Spirit like Jesus, on seeing a snake hugging his hand, shook it into the flame. Why didn't he exercise dominion like Jesus did with wild animals?

Was he scared? Some cretinous post here said it was reflex action, right?

I have shared briefly what I believe dedication means.

When borrowing OT concepts, I find it wise to aks if primitive Christians did it and if not why not or what they did.

Tithing is a LATE tradition at least 400 years after Pentecost. That is quite telling. The problem with believers is they shun history when it condemns them but embrace it when it supports their stand. Please study child dedication history

Bidam:
I am more interested in the child dedication

The problem is basically TRADITION. You have heard of this passage hundreds of times used and many principles or lessons derived from it. You have been told the snake BIT Paul. That's truth for you. Most people arguing for BITE here have NEVER dug the Greek behind it until now

I am not the first Christian on earth and most certainly not the first Spirit filled believer. So I have a lot of respect of Commentaries and those who were in Christ before me. They are not authorities but certainly have a lot we can learn from. Let's look at Barnes;

And fastened on his hand - καθῆψεν kathēpsen. This word properly means to join oneself to; to touch; to adhere to. It might have been by coiling around his hand and arm, or by fastening its fangs in his hand. It is not expressly affirmed that Paul was bitten by the viper, yet it is evidently implied; and it is wholly incredible that a viper, unless miraculously prevented, should fasten himself to the hand without biting.
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/barnes/acts/28.htm


I wonder how easy it is to shake/brush off a snake with even half an inch of a set of its fangs deep inside your flesh. I see strong evidence against a bite than for

Lobeez:
Very correct, most translation's maintained the word 'fastened' for very obvious reasons.
This whole thing happened in a flash, the snake quickly ran out from the pile of burning woods straight on to Paul's hands, he acted on reflex and tried to shake it off.
A rattlesnake is an example of a viper, if it had bitten Paul in that particular scenario, even Paul himself may not have even seen the bite action talk less of the Maltans.
Try watching snake bite videos, they're usually rendered in slow motion frames otherwise you'd miss it. Vipers are superfast strikers, I'm sure the Maltans knew this and so thought Paul must have been bit

Paraphrases versions are good for for private study and teaching but no serious theologian refers to them. When real meat is served, you go for Greek and literal translations as far as possible. This is because the less opinions of the translators are injected into a verse, the easier it is to discern the truth.

If you were half honest, you would not have grabbed versions that buy the fastening=biting theory, you would look at ALL versions and see that VERY FEW have this translation. Let me help you;

[url]https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Acts%2028:3[/url]
How many translations do you have on this site? Of these, how many render fastening as biting?

Thinking is probably the ONLY thing that separates man from animals and I never suspend my brains when meditating and studying scriptures. My photos showed a few irrefutable facts;
1. A snake can fasten itself on a hand WITHOUT biting
2. A snake can fasten itself on a hand and hang at the same time

This means you don't have to INFER a snake bite from the phrases 'fastened' and 'hanging'.

Gombs:
Mba, nlmediator, it's ok they don't believe Paul was bitten. Vook's pictures are even against him, but anyway, like always, they can believe what they may.

if they said Paul wasn't bitten and the Maltan's were assuming, and never saw Paul bitten, but waited for him to die, and later assumed he was a god, fine.

we've made our points, them theirs. The viewers would make a sound decision by the Spirit. No need trying to convince them, but i admire your efforts. DB just wrote off newer bible versions because it did not support his stand. Writers of MSG, NLT, etc must be half wits, getting everything right except Acts 28.

it' ok sha, me i'd not continue the snake hugging Paul's hand debate. Thanks buddy, for your efforts. Good morning

The below picture shows FASTENING on Paul's hand, and the Maltans SAW the viper HANGING on Paul's hand.. and theyaid to themselves, he was surely a murderer.

My last bit bro!

you are a latecomer to this thread. mbaemeka and co started this silly theory of there being seed time and Harvest but no harvest time arguing that harvest is as soon as you ask for it.
They argue that if there is no INSTANT, there is little or no faith
They share examples of INSTANT from Jesus and apostles
I counter and share DELAY from the apostles. We have BOTH INSTANT and DELAY
They claim that our yardstick is not apostles but Christ
I challenge them to repeat Jesus miracles first before exceeding them and only then can we discuss them replicating Jesus' INSTANT

So if you agree with me that waiting is not a sign of faithlessness then you are on my side Please share this with Gombs and the rest.

Cheers buddy

nlMediator:
I still don't get your point. [b]WOF is not against delayed miracles. Teachings abound on what to while waiting. [/b]And how God sometimes gives you the blade, then the ear and afterwards the full corn. Are you Ok?

Again, if you didn't hear it the first time, we're not talking instant miracles here because WOF accepts only such. We're talking instant miracles because somebody suggested that there's no such thing as an instant result from prayer and in response was shown lots of examples from the Bible. How you can jump from there to your baseless charges against WOF is puzzling.

The narrative is this simple. The islanders see a venomous snake wrapped around Paul, they assume Karma is out to get him. Next they see him shake off the snake and live, they assume he is a god surviving two close brushes with death in quick succession

Paul corrected NEITHER of the erroneous impression or at least that is not recorded.

It is clear they at least thought he was bitten and that's why they looked for the signs and then death. If they discovered he was not bitten, such a close encounter with a venomous snake is still something of a miracle.

how could Luke omit such a climax to the incidence?

nlMediator:
No, your explanation is not plausible. There are 2 reasonable explanations.

1. The Maltans thought Paul was bitten. They found out he was not. They still went ahead to consider him a god, not a lucky but ordinary fellow. They must be idiots to think that way. And neither Luke nor Paul acted honorably in relaying this story without telling us that what the people thought was not true. They needed to correct the impression both to the people present and to their readers. Why did they choose not to? Would you, as a Christian, act in that manner? Oh and people survive shipwrecks. It doesn't make them gods.

2. The Maltans thought Paul was bitten. They never found out he was not. So, they treated him as a god. But that cancels out scenario 1. Which is it? You guys seem to suggest both are possible simultaneously, which makes no sense. Besides, Paul and Luke's obligation to correct the wrong impression is also present there.

That they did not suggests that they were affirming the people's impression.

The same apostles who wrought instant miracles suffered persistent sicknesses/delayed miracles

Name ANY WOFer and I can show you a string of delayed miracles or no miracles at all.

nlMediator:
I never said faith and sovereignty are mutually exclusive. To the contrary, that's the point I've been making. A person that upholds faith is not rejecting the sovereignty of God.

Obviously, you have no Scripture to back your claim that delayed or no healings are based on God's sovereignty. Quit adding to God's Word.

I have schooled you using logic and graphics. You are on your own.

What's clear is how hard you try to force a simple passage to support your argument. Occam's Razor; the hypothesis with the least assumptions is probably the most right. All these passages you are twisting require massive assumptions and guesswork. Truth to you is subject to your fertile imagination

I joined NL alone and if anybody supports my point it is because they can see the truth. There is no herd mentality in 'our' camp unlike yours. We break 'ranks'

A venomous snake wrapped around his hand was all they needed to logically conclude that it bit him. That's not absurd. Some snakes are ferocious. If it bit everyone it came into contact with,they were justified in ASSUMING he was bitten without seeing a bite.

Your biggest problem is you read scriptures wearing CE shades and you would never contradict Oyaks. You are not biased but blinded. God has just saved him from a shipwreck, a snake bite is TOO small for Him especially in the light of handling serpents and scorpions. But I have told you God has not called me or you to imagine miracles and ascribe them to Him

mbaemeka:
Vooks,

You and your delusions. You are not deceiving anyone but yourself. Will I have to start explaining fastening and hanging to you? How does that relate with your picture? Anyone looking at any of the uploaded images can readily tell that it had nothing to do with a snake fastening itself or hanging ON a man's hand. I don't know what you smoke but I don't think Fela would have gone close to it. Even your comrades are trying to give you a softlanding by claiming that God prevented the snake from biting him. That's all extra biblical hocus pocus. The Eye witnesses called Paul a god because of what they witnessed. If a man shakes off a snake that barely wrapped his hands around him into the fire, how does that make him a god? If they didn't see the snake bite him then why conclude that he was a god when they could have simply called him a lucky man?

You lots problem is simply unbelief. The very Maltans after seeing this act brought a lot of sick folks to Paul and he healed all. The reason they knew he could heal them happened with his fulfilling the promises of Jesus.

If you don't believe, that is your own headache. The scriptures are very clear and besides, there are many other expositions and commentaries that say he was bitten. So it is not an issue of posting links to some commentaries (that's directed at the link posters).

I have given a plausible explanation for their reaction.
1. They knew he had survived a major danger;shipwreck
2. The mere sight of a venomous snake at a striking distance to the same man made them assume he had been bitten and they waited for the signs.
3. Luke's failure to capture the miracle ( argument from silence). How does he narrate ALL that and miss the climax?


So they were not foolish to expect his death any more than the disciples were foolish when they were scared out of their wits by a 'ghost'

nlMediator:
To me the whole thing is simple: the community members must be utterly foolish to think of Paul as a god if all that happened was that a snake fastened itself on him. Were they seeing a snake for the first time? While they were waiting to see if he would die, why didn't Paul tell them it was no big deal, because the snake just played with his hand until he shook it off?

HANGING and FASTENING are not mutually exclusive. This one is hanging while wrapped around his hand
https://lifecoachontheradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/snake-in-hand-web-200x300.jpg
No point beating a negro who is down. You lost this argument two or so pages ago,
Save your energies for the next 'treasure hunt' aka vooks' tripping as soon as you are done licking your wounds

mbaemeka:
OMG. You're dafter than I thought. Luke said the snake was hanging ON his hand.

Now you have brought up "the snakes grip was light". Hahahahaha.

Puny brains,
That's in the scriptures and I posted the verse BEFORE you but you copied me
Is it in contention that the beast was hanging?

mbaemeka:
Clutching. At least now you know the Maltans didn't think they saw the snake hanging on his hand. They actually did see it.

Shake off,brush off...am indifferent, the snake's grip was casual/light. A bite can't be brushed off, so thank you for THINKING and demolishing your own argument

Now study this image
https://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/modern/29432d1299766411t-pilot-lands-plane-rogue-snake-hand-black-racer.jpg

That snake is HANGING from his hand. Is it biting?

mbaemeka:
Daft and ignorant. I should be showing you the verse. How did the snake hang? By wrapping itself? BTW the words shake off in greek also mean to brush off.

The Maltans saw the snake HANG on Paul's hand and then he brushed it off and FELT no harm.

And am sure you would soon claim that Paul shut the snake mouth by reciting Rhapsodies

mbaemeka:
Acts 28:4 KJV

And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live.

They saw the venomous beast HANG on Paul's hand. I am sure you would soon claim the beast wasn't venomous.

Dumbo,

Refer to the first image I shared.

Acts 28:4 (Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible - YL)
4 And when the foreigners saw the beast hanging from his hand, they said unto one another,

The snake was hanging. 'Firmly fastened' is your rear hallucinating pending your brain cooling

mbaemeka:
^^^^

How do you shake or brush off something that is [b]firmly fastened [/b]around you? Keep deriding yourself. Luke said after the snake fastened itself on Paul he FELT no harm and not that the snake DID no harm. Why would he feel any harm if the snake didn't do something that would elicit the harm?

Your problem is reasoning.

M.oron,
1. Paul is holding firewood and the snake is spooked and its first reaction is flee from heat towards Paul who is AWAY from the fire

2. Neither does the Bible say they saw him bitten. If they saw him bitten or thought he was bitten, their reaction would have been the same. They saw a venomous snake coiled on his hand and waited for him to drop dead

3. Puny brains overheating

4. Distilled idiocy. What spooked the disciples in the boat?

5. Who said hostile fitting? What's the big deal with saying Paul was bitten? How do you shake off a snake with its fangs deep inside your skin dumbo?

mbaemeka:
1. Don't be a dolt. How would the threatened snake react? By wrapping itself around Paul's hands? That's a dumber theory.

2. The Maltans that have seen such snakes bites couldn't have been misled to see otherwise. They know what they saw. The bible did not say they thought he was bitten.

3. Lame point.

4. The Maltans knew what to expect because they had seen something similar happen to others before. They could never have been misled into thinking things. It would take more illogic to suggest so.

5. Another hopelessly daft point. What did Luke mean by hostile fitting? When joints are fastened does it not even allude to a fixing by a nail or screw?

Puny brains,
This means a snake can fasten or bind on your hand WITHOUT biting. The ease with which he removed the snake from his hand suggests against a bite. Ever seen a snake bite? How could you and you can't afford NatGeo/DSTV?

Acts 28:5 (ESV)
5 He, however, shook off the creature into the fire and suffered no harm
You don't shake off a snake that's BITING YOU
https://desicolours.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/snakesbite01.jpg
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/21UBSL_nV_Y/hqdefault.jpg

mbaemeka:
Jesus is lord!!!!!! This is what he means by fastening? This is what binding, laying hold of, fitting means?

Wooooooaw. You are to be quarantined for possessing a depressingly low IQ.

Kid,
There are easier words for BITE in Greek and besides,presence of the preposition ON means fasten can't possibly refer to a BITE because BITE ON A HAND is re.tarded grammar. BTW, how ELSE would you DESCRIBE a snake coiled on Paul's hand other than fastened? Must a snake bite a hand to bind on it?

Can't you see that your godess is not even supporting your moronic theology?

Gombs:
No mind these guys

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 2510:

aorist
1. to fit or fasten to, bind on.

2. to lay hold of, fasten on (hostilely):

na them sabi, the snake reacted hostilely to what Paul was doing, then it fastened himself to Paul's hand for a hug, and Paul shook a beast who came for a hug into the fire (Paul wicked sha), then the foolish Maltan's there just assumed Paul was bitten, then they sat there waiting for Paul to drop down , he didn't, so they also assumed he was a god.


case closed! bros, i wan go chop food abeg. If you wan continuee with them fine, me, i must chop first. Later jare

Do they teach Christ Embassy hooligans to lie?
Paste my extra biblical claim of laying down....wait, I have edited it

mbaemeka:
Your last paragraph was lame especially as I quoted scriptures verbatim including correcting your extrabiblical talks of the lame man laying down at the beautiful gate and now that Paul wasn't bitten. If I am to be generous to you, I would say straightfaced that you are more confused than winx and if you know what that means, you would get a life.

Excellent admission.
So it is down to Christ Embassy hallucinations once again.
Let's study WHY THE SNAKE HAD TO HAVE BITTEN. We have jumped from fastening being equivalent to biting to even more dumb theories.

1. Why the snake reacted tells you NOTHING

2. If the islanders THOUGHT Paul was bitten, they would have reacted with the same shock just as if they had seen him bitten. So their reaction tells you nothing. Think disciples seeing Jesus and freaking thinking it was a ghost, would they not have been EQUALLY scared if it was a ghost?

3. There is nothing like 'ordinary man' people especially women panic at the very sight of a rat while some Chinese would grab it.

4. The Maltans are not CE mumu, they know snake bites are lethal and that snakes bite at close range. They can see a snake they know to be highly venomous coiled on a man's hand and they naturally EXPECT a bite and reaction namely swelling,paralysis and death.

5.The point is there is NO recorded biting. And let's argue from silence. Luke given to all the details can capture all this and leave the miraculous climax of a bite out? For what reasons? So that this kid can hallucinate it?

mbaemeka:
The bible explains why the snake had to have bitten Paul. It was reacting to the heat from the fire that Paul was stoking with the wood he was fetching. The Maltan's watching saw what transpired:[b] If Paul wasn't bitten then there would have been no reason to expect him to swell and die. [/b]There would have been no reason to conclude he was an extraordinary man. Any ordinary man will knee-jerkly shake a rope off let alone snake, if it accidentally drops on him. So the reaction of the Maltan's is the answer to it all.

Puny brained godess,
ANY time you want to point to what I said, please post it here instead of paraphrasing my posts off your rear.
Show me where Paul was bitten by a snake

mbaemeka:
Hahahahahaha besides Point 4 was not your claim. Your claim was there is nothing like shedding of blood in relation to remission of sins, to which I pointed you to Hebrews. I make bold to belabor my assertion that a child gets his blood from the father and not from the mother- explaining Jesus' divine blood. You even claimed Jesus blood was human but you retracted your claims when your friends steered clear from such cretinism.

Now you have added Paul was never bitten by a snake and you think by screaming the never you would all of a sudden become right? hahaha. Please tell us what the word fastened as used there portrays? When you make a mess of it, I would be here to put you in your place like I did the other bucolic churl that spoke with the same whim as you.

As per Paul and going to Jerusalem, you are a late comer. Some of your friends will tell you what they learnt on the lost WOF thread. I would have taken my time to show it to you in clear words again, and then pray in tongues for an hour hoping you would get a brain and a life, but you are not worth it. Let me see you wriggle your way from this recent goof.

The highlighted.
Nobody aksd you to fall sick BECAUSE Paul was sick.
You can't flash INSTANT healing by apostles as evidence of your theory and when I point to their persistent sicknesses or delayed healings you dismiss that as not for you.

If you stick to Jesus example, I will have to ask you to walk on water,multiply loaves and fish to feed 5,000. Go the whole yard. You can't grab INSTANT aspect of His miracles and ignore the rest

How have you added to the scriptures, am not here to babysit you kid, go back to the first time you attempted a dumb Christ Embassy commentary on Peter's healing the lame and my FIRST reply to your shenanigans

mbaemeka:
Everything in the scriptures are for learning. Not all (including from NT) are benchmarks for other christians, only Jesus is. So when you keep shifting the rules of the game to accomodate yourself then you probably do not know anything to begin with but are simply learning on the go.

I am not in the camp of those who delve head first into verses they haven't studied properly- which is your stock in trade. And you may end up not learning anything because you are strongly deluded. If you weren't using a bungalow head (as there's nothing upstairs) you would have simply seen the same connections you have refused to see all through this thread. And what is most risible is the fact that you think you are disproving anything. You are simply exposing yourself further. First I was accused of adding to the scriptures. Now I have quoted the scriptures and he is questioning my interpretation. Ask the Holy Spirit why he had to tell us that it was when Peter pulled him up that his feet and ankles received strength. Ask the Holy Spirit why he had to use 2 different words for leaping in vs 8 and subsequently when the man began leaping and praising God. Also ask him why he didn't say his sovereignty healed the man but that Peters faith in Jesus name did.

You have a lot to learn. The sooner you realize it the better for you.

So now FASTEN is BITING?

[url]https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Acts%2028:3[/url]


FASTENING ON. I thought snakes bite hands not bite ON hands, but with CE hooligans, they never admit wrong. And I forgot to mention you can't possibly beat them on hallucinations
https://lifecoachontheradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/snake-in-hand-web-200x300.jpg

mbaemeka:
See how ridiculous your pride is letting you look. And you are the guy who trolls about charging people to think and questioning their comprehension skills. Pray tell me, what does 'fastened itself on him' mean as used by the scriptures and where did the bible say they thought he was bitten?

I have to bring myself to understand that you have an alternate account that you used to like this post otherwise it means there's another NLder that we might need to quarantine for having an IQ equal to the atomic weight of Helium because I don't believe some of your allies will endorse this brain fart of an idea.

Some Neanderthal in your camp believes in INSTANT. Anything else is fickle faith

Healing whether instant or not is a function of God's sovereignty and not merely down to FAITH. Paul had faith and his infirmity never left him. Epaphroditus was sick till he nearly died. Timothy's ailments took naturopathy. Trophimus. These are apostles' colleagues and himself and if they fell sick and stayed sick, then there is NOTHING like INSTANT healing or Divine Health BS

Faith and sovereignty are not mutually exclusive. Sleep over that

I just looked up Jesus miracles. Am still waiting for the first to feed 5000 with 5 bread and 2 fish. Before you can even claim to do greater than Christ, please match his miracles first

nlMediator:
Aren't we mixing up things here? Nobody ever sadi that ALL healings must be produced instantly. The issue of "Instantness" came up only when somebody challenged the assertion that we can have an instant harvest. That question has now been thoroughly answered. Now, you guys shift to sovereignty. So, if somebody doesn't get his healing at all or it is delayed, it is because of sovereignty. Where does the Bible say that? You guys are the one adding to the Scriptures while WOF takes the Word of God as it is written.

Why didn’t God exercise His sovereignty and heal people in Jesus’ hometown, instead of the Bible telling us that their unbelief kept them from their healing? It sure would help those and help establish in the minds of Jesus’ kinsfolk that He’s the Messiah if God would just do many mighty miracles there. Yet, He waited for them to have faith.

Here’s a little assignment for all of us: Look at the healings Jesus did in the Bible and check how many times people told people that the healing was as a result of faith exercised and how many times He said it was about God’s sovereignty or any other rationale.

Maybe, that would help us decide where to place the emphasis.

Sure most miracles and LEAST verifiable.
I don't get the Creator to work, I work for the Creator

nlMediator:
Au contraire, WOF has more miracles than all of you. Post some of your own experiences casting out demons, healing the sick and getting God to work. Critics hardly ever do. All they do is attack and attack some more. You certainly misunderstand or misrepresent WOF. WOF loves the mercy of God. What we reject is hiding under it to explain your lack of faith or power or knowledge that would help obtain results.

Puny brains is a label I coined to explain your stupidity. How can you claim that a fetus' blood comes from the father and not the mother? I would gladly withdraw this statement if you admitted to insanity

Catch me in error and we be even. That's so obvious. That's why I call you a kid which is an insult to all kids because they are more in charge of their emotions than you!

Sicknesses point to the idiocy of your utopic Divine Health bliss not to mention INSTANT Healing fiction.

Demas actions are clearly represented as WRONG but the sicknesses are presented as a matter-of-fact

Your thinking is defined by Christ Embassy. One needs only 1 hour of Oyaks or studying any of his book to sniff you out. Somebody once called Dawkins Darwin's Rottweiler, you are Oyaks poodle

Paul was NEVER warned against going to Jerusalem, Holy Spirit just revealed the the dangers. In case you missed the memo, Jesus Christ revealed to him of the many things he would suffer for His name. You need to study Acts 21 without Oyaks shades and sense will light up your dark soul. Here is Paul's resolve;

Acts 21:13-14 (ESV)
13 Then Paul answered, “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be imprisoned but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” 14 And since he would not be persuaded, we ceased and said, “Let the will of the Lord be done.”
Long and short of it is warnings was on looming danger ahead not against going. Paul NEVER defied Holy Spirit and am sorry if this is your best shot at poking holes on his character you have to try again. You are free to dig into Discarded epistles because nothing on NT supports your moronic conclusions.


Am very careful not to assist Holy Spirit with His finished work of inspiration. Am not a member of the Godhead unlike you. So I reserve artistic license in my meditation of the Word

1. Isaac NEVER sowed in famine
2. Jesus NEVER ascended twice
3. Paul was NEVER bitten by a snake
4. There is NEVER remission of sins without shedding blood
5. You can NEVER curse what God has blessed you shameless witch

mbaemeka:
Your constant references to puny brains and being a CEO just shows your true insecurities. You would wish everyone on here is as unintelligent as you. When you cannot defend your heresies CE or the most senior Pastor's name flies out of your small mind. You have gone from dangling the scriptures to the law and now to logic, 3 areas that should never be attached to your person and personality. You definitely take the cake for delusions of grandeur and importance. Me, vengeful and trying to catch you in error? What are you? Virtually all Your posts on this thread have been from one level of olodoism to another. You are doing a fine job exposing yourself.

BTW, their sicknesses point to what? Maybe we should ask Demas why he abandoned Paul considering he had the same revelation and Holy Spirit with Paul. Or Maybe Paul should tell us why he still went to Jerusalem against the Holy Spirit's warning if the above conditions you listed meant that everyone in the early church functioned with a special revelation that gave them ministry gifts that caused them to heal sick people but remain sick in their own cases.

You have nothing to say. You will debate clear scriptures to hold on to your ignorance and religious bondage. Yes, I am shackled. I am very proud of it. I have restricted my thinking to ONLY the word of God and nothing else. You should feel free to think out of the box. That's all it is- a feel. In reality, you're in shackles to think the way mere men think and of course, progress your thinking as they correct their own mistakes. Maybe then and just then you would understand what Jesus did with his blood in heaven, the role of shedding blood for the remission of sins, that Isaac sowed in a Famine and that Paul was bitten by a Viper but he felt no harm (as he was fulfilling scriptures). But how would you know? I wager you didn't even know it was a sign that the christian ought to be impervious to poison of any sort. Or maybe you did know but decided to think freely away from it.

You are a sorry case. A hopeless one.

Thank you sir,
To God be all the glory. Human traditions are powerful and can easily void God's command.
Paul's call to examine ourselves applies not just to conduct but to doctrine.
Christians just like Pharisees mistake the age of a tradition for inspiration.

WinsomeX:
When I first read the above, I was almost convinced you had goofed. I was going to read the scriptures again when Grundy provided it here. Indeed that scripture said the snake fastened itself around Paul's hands. It didn't say he was bitten by it. The islanders who were observing him, must have assumed like our WoF friends here that Paul was bitten. But the scripture did not record he was bitten. Now, he could have been bitten but that was not what scripture recorded; what was clearly written was that the snake fastened itself around the hands of Paul and not that it bit him.

I think this has been the problem with these back and forth debates. Reading assumption and preconceived ideas into scriptures and not allowing the bible to speak for itself.

I commend your doggedness in this debate, sir. Well done vooks.

Good question,
Election vs Responsibility.
Is it God's will that everybody be saved? Start with Judas Escariot

mbaemeka:
If I put you on the spot now I'd start hearing CE this and that. And that you feel good to call people more intelligent than the summation of your entire clan simpletons fully places the joke on you.

If God only answers a prayer asked in accordance with his will then there really is no need praying since God will eventually do his own will. Now factor it into Peter and John healing the man at the beautiful gate. Why didn't they ask God if it was his will to heal the man? While you are at it, please show me just one place where God told us to ask him according to his will or else he would not do it.

I will wait.

Tithing, the truth behind this is supporting the poor and the ministers
Circumcision, anything happening at the spirit,conversion
Freewill offerings- giving WITHOUT compulsion.
Dedication- train up your kids in the things of God

Verses are available on request

Bidam:
So can you tell us the truth behind the listed that is easily realized?