That Mad_Max is the mendacious one! Haba!

How can she join Viaro, Davidylan, Kag, Inesqor, Chrisbenogor, Krayola, Enigma amidst a host of other non-intellectuals all just to bully DeepSight, the poor friendly intellectual? Imagine Deists and Atheists (both ends of the barrel) combining together to attack just the one guy!

All these people sef - can't they simply understand that infinity cannot be grasped and thus DeepSight is necessarily beyond reason and sense? Maybe its cos one set are limited to what they see and the other to what they believe when ONE is unlimited except to number fractions!

E pass me oh!

All this and not a single attempt to address the question raised.

Just amazing.

I don't know of a better example of cowardice.

It just remains to have DeepSight arraigned before a panel of Nairaland's Eloheem to explain how he became Infinity.  Then we can all go home happy.

nuclearboy:



That Mad_Max is the mendacious one! Haba!

How can she join Viaro, Davidylan, Kag, Inesqor, Chrisbenogor, Krayola, Enigma amidst a host of other non-intellectuals all just to bully DeepSight, the poor friendly intellectual? Imagine Deists and Atheists (both ends of the barrel) combining together to attack just the one guy!

All these people sef - can't they simply understand that infinity cannot be grasped and thus DeepSight is necessarily beyond reason and sense?  Maybe its cos one set are limited to what they see and the other to what they believe when ONE is unlimited except to number fractions!

Your views of the man, nuclearboy. You are entitled to them. But consider this:

D [thread]: Christianity is Ridiculous. How Can People Worship The Carpenter?
E: There are some people I don’t bother talking to on this forum.
N: Christianity is not ridiculous. If you don’t understand, why not ask?
D: Well, make me understand. I read the Bible. Did it not say…?
N: No. You are deliberately misquoting things. The Bible actually says…
E: You know, N, there are people I don’t bother interacting with around here.
D: Why do you keep doing this? Making indirect references to me without mentioning my name?
E: Well, I will talk to you if you say something worth responding to. But until then I shall take a backseat.
[20 posts between E and D later, with E imperiously insisting on being replied and hardly replying to anything]
E: This is why I don’t answer you. I will ignore your post henceforth. Everybody has similar feelings towards you. You are not worth responding to.
Here, people, see threads where Christians, atheists, and others react similarly to him.

My concern: Now, many here have someone they will not like very much to debate with and what do they do? They IGNORE them. So if you wish to ignore someone, why not IGNORE them? Why rub what you don’t eat around your mouth? Why get into a debate and bail out with a barrage of excuses? Why use lies to cover up for . . . I will stop here.

MyJoe

I try to keep out of this type of spat with your type. However, I am going to be plain direct: you ARE a LIAR!

Anyway, this is the thread that is the root of your bitterness:
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-490515.0.html

Your bitterness lies in the fact that the shallowness of you and your friend Deep Sight was exposed when having let you guys spout, I made that post i.e. https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-490515.128.html#msg6568739 showing how short you guys were of proving your "intellectual thesis".

Enigma:

MyJoe

I try to keep out of this type of spat with your type. However, I am going to be plain direct: you ARE a LIAR!

Anyway, this is the thread that is the root of your bitterness:
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-490515.0.html

Your bitterness lies in the fact that the shallowness of you and your friend Deep Sight was exposed when having let you guys spout, I made that post i.e. https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-490515.128.html#msg6568739 showing how short you guys were of proving your "intellectual thesis".

Oh, yeah!

Common now fellas . . . I hate seeing all these wonderful men I respect very much engaged as such. Can the slate be wiped clean between Enigma and Deepsight (and perhaps also MyJoe)? pleaaaaassssssseeee!

Really disheartening the depths to which this has sunk.

Sure would have been easier, and more uplifting to all: to just address the question.

Unearthing all sorts about personailities, bitterness, etc just leaves a sour taste. Sad.

@ Jesoul

How good is your Yoruba, Jesoul?

Jẹjẹ mi ni mo n'lọ . . . .  

JeSoul:

Common now fellas . . . I hate seeing all these wonderful men I respect very much engaged as such. Can the slate be wiped clean between Enigma and Deepsight (and perhaps also MyJoe)? pleaaaaassssssseeee!

I don't normally get into this sort of stuff, but what I typed up there (the mendacity post) was spontaneous. Maybe I shouldn't have typed it, but it's good I did. Some people actually believe their own lies.

Some people are just too stupi.d to say i don't know whenever they are called out from lies.
Rubbish!

Enigma, the yoruba is rusty but I think I got it. Easy is always good sir.

---

@ MyJoe, Enigma, DS and Nuke,

honestly, I think the whole thing is just a big misunderstanding and clash of egos - and all sides are equally guilty. But this too shall pass . . . I know all of you to be honest and good natured and I know you will all return to the friendly banter that has characterized your conversations here.

Don't worry DeepSight, I still love you, and so does JeSoul, so don't be disheartened or sad.  

I think the real object of contempt that we should all be facing is intellectualism itself.  Arguing over who is intellectually superior or inferior is like arguing over whose excreta smells the sweetest.

and Mad_Max loves Deepie too.

and somewhere in the corner Joagbaje is going 'phew, let them focus on someone else for a minute jare'.

@ Mad_Max & Jesoul

It's all good and it never needed to have got this far. Just that I had endured enough from a couple of people.

All is still well with the world --- on the whole.

LOL! Pasitor! When you go send me email na?

LMAO! All of this because Joagbaje believes that he became God some years ago (and we should bow down and worship ).

Abeg efribody cool temper!  I learnt the hard way, these net-brawls help nobody at the end of the day.

LOL but sha this thread is fun. I would have also liked to also see viaro's refutations of many linear taradiddles #okBye

^that's more like it jare.

  Since we're naming the people we love, have I mentioned that I love Madmax? she abandoned us in the movie section in favor of MyJoe's thread (darn you myjoe).

  Enigma is father to my little husband so ya'll be careful with my in-law.

and DS, you dis lawyer sef, you're so tenacious with debates. You should coolit down sometimes ehn.

Inesqor, you cannot contribute until you pay your return fee. Kunle is the treasurer.

JeSoul:

^that's more like it jare.

  Since we're naming the people we love, have I mentioned that I love Madmax? she abandoned us in the movie section in favor of MyJoe's thread (darn you myjoe).

  Enigma is father to my little husband so ya'll be careful with my in-law.

and DS, you dis lawyer sef, you're so tenacious with debates. You should coolit down sometimes ehn.

Inesqor, you cannot contribute until you pay your return fee. Kunle is the treasurer.

Ha ha, I like that; everyday, I find another reason to be jealous of the guy!

JeSoul:


and DS, you dis lawyer sef, you're so tenacious with debates. You should coolit down sometimes ehn.

^^^ In this event, I have only asked a question based on what I feel is a contradiction.

If Enigma is game: I am notoriously thick-skinned and take nothing at all to heart -

We can thus forget the tantrums and commence again with the question I offered him.

Here it is again -

Christ said -

1. His followers would be one with him - in Enigma's interpretation, this does not mean that christians ARE Jesus Christ himself (- I agree with this.)

2. He and the Father are one - in Enigma's interpretation this means that Christ IS GOD!

Why does Enigma have two different interpretations for the "oneness" used in the SAME sentence? ? ? ?

JeSoul:

^that's more like it jare.

  Since we're naming the people we love, have I mentioned that I love Madmax? she abandoned us in the movie section in favor of MyJoe's thread (darn you myjoe).

  Enigma is father to my little husband so ya'll be careful with my in-law.

and DS, you dis lawyer sef, you're so tenacious with debates. You should coolit down sometimes ehn.

Inesqor, you cannot contribute until you pay your return fee. Kunle is the treasurer.

Lmao. Contribute what o? Lol if I had my way nowadays I would just observe most of the posts and say nothing. But in some cases, I can't help myself. [Besides, if I dont post, nuclearboy   might deflate my anti-gravity suit ]

SO how much is the return fee?

Wait o! KunleOshob is the treasurer?   Is that irony?  

Following on my last post above -

Christ said -

1. His followers would be one with him - in Enigma's interpretation, this does not mean that christians ARE Jesus Christ himself (- I agree with this.)

2. He and the Father are one - in Enigma's interpretation this means that Christ IS GOD!

Why does Enigma have two different interpretations for the "oneness" used in the SAME sentence? ? ? ?

Maybe I should quickly clear up how the foregoing is pertinent to the central debate.

If Enigma is happy to read No. 2 in the question above literally, what stops Joagbaje from reading No. 1 literally as well?

Mind you, I speak in terms of the extent to which scripture is used to defend either position in THIS debate.

As for me y'all know my infinity-madness.

@ Deep Sight

Hope you find a taker for your question.  

O come on. . .u know you are tempted to "educate my ignorance"*. . .do have at the question!

You see, don't let that evil bug called stubborness make you feel that once you have said you will not respond, you must stick to your guns.

E fi le egbon. . . have at it!

________________________________

* (Franchise of words in red owned by Noetic 2 - 16)

DeepSight, I don't exactly speak for Enigma but to answer your question about Enigma's  post rather objectively, you should recall that Jesus's persona is an hypostasis of God and Man; at least if you disagree with that, it's the reason Enigma said so.

SO in my understanding, Jesus' prayer was that, as much as he was essentially God in human flesh and one with God in unity of purpose and being; we should be essentially the-last-Adam (perfect man) and one with Jesus, who was also the last Adam, in unity of purpose and being.

I am leaving the office now so. . . I will be mobile for maybe an hour or so. But if you want me to clarify my views on this please let me know.

Deep Sight:

O come on. . .u know you are tempted to "educate my ignorance"*. . .do have at the question!

You see, don't let that evil bug called stubborness make you feel that once you have said you will not respond, you must stick to your guns.

E fi le egbon. . . have at it!

________________________________

* (Franchise of words in red owned by Noetic 2 - 16)

see tenaciousness o! e gbele o!

@ Inesqor -

Thank you and its been a while. Nice to have you back.

I do not get your explanation. Please do go on to elucidate.

In doing so, do not lose sight if the central issue: In one sentence, Christ referred to his followers being one with him, and also referred to himself being one with God. Enigma will cite the reference of Christ being one with God as evidence that Christ IS God. Given that this is all within the same sentence and context, why then can Joagbaje not equally cite the reference of christians being one with christ as evidence that christians are christ. And since christ is God, then Christians would then be God.

I hope you get what i'm getting at. I am trying to show that this is an absolutely wrong way to read the scripture. The extent to which it is applied towards the deity of christ makes room for the same application in terms of Mr. Agbaje's submissions.

We need to be clear - and recognize that it is not fair or apt to apply one rule to support our positions but shirk the rule when that same rule is applied by another party to advance his own position.

Pastor AIO:

see tenaciousness o! e gbele o!

Well here is some tenacity for you: I am repeating my request to have an email from you for the umpteenth time.

@Joagbaje:

Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?

You are so enamoured by the delusion of your godhood that you ignore the plain truth of scripture and hark after "doctrines of demons" and what your itching ears want to hear; else you would not have referred to scriptural verses refuting your error by these words:

Joagbaje:
Another time wasting trash.

Such is the arrogance and hubris you consistently display even when it is evident that you are actually Biblically illiterate.

#1. Your error is to take obviously messianic psalms that refer to the Incarnation (the Word becoming flesh) and apply them to yourself.

As pointed out earlier Psalm 82 is one such Messianic Psalm. When challenged by the Pharisees, he directed them to it, and why so? Because: All scripture testifies of Jesus not Joagbaje. As Jesus Himself says: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." And ". . .I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it  not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."
To declare to yourself: "I am god" is to claim the right to be worshipped; no matter the spin you try to put on it. At a visceral level you probably understand this which is why the verses from Ezekiel made you angry for they declare God's judgment on all men who claim to be god like you just like in Psalm 82. You will die like a man even though you say "I am god".

#2. Referring to my earlier post:

aletheia:

[. . .]
YLT does renders the literal sense of the verse.
YLT: Psalms 82:1.A Psalm of Asaph. God hath stood in the company of God, In the midst God doth judge.
[. . .]
The incident in John 10:

KJV: John 10:33-36. 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. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 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?

What proponents of the I am god mantra fail to see is that[i] Ps 82 is not about them but about Jesus[/i]---it is a Messianic Psalm that shows that Jesus is God in much the same way as Ps 2 and 45;

In fact Ps 82 closely parallels Ps 2.

The Jews accused Jesus of blasphemy because He said, I am the Son of God; so he directed them to the scripture in Ps 82 that spoke of Him; God hath stood in the company of God, In the midst God doth judge (YLT).

^^Psalm 82 clearly demonstrates the Unity of God. Two different words are translated God in this verse as can be seen from the word analysis above.
God [elohim] hath stood in the company of God [el], In the midst God [elohim] doth judge (YLT).
Elohim is a plural form used of God yet denoting one (430 'elohiym el-o-heem' plural of 433; gods), while El is a singular form also used of God ('el -- God (god)). The Pharisees not understanding that Jesus is God challenged him and He pointed them to the Psalm 82 which shows the nature of God.  

Moreover Psalm 8 which you have tried to use as a justification for your error is plainly shown to be another Messianic Psalm by the explication given in Hebrews:

KJV: Heb 2:6-9. But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

You do realize that "The Son of Man" is Jesus, don't you?

#3. Gods are those things then that men call gods and worship.

Regardless of whatever you "gods" call yourself or are called by your "worshippers"; it is plain to all true disciples of Jesus that: "I Corinthians 8:5-6. For though there be that are called gods [like Joagbaje et al], whether in heaven or in earth [just as Joagbaje is on the earth now], (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."

#4. You are in the same category as the King of Tyre in Ezek 28:2.

Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God [exactly what Joagbaje says], in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man [exactly what Joagbaje is], and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God. Of course the same chapter of Ezekiel shows us that Satan was the one behind this arrogant claim.

#5. It plain and evident to us that Joagbaje did not create the heavens and the earth so:

KJV: Jer 10:10-11. But the LORD is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting king: at his wrath the earth shall tremble, and the nations shall not be able to abide his indignation. Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth [gods such as Joagbaje], even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens.