budaatum:
Honestly? I think you just post plenty word thinking it would beffudle the mind and one wouldn't note you are saying nonsense when the truth is you are saying nonsense to hide the truth from yourself!

How, mutt, does the above mean, "giving the Lord Almighty a choice"?

Note Ihe sliding away from his claim that God chooses between options given to God by apostles!

Empiree:
You have turned this to insult bcus you can't defend your position.

Empiree:

I will call it a day with you.

Empiree:
The dude you cited only used one isolated verse to prove his point.

Empiree:
My question still remain, if all christians read the same bible why do christians differ on who Jesus really is?. Why is the confusion amongst yourselves?. It is clear from the video i posted

Empiree:
Is Jesus God or man or God and man at the same time?

Ihedinobi3:

I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that the 120 disciples did not give God two options to choose from?

[23]So they put forward two men, Joseph called Barsabbas (who was also called Justus), and Matthias. [24]And they prayed and said, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen [25]to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place."
Acts 1:23-25 NASB

Did the 120 not put forward two men and ask the Lord to show which of them He had chosen to replace Judas? What is that called exactly, if I am Apollo , wrong in saying that they gave the Lord two options to choose from?

How confused can you get?

MuttleyLaff:
budaatum, for the love of God, please show me anywhere that I talked about "giving the Lord Almighty a choice?".

budaatum:
That was the point in the post that you contended, mutt, perhaps next time read to understand first!

MuttleyLaff:
No, I guess you're now a clairvoyant. You know what isxin my mind, more than I do. You can read my mind sef. I only said a few words, how come your confusion, hmm? I think, you should self medicate and take your very own prescription, which is, to next time read to understand first.

budaatum:

I don't think one has to be a clairvoyant to read what is in your mind, mutt.

Ihedinobi3:
To Whom It May Concern.

3. The Lord Jesus called Paul in the same way that He called the other Apostles.

Ihedinobi3:

The fact that something is not stated explicitly in the Bible does not mean that it is not in the Bible. It does put plenty in the realm of interpretation, and it is true that an interpretation, such as the one I have just made, can be wrong, but the fact that it is an interpretation does not make it false.

Ihedinobi3:

In fact, apart from some basic truths in the Bible, the vast majority of biblical teachings are only accessible through interpretation.

Ihedinobi3:

This is why the Lord gave pastor-teachers to the Church. They are the only ones who possess the spiritual ability to see the meaning of the text and make them apparent to anyone who is willing to listen to them. And they can only do so after having attained spiritual maturity themselves and done some work of preparation to teach.

Ihedinobi3:
As I always say, no one is required to believe or agree with me. This is only to attempt to clarify that this is something that I have studied and explored from all the angles that it has been so far addressed and challenged in this thread, and even beyond the questions and speculations so far advanced. It should be obvious from some things that I have said that this is true.

MuttleyLaff:
I Even our Muslim brothers have factions in Islam, because of difference in beliefs etcetera. Our muslim brothers are not immune from differing in what they believe in.

Jesus is divine and human. Yes, Jesus is God and man, at the same time. For the work, God came down to earth to do in the person of Jesus, Jesus had to fundamentally be man, apart from being God.

Ihedinobi3:

I did say that you would never admit to any errors. I also told you that my response to your post was not for your benefit.

There is much to be said about Hebrews 8, but I will say just a few things:

1. You lied about what I said. I did not say that the New Covenant is only for the Millennium. I said that the direct teaching of the Lord will only happen during the Millennium as a fruit of the New Covenant.

2. The New Covenant is the basis for the Millennium. Without the Cross, the Kingdom will never be established. Because the Lord Jesus has come and died on the Cross, He has been crowned King of the Earth. But His Kingdom will only be inaugurated in the Millennium. When it is, God's Promises to Israel, including their regathering from the nations, the enlarging of the territory to reach the full extent that God promised Abraham but which Israel has never occupied, and the raising of the Israelite nation to rulership over the nations of the world, will be fulfilled. It is at that same time that the Lord will be teaching the inhabitants of the Earth, especially Israel, the Truth directly. That is what Hebrews 8 teaches.

3. If your interpretation of Hebrews 8 is correct, how does it not violate Isaiah 2:3; Micah 4:2; Ephesians 4 and the passages in John that I pointed out?

4. If we do not need teachers, why do we have them, since you claim that we do have people who have the gift of teaching?

Now, regarding Old and New Covenants, the only difference between the two really is that one looked forward to the other. The Old Covenant believer was a believer who had confidence that the Lord would send a Savior to die for his sins. The New Covenant believer is a believer who has confidence that the Savior has come and died for his sins. That's it. This difference is quite profound because the Advent of the Christ and His Victorious Return to Heaven resulted in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, so that gifts that had never existed among human beings were given to believers for the first time. This is a big deal, yes, but not in the sense that the New Testament believer is completely different from the Old Covenant believer.

The Old Covenant believer relied on prophets and eventually priests to teach him the Truth. The New Covenant believer relies on the work of the Apostles and prophets to have access to the Truth and on pastor-teachers to teach him the Truth that the Apostles and prophets have written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. There are more gifts in the Church today than before and the Holy Spirit is indwelling believers permanently for the first time, but the New Testament believer is still part of the Church and is called by the Lord to rely on other believers in different ways to grow to spiritual maturity.

The thing that you might not be appreciating is that, as Hebrews 8 and Jeremiah 31 both teach, the New Covenant in the Blood of Jesus produces something more than just an enlarged Church comprising Gentiles disproportionately, it also produces the Millennium which is the time that both passages call "after those days." The Millennium follows the Church Age. That is the time of the Kingdom. After the days of the Church, the Millennium will come when the Lord will take things to a new level. At that time, every human being still living on earth will be taught the Truth by Him personally. This is a different dispensation than the Church Age. It is not now. Today is the Church Age when we learn the Truth with the help of one another. That is why we are told that the Bride readies or prepares herself (Revelation 19:7, compare Ephesians 4:11-13). That is, we all work together to build each other up to full spiritual maturity in preparation for the return of our Bridegroom.

Millennial believers are not part of the Church. They are the complement of the Church, that is, an addition to the Church that is the Lord's Bride, so their dispensation is different. They receive the Truth directly from the Lord, but we receive the Truth today through the agency of pastor-teachers who interpret the revelations given to the Apostles and prophets to write down in the Bible.

As for the KJV, I still don't see what you mean. Are you saying that it is only this "authentic translation" that is inspired? Or are you saying that you made a mistake and there is no inspired KJV translation regardless who you believe published it?

I don't see your answers to the accusations I made against you. You did challenge me to produce evidence of the lies that I charge you with, and I provided a sampling of them. What you have done now is to claim that you are innocent, without providing any proof at all of this innocence.

Nonetheless, I don't quite care. I never expected you either to own up to your errors or to provide proof that you did not lie. I only provided the evidence so that it is clear that you and I are not at all alike and that I am not the liar here. As I said, I own up to my own errors and accept correction where necessary, but then you're not like me.

At this point, I am done with our conversation. You may have an answer, but I think that I will leave things at this point. There is little value that I see in continuing this discussion with you.

Ihedinobi3:
To Whom It May Concern.
It is true that we will not see it explicitly stated that Matthias was not a legitimate replacement for Judas or that Paul was. But the principles are quite clear:

1. It is the Lord Jesus Who appointed Apostles (John 6:70; Mark 3:14).
2. The Lord Jesus did not appoint Matthias.
3. The Lord Jesus called Paul in the same way that He called the other Apostles.
4. The Principle of the double portion is profoundly accomplished in Paul who worked harder than the other eleven (1 Corinthians 15:10).

The fact that something is not stated explicitly in the Bible does not mean that it is not in the Bible. It does put plenty in the realm of interpretation, and it is true that an interpretation, such as the one I have just made, can be wrong, but the fact that it is an interpretation does not make it false. In fact, apart from some basic truths in the Bible, the vast majority of biblical teachings are only accessible through interpretation. This is why the Lord gave pastor-teachers to the Church. They are the only ones who possess the spiritual ability to see the meaning of the text and make them apparent to anyone who is willing to listen to them. And they can only do so after having attained spiritual maturity themselves and done some work of preparation to teach.

Ihedinobi3:

Barnabas was like many other believers whom the Lord gave as secondary apostles to accompany the Apostles and aid them in their work of establishing churches across the world. Silas was another. Apollos was another. John Mark too was another. There were very many. But the Twelve were special. They were those with ranking authority over all the Church.

My argument is not that Paul was more visible than Matthias. It is that Matthias was selected by men who did not know better at the time. If he was an apostle, then he was certainly the only believer in history who received a spiritual ministry through human election. Every other believer received their spiritual gift and ministry directly from the Lord.

JMAN05:


Don't be too fast to discredit the Bible, just because you can't find evidence in Google.

Scholarly research is a work in progress. In the future it may be realised how the book of Daniel used Darius. Critics have sometimes failed when new evidence comes up to vindicate the Bible records.

No true scholar would relegate the Bible to a made-up story. We must admit our limitations in getting all the evidence we need now from secular authorities since the Bible is from a Higher source. It's authenticity will in the future be discerned by the critics.

Don't be too fast, lest you make serious mistakes.

budaatum:

This is unblibical. Jesus was in body and in Spirit when he appointed the Apostles, while Paul was appointed by the Spirit of Christ.


Sounds like adding to the Bible to me, as you constantly accuse me of doing, but how can an interpretation that is wrong be true Ihe?


Seriously? "The vast majority of biblical teachings are not accessible through the Word of God itself, Ihe, but through what you interpret it to be?


Oh. Only some people can use their and training and preparation to understand enough to interpret Biblical teachings? I agree. It's hard work, afterall. Not for lazy fuqs.


Of course Ihe, you have worked harder than everyone else and we are "not one of you"!

gobuchinny:


I'm happy everyone with the Spirit of God can discern the evil spirit that operates in your life. The same spirit that allows you to distort scrpiture. Everything you quoted about the millennia is a lie and you have no scripture in the NT to back it up. Your lot love to dwell in the OT forgetting that OT was written to a people and was a book of prophesies which have already passed and the remaining prophesies are the destruction of the earth and the establishing of the new Jerusalem e.t.c. ALL those words in theOT were addressed to a people not you or me and the ones that were prophesies for our time like the coming messiah and everlasting judgement were clear. Now you r quoting Micah, oya let's look at it together.

Micah 4:1-4 But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.
And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken ....

Dont you see Micah helps to explain my points? Its says in the last days the mountain of the Lord will be establish in the Top of the Mountains. what is the mountain of the Lord? This signifies authority, its saying The Lords mountain will be exalted just like we have it in Yeshua who is exalted and sitting above all principalities and power and above all other mountains as Eph 1 tells us., verse 2, and people shall flow into it and MANY NATIONS WILL COME. it means the gentiles will be allowed access to these mountain ......verse 4 and many will say come let us go and seek the Lord for HE will teach us of His ways, verse 5 FOR OUT OF ZION SHALL PROCEED THE LAW, Where or what is Zion? Why is the law from Zion direct and not from pastor teachers? Why is it God that will teach His ways and not your pastor teachers. These was Micah like other OT prophets who God allowed to see the times of the reformation where 5he gentiles will be included and God Himself will Pour out His Spirits. The Isaiah you also quoted is the exact same with Micah. Do you know these prophets wondered what kind of men will beleive in Yahweh during this time?

1 Peter 1:10-11 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

The old prophets saw the salvation that Yeshua will bring because they also had the same Spirit.

We know that everywhere in scrpiture when it talks of the last days its talking about the days after the messiah has been sacrificed as an offering and resurrected. We are In the last days.

Let me tell you all the prophesies in a nutshell. A nation Israel will be born, they will rebel and God will send them destructions (which were d details of literally all the prophets from Jeremiah till Malachi? Which led to the temples destruction and the rebuilding was prophesied that Cyrus will help consumamate. Then that The temple will be destroyed again because of sin and that the messiah will come, and that he will ride a colt and be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver and killed and resurrect, then the world will be destroyed when the Messiah returns with His saints to establish the new heaven and earth after judging sinners, satan and his Angel's and the fallen angels.

My friend all the prophesies have been fulfilled till the coming of the messiah. What we r waiting for now is the destruction of the earth as that is the last days were the wicked will become more wicked.


You have complicated the simplicity of the gospel with your heresies. And you r rong, Yeshua is not King on earth as there is a god of this world already and they cant be two Kings in a Kingdom. Yeshua is in heaven and until the earth is first destroyed and sinners removed. Can you honestly say this earth is for Yeshua? Men rule this earth in collaboration with principalities.

All the apostles preached that the earth will be destroyed and judgement will come. Yeshua prophesied the last days to be rough in mt25 and not pleasant. Earthquakes, killings etc and then the end will come.

I'm not addressing this to you because you portion is hell already. It's for posterity and the one folk who will find this words. PLEASE READ YOUR BIBLE YOURSELF WITH THE HELP OF THE LORD. THESE R D LAST DAYS AND THE DEVIL IS LOOKING FOR WHO TO DEVOUR. ITS ALL ABOUT HEAVEN AND HELL NOT RICHES. THESE WORLD IS PASSING AWAY AS WE R IN THE LAST DAYS. READ THE NT AND YOU WILL REALISE THAT MANY FALSE PROPHETS ARE GONE OUT ALREADY SELLING PEACE PEACE WHEN TRULY THERE IS WAR WAR.

DO NOT BE DECEIVED WE ARE IN THE DEVILS KINGDOM. THE EARTH AS WE HAVE IT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO HIM. HE IS THE PRINCE/god of this world. YOU CANNOT TAKE ANY MOUNTAIN AS FAKE PASTOR SAID. ALL THE MOUNTAINS OF THE EARTH ARE CARNAL . The kingdom of God and His son is not a carnal kindgom and not of this world. The earth will be destroyed and the messiah shall appear. It will be like the days of Noah. Pls read your bible and see this things for yourself so you can prove what is that good, acceptable and perfect will of God.

A word is enough for the wise

OkCornel:




See how you contradict yourself with the bolded in red.

My questions still stands.

1) Why didn't God outrightly reject both choices the Apostles presented to Him? Have you suddenly forgotten the case of Samuel trying to anoint a replacement for King Saul for example? Or did God's ways suddenly change?

2) Why didn't the Holy Spirit outrightly reject the apostleship of Matthias?

3) Where in the scriptures can we see Jesus appointing Paul for the purpose of replacing Judas? Oh wait, this now subjected to "the realm of interpretation"...

4) If your argument is about Jesus calling Paul to service like He did to the other Apostles, what of the other 70 (or 72 as the case might be) Jesus called and commissioned directly?

Ihedinobi3:




So, I am being corrected and told off by a self-proclaimed unbeliever who somehow also claims to serve Jesus Christ, a syncretist who mixes Christianity with Eastern religions, and an established liar (all three are proven liars, by the way). But I'm the one who needs to be corrected about what the Bible teaches and warned for presenting myself as a pastor-teacher, although I believe in Jesus Christ as revealed in the Bible, refuse to accept any foreign elements and intrusions into the Bible, and own up to my errors and mistakes in the rare instances that I make them.

Well, the Scriptures are clear that Satan masquerades as an angel of light and his ministers do the same. I don't see more that I can do either to correct you three and others like you or to warn anyone who chances upon our conversations to be wary of you.

So, as I said before, I'm moving on from these discussions. I will not attempt to correct the misrepresentations of my own comments by you three: my posts should be enough to prove to anyone who cares that you are lying about what I have said wherever you are doing so.

Empiree:
no Muslim faction believe Jesus is God

Empiree:
No Muslim faction believe Muhammad is God.

Empiree:
No Muslim faction believe Jesus is God and man at the same time. Differences within factions amongst Muslims are something far less important not this major creed. You have a lot to learn, buddy.

Empiree:
if you die on this belief, you really stand no chance of eternal life at all.

Empiree:
Listen, your Bible is your major problem. There is no way you could get out of this confusion unless you think outside the box.

Empiree:
John and Luke you used to back yourself were historians. They copied stories from one another. They penned their stories from random people.

Empiree:
What they wrote is about Jesus not what Jesus said.

Empiree:
Your concept of God is pathetic.

Empiree:
You need reorientation all over.

Empiree:
For some reason I feel so reluctant to engage you all along.

Empiree:
Please don't die on this belief of yours. It is not gonna be pretty

Ihedinobi3:


So, I am being corrected and told off by a self-proclaimed unbeliever who somehow also claims to serve Jesus Christ, a syncretist who mixes Christianity with Eastern religions, and an established liar (all three are proven liars, by the way).

PrincewithGod:
God in His omniscience has designed the Bible to come to us the way it is and in His omnipotence has used whatever council or group of persons or person to bring it to us the way it is. If it was His will for all these books to be included in His Bible, He would have allowed them to be included. It will be kind of trying to overreach ourselves when we go after those books.

PrincewithGod:
God in His omniscience has designed the Bible to come to us the way it is and in His omnipotence has used whatever council or group of persons or person to bring it to us the way it is. If it was His will for all these books to be included in His Bible, He would have allowed them to be included. It will be kind of trying to overreach ourselves when we go after those books.

AlexFlemming:
The Roman Catholic Church recognizes:

Tobit
Judith
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Wisdom
Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus)
Baruch
The Letter of Jeremiah (Baruch Chapter 6)
Greek Additions to Esther (Book of Esther, chapters 10:4–12:6)
The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children verses 1–68 (Book of Daniel, chapter 3, verses 24–90)
Susanna (Book of Daniel, chapter 13)
Bel and the Dragon (Book of Daniel, chapter 14)

AlexFlemming:
In addition to the above,

The Greek and Russian Orthodox Churches recognize the following:

3 Maccabees
1 Esdras
Prayer of Manasseh
Psalm 151

AlexFlemming:
Russian and Georgian Orthodox Churches include:
2 Esdras i.e., Latin Esdras in the Russian and Georgian Bibles
There is also 4 Maccabees which is only accepted as canonical in the Georgian Church, but was included by St. Jerome in an appendix to the Vulgate, and is an appendix to the Greek Orthodox Bible, and it is therefore sometimes included in collections of the Apocrypha.

The Syriac Orthodox tradition includes:
Psalms 151–155
The Apocalypse of Baruch
The Letter of Baruch


The Ethiopian Biblical canon includes:
Jubilees
Enoch
1–3 Meqabyan
and some other books.


The Anglican Church uses some of the Apocryphal books liturgically, though rarely and with alternative reading available. Therefore, editions of the Bible intended for use in the Anglican Church may include the Deuterocanonical books accepted by the Catholic Church, plus 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh, which were in the Vulgate appendix.

AlexFlemming:
I am patiently waiting for the "66 books is the inspired and complete word of God" crew to tell us the following churches are apostate churches for believing in more than 66 books;

1) Syriac Orthodox Church
2) Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
3) Eastern Orthodox churches
4) Russian Orthodox churches
5) Georgian Orthodox churches
6) The Anglican church
7) The Roman Catholic church
8 ) The Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church

OkCornel:


Is this the scriptural evidence pointing to where Jesus appointed Paul to replace Judas?

Is this the scriptural evidence pointing to where the Holy Spirit rejected Matthias’ apostleship?


I get it, you have no answer to the queries being raised here, and would rather rely on your conjectures and interpretation of the scriptures.

I take this as your exit strategy in the absence of scriptural evidence to support your claims.


You’re a joke. The bolded in your quote reeks of “humility”. It’s very essential in your walk with God. Ride on Ihedinobi3, the all knowing one.

OkCornel:


Hope you know there’s no general consensus as to how many books makes up the Bible.

You might want to check the first version of King James Bible for a start.

1611 KJV Bible

PrincewithGod:

What I have observed in all these arguments is that the role of God is being left out of how the Bible came to us. The Bible is the word of God and it is up to Him to determine what comes to us and in order to purify His word from contamination from the enemy (satan).
Deutronomy 29 : 29.

OkCornel:


The one with 66 books? Or over 80 books?

Do you believe all of God’s words can be limited to a set of books?

Revelations and prophecies given to those with a gift of prophecy in our time that came to pass, whose words are they?

PrincewithGod:

Did you even read the quotation?

OkCornel:


Deuteronomy 29:29 New King James Version (NKJV)

29 “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.


I did bro. Just wanted to hear your view per my question.

PrincewithGod:

Good, so let us leave the secret things that belong to God to Him. What should be our priority now is to strive to make heaven, when we get there we shall come into the knowledge of why He allowed those books to be taken out of or not to be included in the bible.

OkCornel:


A lovely consolation for ignorance, and getting stuck in a comfort zone. If everyone has this attitude, I wonder...I just wonder.