Kobojunkie:
1. Did you know that all those who are of Jesus Christ that will end up in Heaven eventually will all become like angels — no longer humans? These are humans who made the decision to forego disobedience(sin), abandoning it all in order to live their lives in continuous submission and obedience to the teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ, eventually to be sealed by the Spirit of God in this state of continuous obedience for eternity. Can that which is sealed into a state of obedience by God Himself then sin against God? Impossicant!

2. There was never a Lucifer as that entire story that you have been fed is born of myth, I am afraid.

Who purportedly tempted Jesus then?

LordReed:
Who purportedly tempted Jesus then?

■ I believe it is written that Satan did.

Kobojunkie:
■ I believe it is written that Satan did.

So Lucifer is not another name for Satan?

LordReed:
So Lucifer is not another name for Satan?

No

Kobojunkie:
No

Ok so I take it that you don't think Revelations is from the god or Jesus?

LordReed:
■Ok so I take it that you don't think Revelations is from the god or Jesus?

1. Does Revelations tell you instead that Lucifer is Satan?

Kobojunkie:
1. Does Revelations tell you instead that Lucifer is Satan?

Can you answer the question? You've already said Lucifer is not another name for Satan. Fin.

LordReed:
■ Can you answer the question? You've already said Lucifer is not another name for Satan. Fin.

I did state that Satan is not Lucifer, yes?

Kobojunkie:
I did state that Satan is not Lucifer, yes?

Yes and we are done with that. I asked a different question I dunno why you are going back to that. Do you think Revelation is the word of the god or Jesus?

LordReed:
■ Yes and we are done with that. I asked a different question I dunno why you are going back to that. Do you think Revelation is the word of the god or Jesus?

1. I think Revelation is a vision revealed to John by Jesus Christ as John himself stated in Revelations 1 vs 1 - 2. The Word of God instead refers to the Word that emanates directly from the mouth of God Himself or Jesus Christ.

Kobojunkie:

1. I think Revelation is a vision revealed to John by Jesus Christ as John himself stated in Revelations 1 vs 1 - 2. The Word of God instead refers to the Word that emanates directly from the mouth of God Himself or Jesus Christ.

What's the difference? In the vision was it not Jesus speaking to John?

LordReed:
■What's the difference? In the vision was it not Jesus speaking to John?

1. According to John, Jesus Christ wasn't the only one who spoke to him in the vision. And John made certain to reveal this in his book. So, basically, the Words attributed to Jesus Christ can be considered valid as is — Truth. However, the words that are not of Jesus Christ cannot be considered in the same way.

For instance, when, John records Jesus Christ as declaring that He is the brighter morning star in Revelations 22 vs 16, one is meant to take that as Jesus Christ revealing Truth.

Kobojunkie:
1. According to John, Jesus Christ wasn't the only one who spoke to him in the vision. And John made certain to reveal this in his book. So, basically, the Words attributed to Jesus Christ can be considered valid as is — Truth. However, the words that are not of Jesus Christ cannot be considered in the same way.

For instance, when, John records Jesus Christ as declaring that He is the brighter morning star in Revelations 22 vs 16, one is meant to take that as Jesus Christ revealing Truth.

So some of the chapters of Revelation cannot be considered as valid?

LordReed:
■So some of the chapters of Revelation cannot be considered as valid?

1. Be specific. What particular things in what chapters?

Kobojunkie:
1. Be specific. What particular things in what chapters?

Some chapters of Revelations don't have Jesus or the god speaking so such chapters won't be valid based on what you said "However, the words that are not of Jesus Christ cannot be considered in the same way". Chapter 4 for instance, according to what you said would it be valid?

LordReed:
Some chapters of Revelations don't have Jesus or the god speaking so such chapters won't be valid based on what you said "However, the words that are not of Jesus Christ cannot be considered in the same way". Chapter 4 for instance, according to what you said would it be valid?

What is it in Chapter 4 that you are considering?

Kobojunkie:
What is it in Chapter 4 that you are considering?

The entire chapter.

LordReed:
The entire chapter.

1. According to John what he wrote is what he saw. Do you wish to refute his claim?

Kobojunkie:
1. According to John what he wrote is what he saw. Do you wish to refute his claim?

You said:

Kobojunkie:
1. According to John, Jesus Christ wasn't the only one who spoke to him in the vision. And John made certain to reveal this in his book. So, basically, the Words attributed to Jesus Christ can be considered valid as is — Truth. However, the words that are not of Jesus Christ cannot be considered in the same way.

With emphasis on the bolded words. Chapter 4 has no words of Jesus or the god so it is not to be considered on the same level as chapters 1-3, according to you.

LordReed:
You said: With emphasis on the bolded words. Chapter 4 has no words of Jesus or the god so it is not to be considered on the same level as chapters 1-3, according to you.

The Words out of the mouth of Jesus Christ is Truth! All else is to be validated against that which is written.

There is a law that states that by the accounts of 2 or 3 witnesses shall truth be established. That law is part of the Old Law -Deuteronomy 17vs 6 - and also of the new - Matthew 18 vs 16 - This is used in verifying pretty much any claims that are made outside of that decreed by God Himself. So what is written in Revelations 4, John's account of what he saw, is his account of what he saw. Now, to verify his claim you find other witnesses who claim to have seen the same.

Kobojunkie:
The Words out of the mouth of Jesus Christ is Truth! All else is to be validated against that which is written.

There is a law that states that by the accounts of 2 or 3 witnesses shall truth be established. This is used in verifying pretty much any claims that are made outside of that decreed by God Himself. So what is written in Revelations 4, John's account of what he saw, is his account of what he saw.

It was your own words o, I didn't force you. You wrote it clean clear. Are you walking it back?

So which 2 or 3 witnesses are we going to use to verify chapter 4?

LordReed:
■It was your own words o, I didn't force you. You wrote it clean clear. Are you walking it back?
■ So which 2 or 3 witnesses are we going to use to verify chapter 4?

1. Where do you have me walking it back?

2. you look through scripture to find your witnesses

Kobojunkie:
1. Where do you have me walking it back?

2. you look through scripture to find your witnesses

Again you:

Kobojunkie:
1. However, the words that are not of Jesus Christ cannot be considered in the same way.

Chapter 4 has no words of Jesus. So we shouldn't consider it to be the same as chapters 1-3 according to you.

There is no other person in the Bible who wrote similar to what was written in chapter 4 of Revelation. So do we regard it as invalid?

LordReed:
Again you: Chapter 4 has no words of Jesus. So we shouldn't consider it to be the same as chapters 1-3 according to you. There is no other person in the Bible who wrote similar to what was written in chapter 4 of Revelation. So do we regard it as invalid?

As I already explained in my previous comments, The Words out of the mouth of Jesus Christ/God is Truth! All else is to be validated against that which is written.

There is a law that states that by the accounts of 2 or 3 witnesses shall truth be established. That law is part of the Old Law -Deuteronomy 17vs 6 - and also of the new - Matthew 18 vs 16 - This is used in verifying pretty much any claims that are made outside of that decreed by God Himself. So what is written in Revelations 4, John's account of what he saw, is his account of what he saw. Now, to verify his claim you find other witnesses who claim to have seen the same.

If no one else in scripture corroborates it, then you simply take it as, in this case, John's accounts of what he saw in his dream/vision.

Also, from my own research, for a thing to be considered invalid though, it has to exist in direct contradiction to that which is written.

Kobojunkie:
As I already explained in my previous comments, The Words out of the mouth of Jesus Christ/God is Truth! All else is to be validated against that which is written.

There is a law that states that by the accounts of 2 or 3 witnesses shall truth be established. That law is part of the Old Law -Deuteronomy 17vs 6 - and also of the new - Matthew 18 vs 16 - This is used in verifying pretty much any claims that are made outside of that decreed by God Himself. So what is written in Revelations 4, John's account of what he saw, is his account of what he saw. Now, to verify his claim you find other witnesses who claim to have seen the same.

If no one else in scripture stated it, then you simply take it as, in this case, John's accounts of what he saw in his dream/vision.

There are no words of Jesus in chapter 4 of Revelation.

There no writers in the Bible who wrote similar to chapter 4 of Revelation.

LordReed:
■ There are no words of Jesus in chapter 4 of Revelation. There no writers in the Bible who wrote similar to chapter 4 of Revelation.

then it is not an established truth but the account of the writer in that case.

Kobojunkie:
As I already explained in my previous comments, The Words out of the mouth of Jesus Christ/God is Truth! All else is to be validated against that which is written.

There is a law that states that by the accounts of 2 or 3 witnesses shall truth be established. That law is part of the Old Law -Deuteronomy 17vs 6 - and also of the new - Matthew 18 vs 16 - This is used in verifying pretty much any claims that are made outside of that decreed by God Himself. So what is written in Revelations 4, John's account of what he saw, is his account of what he saw. Now, to verify his claim you find other witnesses who claim to have seen the same.

If no one else in scripture corroborates it, then you simply take it as, in this case, John's accounts of what he saw in his dream/vision.

Also, from my own research, for a thing to be considered invalid though, it has to exist in direct contradiction to that which is written.

So why don't you take Paul's words as it is?

That means the story in in chapter 12 should be taken as it is since it doesn't contradict anything in the Bible.

LordReed:
■So why don't you take Paul's words as it is?
■ That means the story in in chapter 12 should be taken as it is since it doesn't contradict anything in the Bible.

1. I am sorry! What part of what I explained do you not understand?

2. What part of the story in 12 are you referring to?

Kobojunkie:
then it is not an established truth but the account of the writer in that case.

So the same writer says he heard Jesus but the same writer can't be trusted in the same book because it's not the words of Jesus? How can you tell the author is correct in any case? Again there are no writers that have written anything similar to what John wrote.

Kobojunkie:
1. I am sorry! What part of what I explained do you not understand?

2. What part of the story in 12 are you referring to?

It seems you are the one dodging from understanding what you wrote.

All of it but particularly the war in heaven.

LordReed:
■So the same writer says he heard Jesus but the same writer can't be trusted in the same book because it's not the words of Jesus?
■ How can you tell the author is correct in any case? Again there are no writers that have written anything similar to what John wrote.

1. The mandate is to trust and obey God, not His apostles or in the writers of scripture.

2. Basically,

■ God's Word is the Truth
■ Every other account that is not of God needs to be validated against God's Word
■ In the case that there is no statement made by God regarding an issue, then by the accounts of two or three witnesses shall truth be established
■ In the case that there are no statements made by God regarding an issue, and no other accounts to corroborate the claim made, then the truth revealed is not established but local — that of the author. In this case, anything that cannot be verified and does not contradict God is John's account.

LordReed:
■ It seems you are the one dodging from understanding what you wrote. All of it but particularly the war in heaven.

1. Recall that you are reading from a person's dreams. Do you apply the same literal reasoning to the dreams of others or even your own dreams?