ichuka:
Hi bro
Will come back to these later.
Busy now
Thanks

I added a number 3

ichuka:
He' sound like an eckist

Na jollification be dat hin dey then

Ihedinobi3:

I think I did see the point. As I have said before, you appear to have a fair grasp on these things, but there is a bit of baggage apparent in your comprehension of them, so I offer my responses to try to clear things up.

It was not that the animal sacrifices were found wanting in some way that the Lord Jesus came. That is my concern. The animal sacrifices were never the answer to man's sin. They were merely placeholders for the Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus. It was the idea that the ritual itself had power that led many of the Israelites and even the other nations of the world into a self-righteousness that cost them their Salvation, with all of them ending up in gross paganism as a result.

Okay this i cannot fault

missjo:
Okay this i cannot fault

Have a crack at the above earlier three questions about the blood. Take pot shots if you may.

MuttleyLaff:
"And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge,
and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none
(i.e. I looked for someone who might rebuild the wall of righteousness that guards the land.
I searched for someone to stand in the gap in the wall so I wouldn’t have to destroy the land, but I found no one.)/i]"
- Ezekiel 22:30

"[i]He saw that there was no man—He was amazed that there was no one—to intercede;
so His own arm brought salvation, and His own righteousness sustained Him."
- Isaiah 59:16

"I was amazed to see that no one intervened to help the oppressed.
So I myself stepped in to save them with my strong arm, and my wrath sustained me
(i.e. I looked, but there was no one to help; I was shocked because there was no one offering support.
So my right arm accomplished deliverance or achieved salvation for me, my raging anger drove me on)"
- Isaiah 63:5

ichuka, you must have quite a lot of times, heard the saying that "If you want something done right, do it yourself", well none, nobody, no angel out of the whole angelic hosts of heaven, nor no man out of the whole world wide, offered to accept the challenge to help man get returned back to man's original status before the fall, so God resorted to DIY

ichuka, you know that Christ, means Saviour, right?. So if you do, how then do suppose God will be able to pull this off this God's redemptive work, if Christ isnt God and man, hmm? Give this some thought ichuka

missjojo/Ihedinobi3, why is blood, at all, necessary in the redemptive work? I think I need to clear the cobwebs in that question and re-ask it all over again.

1/ Without bringing into the equation, animal blood sacrifices temporarily covering up sin, why is blood, at all, necesaary in the redemptive work?
2/ How did God successfully go about the redemptive work for man with the blood of Jesus Christ?
3/ What is it that's specific, constitutional and instrinic in the blood of Jesus Christ that makes it to be required in the redemptive work?

I think i will sum up your three questions into one and provide a substantive answer.

Adam & Eve disobeyed and caused themselves to acknowledge their own unclothedness because the glory of God was departed from them. They tried to cover themselves up with leaves BUT God deemed this insufficient covering so Jehovah did this:

Genesis 3:21 King James Version (KJV)
21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

To make a coat of skins, animals had to provide the raw material. And for this to happen, the animal gave its life and had to be killed, its blood shed.
This was the very first sacrificial rite performed by God himself. There was shedding of blood to cover the unclothedness of Adam & Eve.

In essence, sin does expose us to spiritual unclothedness and God cannot look upon us without a sort of covering over us. Blood became a necessity, and only animals could be used for this purpose during the age of humans after Adam & Eve since it is abominable to spill the blood of a human (See Cain and Abel). Jesus was not all human, his blood had the God-characteristics, it is not just any blood.
His sacrificial offering on the cross is the final blood sacrifice.

MuttleyLaff:
Have a crack at the above earlier three questions about the blood. Take pot shots if you may.

Done

missjo:
I think i will sum up your three questions into one and provide a substantive answer.

Adam & Eve disobeyed and caused themselves to acknowledge their own unclothedness because the glory of God was departed from them. They tried to cover themselves up with leaves BUT God deemed this insufficient covering so Jehovah did this:

Genesis 3:21 King James Version (KJV)
21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

To make a coat of skins, animals had to provide the raw material. And for this to happen, the animal gave its life and had to be killed, its blood shed.
This was the very first sacrificial rite performed by God himself. There was shedding of blood to cover the unclothedness of Adam & Eve.

missjo, dont think, I'll let this lie ooo. Please tell, where in the text did you read that God killed an animal to provide raw material to make coats of skins, hmmm? Tut, tut, tut tut. Smh lol aah. Hmm, that is what you learned isnt it. Right?
After they lost their cloth of righteousness, the skin we currently have is what God made in Genesis 3:21 missjo to clothe and cover them up with, lol.

missjo:
In essence, sin does expose us to spiritual unclothedness and God cannot look upon us without a sort of covering over us. Blood became a necessity, and only animals could be used for this purpose during the age of humans after Adam & Eve since it is abominable to spill the blood of a human (See Cain and Abel). Jesus was not all human, His blood had the God-characteristics, it is not just any blood.
His sacrificial offering on the cross is the final blood sacrifice.

missjo:
Done

When Adam sinned, we all sinned because we all were inside Adam's loins and as such inherited the OSN in his blood DNA, remember from Biology 101 that DNA has all sorts of characteristis passed on to us from dad and mum. kkins25 is a biologist and when he is not feigning ignorance, knows much about all this, like about meiosis and all. So yes bulleyes missjo at the above emboldened and underlined, Jesus was not all human, His blood had the God-characteristics. He needed to be human so use this God-characteristics in His human DNA to return man back to the original default format or state. Angels could'NT face up to this, no other human being is qualified to do, so God literally just stepped up to plate and DIY did it all Himself

ichuka:
Why, in God’s plan of redemption, must Christ be both God and man at the same time?

First and foremost, God's plan from the beginning is that all things should be brought together in Christ to him. For this to happen the issue of sin must be dealt with and that will require Christ himself through whom all things were made, sacrifice himself.
Sin has a Judicial undertone and the price must be equal to the offence in quality, since God created a perfect man then only an equally perfect man can pay the price.

Because Jesus is the one through whom all things were created, through him also all things will be restored, He took upon himself the from of man who had no link with the corrupted Adamic nature because he was born by a virgin without a human father yet he was a complete (100%) man and complete (100%) God.

He made the worlds through the words of his mouth but he destroy sin through the blood of his veins.

In christ we see a perfect man instead of an imperfect Adam and we see God.

In Christ we see our image of what we shall be when we see him and we see God who redeemed us from destruction brought by sin through the fallen Adam.

Jesus is both Man and God till today and will continue to be so forever. He will never take off his humanity for it is an everlasting covenant.

MuttleyLaff:


Nobi fight ooo nau, abeg.

ichuka:

He' sound like an eckist

Unfortunately, the old religion has forgotten about the Sound Current, the Voice of God, the Word / Logos, as the sole mechanism for spiritual redemption.

MuttleyLaff:
missjojo, dont think, I'll let this lie ooo. Please tell, where in the text did you read that God killed an animal to provide raw material to make coats of skins, hmmm? Tut, tut, tut tut. Smh lol aah. Hmm, that is what you learned isnt it. Right?
After they lost their cloth of righteousness, the skin we currently have is what God made in Genesis 3:21 missjojo to clothe and cover them up with, lol.

Lol, Mutt Mutt, I like you.
Okay, so the original Hebrew word used in that verse is kĕthoneth. The direct translation for this in English is 'Tunic' or 'Garments' or 'robe'. The hebrew word owr interpreted as skins should have been interpreted as leather, hide, this is the direct English translation.
Kĕthoneth is also used in Exodus 28:4 & 39-40 regarding the priestly law for dressing given by God to Moses.

Make no mistake about it Muttley, Genesis 3:21 is talking about Garments of animal skin used to cloth (Hebrew: Labash) Adam & Eve.


This is how a direct translation from the original hebrew should read:

Genesis 3:21
21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make garments/robes of leather/hide, and clothed them.

Leather/hide is animal skin, I am certain you are aware of this.

missjo:
Lol, Mutt Mutt, I like you.

I like you too, as I am mentally turned on by smart people, just like you.

missjo:
Okay, so the original Hebrew word used in that verse is kĕthoneth. The direct translation for this in English is 'Tunic' or 'Garments' or 'robe'. The hebrew word owr interpreted as skins should have been interpreted as leather, hide, this is the direct English translation.
Kĕthoneth is also used in Exodus 28:4 & 39-40 regarding the priestly law for dressing given by God to Moses.

Make no mistake about it Muttley, Genesis 3:21 is talking about Garments of animal skin used to cloth (Hebrew: Labash) Adam & Eve.

This is how a direct translation from the original hebrew should read:

Genesis 3:21
21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make garments/robes of leather/hide, and clothed them.

Leather/hide is animal skin, I am certain you are aware of this.

Genesis 3:21, says, made tunics of skin of man and not of animal(s) to clothe them missjojo. Our skin is a garment, Yorubas have a saying about "aso leniyan"

I am not sure how you managed to interpolate animal death sacrifice, blood letting and garment of animal skin into this Genesis 3:21 verse missjojo.

Thanks for sharing this post. Do you want to get a beautiful spells through beauty spells then consult with our spellcaster astrologer M K Sharma Ji and get beauty spells that work fast without ingredients. For more info about these beauty spells that work immediately, visit us @ https://chantspells.com/beauty-spells-that-work-fast-instantly-without-ingredients/

missjo:

Okay this i cannot fault

Good for you.

missjo:

I think i will sum up your three questions into one and provide a substantive answer.

Adam & Eve disobeyed and caused themselves to acknowledge their own unclothedness because the glory of God was departed from them. They tried to cover themselves up with leaves BUT God deemed this insufficient covering so Jehovah did this:

Genesis 3:21 King James Version (KJV)
21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

To make a coat of skins, animals had to provide the raw material. And for this to happen, the animal gave its life and had to be killed, its blood shed.
This was the very first sacrificial rite performed by God himself. There was shedding of blood to cover the unclothedness of Adam & Eve.

In essence, sin does expose us to spiritual unclothedness and God cannot look upon us without a sort of covering over us. Blood became a necessity, and only animals could be used for this purpose during the age of humans after Adam & Eve since it is abominable to spill the blood of a human (See Cain and Abel). Jesus was not all human, his blood had the God-characteristics, it is not just any blood.
His sacrificial offering on the cross is the final blood sacrifice.

Regarding the above, there are a few things that I must say:

1. It wasn't so much about physical unclothedness as it was about a lesson about Redemption. Adam and Eve were geniuses. Their bodies were perfect until they sinned, and even then they were still of far higher quality than our bodies today are, so they really were able to make exceptionally good coverings from leaves. That does not even take into consideration the type and variety of vegetation that was available to them in the Garden. So, it wasn't about clothes. It was about Redemption.

2. The issue of redemption is that rebellion against God is essentially cosmic treason. According to the Word of God itself, such rebels forfeit their lives by rebelling. The only way then to fix the problem was to give life in exchange for the life of the rebel. That is why there had to be a death in order to save the life of the sinner.

3. It is not about blood as a substance. It is about what blood represents. In Genesis 9:4, the Lord makes abundantly clear that blood represents life. Even in colloquial usage today, to shed blood is to kill. It is not necessary to actually spill blood physically in order to kill. So it is not about blood as a substance.

4. The Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus had nothing to do with His physical blood. In fact, the Price that He paid for our sins was spiritual in nature. The Bible records that He was still alive when He declared the Sacrifice accomplished with the tetelestai, that is, the statement "it is finished" or "it has been accomplished." That is conclusive evidence that He had already paid the Price before He physically died. The Blood of Jesus is actually a metaphor for the Sacrifice that He offered for us. It is not His Physical Blood. That Sacrifice was made in the three hours of darkness that fell while the Lord was on the Cross. It involved the actual separation that our Lord experienced from the Father, and the actual suffering and pain that is associated with Judgment upon sin. The Lord suffered all of that to an infinite degree for those three hours. After He had, the darkness was lifted and the veil of the Holiest Place was torn in two symbolizing the removal of the barrier between God and Man.

5. So, again, I must warn you to avoid reading anything into the actual physical metaphors used for the Sacrifice. It was not a material thing at all. Redemption was wholly a spiritual affair.

6. Finally, the Lord Jesus's Deity was voided during His first Advent (Phil 2:7). That is, the Lord was not taking advantage of His Deity in any way, so it is not at all biblical that His Blood had "God-characteristics." In fact, Hebrews 10:5, which I showed you before, is crystal clear that the Sacrifice was only possible because the Lord was given a real human body to make it with. It was purely His Humanity that suffered and died for us. Deity cannot die or suffer in any way, which is why the Lord voided His Deity to make the sacrifice, a theological concept called kenosis.

7. I sometimes, but very rarely, warn people about others on this platform. I don't do it often, because I worry that it will do more harm than good. In my other response to you on the other thread, I have already given you a warning that I think is sufficient if you do have a heart for the Truth, as it seems to me that you do. Nonetheless, I will warn you here about such people again. It appears to me that one such has marked you, as he often does people who are ripe for the Truth, but who are still neophytes. I have shown you a place that I believe is perfectly safe for you to feed and grow in the Truth. If you will give your attention there, you will be safe from such wolves in sheep's clothing. It concerns me that you may not be doing so, but that is really your choice to make, not mine. Suffice to say, that although you may be taking joy in the attentions of people who appear to have "deep wisdom," some of them only have the "deep things of Satan," but are so caught up in their minds with the idea that they are something special in the Church that they can never see their own errors. If you are not careful, you too can be swept away by them. As it is, it appears that two such people, in fact, have caught your attention. Please, be careful. This board is a very dangerous place for young believers who are still growing in the Truth.

MuttleyLaff:
missjojo, dont think, I'll let this lie ooo. Please tell, where in the text did you read that God killed an animal to provide raw material to make coats of skins, hmmm? Tut, tut, tut tut. Smh lol aah. Hmm, that is what you learned isnt it. Right?
After they lost their cloth of righteousness, the skin we currently have is what God made in Genesis 3:21 missjojo to clothe and cover them up with, lol.

where in the bible did it say that God did not use animal hide??

When Adam sinned, we all sinned because we all were inside Adam's loins and as such inherited the OSN in his blood DNA, remember from Biology 101 that DNA has all sorts of characteristics passed on to us from dad and mum.

@bolded- lier,lier, pants on fire. now, where were we? ohh yeah, 'the god DNA'. i don't like it when people lie against the holy spirit of DNA. characteristics passed down from parent is only physical( which may somewhat affect psychology and not anything spritual of the offspring. Do not that a paradigm cannot be passed down genetically which of course you know) now, what Sin could adam have commited that it tinted his DNA to the extent that it was transcribed into the gene of the gametes. surely sir, there is a very big loop hole in this theory of SIN passed down from adam to you.

kkins25 is a biologist and when he is not feigning ignorance, knows much about all this, like about meiosis and all. So yes bulleyes missjojo at the above emboldened and underlined, Jesus was not all human, His blood had the God-characteristics

.
Christianity knows no boundaries when it comes to illogical,irrational mythological concepts, if jesus was half human and half God then tell me buddy; why the deuce is he been praised for [b]dying[/b]for the sins of man. when the God part of him was well and active? why was jesus praised for been sinless when he had God genes which are incapable of sinning huh? what is the essence of the whole 'died for your sins' shiit? maybe as the strokes of koboko that Pontius Pilate wired him was not even itching him talkmore of inflicting pain. isn't this concept of jesues being half man and half human a scam? yes it is..jesus they say fasted for forty days and forty nights, this was truely a remarkable feat until when i read this conversation btw you and misjojo(as you call her). muttleylaff,consider your arch-nemesis' comment here

In fact, Hebrews 10:5, which I showed you before, is crystal clear that the Sacrifice was only possible because the Lord was given a real human body to make it with. It was purely His Humanity that suffered and died for us. Deity cannot die or suffer in any way, which is why the Lord voided His Deity to make the sacrifice, a theological concept called kenosis. -ihedinobi3

i conclude- based on your comment, that the whole 'jesus christ superstar' drama is just a scam by a wicked entity(lord sarassin once said) yhw to manupulate the humanity to worship him. budaatum, you know angels from some school of esotoric knowledge are manifestations of God can we then say that the angel that God used to impregnate mary was Angel Konji-EL??

He needed to be human so use this God-characteristics in His human DNA to return man back to the original default format or state. Angels could face up to this, no other human being is qualified to do, so God literally just stepped up to plate and DIY did it all Himself

@bolded, arent you contradicting yourself with respect to all your epistles on the thread ; "why was the book of enoch removed from the bible"? even spiritually,sins cannot be passed down from father to son

The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. Ezekiel 18:20

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned Romans 5:12very interesting @bolded isnt it??

ChantSpells:
Thanks for sharing this post. Do you want to get a beautiful spells through beauty spells then consult with our spellcaster astrologer M K Sharma Ji and get beauty spells that work fast without ingredients. For more info about these beauty spells that work immediately, visit us @ https://chantspells.com/beauty-spells-that-work-fast-instantly-without-ingredients/

Really?? Of all thread....u chose this one to advertise ur merchandise??

missjo:

Done

U seem to have some knowledge in this area...I would like to know ur view on Trinity....

1) Is God one entity operating in three different dispensation as the father, the son and the Holy Spirit i.e God himself died for humanity...like the OP said... the forgiver bears the damage of the wrong, so for God to bear the damage of our sins, he has to make the atonement himself not anyone else...making God the father=Jesus
. if this is correct...how come there are so many scriptures that faults this idea..e.g
.a) father why have thou forsaken me(on the cross) mat 27v45
b)paul clearly said in 1cor 15v27: For the Scriptures say, “God has put all things under Jesus ” Of course, when it says “all things are under his authority,” that does not include God himself, who gave Christ his authority.....

OR
2) There are 3 separate God-head with one aim, one purpose as said by John in 1 John 5:7 reads: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost... if this is the case, is Jesus still a “God” ?....if he is....doesn’t that negate what the Bible clearly says that there’s only one God making point number one above a more valid idea

kkins25:
@bolded, arent you contradicting yourself with respect to all your epistles on the thread

The typo has been corrected, so go check the edit. You could tell I didnt fully type out my train of thought in there

Didn't you read the Bible Ezekiel 22:30, Isaiah 59:16 and Isaiah 63:5 verses I earlier provided where someone was looked for to volunteer but none was forthcoming, hence why God DIY the redemptive work Himself, hmm?

kkins25:
@"why was the book of Enoch removed from the bible"?

It was removed because of concrete proofs that the book of Enoch, is a first century bestseller fantansy/fiction pack book. kkins25, it was removed because of undoubtedly being a work of fantastic fiction, written by a first century Dan Brown who let his imagination run wild and go into overdrive, lifting verses from the scripture, not only embellished them but concocted unbelievably untrue accounts

Enoch Chapter 1 v 9;

And behold! He comes with ten thousand of His holy ones (saints) in order to execute judgment on all, to destroy all the ungodly (wicked ones), and to convict all flesh of their works of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.

Jude 1 v 14 - 15;
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

Jude and Peter never quoted the Book of Enoch as a result of it being considered to be an inspired book of God kkins25

kkins25 , read carefully together Enoch Chapter 1 v 9 and Jude 1 v 14 - 15 quoted above, where Jude and Peter referred to a section of the Book of Enoch to see what exactly they were doing when they took an excerpt out from the Book of Enoch to paraphrase. Of course kkins25, on the surface, there is a similarity between 1 Enoch 1:9 and Jude 1:14-15, but if you look under the bonnet and if you're in the know, there its very easy to understand and a piece of cake to explain what Jude and Peter were doing paraphrasing 1 Enoch 1:9.

Fyi kkins25, 1 Enoch 1:9 is a subset a part of a larger 1 Enoch 1:1-9, which the author of the Book of Enoch, lifted a part off from Deuteronomy 33:2 and then embellished or dressed it up to make 1 Enoch 1:9, so the quote you see and read in 1 Enoch 1:9, actually was originally of course written by Moses, and no Enoch, not even the fictitious Enoch or any real Enoch.

kkins25, context is king and this is to be remembered, especially when in relation to Jude 1:14-15. You see kkins25, fyi Jude 1:14, in the original bible text never said or used the words "prophesied of these". The correct rendering of what Jude wrote in Jude 1:14 is "prophesied to these" This is where context shows to be king. Now kkins25 here are a few "inquiring mind" questions for you. Who is Jude saying the fictitious Enoch prophesied to then?. Why is Jude using the fictitious Enoch's words, like as if, he is to mocking some people, he is against with using them, hmm? Well kkins25, here is where context is king comes into useful play, when you contextually read, starting from as far backwards as Jude 1:8-13, you will see who Jude was using Jude 1:14-15 to target and address. He turned the table on those false teachers and used in the same false book they believe in to damn them with readings from the book they are familiar with, they believe in and easily will recognise or remember.

The Book of Enoch and other variants of it, are best flushed down the toilet, where they belong. kkins25, if you start to read that accursed book, you won't last five minutes into reading the book, before you'll shove it away, from finding the content, being ludicrous and a waste of even idle time.

The Book of Enoch was written by the person self styling himself as Enoch, who thought it a great idea and best way to deflect detection was to give the book's star character a name of someone great, like Enoch. Smh, tsk, tsk, tsk. Tsk.

The Book of Enoch is no different to the Otum series, done by our own resident "Enoch/Dan Brown" version guy, we have here, on Nairaland. Both the Book of Enoch and that Nairaland Otum series, are literary works done by someone under the influence of the devil and inspired from pit of hell darkest abyss

kkins25:
@even spiritually, sins cannot be passed down from father to son

kkins25 you're the biologist now, so please where from did the information and instructions come that made you a male, made you averagely tall, made you handsomely God's gift to the ladies, made you have your melanin, made you have those your peculiar idiosyncrasies, gave you your distinctive characteristics, qualities, and/or quirky behavioural etcetera. Where are all those information stored and triggered from, huh? Of course, the genetic instructions for your development and functioning is in your DNA

Your make up was passed down from your parents. Your father, with his XY chromosome determined whether or not you came out a male or female. DNA samples are used for paternity test to see if an alleged father is the real or not father. If not the real father, then there will be not be enough shared genetic material.

Adam's blood after the fall, had the OSN in it and it with all its characteristics automatically is passed on to and ever since shared with every human being. You are slacking kkins25, falling in my hand, as I thought you knew, and why you brought up meiosis. Smh.

MuttleyLaff:
I added a number 3

Na jollification be dat hin dey then

Hi bro
Pls let's do these tommorow not today oo,
Still very busy
My bday is even today so most likely I won't be on till tommorow

ichuka:
Hi bro
Pls let's do these tommorow not today oo,
Still very busy
My bday is even today so most likely I won't be on till tommorow

[img]https://s8/images/MuttleyHappyB.gif[/img]
Happy Birthday ichuka!
I pray you have a phenomenal time today.
I also pray you henceforth get all your bread and all the crumbs too.
In fact, 3 John 1:2, "Beloved, I pray you, to prosper concerning all things and to be in good health, just as your soul prospers."

missjo:
Done

1StopRudeness:
U seem to have some knowledge in this area...I would like to know ur view on Trinity....

1) Is God one entity operating in three different dispensation as the father, the son and the Holy Spirit i.e. God himself died for humanity...like the OP said... the forgiver bears the damage of the wrong, so for God to bear the damage of our sins, he has to make the atonement himself not anyone else...making God the Father=Jesus
If this is correct...how come there are so many scriptures that faults this idea. e.g
a) Father why have thou forsaken me (on the cross) Matt 27v45
b) Paul clearly said in 1 Cor 15v27: For the Scriptures say, “God has put all things under Jesus ” Of course, when it says “all things are under his authority,” that does not include God himself, who gave Christ his authority.....

To start with, "Father why have thou forsaken me (on the cross) Matt 27v45" is a mistranslation, the gist of the mistranslation is for another day. For now, take it that what Jesus said on the cross was never anything about being forsaken. OK?

Now next, Jesus was first God, before God ever becoming to be Jesus, it is the same way, PMB was first General before becoming ever PMB. Same person one person, in different timelines, different titles, name, designations or purpose. The glaring difference between God and PMB, is that PMB cant be in Lagos and Abuja at the same point in time, but God can.

1StopRudeness:
OR
2) There are 3 separate God-head with one aim, one purpose as said by John in 1 John 5:7 reads:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost..

If this is the case, is Jesus still a “God” ?....if he is....doesn’t that negate what the Bible clearly says that there’s only one God making point number one above a more valid idea

I know its difficult for many, to understand, what is meant when God, says: I AM

''I AM that I AM'', ''I SHALL BE THAT I SHALL'' or ''I WILL BE THAT I BE'' are expressive phrases. It means, God will be what God needs to be. We find out what God was yesterday, we keep knowing Him every moment and day. He is new every morning, He is new tomorrow

Thats why, God in Exodus 3:14, said to Moses:
"I AM WHO I AM.
This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you."

Essentially, the "I AM WHO I AM or I AM THAT I AM" in Exodus 3:14 above means, I will become whatsoever I may become. I'll be, I will become whatever it is necessary for Me, to be and/or Me to become.

God therefore, is, a "not-known-number" of person. God, then, is, x-person and so God, in effect is, ∞-persons, as in meaning, is infinite or infinity. God has no limit, has no number, as in meaning, God has unknowable scope etcetera

God is someone without any bound, without limit, without an end. God is the first and the last, God oxymoronically has no beginning and no end. God is someone bigger and larger than any specified number, even three or trinity.

1StopRudeness, let's with this "clearing the cobwebs" try to make all this easier to understand. 1StopRudeness tell me,
1/ Is it anything hard for God to do, as in, to be in more than one place at the same time, hmm?
2/ Is it anything hard for God to do, like as in, physically project Himself and briefly co-exist on earth in human form, while remaining still existing at the same time in heaven huh?
3/ Can you without God be in the equation be whatever you want to be 1StopRudeness?
It's easier said than done, isn't it? It is only God that can hand pounding chest and say: "I shall be that I shall be"

MuttleyLaff:


To start with, "Father why have thou forsaken me (on the cross) Matt 27v45" is a mistranslation, the gist of the mistranslation is for another day. For now, take it that what Jesus said on the cross was never anything about being forsaken. OK?

Now next, Jesus was first God, before God ever becoming to be Jesus, it is the same way, PMB was first General before becoming ever PMB. Same person one person, in different timelines, different titles, name, designations or purpose. The glaring difference between God and PMB, is that PMB cant be in Lagos and Abuja at the same point in time, but God can.

I know its difficult for many, to understand, what is meant when God, says: I AM

''I AM that I AM'', ''I SHALL BE THAT I SHALL'' or ''I WILL BE THAT I BE'' are expressive phrases. It means, God will be what God needs to be. We find out what God was yesterday, we keep knowing Him every moment and day. He is new every morning, He is new tomorrow

Thats why, God in Exodus 3:14, said to Moses:
"I AM WHO I AM.
This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you."

Essentially, the "I AM WHO I AM or I AM THAT I AM" in Exodus 3:14 above means, I will become whatsoever I may become. I'll be, I will become whatever it is necessary for Me, to be and/or Me to become.

God therefore, is, a "not-known-number" of person. God, then, is, x-person and so God, in effect is, ∞-persons, as in meaning, is infinite or infinity.

God is someone without any bound, without limit, without an end. God is the first and the last, God oxymoronically has no beginning and no end. God is someone bigger and larger than any specified number, even three or trinity.

1StopRudeness, let's with this "clearing the cobwebs" try to make all this easier to understand. 1StopRudeness tell me,
1/ Is it anything hard for God to do, as in, to be in more than one place at the same time, hmm?
2/ Is it anything hard for God to do, like as in, physically project Himself and briefly co-exist on earth in human form, while remaining still existing at the same time in heaven huh?

You have left me more confused or should I say, uve not technically answered the question based on my scripture reference...
although u tried to ask me questions to answer the question...and the answer is of course, God is able to do all things, God is able to be in all place at the same time.....this is a convenient and default answer and technically not scriptural because u and I know God doesn’t just do anything.
because If he does anything..he would have just snapped his fingers and make the devil and his demons and principalities go away, or just make all the evil in the world disappear.....he CAN do anything but he WILL not just do anything...he operates with principles...
Ive noticed that When we are explaining God in the context of why he did something in a particular way and not just do it easily after all he’s almighty..... we say he’s got principles meaning he’s confined in some ways like Paul said “ the weakness of God is stronger than the strength of man”......for example, God cannot forgive u if u won’t come to him and believe despite he has the capability to and has made provisions for forgiving you.
On the other hand when we find it hard to explain him or to fit him into a narrative, we say he’s God and he can do anything.. don’t get me wrong I’m not saying he doesn’t have the power to do anything


In addition you ddnt explain what Jesus said on the cross you just said I should accept that’s not what he said...one of the reasons I accepted the Bible over other relegious books is that it’s technically not a single human author( though its spiritually a single author) ...from genesis to Malachi, Each author keeps validating what the previous author has said, they keep pointing to Jesus...
Now, 4versions of the gospel was recorded and all gave the account of the cross as the same “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani” : you said Jesus ddnt say “forsaken me” so what exactly did he say.??.

Let assume that’s not what Jesus said, what was Paul saying in In 1cor 15v27...

Permit me to say u ddnt do justice at all to
1 John 5v7 or perhaps I’m the one not catching ur drift

1StopRudeness:


U seem to have some knowledge in this area...I would like to know ur view on Trinity....

1) Is God one entity operating in three different dispensation as the father, the son and the Holy Spirit i.e God himself died for humanity...like the OP said... the forgiver bears the damage of the wrong, so for God to bear the damage of our sins, he has to make the atonement himself not anyone else...making God the father=Jesus
. if this is correct...how come there are so many scriptures that faults this idea..e.g
.a) father why have thou forsaken me(on the cross) mat 27v45
b)paul clearly said in 1cor 15v27: For the Scriptures say, “God has put all things under Jesus ” Of course, when it says “all things are under his authority,” that does not include God himself, who gave Christ his authority.....

OR
2) There are 3 separate God-head with one aim, one purpose as said by John in 1 John 5:7 reads: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost... if this is the case, is Jesus still a “God” ?....if he is....doesn’t that negate what the Bible clearly says that there’s only one God making point number one above a more valid idea

About having some knowledge in this area, i just do what i can to gain understanding and always happy to share. Thanks tho

Regarding your questions:
There are three different entities in one God-head, NOT three separate God-heads.
The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, are distinct in their functions such that while the Father is the authority over all that was, is, and is to come, the Son is the manifestation of his word. The Holy Spirit is the purpose through which the authority of the father's word is fulfilled.
These three are in communion and fellowship with one another constantly. They have always existed together and will always do.

God died for us through Jesus the son, by the power of the holy spirit.
It does not in any way imply that God the father himself did the dying.

missjo:
About having some knowledge in this area, i just do what i can to gain understanding and always happy to share. Thanks tho

Regarding your questions:
There are three different entities in one God-head, NOT three separate God-heads.
The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, are distinct in their functions such that while the Father is the authority over all that was, is, and is to come, the Son is the manifestation of his word. The Holy Spirit is the purpose through which the authority of the father's word is fulfilled.
These three are in communion and fellowship with one another constantly. They have always existed together and will always do.

God died for us through Jesus the son, by the power of the holy spirit.
It does not in any way imply that God the father himself did the dying.

missjo, at what point has God been a Father? Do you have a verse to provide as evidence to support or prove the truth of your answer with?

1StopRudeness:
You have left me more confused or should I say, uve not technically answered the question based on my scripture reference...
although u tried to ask me questions to answer the question...and the answer is of course, God is able to do all things, God is able to be in all place at the same time.....this is a convenient and default answer and technically not scriptural because u and I know God doesn’t just do anything.
because If he does anything..he would have just snapped his fingers and make the devil and his demons and principalities go away, or just make all the evil in the world disappear.....he CAN do anything but he WILL not just do anything...he operates with principles...
Ive noticed that When we are explaining God in the context of why he did something in a particular way and not just do it easily after all he’s almighty..... we say he’s got principles meaning he’s confined in some ways like Paul said “ the weakness of God is stronger than the strength of man”......for example, God cannot forgive u if u won’t come to him and believe despite he has the capability to and has made provisions for forgiving you.
On the other hand when we find it hard to explain him or to fit him into a narrative, we say he’s God and he can do anything.. don’t get me wrong I’m not saying he doesn’t have the power to do anything


In addition you ddnt explain what Jesus said on the cross you just said I should accept that’s not what he said...one of the reasons I accepted the Bible over other relegious books is that it’s technically not a single human author( though its spiritually a single author) ...from genesis to Malachi, Each author keeps validating what the previous author has said, they keep pointing to Jesus...
Now, 4versions of the gospel was recorded and all gave the account of the cross as the same “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani” : you said Jesus ddnt say “forsaken me” so what exactly did he say.??.

Let assume that’s not what Jesus said, what was Paul saying in In 1cor 15v27...

Permit me to say u ddnt do justice at all to
1 John 5v7 or perhaps I’m the one not catching ur drift

Leaving you more confused wasnt part of the plan. 1 John 5v7 similarly would mean, there are three that testify of 1StopRudeness, his Nairaland written text, his spoken word and the moniker/person 1StopRudeness himself, the three of them are in one, 1StopRudeness, testifying of each other.

MuttleyLaff:
missjojo, at what point has God been a Father? Do you have a verse to provide as evidence to support or prove the truth of your answer with?

Please rephrase your question, i am finding it difficult understanding what you're trying to find out.

Ihedinobi3:

Good for you.


Regarding the above, there are a few things that I must say:

1. It wasn't so much about physical unclothedness as it was about a lesson about Redemption. Adam and Eve were geniuses. Their bodies were perfect until they sinned, and even then they were still of far higher quality than our bodies today are, so they really were able to make exceptionally good coverings from leaves. That does not even take into consideration the type and variety of vegetation that was available to them in the Garden. So, it wasn't about clothes. It was about Redemption.

2. The issue of redemption is that rebellion against God is essentially cosmic treason. According to the Word of God itself, such rebels forfeit their lives by rebelling. The only way then to fix the problem was to give life in exchange for the life of the rebel. That is why there had to be a death in order to save the life of the sinner.

3. It is not about blood as a substance. It is about what blood represents. In Genesis 9:4, the Lord makes abundantly clear that blood represents life. Even in colloquial usage today, to shed blood is to kill. It is not necessary to actually spill blood physically in order to kill. So it is not about blood as a substance.

4. The Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus had nothing to do with His physical blood. In fact, the Price that He paid for our sins was spiritual in nature. The Bible records that He was still alive when He declared the Sacrifice accomplished with the tetelestai, that is, the statement "it is finished" or "it has been accomplished." That is conclusive evidence that He had already paid the Price before He physically died. The Blood of Jesus is actually a metaphor for the Sacrifice that He offered for us. It is not His Physical Blood. That Sacrifice was made in the three hours of darkness that fell while the Lord was on the Cross. It involved the actual separation that our Lord experienced from the Father, and the actual suffering and pain that is associated with Judgment upon sin. The Lord suffered all of that to an infinite degree for those three hours. After He had, the darkness was lifted and the veil of the Holiest Place was torn in two symbolizing the removal of the barrier between God and Man.

5. So, again, I must warn you to avoid reading anything into the actual physical metaphors used for the Sacrifice. It was not a material thing at all. Redemption was wholly a spiritual affair.

6. Finally, the Lord Jesus's Deity was voided during His first Advent (Phil 2:7). That is, the Lord was not taking advantage of His Deity in any way, so it is not at all biblical that His Blood had "God-characteristics." In fact, Hebrews 10:5, which I showed you before, is crystal clear that the Sacrifice was only possible because the Lord was given a real human body to make it with. It was purely His Humanity that suffered and died for us. Deity cannot die or suffer in any way, which is why the Lord voided His Deity to make the sacrifice, a theological concept called kenosis.

7. I sometimes, but very rarely, warn people about others on this platform. I don't do it often, because I worry that it will do more harm than good. In my other response to you on the other thread, I have already given you a warning that I think is sufficient if you do have a heart for the Truth, as it seems to me that you do. Nonetheless, I will warn you here about such people again. It appears to me that one such has marked you, as he often does people who are ripe for the Truth, but who are still neophytes. I have shown you a place that I believe is perfectly safe for you to feed and grow in the Truth. If you will give your attention there, you will be safe from such wolves in sheep's clothing. It concerns me that you may not be doing so, but that is really your choice to make, not mine. Suffice to say, that although you may be taking joy in the attentions of people who appear to have "deep wisdom," some of them only have the "deep things of Satan," but are so caught up in their minds with the idea that they are something special in the Church that they can never see their own errors. If you are not careful, you too can be swept away by them. As it is, it appears that two such people, in fact, have caught your attention. Please, be careful. This board is a very dangerous place for young believers who are still growing in the Truth.

This was good to read.

missjo:
... the Father is the authority over all that was, is, and is to come, the Son is the manifestation of his word...

God died for us through Jesus the son, by the power of the holy spirit.
It does not in any way imply that God the father himself did the dying.

missjo:

Please rephrase your question, i am finding it difficult understanding what you're trying to find out.

I liked the post then asked a simple, straightforward direct question based on your comments above about the God fatherhood, that at what time did God start to be a Father?
Do you have a verse(s) to provide as evidence to support or prove the truth of your answer with?

missjo:



This was good to read.

I'm glad you found it so.

Ihedinobi3:

Good for you.


Regarding the above, there are a few things that I must say:

1. It wasn't so much about physical unclothedness as it was about a lesson about Redemption. Adam and Eve were geniuses. Their bodies were perfect until they sinned, and even then they were still of far higher quality than our bodies today are, so they really were able to make exceptionally good coverings from leaves. That does not even take into consideration the type and variety of vegetation that was available to them in the Garden. So, it wasn't about clothes. It was about Redemption.

2. The issue of redemption is that rebellion against God is essentially cosmic treason. According to the Word of God itself, such rebels forfeit their lives by rebelling. The only way then to fix the problem was to give life in exchange for the life of the rebel. That is why there had to be a death in order to save the life of the sinner.

3. It is not about blood as a substance. It is about what blood represents. In Genesis 9:4, the Lord makes abundantly clear that blood represents life. Even in colloquial usage today, to shed blood is to kill. It is not necessary to actually spill blood physically in order to kill. So it is not about blood as a substance.

4. The Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus had nothing to do with His physical blood. In fact, the Price that He paid for our sins was spiritual in nature. The Bible records that He was still alive when He declared the Sacrifice accomplished with the tetelestai, that is, the statement "it is finished" or "it has been accomplished." That is conclusive evidence that He had already paid the Price before He physically died. The Blood of Jesus is actually a metaphor for the Sacrifice that He offered for us. It is not His Physical Blood. That Sacrifice was made in the three hours of darkness that fell while the Lord was on the Cross. It involved the actual separation that our Lord experienced from the Father, and the actual suffering and pain that is associated with Judgment upon sin. The Lord suffered all of that to an infinite degree for those three hours. After He had, the darkness was lifted and the veil of the Holiest Place was torn in two symbolizing the removal of the barrier between God and Man.

5. So, again, I must warn you to avoid reading anything into the actual physical metaphors used for the Sacrifice. It was not a material thing at all. Redemption was wholly a spiritual affair.

6. Finally, the Lord Jesus's Deity was voided during His first Advent (Phil 2:7). That is, the Lord was not taking advantage of His Deity in any way, so it is not at all biblical that His Blood had "God-characteristics." In fact, Hebrews 10:5, which I showed you before, is crystal clear that the Sacrifice was only possible because the Lord was given a real human body to make it with. It was purely His Humanity that suffered and died for us. Deity cannot die or suffer in any way, which is why the Lord voided His Deity to make the sacrifice, a theological concept called kenosis.

7. I sometimes, but very rarely, warn people about others on this platform. I don't do it often, because I worry that it will do more harm than good. In my other response to you on the other thread, I have already given you a warning that I think is sufficient if you do have a heart for the Truth, as it seems to me that you do. Nonetheless, I will warn you here about such people again. It appears to me that one such has marked you, as he often does people who are ripe for the Truth, but who are still neophytes. I have shown you a place that I believe is perfectly safe for you to feed and grow in the Truth. If you will give your attention there, you will be safe from such wolves in sheep's clothing. It concerns me that you may not be doing so, but that is really your choice to make, not mine. Suffice to say, that although you may be taking joy in the attentions of people who appear to have "deep wisdom," some of them only have the "deep things of Satan," but are so caught up in their minds with the idea that they are something special in the Church that they can never see their own errors. If you are not careful, you too can be swept away by them. As it is, it appears that two such people, in fact, have caught your attention. Please, be careful. This board is a very dangerous place for young believers who are still growing in the Truth.

I really don’t like deep theology it always leaves me confused.....u say the work is finished while he was alive....u make it sound like his death and shedding of blood ddnt mean anything....so what was the purpose of dying if the redemptive work was accomplished during the dark 3hrs....??

1StopRudeness:


I really don’t like deep theology it always leaves me confused.....u say the work is finished while he was alive....u make it sound like his death and shedding of blood ddnt mean anything....so what was the purpose of dying if the redemptive work was accomplished during the dark 3hrs....??

Therefore it says,
“When he ascended on high he led a host of captives,
and he gave gifts to men.”
(In saying, “He ascended,” what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth? He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.)
Ephesians 4:8-10 ESV

ichuka:
Why, in God’s plan of redemption, must Christ be both God and man at the same time?

That is blasphemy. A statement of had known before the Lord of the Throne. Illogical statements if only u can use ur brain.

Your God is One God, Jesus is not your God nor is partner to God but a righteous slave of God.

ichuka:
Why, in God’s plan of redemption, must Christ be both God and man at the same time?

Auki:
That is blasphemy. A statement of had known before the Lord of the Throne. [s]Illogical statements if only u can use ur brain[/s].

Your God is One God, Jesus is not your God nor is partner to God but a righteous slave of God.

"All right then, the Lord himself will give you the sign. Look! The virgin will conceive a child!
She will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel (which means ‘God is with us’)"
- Isaiah 7:14

"²²All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:
²³“Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son,
and they will call Him Immanuel” (which means ‘God is with us’)."
- Matthew 1:22-23