NewStats: 3,263,955 , 8,182,080 topics. Date: Monday, 09 June 2025 at 03:24 AM 5f2l6

GothamCities:


Meanwhile, the scriptures never make Paul the standard for judging heresy. Jesus is the standard. Any contrary opinion to Christ is heresy. Not Paul.

While Paul aligns his messages with Christ's, some others think he doesn't, and that's where the problem is.

after all the beating about the Bush. Paul didn't align his message to christ, his message was christ message.
Galatians 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

GothamCities:

My God! I thought I was talking to a mature Christian. I didn't know I have to break things down for you to understand. Would you actually place Peter alongside any of the PFN or Christian leaders we have today? Can't you see that if Peter were in the world today, whatever he says about Christianity will be final? When I said no one is an umpire over anyone's faith, was I not talking about today? If Peter, Paul, James, John or any of the apostles were in the world today, whatever they say would be final! Would you argue against Peter the same way you would argue against Adeboye or Billy Graham? They are the foundation upon which the church is actually built. We can trust their leadership! Today, nobody trusts anybody's leadership completely. Anyone can err. Hence, no one can be an umpire over the faith of others. Simple logic now. You can only correct what is generally accepted as wrong. Not sectional matters of faith that divide the Church.

There in your family, if you don't know that your father once lived in London, but there are unconfirmed reports of it, and meanwhile your father is unavailable to give clarity on the matter, would you call any member of your family who makes claims of your father's London residency a liar? That would be foolish. None of you are sure, though you'll all have your opinions depending on the level of information you have individually. Each of you will claim to be correct while the others are wrong. Yet, It will be wrong for anyone of you to call anyone a liar for ing or not ing the matter of your father's London residency. However, if someone comes up and says hey, your father never built a house when you all generally know that your father built a house, then you'll call that person a liar because that knowledge is explicit and generally known without any controversy. If someone comes up and says anything contrary to that, you can call him a liar or an heretic as in the case of Damina. But on the matter of the London house, you cannot call anyone a liar or an heretic. Everyone would hold on to his individual opinion as in the case of Suleiman and Selman. Except you want to deliberately bring up a fight of course. However if an external person who was an early associate of your father comes out to clarify the London issue, you would have to succumb to whatever he says as in the case of Peter. Should I be explaining this way before you get my point?


You should go and ask Paul why he had to defend his apodtolshipship. Personal opinion is personal interpretation! Paul says the same things as other apostles but some people thinks he contradicts! Why should you be twisting words? Some people think Paul contradicted Christ and other apostles. This has been since the days of Paul himself. How many times would I have to explain this to you?




Are Suleiman and Selman not part of the new testament church? Are they the only ones? Are there not other churches and individuals who have the same views as Suleiman? Are you a new Christian who knows nothing about the Christendom? Go and educate yourself and learn why some fellow Christians choose to call you a Pauline Christian!

You think you are matured?

See how you shot down your own argument.

According to the letter you posted, it defines an heresy.

Heresy is, "a belief or opinion contrary to orthodox Christian doctrine and any belief, teaching or practice that explicitly undermines the gospel." Heresies are "beliefs or teachings that deviate from established or orthodox doctrine, often considered contrary to the accepted teachings of a religion or faith."
The definition of heresy has nothing to do majority agreement but contradiction against the historical teaching of the church from inception.

The orthodoxy teaching about Paul and his teachings are that Paul is truly an apostle and one of the foundation of Christianity and his teachings are inerrant making contrary opinion heresy meaning joshua Selman and suleiman are heretics.

You might think you are educated and mature but it is only an irony, even your definition of heresy goes against what is defined in the letter. Good day.

MaxInDHouse:

When a rich man claims he builds a mansion all by himself does it mean he never employed craftsmen working for him?

So which big man would say he build a mansion by himself whereas he didn't do it by himself.

Isaiah 44:24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
Jehovah clearly said he strected the heavens alone and the earth by himself meaning there was no other being with him.

The brain behind creation of things is Jehovah but after creating the firstborn of all creations {Colossians 1:15 compare to Proverbs 8:22} Jehovah employed His firstborn Son to do other works under His supervision.

According to Jehovah he alone stretched the heavens and he made the earth by himself.

Ọmọ Jesus is archangel Michael that's why the same angel is said to be the one standing for the salvation of obedient mankind! Daniel 12:1 compare to Matthew 23:37-38

Jesus is the head of all loyal spirit sons of God (angel) that's why he is called the "archangel". Matthew 25:31 compare to Revelations 12:7

Jesus is the resurrection {John 11:25} that's why his archangel's voice is used when it comes to the resurrection of dead souls! John 11:43 compare to 1Thessalonians 4:16

In the Bible book of Daniel 10:13 we read that Michael came to rescue the situation just as he did at Jude 1:9 this is the same angel who has been representing Jehovah for the salvation of God's people! Exodus 13:21; 14:19

So Jesus is the archangel Michael who often comes to salvage the situation anytime rebellious angels stands against the will of God!

But Jesus is greater than Michael. How can he be what he is greater than?
Heb 1:4

GothamCities:


Jesus Christ! Can't you see that even Peter had to address the issue of Paul and even commented that some of the things he teaches are hard to understand, and that as a result, some people wrest it to the detriment of their souls as they do the other scriptures? Paul himself at different occasions has had the need to defend his apostleship. In most of his epistles, there are chapters wholly dedicated to defending his apostleship. Paul's matters are not of today!

Do you even sit for a minute to understand what you wrote? According to you can or pfn cannot judge what is right or wrong but here Peter is judging those who twist scriptures as doing it for their own damantion. If rejection of Pauline epistles was just a matter of personal opinion why would Peter denounce such persons?
Again why would Paul defend his apostleship if it's was just a personal opinion? He even said anyone who preached a different gospel from the ones heard the other apostles preached are cursed and you say it is just a matter of personal opinion?

In what way did they act as authority over Abel Damina's faith? They asked him to stop misleading people on clear matters of faith! Simple! Matters that are generally believed and accepted by all believers.

And the whole church do not generally accept Paul's epistles as inspired scriptures? What credible non heretic church reject the teachings of Paul?

It is currently a debate. The new testament church is discussing the issue right now all over the world with different opinions coming to the surface.

what new testament church is debating it today name just one? Why is it hard for you?

Is tithing not scripture? Has anyone ever learnt about tithing in a university? Is it not from the Bible that we all get to know about tithing?



Show me how they have acted as authority over Damina's faith. If Damina is not teaching others what is considered entirely anti-scripture by all Christians worldwide, would anyone have to call him out? He should keep his heresies to himself and not corrupt the body with his leaven of falsehood.

just one question show me one non heretic church that rejects Paul's teachings? Just one

MaxInDHouse:


There is just two entities at Genesis 1:26 talking:
Jehovah was talking to Archangel Michael (the prehuman Jesus) Proverbs 8:22-31

Isaiah 44:24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

How can Jesus be angel Michael when he is greater than angel michael. Heb 1 vv 4

MaxInDHouse:


Of course Jehovah does whatever it takes to fulfill His purpose but He can not die or pray to anyone!

God can take on human form and die, if Jehovah described himself as a "us" in Gen 1 v26 it means he can pray to Jehovah.

MaxInDHouse:


During his life on earth, (Jesus) offered up supplications and also petitions, with strong outcries and tears, to the One who was able to save him out of death, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. Hebrews 5:7

Are you sure this person is the ALMIGHTY?

yes in human form carrying out his mission.


This below is according to jw.org

SONG 104 God’s Gift of Holy Spirit

PREVIEW a

1. What can Jehovah do in order to accomplish his purpose?

JEHOVAH can become whatever is necessary in order to accomplish his purpose. For instance, Jehovah has become a Teacher, a Comforter, and an Evangelizer, just to name a few of his many roles. (Isa. 48:17; 2 Cor. 7:6; Gal. 3: Still, he often uses humans to carry out his purposes. (Matt. 24:14; 28:19, 20; 2 Cor. 1:3, 4)

GothamCities:


I don't think it's profitable to keep dragging this with you since you don't seem to understand anything I've been saying. Perhaps you're not even reading. Otherwise you'll not be asking the questions you're asking. I hate fruitless arguments honestly.

Is PFN or CAN a person? Are they not all individual churches and groups with different levels of doctrinal understanding? Is Abel not a member of PFN? Are Suleiman and Selman not too? While no one may hold the same views about Christ as Abel, it is not only Selman or Sulaiman that hold the opinion they've voiced against Paul's doctrines. I have explained things to you as simply as I could but it seems you're not even reading. You don't even seem to see that I'm totally at home with all of Paul's doctrines. Asking me if I know if Paul is one of Christ's evidence of resurrection is irrelevant because I'm not against Paul and his doctrine as a person.

I'll give you another illustration and if you still don't get it, there's no way I'll be able to help any further.

You need to understand that there's no one who is an umpire over other people's faith. Nobody is a father of all Christians to be judging whose doctrine is right or wrong. There are many different opinions regarding many parts of Scripture. This Paul issue is just one. Selman and Suleiman are not alone in this. There are several of CAN and PFN who hold the same views as theirs. They are all Christians who love the Lord. Their views are based on their understanding. You're not their father. You're not God. You cannot be the one to call them heretics. If you think you have Scriptures to your views of Paul, they also have Scriptures ing their views as well. To them you are an heretic too.

Pauline and none Pauline ministers are in CAN, PFN and other Christian bodies. Which group should be calling which group an heretic? Tell me now. There are Pauline and none Pauline leaders among the leadership itself. Everyone believes he is right while the other party is wrong. So, which leaders should come and call the other leaders and those who hold the same views as theirs as heretics? If you're among PFN leadership, would you come and announce Selman or Sulaiman as heretics just because they don't hold your views? Then, you're immature and lack wisdom if you do that. That's even if you have the sole power to make that lone announcement. It will only breed chaos and debates.

But on clear matters of doctrine where Abel is seen to be a deliberate heretic, he should be called to order! Everyone knows he's erring. That's not up for debates. If you have issues with those who are against Paul, go debate them!

Before you can start saying those who hold views against Paul are heretics, then you can start calling post-tribulationists heretics too if you are a pre-tribulationist and vice versa. Where's the wisdom in that? Can't you see?

Where did I say they're united against Abel and not against Suleiman and Selman because of bias? Should you lie or you actually really don't get the point?

How would they unite against Suleiman and Selman when Suleiman and Selman are just a fraction of the group within the Christian bodies that hold the same views. Who's the umpire over all Christians that would start calling those none Paulines heretics? Christians that hold the same views as Selman and Suleiman are all over the world. It's not a Suleiman and Selman thing! What Scriptures do you want to quote to them that they don't know. They too have scriptures they've made ready for you. That's not the type of situation you start attacking to be heresy. The same way they cannot attack tithing or none tithing as heresy. It's that simple. Tithing issue is based on your level of scriptural understanding. The same for the issues of Paul's doctrines.

Abel Damina's doctrines are purely his own. He brought strange and new doctrines that he has fabricated in his own head. Hence, he needs to be called to order!

can you show me which of the church has ever had issues with Paul's epistle just one?
You just itted that can or pfn do not have the authority over people's faith and at the same time acting as authority over Abel damina, does this not show hypocrisy?
Heresy is not a matter of individual opinion, else you just fall into the error of subjectivity which you are grappling with.

Historically and from the scriptures the new testament church do not have tithing as a doctrine and it has never being a debate.

Your attempt at placing tithing on same footing with denying scripture is ridiculous.

You claim pfn and can are no authority over individual faith and yet they could act as authority over abel's faith

Janosky:


The same ghost deity deceiving you gave Bill Mounce a conflicting info contradictory to your claim.

Oga,go and rest.
You can't convince your fellow Trinitarians just dey your day..

Theiotes meaning divine quality. (Screenshot evidence)

JW's are very correct.

I think the writer of the article is correct and you actually agreed with him, theiotes means divine qualities which is different from theotes which means the state of being God.
This clearly shows Jesus is Almighty God.

GothamCities:


Smiling.

I'm not holding brief for anyone too. I'm just being objective. All heresies are dangerous but sometimes they can be subjective. There are some of the things you yourself believe right now that someone else sees you as an heretic because of them. Lol. The truth is that even the people who have called out Damina might not be united regarding Sulaiman and Selman's position on Paul. This is because that is a very slippery position. There are many here on Nairaland who think the same way of Paul. They're everywhere. No one is perfect in knowledge. Those who believe Paul was wrong also see you as an heretic for thinking Paul is right. Someone once called me an agent of the devil for standing on Paul's words and defending it. This situation happened because the matters in question are not clearly stated in scripture. You'll need to dig deep and have a certain level of understanding to see what Paul is saying. So, the people in PFN, CAN and this Ecumenical council might not even agree among themselves regarding the Pauline epistles. Hence, it's difficult to call out Sulaiman and Selman on such a slippery matter of doctrine. Hope you're getting my point? Meanwhile, Abel's heresies are very glaring even to the baby Christian. Everyone can agree that they're heresies. Hence, they can call out Abel.

smh I don't think you are even seeing your backfliping. According to the standard you set to judge Abel, sulieman and Selman are guilty of heresy.
By the way which of the PFN, CAN and ecumenical council ever argues against the inerrancy of Pauline epistles?

Can you name just one.
You have confessed that they are not united against Selman and sulieman as they are against Abel because of bias.
Plus any body disputing against the inerrancy of Paul's epistle is also calling apostle Peter a liar who endorsed his epistles as scripture, and hence brings the whole Christian faith into disrepute, Paul clearly stated that what he preached where the very revelation of Jesus that it was not of man but of Jesus. Such a person also blaspheme the holy spirit who confirms Paul's ministry with signs and wonders. He lso makes all the books of Paul questionable and also Peter because according to him Peter is lying and also makes the book of Acts a lie because it records the Jesus called Paul to build the church and endorses Paul's ministry, it also destroys the book of Luke because it was Luke that wrote acts, the destruction goes on and on, and at the end of the day render the whole church today a lie hence these so called apostles and prophets would have nothing to stand on. isn't ironic you are making such serious issue a mere personal opinion?

Do you even know that one of the evidence of christ resurrection is the ministry of Paul? I guess you don't know this? Paul conversion is one of the proof that christ rose.

GothamCities:


Smiling. Let me explain.

No one has ever said that Paul is not an apostle. That would have been heretic. No one has ever said that his epistles are not scripture. That would be heretic too. Have you ever listened to this people before? There argument is not on the personality of Paul or his apostleship. They think that Paul contradicted the Lord Jesus in some of his statements which literally looks so but at a more careful study, you'll find he didn't. The allegations regarding some of Paul's doctrines are all opinionated and based on individual understanding. Not deliberate heresies. For example, Paul emphasis faith as the basis for salvation, meanwhile it looks as though the Lord Jesus emphasizes works. It takes a more careful study to discover that both Christ and Paul are on the same page. Can you call them heretics for their lack of understanding. No.

@ bolded not deliberate heresies are still heresies regardless and dangerous, isn't the reason why bodies such as can and this body to come out and debunk such heresies and not keep mute? We are back at the start again. If they I had said I believe so and so but I will study the scripture more, it would be a different issue, but to make a blanket statement and stand on it and even saying that Jesus or some angel or Saint appear to them to reveal the heresy ad the truth, should be more alarming.

Even the scriptures says we should strengthen those that are weak. You'll see clearly here that, it's a matter of understanding.

Now, if someone comes and says that Christ is not coming back, that's dangerous because Christianity stands on the foundation of Christ's second coming which is our blessed hope. Every Christian knows that Christ is coming because it is very clear in scripture. Christ and His disciples declared it without mincing words. Anyone, such as Abel who says Christ is not coming is an heretic.

While Christ's second coming is clear. The events surrounding His coming as it relates to the tribulation are not very clear. While someone who says Christ is not coming is an heretic, someone who says Christ will come before the tribulation is not. Ironically, someone who says Christ is coming after the tribulation is also not considered heretic. Hope you're getting my point?

1. Someone who says Christ is not coming is an heretic because the Scripture very clear that Christ is coming again.

2. Someone who says Christ will come pre-tribulation is not an heretic because he talks according to the level of his understanding regarding the topic which is not very explicit.

3. Someone who says Christ will come post-tribulation is also not an heretic for the same reasons as that of point two above.

Deliberate contradictions of clear Scriptures is heretic. This is where Abel erred. Infact if he had preached that there are 7 heavens, he would not be considered heretic because the Scriptures clearly stated that there are heavens but no one knows exactly how many. I personally believe there are 3 because Paul wrote that he knew of a man who ascended up to the third heaven and heard the voices of God. I believe by my understanding that there can be no heaven above the third heaven where God dwells, hence, there are heavens. Someone else can have a different opinion, I can't call him an heretic neither can he call me so.

I believe my explanation is clear.

It is not a matter of weakness. I am not standing brief for Abel. But that same standard should be applied to every other heretic simple.

Leviticus 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

How col 2.9 prove that Jesus is Almighty God and 2 Peter 1 vv4 does not teach Christians are become God because the participate in the divine nature.

Jehovah's Witnesses: How does Colossians 2:9, not prove the Trinity?
At Colossians 2:9 the apostle Paul says that in Christ “all the fullness of the divine quality [form of the·oʹtes] dwells bodily.” Here, again, some translations read “Godhead” or “deity,” which Trinitarians interpret to mean that God personally dwells in Christ. (KJ, NE, RS, NAB) However, Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon defines the·oʹtes in basically the same way it does thei·oʹtes, as meaning “divinity, divine nature.” (P. 792) The Syriac Peshitta and the Latin Vulgate render this word as “divinity.” Thus, here too, there is a solid basis for rendering the·oʹtes as referring to quality, not personality.

A consideration of the context of Colossians 2:9 clearly shows that having “divinity,” or “divine nature,” does not make Christ the same as God the Almighty. In the preceding chapter, Paul says: “God saw good for all fullness to dwell in him.” (Col 1:19) Thus, all fullness dwells in Christ because it “pleased the Father” (KJ, Dy), because it was “by God’s own choice.” (NE) So the fullness of “divinity” that dwells in Christ is his as a result of a decision made by the Father. Further showing that having such “fullness” does not make Christ the same person as Almighty God is the fact that Paul later speaks of Christ as being “seated at the right hand of God.”—Col 3:1.

Considering the immediate context of Colossians 2:9, it is noted that in verse 8, Christians are warned against being misled by those who advocate philosophy and human tradition. They are also told that “carefully concealed in [Christ] are all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge,” and they are urged to “go on walking in union with him, rooted and being built up in him and being stabilized in the faith.” (Col 2:3, 6, 7) In addition, verses 13 to 15 explain that they are made alive through faith, being released from the Law covenant. Paul’s argument, therefore, is that Christians do not need the Law (which was removed by means of Christ) or human philosophy and tradition. They have all they need, a precious “fullness,” in Christ.—Col 2:10-12.

Finally, at 2 Peter 1:3, 4 the apostle shows that by virtue of “the precious and very grand promises” extended to faithful anointed Christians, they “may become sharers in divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world through lust.” Elsewhere in the Scriptures, Christians are referred to as ‘sharing’ with Christ in his sufferings, in a death like his, and in a resurrection like his to immortality as spirit creatures, becoming t heirs with him in the heavenly Kingdom. (1Co 15:50-54; Php 3:10, 11; 1Pe 5:1; 2Pe 1:2-4; Re 20:6) Thus it is evident that the sharing of Christians in “divine nature” is a sharing with Christ in his glory.

The verb form “to divine” generally means to employ divination, a practice directly condemned by Jehovah God.—De 18:10-12

“It is in him that all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily.” (Col. 1:19; 2:9) Having been with his heavenly Father for aeons of time, Jesus knows better than anyone else the personality and will of God. Throughout his earthly ministry, Jesus taught others what his Father had taught him and reflected in his actions the qualities that his Father had nurtured in him. That is why Jesus could say: “He that has seen me has seen the Father also.” (John 14:9) All the wisdom and knowledge of God are hidden, or are dwelling, in Christ, and there is no better way for us to learn about Jehovah than by carefully learning all that we can about Jesus.

We must address several key issues with their understanding of the Greek word θεότης (theotēs), their interpretation of "fullness" in relation to Christ, and their attempt to diminish the deity of Christ by referencing other texts like 2 Peter 1:3-4. Let’s examine each aspect closely:

1. Greek Word θεότης (Theotēs) vs. θειότης (Theiotēs):

The Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that θεότης in Colossians 2:9 means “divine nature” or “divinity,” equating it with θειότης in Romans 1:20. They claim this allows them to render the age as referring to Christ having a "divine quality" rather than the full essence of deity.

However, there is a significant difference between θεότης and θειότης. The former (θεότης) refers to the very essence of God, meaning the state of being God. This term encapsulates the fullness of divine nature, meaning that Christ possesses the entirety of what it means to be God. θειότης (used in Romans 1:20), on the other hand, refers to "divine qualities" or attributes that can be observed in creation, but does not signify the full essence of God.

By conflating θεότης with θειότης, the Jehovah's Witnesses commit a serious lexical error. Scholars such as A.T. Robertson, Bruce Metzger, and others have highlighted the specific choice of θεότης in Colossians 2:9 to emphasize Christ's full deity, not merely His possession of divine qualities. The word θεότης is a stronger term that underscores Christ’s full participation in the divine essence, distinguishing Him from any created being, including angels. In contrast, θειότης is never used in connection with Christ’s nature in this context, which makes the Jehovah's Witness interpretation both inaccurate and misleading.

2. Context of "Fullness" (πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα):

The term "fullness" (πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα) in Colossians 2:9 further emphasizes the complete and undivided nature of the deity that dwells in Christ. Jehovah’s Witnesses suggest that Christ possesses this fullness merely because "it pleased the Father" (Colossians 1:19). However, this reading misses the point. While Colossians 1:19 refers to God’s decision that all fullness dwells in Christ, Colossians 2:9 expands on this by stating that this fullness is the fullness of deity (θεότης), dwelling in Christ bodily.

Paul’s usage of πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα implies the totality of what it means to be God resides in Christ. This fullness is not limited or granted by the Father as if Christ were a mere vessel of divinity. Instead, Paul is stressing that the divine essence itself—the very nature of God—permanently dwells in Christ. This makes Christ fully and completely God, not merely a reflection or representative of God's attributes. The Jehovah's Witness argument that this fullness does not make Christ equal to God fails because it ignores the theological weight behind the used and the implications of θεότης.

3. Jesus is Not Merely Reflecting God’s Qualities:

Jehovah's Witnesses argue that Jesus reflects God's qualities, as seen in John 14:9 ("He that has seen me has seen the Father", but this does not align with the stronger assertions Paul makes in Colossians 2:9. If Paul had wanted to convey that Jesus merely reflected or shared divine qualities, he could have used θειότης or similar terminology. Instead, he chose θεότης to show that Jesus possesses the full essence of God.

Furthermore, the idea that Jesus is just a reflection of God’s qualities conflicts with Paul's assertion that in Christ "all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" are hidden (Colossians 2:3). Christ doesn’t just reflect or possess godly attributes; He embodies the totality of divine wisdom and knowledge, which points to His inherent divinity, not a delegated or derivative one.

4. Colossians 2:9 vs. 2 Peter 1:4:

The Jehovah’s Witnesses reference 2 Peter 1:4, where Christians are said to "share in the divine nature," to argue that Jesus sharing in divinity doesn’t make Him fully God. However, this is a false equivalence. In 2 Peter 1:4, the phrase "divine nature" refers to Christians partaking in God's holiness and moral characteristics through sanctification, not to them becoming gods or sharing in God’s essence. The word used here is theia physis, which refers to a participation in godly characteristics, not a sharing of the divine essence itself, which remains unique to God.

In contrast, Colossians 2:9 uses θεότης to express the idea that Christ possesses the full and complete essence of God, not merely attributes. The comparison between believers sharing in the “divine nature” and Christ possessing the fullness of deity is not appropriate because they are entirely different categories: one is transformative participation, and the other is essential nature.

5. Christ Seated at God’s Right Hand:

Jehovah's Witnesses often argue that since Christ is seated at the right hand of God (Colossians 3:1), He must be subordinate to God. However, this argument misunderstands the function of the right-hand position in biblical and ancient contexts. Sitting at the right hand of a king did not imply inferiority but rather shared authority and honor. In fact, it was the highest place of honor one could have. Christ’s position at the right hand of God signifies His exaltation and co-rulership, not subordination in essence or nature.

Conclusion:

The Jehovah’s Witness interpretation of Colossians 2:9 is flawed on several levels. Their rendering of θεότης as "divine quality" ignores the deeper meaning of the term, which refers to the full essence of deity. Additionally, their attempt to diminish the significance of Christ possessing the fullness of deity ignores the specific vocabulary used by Paul to affirm Christ’s full divinity. The context of both Colossians 1:19 and 2:9 points to Christ being fully God, not merely a reflection or vessel of divine attributes. This understanding cannot be applied to any angel or created being, as no other being in Scripture is said to embody the fullness of deity as Christ does.
Copied from a reply of xyzhu in quora.com

MaxInDHouse:
The title "GOD" connotes SUPREME RULER and that means one who supposed to set standards among intelligent beings so when the true God made Moses and Jesus like Gods {Exodus 7:1; John 1:1} they are to do unnatural things that is unexplainable to the common man which qualifies them to set standards but the truth is both Moses and Jesus relied on the One who sent them as the rightful ruler over them whereas those CLAIMING they are Gods don't want anyone to tell them what is right or wrong! Genesis 3:4-5 compare to Psalms 82:6

I don't think you understand the qualifications only true God has rendered every other god a false god.
Claiming Jesus only bard the title God is calamitous because Jesus created all things and by implication according to you a false god created all things, and again according to col 2.9 Jesus is not God by mere title he has full essence of God making him same God with the father.

GothamCities:


Abel is an heretic because he tries to misrepresent clear scriptural teachings that are generally acceptable. They are generally acceptable because they're clear. Very clear. Yet Abel comes up with contradictions of clear messages. You get it?

There are cases where opinions differ. Paul wrote most of his epistles to address differing opinions among his followers. Differences in opinions have always existed since the very beginning of Christiendom. However, except you're puffed up and see yourself the only one who has knowledge, you cannot expect everybody to have the same opinion as yourself on matters that require divine scriptural insights to understand.

@Bold you have being beating round the bush all these while and again contradicted yourself, according to your own qualification for heresy, Paul has being clearly, very clearly declared by the scriptures as an apostle of Jesus christ and his epistles as scripture for the church and he has accepted by the church from the days of the apostles till date as an apostle of Jesus christ and his epistles scriptures for the church, yet some men came to oppose it yet you are saying it is a matter of mere opinion? Are you not contradicting yourself?

Isn't the double standard glaring? You are screaming that Abel is a heretic but refusing to call out other heretics.

Leviticus 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

GothamCities:


Scripture speaks for itself but various individuals have different understanding and perspectives.

you are just arguing like those people who say there is no absolute truth yet they take the very premise of their argument as an absolute truth.
According to you if various individuals have different understanding and perspective on scripture then on what basis do you call Abel a heretic since According to your logic it is just your understanding and perspective?

GothamCities:


Who has the final say about scripture? God or they? The same way you think they reject scripture is the same way they also think you reject scripture. It becomes a matter for debates. But the on matters that are clearly seen as heresies, anyone can call anyone to order.

Simple, scripture speaks for itself.

sonmvayina:


Just like Jesus or is he an exception?

Jesus is God, he is not a creature who became God.

GothamCities:


I don't understand you. Where did I the issues brought against Paul? I am 100% ive of the Pauline epistles. I'm telling you that the arguments about Paul is not a new thing. Selman and Sulaiman are not the first. It's an opinionated thing that they cannot just veer into. That's an issue of global debates. Just like the issue of tithe.

On the other hand, Abel Damina's heresies are personal heresies. Very horrendous types of heresies. His heresies are gaining traction, hence the need to call him to order. For instance, I personally know about most of the heresies they attributed to Damina. Meanwhile, the only heresies I know of Selman and Sulaiman borders on their Pauline stand. Apart from that, I know nothing of any other heresies they might have peddled. If there are, then, their heresies have not gained traction like that of Damina that is almost becoming mainstream. His stance about tithing coupled with Pastor Adeboye's apology regarding his previous statement on tithing puts many unlearned persons in grave danger because, Damina became more popular as a result of that apology, and those unlearned people might think he has always been right in everything he has ever said.

what has opinion got to do with what is written in the scripture? A man reject scripture you are saying they can't veer into it, so on what ground are they condemning Damina?

GothamCities:


You didn't read the post bro. It seems you only responded to the headline. They listed a good number of his heresies including where he said the Bible is not the Word of God, Jesus is not coming back, there's no heaven, etc. Please read the post before responding.

Selman,Sulaiman and co also did similar thing why single out only Abel damina.
Abel damina is also heretical even those condemning him are no better

The issue about Paul is not a new issue. It's been an ongoing thing. It's an opinionated issue that they do not need to respond to.

then you don't know your Bible, is the opinion of men now the authority or the scripture.
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Anybody who preached a different gospel different from what Paul and the other apostles preach is cursed. There is no opinion

Earthscience:


Yes o! Christ is the standard. Some of these god or men have craftily champion the course of the Christianity that suite them (their stomach) at the expense of the real truth (GOSPEL of JESUS Christ).
Their current behaviour is like the last kick of a dying horse, having discovered that their stomach (finance) is in trouble.

That is just the truth, their actually concern is just because it has to do with finance, otherwise they actually not concerned.

They learned well from America Televangelists like Benny hin, creflo dollar, Kenneth Copeland, Joyce Meyers etc

GothamCities:


You're not getting it my brother.

Everyone at anytime can make errors due to human imperfections and limited knowledge. In the case of Adeboye, he retracted and apologized. I don't expect you to include him in your list.

That said, I want you to know that:

1. It is not all the heresies that are out there that would come to the ears of the organization.

2. They mentioned that Damina's heresies are now widespread on social media. Meaning it's getting a lot of traction and may soon become mainstream. They had to rise up to the occasion.

They're not censoring a the messages and heresies out there. They rose up to call Damina to order because he is already going overboard.

But they didn't state the heresies?
Is about tithe payment? Or about the prosperity gospel? He is partially right now tithe and right on the prosperity gospel.
During the frenzy of miracle money this body was not seen, I don't buy the idea that they unaware.

Iam sorry I didnt included that he apologized adeboye, but when the frenzy was on going they were dead silence.

For example what Suleman and Selman said concerning the bible and apostle paul teaching are all on social media, and It is even worst but the body is unaware? That is not an excuse.

Stubborn82:
The issues of tithing is generating lots of controversy among the Christians of now adays, while some think it is good to pay tithe, some think otherwise, backing their believe with scriptural references, at the bases of using scriptural references to justify whether tithing is important or not, many Christians are confused and lost, not knowing which to accept or to follow.

The truth is that the word of God can not contradict one another, it is the ignorance or selfishness of the people that causes the contradiction. Someone bump into my inbox recently, after I commented on a Facebook post about tithing, this person happened to be the of the page, he tried to contradict himself by wanting me to agree with his view about tithing, in fact he sent lots of references upon references pointing to the direction of his view, but what struck me the most, in all his arguments was this question, "why Jesus pay tax and didn't pay tithe?" I did my best by giving him the answer with the wisdom from the scripture.

I found out that many Christians are still confused and struggling to understand why Jesus didn't pay tithe but went ahead and pay tax, to understand this better, we need to divide this question into two, and ask ourselves, what is tax and what is tithe, are they the same thing? This person that came into my inbox, cited Matt 17:24-25 to show that Jesus paid tax, but this person made a mistake, because the key to understand mystery is WHY not WHAT, Jesus paid tax, that's WHAT Jesus did, WHY Jesus did that? This is one thing that this person didn't know or probably trying to hide it, then I pointed to the same Matt 17 he cited earlier but this time i asked him to read verse 26 and 27 in order to see the answer to why Jesus paid the tax, initially, it is not Jesus obligation by right to pay tax, but he did that simply to avoid problem with the tax collectors.

Why Jesus didn't pay tithe?
This is another controversial question and the point of reference for many to generate justification about tithing, it is very important to know that, while tax is to be paid, tithe is to be giving, you don't pay tithe, you give tithe, which ever way, but the question is why Jesus didn't pay or give tithe? Like I said before, that the key to understand mystery is WHY, one good reason that Jesus didn't pay tithe is because neither Jesus nor the apostles works or engaged in profitable business, tithe is only mandatory to income earners or profit enterprise, Jesus didn't come to contradict the word of God, he came to fulfill it, tithe is not mandatory on gift items, tithe is strictly for income earners, you can't expect Jesus to give ten percent of the food someone invited him to eat in his house, same way you can't tell someone to give tithe on a gift items or materials that he or she received from someone, tithe is not mandatory on gift items but only on profit and income earnings.

Perhaps somebody can still argue that, tithing is an old testament doctrine or law and it is not applicable to new testament teaching, but the truth is, tithing is not a law or doctrine, tithing is a commandment from God, it is not a church doctrine or religious laws, if they says it is an old testament law and it should be disregarded, then is marriage not also come from old testament, is praying not also come from old testament? Why do you want to abolish tithe and not abolish praying or abolish the commandment of God that says, man shall leave his parents and cleave to his wife and the two shall become one flesh? Tithe is a commandment just like marriage commandment, it is not limited to any religion, whether Christian, Islam, Judaism or induism. Tithe is a commandments to whoever seek after God, regardless of religious affiliation.

Thanks for taking your time to read this epistle, next Sunday I will conclude on this series of tithing, the benefits of tithing and Why we need to engage in tithing regardless of our religious affiliation.

Jesus may have tithed, because it was demanded by the law and Jesus fulfilled the law.
You seem to think all religion worship the same God, you are wrong tithing was commanded by the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob, nor allah, or the god of other religions that are demons any way.
Christians can tithe but not compulsory, if you Islam, Hinduism, Judaism etc apart from Christianity the least of your worry should be tithe because you are simply serving the devil not Jesus christ.
Jesus christ said I am the way the truth and the life, he didn't say I ama one of the ways.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Earthscience:


well said. Even if they have to reach out to him, they should have done that in the secret. I did not see in the write up to show evidence of initial engagement with him on this subject matter.
The conclusion of the whole matter is this...Know your GOD, have a One on One relationship with HIM and HE will reveal himself to you. Let the BIBLE be your standard and forget this god of men

exactly, paul said follow me as I follow christ no rom for blind followership in christianity, christ is the standard.

What are the things Abel teach that is heretical?
I have not seen these groups caution the others , when adeboye Said without tithe you cannot make heaven, they were dead silence, when Selman and Sulaiman came out to debunk apostle paul and the bible they where no where to be seen, when pastor Chris said he is a god that should be worshipped, and also said God is not the miracle workers but Christians are, there were no rebukes, many other pastors, g.os and so on have said things that are against christian teachings and continue to double down on it. Why all of a sudden Abel is now the enemy?

Yes Abel do have some false teachings but on the issue of tithing he is right, Christians are not mandated to tithe but if any church or individual decide to tithe it is good.
Paul already addressed issues like these.
Howbeit it was concerning observing holy days.
Romans 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. 14:7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
14:8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
14:9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

Ever since the church have being turn to industry all manner of shameful things are happening, even unbelievers are mocking.
Concerning healing and financial prosperity, May heal a man or may not heal a man, may make him reach or may not make him reach it all depends on his plans, even Paul was having eye problem hence he wrote with large letters he told Timothy to avoid drinking only water but to take a little of wine (a form of medicine) for health sake, he didn't tell him that he lacked faith.
God is not a gene or some kind of toy that do your bidding, in stead he said pray according to my will. When paul Complained about what he was ing through as per the thorn in his flesh what did the Lord say? He said my grace is sufficient for you.
When paul said I can do all things, he was referring to endurance and perseverance through poverty, obstacles, even in handling abundance.

When Isaiah said by his stripes we are healed it is primarily talking about the healing of out souls, Jesus used what happened to the israelites at When they sinned and God sent them serpent and bite them and they fell sick and began to die but Moses made a bronze serpent that any one who saw it were healed and they did not die, Jesus used this to illustrate salvation, sin makes our soul sick and die eventually but Jesus brings healing that heals and saves it, however it does not mean God have ceased to heal and grant material prosperity but that is not the center of a Christian relationship with God.
Whether sick or healed, poor or rich what matters is our relationship with God. Shadrack, meshack and abednego never predicated their faithfulness to God on his ability to deliver them though je eventually did? They said we are not careful in this matter, whether our God is able or deliver us or not we will not bow to this your graven image full stop.

Leviticus 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

Yes rapture is real, The answer you got, that you were not part of the rapture because you smoke is meant for you to know that anyone in sin cannot be raptured. Note even if you get rid of smoking other sins would still prevent you, what you need is a complete change in your Spirit, this change will lead you to walk in true holiness and righteousness. This change is what scripture called being born again.
This new birth is in the Spirit and it comes by accepting the Jesus christ the son of God as your Lord and saviour and accepting his death a payment for your sin.
Without this new birth one cannot be raptured.
Have you read the Bible?
Spare some time start from the gospels, especially John.

Yes rapture is real, The answer you got, that you were not part of the rapture because you smoke is meant for you to know that anyone in sin cannot be raptured. Note even if you get rid of smoking other sins would still prevent you, what you need is a complete change in your Spirit, this change will lead you to walk in true holiness and righteousness. This change is what scripture called being born again.
This new birth is in the Spirit and it comes by accepting the Jesus christ as your Lord and saviourand accepting his death a payment for your sin.
Without this new birth one cannot be raptured.

AbuTwins:


You still don't get it. Noah preached to his people for 950years and they didn't repent nor change their ways! He requested Allah to destroy the disbelievers! And this happened! Noah and his followers were saved! Even Noah's son perished!

What genocide are you talking about?

Didn't allah kill babies and animals along?

Talking about genocide

According to the traditional Islamic sources, in 627 AD as a result of the Battle of the Trench and the betrayal of the Muslims by the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza, the Muslims under the direct military command of the prophet Muhammad laid siege to the Banu Qurayzah compound. After a siege of around 2 weeks, depending on the source, the Jews of Banu Qurayzah surrendered and entrusted their fate to a trusted intermediary from the Muslims of the tribe of 'Aws, Sa'd bin Mu'adh. Sa'd bin Mu'adh advised Muhammad to slaughter the men folk of the tribe and take the women and children as captives. Muhammad took this advice and as a consequence between 400 and 900 male prisoners of the tribe including any boys showing signs of puberty were beheaded, many in front of their families, and the rest of the tribe were taken or sold into slavery. The event is well attested to in the Islamic historical tradition, and has served as the basis for multiple rulings throughout history dealing with the treatment of captured non-Muslims by Muslim military forces.

Steep:
Psalm 82:6 was never referring to Christians rather to the judges and leaders of Israel who became corrupt in their dispensation of justice.
Psalms 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
A simple reading from vs 1 - 3 would tell you they were thee judges of Israel.

Psalms 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

82:2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

82:3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.

Exodus 22:28 Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.

The gods werr the judges of Israel.

were they actually gods?
No they were not actually God but the right of rulership and judgment werr from God.

Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

God made Moses a God over Pharaoh.
Exodus 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

It does not mean Moses was actually God but Moses was given authority over Pharaoh.
Moses never went about calling himself God nor demanding to be worshipped.

False teachers claim they are actually Gods who are to be worshipped, the claim the rejection of worship by the apostles was out of ignorance. They are arrogant, proud, high minded and exalt themselves.

Ezekiel 28:2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

Is the little gods theology a preparation ground for the man of lawlessness?

I believe so, the scripture tell us that the mystery of iniquity is already at work.

2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

A mystery is something hidden, like lucifer who wanted to exalt himself as the most High God, the anti christ would also exalt himself and sit in the temple as God.


2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

All the craze about "humans evolving to be better" "personal truth" having a "christ consciousness" seeking to become a "better versions of one's self" is to create the illusion of self sufficiency in humans so that they think they don't need any God outside themselves.

Some preachers even preach God no longer perform miracles that Christians are the miracle workers not God, what a blasphemy and yet no rebuttal by can or any minister but are quick to raise tumult about less significant issues as tithe payment because alot of are in the same boat.

AbuTwins:


Allah destroyed them agreed but Noah didn't kill them! Noah and some people survived!

Yahweh told people to commit genocide in Numbers 31:17-18 and 1 Samuel 15:3. Genocide is the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.

Noah and some people survived so it is not genocide!

So you agreed allah killed a large group of people including babies and animals? Meaning by your logic allah committed genocide. What does it matter commanding people to do it or doing by himself it means nothing.
Your logic is that killing women, children, babies or animals is wrong, even so by your logic allah committed genocide.
Why do Muslims kill innocent ram every year to celebrate their festival?

AbuTwins:


Noah didn't kill them!

Yahweh sent people to commit genocide! Noah's case was not genocide!

Didn't allah destroyed everyone including babies in the time of Noah except Noah and his family,
So why would Allah kill babies in the flood for the parents sin?
Allah, may He be exalted, said (interpretation of the meaning):

“And We saved him and those with him in the laden ship.

Then We drowned the rest (disbelievers) thereafter”

[ash-Shu‘ara’ 26:119-120].

“(So it was) till then there came Our Command and the oven gushed forth (water like fountains from the earth). We said: ‘Embark therein, of each kind two (male and female), and your family, except him against whom the Word has already gone forth, and those who believe. And none believed with him, except a few.’”

[Hood 11:40].

AbuTwins:


Yes, but Noah, some people and animals were saved!

This one Yahweh killed everything including animals!

It was only those with Noah and few animals, meaning Allah killed the rest people including babies and animals.

You don't yet know you have fallen into your own trap.

AbuTwins:


So if a father is evil you can kill the babies with their animals?

Didn't allah destroyed everyone including babies in the time of Noah except Noah and his family,
So why would Allah kill babies in the flood for the parents sin?
Allah, may He be exalted, said (interpretation of the meaning):

“And We saved him and those with him in the laden ship.

Then We drowned the rest (disbelievers) thereafter”

[ash-Shu‘ara’ 26:119-120].

“(So it was) till then there came Our Command and the oven gushed forth (water like fountains from the earth). We said: ‘Embark therein, of each kind two (male and female), and your family, except him against whom the Word has already gone forth, and those who believe. And none believed with him, except a few.’”

[Hood 11:40].