Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 04 2011,04:46)Quote (Istari @ April 03 2011,04:17)Therefore, The Hotseat, or similar, is the best way. The poser can ask a single Explicit question based on the original question and the responder MUST answer directly or concede.The answer MUST be accepted by the poser so as not to encourage long drawn out debate and turn…[Read more]

So we know that we can partake in divine nature.Case closed.Now that Istari/JA is posting again, does he want to continue his debate with WJ?

So I won this debate KJ.1 John 5:20 is not saying that Jesus is the true God. On the contrary, it is saying that the Father is the true God.Debate over.1 John 5:20 is no longer a Trinity proof verse and cannot be used by KJ as such.20 We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And…[Read more]

You know WJ, you can try to diverge the topic, but I will hold you to answering the question that this debate is about.Why do you accuse Jesus of blasphemy by saying that he is God, when he actually said, 'I am God’s Son'?. You will have to answer this question, or admit that you have no defense and thus you accuse Jesus of blasphemy because you s…[Read more]

WJ, if I can show you one scripture that calls one man an angel, then you have to concede that you are wrong about Malak being exclusively reserved as a word for heavenly beings.

WJ, an angel is a messenger and that word can be applied to Man, Seraph, Cherub, and probably any type of creature that God uses as a messenger.God sent most of the time, messengers from Heaven to proclaim a message. Moses for example saw an angel/messenger on Mt Sinai. The prophets often were shown things by heavenly angels. But men can also be…[Read more]

Of course Jesus is an angel. Malak means messenger and it can be applied to heavenly creatures as well as man.Malak is not a race or species as some think. It is an office.If we want to talk about races or species of heavenly creatures then we have Cherubs, Seraphs, and others and of course in scripture they are called angels because they are…[Read more]

WJ, this debate is centred around this question.Why do you not call God, THEM or THEY as your doctrine dictates? You have failed to provide an answer, so is it time for me to turn the debate off or allow others to participate and proclaim that you lost?So far you are on the losing end here, because you have avoided the question and as KJ rightly…[Read more]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 03 2011,09:10)Uh oh Keith. Mike said you had to answer “honestly” which means you should have answered “No.” So if his daddy t8 gives him what he wants you'll get tiled.JackYou are being paranoid KJ.

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 03 2011,05:57)The whole thing is stupid! If someone doesn't answer a question the whole internet world can see it if it is running and hiding.Like here KJ?https://www.heavennet.net/cgi-bin….2;st=50I mean, you have stopped debating here because it appears that you are stumped.So yes, you are right when you say that…[Read more]

Quote (terraricca @ April 03 2011,04:26)T8 and mikeis there a redemption if you are tiled PierreYes there is always redemption when you amend that which you were tiled for.

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 03 2011,02:11)NO because we are under no contract here and we may come and go as we please unless it is a formal debate inwhich parties agreed upon set terms.KJTrue KJ.What happens when you debate someone and they refuse to acknowledge that they are stumped or refuse a question because it proves them wrong?In the…[Read more]

Maybe it should be in the Debates and Hot Seat forums only.

Sorry WJ. But there are too many holes in your teaching and your rebuttals against myself and Mike are exceptionally weak that they do not stand.Here are 5 facts that you cannot accept.1) Others are called theos/elohim in a qualitative or representative sense.2) We are specifically taught that there is one God the Father.3) We are specifically…[Read more]

Although I do not necessarily agree with your statement, I will run with what you said for now because yes a name is a name and isn't necessarily saying that he is an angel/malak. However, if I give you proof that a son of God is called by the title malak/angel/messenger will you admit that it is possible then? And if I prove it to you, what is…[Read more]

Your posts/topics are still there charity. You might need to to the last topic and work forward from there. Make sure you are also in the right forum.

KJ. Thanks for setting up this topic.It is your turn to reply in that topic.I have supplied clear proof that Jesus is not the God in this verse. I am waiting for you to reply.https://www.heavennet.net/cgi-bin….2;st=50

KJ, I noticed that you are posting around the place and adding in those laughing icons etc.So why haven't you posted here?Is this tantamount to admitting that you are wrong with your interepetation of 1 John 5:20?I just need an answer as to whether you are defeated here or if you have a come-back and I just need to wait a bit longer.Please reply.

Now back to the topic WJ.Do you acknowledge that Malachi the prophet is a man, who must be a son of God, due to contributing scripture to the bible. And that Malachi is actually the word for angel. So this man was called mal'ak.A simple nod or a yes will do. We can then move on.

WJ, as you have probably read before.There is a difference between avoiding a question and not reading a question.The latter happens because we do not read every post in the forums and thus questions do get missed.However, questions will eventually be noticed if you ask it often, but you do have the power to bring a question to our attention…[Read more]