Apostle paul is regarded as the most prolific of the apostles and the greatest christain writer/ teacher in history. His writings make up almost 2/3 of the new testament and he is meant to be an example for christian leaders and teachers to follow below are some excerpts from the work of Paul and i want us all to compare and see how well our leaders today are following his examples.

Acts 20:29-35:
29[b] I know that false teachers, like vicious wolves, will come in among you after I leave, not sparing the flock. 30 Even some men from your own group will rise up and distort the truth in order to draw a following.[/b] [sounds familiar? ] 31 Watch out! Remember the three years I was with you—my constant watch and care over you night and day, and my many tears for you.
   32 “And now I entrust you to God and the message of his grace that is able to build you up and give you an inheritance with all those he has set apart for himself.

   33 “I have never coveted anyone’s silver or gold or fine clothes. 34 You know that these hands of mine have worked to supply my own needs and even the needs of those who were with me. 35 And I have been a constant example of how you can help those in need by working hard. You should remember the words of the Lord Jesus: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”


2 Thessalonians 3:6-10:
6 And now, dear brothers and sisters, we give you this command in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ: Stay away from all believers who live idle lives and don’t follow the tradition they received from us. 7 For you know that you ought to imitate us. We were not idle when we were with you. 8 We never accepted food from anyone without paying for it. We worked hard day and night so we would not be a burden to any of you. 9 We certainly had the right to ask you to feed us, but we wanted to give you an example to follow. 10 Even while we were with you, we gave you this command: “Those unwilling to work will not get to eat.”


1 Timothy 3:1-3:
Leaders in the Church
1 This is a trustworthy saying: “If someone aspires to be an elder,[a] he desires an honorable position.” 2 So an elder must be a man whose life is above reproach. He must be faithful to his wife. He must exercise self-control, live wisely, and have a good reputation. He must enjoy having guests in his home, and he must be able to teach. 3 He must not be a heavy drinker or be violent. He must be gentle, not quarrelsome, and not love money

I really wonder why the so-called church leadership today love money so much.


1 Timothy 6:10-11:
10 For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. And some people, craving money, have wandered from the true faith and pierced themselves with many sorrows. 11 But you, Timothy, are a man of God; so run from all these evil things. Pursue righteousness and a godly life, along with faith, love, perseverance, and gentleness.

Here we see that men of God are admonished to runaway from evil [love of money] but today what we see is them not just running after it but twisting the gospel to extort money from brethen. May God save us from this so called "men of God" as they are not only robbing the flock of their money but they are also robbing them of their salvation trough the teaching of false gospel [i.e prosperity gospel] which is contrary to the teachings of christ and the apostles.

I'm sure most of the current crop of teachers/church leaders today conveniently/knowingly skip these parts of the bible.
These things are so clear to understand and follow that one keeps wondering about the extent to which some people have been deceived/blinded.

* sighs *

Kunle abeg tell them
@ Pilgrim please where are you ,could you please educate us on why Paul fended for himself when he copuld have helped himself with tithes

faith69:

Kunle abeg tell them
@ Pilgrim please where are you ,could you please educate us on why Paul fended for himself when he copuld have helped himself with tithes

Do you really wanna unleash the dragon?!

ttalks:

Do you really wanna unleash the dragon?!

Lol, @ttalks, you understand pilgrim.1 so well I'm now scared of you! Thank goodness you didn't report me as you threatened earlier. I'm still a good gal and will remain so to you for some time to come.

pilgrim.1:

Lol, @ttalks, you understand pilgrim.1 so well I'm now scared of you! Thank goodness you didn't report me as you threatened earlier. I'm still a good gal and will remain so to you for some time to come.

Good morning Miss Pilgrim. I look forward to a day of juicy debate. I don't want to pressure you but I'm keen to hear what you're going to say next on the thread about the Origin of Roman Catholicism. That one is you and Lady. But please take your time, don't feel pressured, whenever you're ready . . . how about right now. I'm waiting!

only joking! but I'm keen to see how that develops.

pilgrim.1:

Lol, @ttalks, you understand pilgrim.1 so well I'm now scared of you! Thank goodness you didn't report me as you threatened earlier. I'm still a good gal and will remain so to you for some time to come.

I was only singing sisco's song na,

Pastor AIO:

Good morning Miss Pilgrim. I look forward to a day of juicy debate. I don't want to pressure you but I'm keen to hear what you're going to say next on the thread about the Origin of Roman Catholicism. That one is you and Lady. But please take your time, don't feel pressured, whenever you're ready . . . how about right now. I'm waiting!

only joking! but I'm keen to see how that develops.

I have got front row tickets to the game, want one?

faith69:

Kunle abeg tell them
@ Pilgrim please where are you ,could you please educate us on why Paul fended for himself when he copuld have helped himself with tithes

Some of you folks should learn to prayerfully study your Bibles before seeking out 'pilgrim' - this subject is not about me nor anyone else. If you are averse to tithing, keep it to yourself; and then allow others to do what their hearts reveal to them.

That said, indeed Paul fended for himself - but not at all times. There are many instances where he actually demanded his expenses to be sorted out by several churches, especially the churches he was responsible for. Do you want examples?

1 Corinthians 16:6 (English Standard Version)
and perhaps I will stay with you or even spend the winter, so that you may help me on my journey, wherever I go.

Romans 15:24 (New International Version)
I plan to do so when I go to Spain. I hope to visit you while passing through and to have you assist me on my journey there, after I have enjoyed your company for a while.

2 Corinthians 1:16 (New American Standard Bible)
that is, to pass your way into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and by you to be helped on my journey to Judea.

Philippians 4:18 (English Standard Version)
I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God.

Dear faith69, it's useless being reactive just because you find someone quoting verses against church leadership. You didn't take time to prayerfully study your Bible and started out sounding like apostle Paul never received any financial help from the churches, or that the only source of funding his expenses was through fending for himself. If you want numerous other verses where he went so far as to both receive financial assistance from Churches as well 'demanded' that they foot his missionary bills, just gee me a call. Celebrating ignorance is now common place - and if that's what you're all about, enjoy plenty.

Pastor AIO:

Good morning Miss Pilgrim. I look forward to a day of juicy debate. I don't want to pressure you but I'm keen to hear what you're going to say next on the thread about the Origin of Roman Catholicism. That one is you and Lady. But please take your time, don't feel pressured, whenever you're ready . . . how about right now. I'm waiting!

only joking! but I'm keen to see how that develops.

Chrisbenogor:

I have got front row tickets to the game, want one?

No worries, I'll take my time and reply accordingly. My apologies I could not appear on the forum yesterday - was a busy day at my office.

pilgrim.1:

No worries, I'll take my time and reply accordingly. My apologies I could not appear on the forum yesterday - was a busy day at my office.

Seriously though just by the way side how do you cope with such uncertainty in christianity, because from my point of view everybody does have a valid point in interpreting a verse in the bible,

Chrisbenogor:

Seriously though just by the way side how do you cope with such uncertainty in christianity, because from my point of view everybody does have a valid point in interpreting a verse in the bible,

Let me make this concise. Chrisbenogor, there are foundational premises for Biblical exegesis. When people fail to follow the rubrics of Biblical exegesis, the result is eisegesis. So, while it seems at face value that someone might be having a 'valid' point, they often may not be able to sustain that very point when closely examined.

That is how I test whatever assumptions I might hold at any one time. After reading a text and drawing a conclusion, if my point does not stand up to the scrutiny of Biblical exegesis, I could well understand that something is missing in my premise - and the better thing for me to do is hold my point with reservations. . . until such a time as another better premise is deduced that answers to the rubrics of Biblical hermeneutics.

Unfortunately, many people make assertions and will never see anything else. When you ask questions thereto, they never are able to come up with sound answers. Why? They know their assumptions are unfounded and only tend to eisegesis, not exegesis.

pilgrim.1:

Let me make this concise. Chrisbenogor, there are foundational premises for Biblical exegesis. When people fail to follow the rubrics of Biblical exegesis, the result is eisegesis. So, while it seems at face value that someone might be having a 'valid' point, they often may not be able to sustain that very point when closely examined.

That is how I test whatever assumptions I might hold at any one time. After reading a text and drawing a conclusion, if my point does not stand up to the scrutiny of Biblical exegesis, I could well understand that something is missing in my premise - and the better thing for me to do is hold my point with reservations. . . until such a time as another better premise is deduced that answers to the rubrics of Biblical hermeneutics.

Unfortunately, many people make assertions and will never see anything else. When you ask questions thereto, they never are able to come up with sound answers. Why? They know their assumptions are unfounded and only tend to eisegesis, not exegesis.

You are also guilty of "eisegesis", There is nothing like bible exegesis, it all depends on who is doing the exegesis and how well it agrees with his theology. There is NO universally acceptable standard for exegesis, your exegesis will be considered "eisegesis" to another person whose theology differs from yours.

toneyb:

You are also guilty of "eisegesis", There is nothing like bible exegesis, it all depends on who is doing the exegesis and how well it agrees with his theology. There is NO universally acceptable standard for exegesis, your exegesis will be considered "eisegesis" to another person whose theology differs from yours.

When making a statement, you'd have to validate it after carefully considering what others are saying - otherwise it makes you more of a piffling arrant noise-maker than a reasonable discussant. First, you make the assertion that 'there is nothing like bible exegesis', and then you immediately deflate that assertion by implication that "it all depends" on who's doing the exegesis. Why would anyone be doing what in your narrow cubicle has been asserted to be non-existent? The way some of you folks talk makes me shake my head in pity as to where you have discarded your reasoning ability.

If you had carefully considered my reply earlier, there would be no need to just jump in and start breathing such harrumph. I made clear that "I could well understand that something is missing in my premise" - if my conclusions fail to square with the rubrics of Biblical exegesis. I don't assume an over-bearing superiority anywhere, and I'm quite happy to be corrected where I might've been missing something.

As regards your assertion that "There is nothing like bible exegesis", the fact that there is such a thing is being discussed in another thread raised by Pastor AIO. Just don't jump in a thread and post reactive statements that are vacant and unwarranted.

pilgrim.1:

Some of you folks should learn to prayerfully study your Bibles before seeking out 'pilgrim' - this subject is not about me nor anyone else. If you are averse to tithing, keep it to yourself; and then allow others to do what their hearts reveal to them.

That said, indeed Paul fended for himself - but not at all times. There are many instances where he actually demanded his expenses to be sorted out by several churches, especially the churches he was responsible for. Do you want examples?

Dear faith69, it's useless being reactive just because you find someone quoting verses against church leadership. You didn't take time to prayerfully study your Bible and started out sounding like apostle Paul never received any financial help from the churches, or that the only source of funding his expenses was through fending for himself. If you want numerous other verses where he went so far as to both receive financial assistance from Churches as well 'demanded' that they foot his missionary bills, just gee me a call. Celebrating ignorance is now common place - and if that's what you're all about, enjoy plenty.

When paul fended for himself why didnt he lambast them for not paying tithes

faith69:

When paul fended for himself why didnt he lambast them for not paying tithes

Are you changing your previous position?    So, having first tried to make shakara about Paul fending for himself, you crawl back still with that same excuse? No worries, please read 1 Corinthians 9 - Paul did not need to "lambast" anybody about any "payments". It is folks like you who have your priorities mixed up that are always reading your prejudices into the texts and looking for words ('lambast') that are not there in the first place.

What's your next sob story?

pilgrim.1:

That said, indeed Paul fended for himself - but not at all times. There are many instances where he actually demanded his expenses to be sorted out by several churches, especially the churches he was responsible for. Do you want examples?

It is really in very poor taste that you constantly and routinely not only twist scripture [in the name of exegesis] you also deliberately force your poorly conceived opinions and biases into it. Even from all the scriptures you quoted there is not one single one were he demanded expenses to be sorted out. He was merely thanking for and anticipating help for his travels which does not always have to be financial. That not with standing no one as said in this post that Paul never receibved assistance from the church for his evangelism. All the post is saying is that most of our pastors today ignore Pauls example of not being a burden to the flock even though he made it clear that preachers ought to emulate him in 2 thessalonians 3:9

faith69:

When paul fended for himself why didnt he lambast them for not paying tithes

Hey pilgrim,

Long time. It's actually because of u i'm here. . . nothing else. I always like to stay away from threads like this esp when i'm not sure of the Spritual state of the poster. . . if he is submitted to the authority of the Spirit himself.

Anyways my little contribution:

Any man of God that depends on his congregaion for his prosperity is not living the life God called him to live.

God dosnt send people to a man of God to make the MOG rich. No.

These men are blessed and sent to make many rich(2cor 6:10). When they were sent, all that they needed was put in them (except they were not sent but went).

There are signs of a sent one that any Spirit filled christian can percieve and it has nothing to do with materialism.

A blessed man has all he needs for life in that blessing (which is spiritual). But every other thing u see around him is not the blessing but the result of the blessing.

So whether in want or in plenty a true man of God is blessed and able to make others rich.

God said to abraham, I will bless you and make you a blessing. He that blesses you is blesssed and he that curses you is cursed. That is why they seem to be money magnets. The moment the MOG take his eyes of the kingdom which is the reason for the blessing and focuses on the things of this world, the riches which carnal eyes see will soon be no more.

A man of God who is put in charge of God's people must first be dead to this world with its cares and put the needs of his flock before his (and this has nothing to do with how many cars he drives, what he wears or whether he has a house or not) as all that in the face of God is nothing but dung.

Apostle paul is regarded as the most prolific of the apostles and the greatest christain writer/ teacher in history

It is sad that you people cannot accept the truth. Truth is truth! You have been programmed to accept things as they come and you are content with just knowing the basics of religion, you don’t even dare question the validity of their teachings. Stop being so lazy, and research. Question their logic. Find out the truth for yourself. It’s clear, if you just take time to research you will see that you are following Paul (The Deceiver) and not Yashua (Jesus).

donnie:

Hey pilgrim,

Long time. It's actually because of u i'm here. . . nothing else. I always like to stay away from threads like this esp when i'm not sure of the Spritual state of the poster. . . if he is submitted to the authority of the Spirit himself.

Hi donnie,

Yes, quite some time - and like you, I've come to the point where my discussions are limited to people who make sense with a good head on their shoulders.

Indeed, you've communicated well - and that's another balance I appreciate. However, my inputs were not about making any MOG 'rich' through the offerings and/or gifts of God's people. There's nothing wrong with ministers receiving such assistance from God's people - absolutely nothing wrong with that. However, such is not the focus of ministry. The problem with many is that they focus so much on these problems that they lose sight of the more essential issues about our being believers in Christ. So, you can see that while the concerns of many are too driven by finger pointing and accusative adventures, I've moved past that to try and focus on what is more essential to my being a Christian than worrying about other people's headaches.

That is why you won't find me castigating anyone - such as threads raised up against Pastors - like pastors Chris Oyakhilome, Adeboye, Kumuyi, etc. It is not as if these pastors are all 'perfect', and indeed they have their own issues. But what will 'pilgrim.1' personally benefit from joining in those threads to mudsling anyone? Don't I have pastors who have their own faults as well? I do - and in some instances I may not agree with some of the things they hold. Yet, I've benefitted from one thing they teach us: don't make attacking others the reason for your Christianity. That is why I also came round to realizing that I'm not even better than Catholics - and the threads where I debated them in my mistaken pride are there as testimony to show at least one thing: I have a heart to grow and mature beyond my yesterday.

So, donnie. . . if anyone feels like slurring others is the best they can show for their Christianity, leave them alone. Let them 'belleful' on such, and let God Himself hear and decide on such matters. In your comments above, you've communicated well - and I appreciate your points. God bless you.

pilgrim.1:

When making a statement, you'd have to validate it after carefully considering what others are saying - otherwise it makes you more of a piffling arrant noise-maker than a reasonable discussant. First, you make the assertion that 'there is nothing like bible exegesis', and then you immediately deflate that assertion by implication that "it all depends" on who's doing the exegesis. Why would anyone be doing what in your narrow cubicle has been asserted to be non-existent? The way some of you folks talk makes me shake my head in pity as to where you have discarded your reasoning ability.

If you had carefully considered my reply earlier, there would be no need to just jump in and start breathing such harrumph. I made clear that "I could well understand that something is missing in my premise" - if my conclusions fail to square with the rubrics of Biblical exegesis. I don't assume an over-bearing superiority anywhere, and I'm quite happy to be corrected where I might've been missing something.

As regards your assertion that "There is nothing like bible exegesis", the fact that there is such a thing is being discussed in another thread raised by Pastor AIO. Just don't jump in a thread and post reactive statements that are vacant and unwarranted.

How does this dis-prove my assertion that there is no universally acceptable exegesis? Every body's exegesis depends SOLELY on his/her theology. According to Pastor AIO link, there are different types of exegesis. People ONLY accept the one that agrees with their own theology. So there is no universally acceptable standard for it and people do not agree to it.

2 Corinthians 11:13:
13 These people are false apostles. They are deceitful workers who disguise themselves as apostles of Christ.


This aptly descibes the charlatans called prosperity preachers we have today
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ephesians 4:14:

14 Then we will no longer be immature like children. We won’t be tossed and blown about by every wind of new teaching. We will not be influenced when people try to trick us with lies so clever they sound like the truth.

Lies like tithes, seed sowing thanksgiving offerings twisted from old testamen doctrine which the apostles never taught.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 Corinthians 11:4:
4 You happily put up with whatever anyone tells you, even if they preach a different Jesus than the one we preach, or a different kind of Spirit than the one you received, or a different kind of gospel than the one you believed.


This aptly applies to most christains today, very sad  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Romans 16:17-18:
17 And now I make one more appeal, my dear brothers and sisters. Watch out for people who cause divisions and upset people’s faith by teaching things contrary to what you have been taught. Stay away from them. 18 Such people are not serving Christ our Lord; they are serving their own personal interests. By smooth talk and glowing words they deceive innocent people.


Such warnings as stated above abound in the bible, i am really at a loss why so many people still fall for the tricks of these scammers today
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romans 13:8:
Be under obligation to no one- the only obligation you have is to love one and other. Whoever does this has obeyed the law.


Yet some crooks tell you consisitently that you are not only under obligation to tithe but you must also bring first fruit, sow seeds and do monetary thanksgiving

@Donnie


Bro, did you make that beautiful submission, with the hope that carnal minds like Kunle would understand?

These folks are still sense-ruled!

They believe you get money because you pursue it. they find it difficult to understand that money is our servant. I always feel insulted when these pharisees ignorantly say we have the love of money, just because we have it but they fail to understand how it happens.

They don't know there's the zion economics, which defies contemporary economic concepts. Hence, we must be stealing to have such.

Our prosperity is kingdom-driven. We focus on the kingdom works, and money knows it must come to us! It serves us! It answers our call. How can I focus on something I know serves me?

They quote all sorts of scriptures that have nothing to do with nada!

Hi every1,
         
                   I'm a JJC here and I'm just getting acquainted with the arguments/ discussions etc in this forum. The Religious Section is my best section - Huxley, Pilgrim.1,  KunleOshob, Chrisbenogor, David Dylan and co ( cant mention y'all here here   make my day.

   I find a particular poster here very intriguing- Pilgrim.1 !

Pilgrim.1,

I've read many of your posts, I admire the way you put forth your arguments and the depth of your knowledge on religious issues being raised.  What I do find intriguing is your personality which shows from your posts as opposed to the sort of person i.e. Christian, you want us to see you as.

  You do accuse some other posters of being reactionary, while you commit the same 'crime' yourself. You have a good knowledge of issues ( I must give you that   ) but you now behave like an ITK ie I Too Know, forgetting that others are equally as knowledgeable and even more so than you. In other words, there's a heavy air of arrogance in your posts as if your fellow discussants know nothing. Your arrogance is like that of Paul who proclaimed himself the 'Chief of Apostles' and made sure nobody forgot it  .
 
 Pilgrim.1, you also have the habit of being rude to people in the first instance. I'm referring to you being rude to someone without him/ her being rude to you first. Look at this :

When making a statement, you'd have to validate it after carefully considering what others are saying - otherwise it makes you more of a piffling arrant noise-maker than a reasonable discussant.


  You really did not need to throw the yabis : piffling arrant noise-maker / reasonable discussant . Why not just stick to the topic of the argument instead of descending into [i]argumentum ad hominem [/i]which you relish accusing others of doing ? So by throwing the yabis makes you a reasonable discussant? Get a grip on yourself girl, you do have some narcissistic attitudes !  You certainly love to cherry-pick like a lot of Christians do. This is just one of your quotations dear, there are many of them.

  Here's one thing I find funny ( not in a comical sense ) about you. Your conversion story. Even though it isn't a conventional  conversion story, it still makes one wonder who the central character of the story is - you or Jesus? You had all your adulators begging you for more, and you were feeling like some 'star   . Your conversion story read like a poorly- written romance bedtime story. You did a shoddy job in the whole story. My advice here is that you stick to what you do best : thrashing out ecclesiastical issues. This should have been well-discussed in your conversion story a la arguments, counter-arguments, evidence and the whole works. A little trimming ie the romance part is nice in a story, just make sure you know how to do the trimmings well otherwise you''ll ruin the whole story ( like you certainly did).

  There's a lot of false humility about you. You've laid this patina of humility thinly though, so a little pressure on you chips it off and then the real you emerges. At this point, you should do an introspection and see whether you reflect the Christ you profess to have in your life.

  I'm waiting for your [i]healthy discussion [/i]with Lady today ( hopefully). I hope you two ladies won't descend into tearing each other's hair and eyes out   . It's a well-known fact that the Catholic church brought about the existence of the Bible, I wondered at your reluctance in accepting this truth ( you resorted to writing something totally unconnected to the issue ). It seemed to me that you just wanted to counter Lady for the sake of argument, rather than truth and facts . Tut, tut, tut,

  I know the above isn't relevant to the topic, I didn't feel the need to open a thread dedicated to you (wouldn't want your head to grow bigger than it already is).

JaguaNana:

It seemed to me that you just wanted to counter Lady for the sake of argument, rather than truth and facts . Tut, tut, tut,

Classical pilgrim.1

toneyb:

How does this dis-prove my assertion that there is no universally acceptable exegesis? Every body's exegesis depends SOLELY on his/her theology. According to Pastor AIO link, there are different types of exegesis. People ONLY accept the one that agrees with their own theology. So there is no universally acceptable standard for it and people do not agree to it.

How does the above confirm your previous assertion that "there is nothing like bible exegesis"?? Does Pastor AIO's thread make the same assertion that there is NOTHING LIKE biblical exegesis if indeed you've come round to say that THERE ARE DIFFERENT TYPES of exegesis?? Do you take time to read through your own posts?

JaguaNana:

  Hi every1,
         
                   I'm a JJC here and I'm just getting acquainted with the arguments/ discussions etc in this forum. The Religious Section is my best section - Huxley, Pilgrim.1,  KunleOshob, Chrisbenogor, David Dylan and co ( cant mention y'all here here   make my day.

   I find a particular poster here very intriguing- Pilgrim.1 !

Pilgrim.1,

I've read many of your posts, I admire the way you put forth your arguments and the depth of your knowledge on religious issues being raised.  What I do find intriguing is your personality which shows from your posts as opposed to the sort of person i.e. Christian, you want us to see you as.

  You do accuse some other posters of being reactionary, while you commit the same 'crime' yourself. You have a good knowledge of issues ( I must give you that   ) but you now behave like an ITK ie I Too Know, forgetting that others are equally as knowledgeable and even more so than you. In other words, there's a heavy air of arrogance in your posts as if your fellow discussants know nothing. Your arrogance is like that of Paul who proclaimed himself the 'Chief of Apostles' and made sure nobody forgot it  .
 
 Pilgrim.1, you also have the habit of being rude to people in the first instance. [/b]I'm referring to you being rude to someone without him/ her being rude to you first. Look at this :

[b]When making a statement, you'd have to validate it after carefully considering what others are saying - otherwise it makes you more of a piffling arrant noise-maker than a reasonable discussant.


  You really did not need to throw the yabis : piffling arrant noise-maker / reasonable discussant . Why not just stick to the topic of the argument instead of descending into [i]argumentum ad hominem [/i]which you relish accusing others of doing ? So by throwing the yabis makes you a reasonable discussant? Get a grip on yourself girl, you do have some narcissistic attitudes !  You certainly love to cherry-pick like a lot of Christians do. This is just one of your quotations dear, there are many of them.

  Here's one thing I find funny ( not in a comical sense ) about you. Your conversion story. Even though it isn't a conventional  conversion story, it still makes one wonder who the central character of the story is - you or Jesus? You had all your adulators begging you for more, and you were feeling like some 'star   . Your conversion story read like a poorly- written romance bedtime story. You did a shoddy job in the whole story. My advice here is that you stick to what you do best : thrashing out ecclesiastical issues. This should have been well-discussed in your conversion story a la arguments, counter-arguments, evidence and the whole works. A little trimming ie the romance part is nice in a story, just make sure you know how to do the trimmings well otherwise you''ll ruin the whole story ( like you certainly did).

  There's a lot of false humility about you. You've laid this patina of humility thinly though, so a little pressure on you chips it off and then the real you emerges. At this point, you should do an introspection and see whether you reflect the Christ you profess to have in your life.

  I'm waiting for your [i]healthy discussion [/i]with Lady today ( hopefully). I hope you two ladies won't descend into tearing each other's hair and eyes out   . It's a well-known fact that the Catholic church brought about the existence of the Bible, I wondered at your reluctance in accepting this truth ( you resorted to writing something totally unconnected to the issue ). It seemed to me that you just wanted to counter Lady for the sake of argument, rather than truth and facts . Tut, tut, tut,

  I know the above isn't relevant to the topic, I didn't feel the need to open a thread dedicated to you (wouldn't want your head to grow bigger than it already is).

@JaguaNana,

First, let me take the oportunity to welcome you to Nairaland. It really does not matter what you say about me, at best it may apply to your prejudices - but that is okay all the same. Do enjoy your joining the forum and don't focus so much on taking sides to slur anyone, it does not add to your spiritual health.

JaguaNana:

  You do accuse some other posters of being reactionary, while you commit the same 'crime' yourself. You have a good knowledge of issues ( I must give you that   ) but you now behave like an ITK ie I Too Know, forgetting that others are equally as knowledgeable and even more so than you. In other words, there's a heavy air of arrogance in your posts as if your fellow discussants know nothing. Your arrogance is like that of Paul who proclaimed himself the 'Chief of Apostles' and made sure nobody forgot it  .

Thank you, thank you again, and thank you evermore. I have repeatedly said that: "I don't assume an over-bearing superiority anywhere, and I'm quite happy to be corrected where I might've been missing something". Perhaps you're confusing issues for yourself to suppose that humility is akin to bootlicking where I'm to put up with just about any stupidity thrown my way. if i don't, then I'm not in your good books. Tough luck.

JaguaNana:
 
 Pilgrim.1, you also have the habit of being rude to people in the first instance. I'm referring to you being rude to someone without him/ her being rude to you first. Look at this :

When making a statement, you'd have to validate it after carefully considering what others are saying - otherwise it makes you more of a piffling arrant noise-maker than a reasonable discussant.


  You really did not need to throw the yabis : piffling arrant noise-maker / reasonable discussant . Why not just stick to the topic of the argument instead of descending into [i]argumentum ad hominem [/i]which you relish accusing others of doing ? So by throwing the yabis makes you a reasonable discussant? Get a grip on yourself girl, you do have some narcissistic attitudes !  You certainly love to cherry-pick like a lot of Christians do. This is just one of your quotations dear, there are many of them.

Thank you again. Did you care to scroll up and see the way he addressed me initially - or that was a convenient way to duck behind your PC and rush in to make another back-patting ceremony? No, I don't see you intrigued by his accusative tone in his initial reply; but this is not surprising though - I'm used to such distractions, so no worries.

JaguaNana:

Here's one thing I find funny ( not in a comical sense ) about you. Your conversion story. Even though it isn't a conventional  conversion story, it still makes one wonder who the central character of the story is - you or Jesus? You had all your adulators begging you for more, and you were feeling like some 'star   . Your conversion story read like a poorly- written romance bedtime story. You did a shoddy job in the whole story. My advice here is that you stick to what you do best : thrashing out ecclesiastical issues. This should have been well-discussed in your conversion story a la arguments, counter-arguments, evidence and the whole works. A little trimming ie the romance part is nice in a story, just make sure you know how to do the trimmings well otherwise you''ll ruin the whole story ( like you certainly did).

I just have a feeling I know who's hiding behind the screens and going about with worries about my 'conversion story'. Actually, I took a step back and didn't seek to make myself a 'star'. Many people would read what they want to - and they have. Some even sent me quotes and links of what others have said in various other threads, just in case I didn't see it - again I refused to react. That's just me. If you have a conversion story to share, you can do so without being unduely worried about mine. I don't have to be a clone of anyone else, do I?

JaguaNana:

There's a lot of false humility about you. You've laid this patina of humility thinly though, so a little pressure on you chips it off and then the real you emerges. At this point, you should do an introspection and see whether you reflect the Christ you profess to have in your life.

Thank you again.

JaguaNana:
  I'm waiting for your [i]healthy discussion [/i]with Lady today ( hopefully). I hope you two ladies won't descend into tearing each other's hair and eyes out   . It's a well-known fact that the Catholic church brought about the existence of the Bible, I wondered at your reluctance in accepting this truth ( you resorted to writing something totally unconnected to the issue ). It seemed to me that you just wanted to counter Lady for the sake of argument, rather than truth and facts . Tut, tut, tut,

I haven't sought to be what you're misrepresenting about me here; and if you read carefully, you'd have noted I repeatedly asked that ~Lady ~ calmed down and read issues carefully. I left some questions for some catholics there as well, and have indicated that I would discuss further when they proffer answers to them. That does not sound like what you're seeking to present here.

JaguaNana:

  I know the above isn't relevant to the topic, I didn't feel the need to open a thread dedicated to you (wouldn't want your head to grow bigger than it already is).

Was there really a need to devote a whole long thesis to bear out your grudges against 'pilgrim.1'? I'm honoured - and thank you all the same.

Pilgrim i beg to disagree . . . Paul did not DEMAND for gold and rainment on his missionary journey.

Afternoon all,

Please forgive my posting ad-hoc, and without reference to scripture.

Paul the Apostle was a man seperated unto the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ by God. At that point it was his reality, his life.

Furthermore, for the most part he was a missionary-preacher, essentially involved in only two things;

1. Spreading the gospel
2. Strentghening those who had recieved it

He did nothing else and was consumed by what he was called to do. Not only was he far from seeking riches for it, he was more than happy to do it without pay - "woe is me".

His point to being supported by the gospel was for those whose whole lives  - along with any personal ambition, aspiration or will - were given up for it. Even so, he was not dogmatic about it in practice. He made no demands & always appreciated assistance/offering in regard his need as "gifts".

He was a Pharisee and trained lawyer. Tent making was not his profession, it was a side job undertaken when and as he could to provide for his needs, whilst maintaining focus on his calling. In as much as he took anything from anyone, it was always for his immediate physical need or that of others.

He was not a Sunday.Sunday congrgational elder (pastor or whatever your preferred option is) like most are today. That role is not meant to be "salaried" or funded by the church as a whole. That is why the ideal is "a plurality", so the burden of eldership can be shared.

If elders do recieve anything, it is based on their need, like it is for everyone else. Only that they should perhaps be prefered, due too their labour of love to the body.

He was not one to let the gospel be slandered or the Lord to be blasphemed because of filthy lucre.

_{Please note that he was never a self-styled "GO" or "Presiding Bishop" or "Covering Apostle" of those congregations he started or ministered to. Once strengthened and elders raised up they were self running/governing local communities. But don't let me derail the thread sha!}

God bless
TV

davidylan:

Pilgrim i beg to disagree . . . Paul did not DEMAND for gold and rainment on his missionary journey.

It's quite okay to disagree. The 'demand' was facetious, but then I didn't stretch it to specifically "gold and raiment". On the whole, it cannot be gainsaid that he had asked for assistance in his missionary work, which is why I posted those verses.

TV01:

His point to being supported by the gospel was for those whose whole lives  - along with any personal ambition, aspiration or will - were given up for it. Even so, he was not dogmatic about it in practice. He made no demands & always appreciated assistance/offering in regard his need as "gifts".

I don't remember anyone arguing that Paul's receiving assistance was a 'dogmatic' issue. Yet, it is not true that 'he made no demands', for he actually did. When one asks assistance from others, there's no grounds to deny that he was actually requesting such assistance (yes, 'demand' was a strong facetiously word; but it does not negate the very fact that Paul requested and expected assistance from churches).