somehow:
NO, she did not name him, the angel named him because the child (JESUS) was said not to be a normal birth. It's funny that you are using a unique birth as an evidence of a wife naming her child in a matrimonial home when the child is not a bastard.

She was given an instruction to name him, which mind you, she could have chosen not to. The angel did not name him on the eighth day, his parents did.

The angel gave her and also Joseph the instruction to name him Jesus. You think Joseph would have accepted to name him that name if the angel did not appear to him too?

Sixfeetbelle:


She was given an instruction to name him, which mind you, she could have chosen not to. The angel did not name him on the eighth day, his parents did.

somehow:
The angel gave her and also Joseph the instruction to name him Jesus. You think Joseph would have accepted to name him that name if the angel did not appear to him too?

Finally you agree to something I'm saying. If the angel hadn't talked also to Joseph, he wouldn't have accepted with Mary to name the child Jesus. Same way I pointed out that sometimes a woman may have a spiritual directive to give the child a particular name and in such cases should be allowed to name the child, instead of all these "man of the house" nonsense.

So "spiritual directive" told the woman to name a child freedom? are they living in bondage?
So why has the "spiritual directive" not directed the man too since God is not an author of confusion? The man can as well say he got his leading from "spiritual directive". Two can play the game.

It is mostly in Africa people hide behind religion to manipulate others when they lack superior facts/figures.

Sixfeetbelle:


Finally you agree to something I'm saying. If the angel hadn't talked also to Joseph, he wouldn't have accepted with Mary to name the child Jesus. Same way I pointed out that sometimes a woman may have a spiritual directive to give the child a particular name and in such cases should be allowed to name the child, instead of all these "man of the house" nonsense.

Sixfeetbelle:


Which of between Mary and Joseph did the Angel appear to first and instruct to name the child? If only Joseph didn't get fidgety about marrying a pregnant virgin, the angel wouldn't have even spoken to him sef. Read your Bible well, especially that same book of Luke you quoted.

That he was named and circumcised on the eight day doesn't mean it was his father's choice to name him "Jesus". His mother already had the spiritual directive and in such a case, the man is expected to pack one side and let the woman name the child. Like Elkanah did.

Thank heavens your comment was for the masses (even though I still don't get why you quoted me), the tirade you spill here reeks of a stubborn arrogant fellow with a rigid way of thinking.

The first two paragraphs are just amusing, I won't debate scripture with you.

As for the last one, please specify the places that depict a "stubborn arrogant fellow with a rigid way of thinking" and please be sure to point out where I'm wrong with solid proof other than your opinion which I've observed isn't very credible a source.

Qsand:



The first two paragraphs are just amusing, I won't debate scripture with you.

As for the last one, please specify the places that depict a "stubborn arrogant fellow with a rigid way of thinking" and please be sure to point out where I'm wrong with solid proof other than your opinion which I've observed isn't very credible a source.

You should debate scripture with me cause I work with facts.

The book of Luke isn't amusing to me, even if it is to you. The angel in Luke 1 vs 31 tells her to name the child Jesus before he was even conceived. The Book of Matthew 1 Vs 19 downwards tells of an angel convincing Joseph to not divorce his pregnant virgin, but to stay with her and name the child Jesus.

A man who is set in his ways even in the face of evidence is arrogant. I don't need to point out anything to someone who works with opinion, rather than fact.

A woman is allowed to name her child if she will it, most especially if she gets a directive from God. If you're not for this argument, then I don't have anything else to say to you.

AmazonTopaz:
You are not okay

Are you an illegitimate child Why mention me

somehow:
So "spiritual directive" told the woman to name a child freedom? are they living in bondage?
So why has the "spiritual directive" not directed the man too since God is not an author of confusion? The man can as well say he got his leading from "spiritual directive". Two can play the game.

It is mostly in Africa people hide behind religion to manipulate others when they lack superior facts/figures.

You don't know what spiritual battles the woman went through to have the child, so Freedom is appropriate. Some women go on fasting, some go on deliverance ministrations, some go on prayer warfare just to birth a child. Men usually think that once they ejaculate, baby should form forgetting that women have a greater responsibility in ensuring the child is born.

It is majorly in Africa Christians jump in and out of religion whenever they want to exert their male dominance. Weren't you the one who said Bible gave men right to name a child? Now you call it spiritual manipulation cause I pointed out your error?

Sixfeetbelle:


You don't know what spiritual battles the woman went through to have the child, so Freedom is appropriate. Some women go on fasting, some go on deliverance ministrations, some go on prayer warfare just to birth a child. Men usually think that once they ejaculate, baby should form forgetting that women have a greater responsibility in ensuring the child is born.

It is majorly in Africa Christians jump in and out of religion whenever they want to exert their male dominance. Weren't you the one who said Bible gave men right to name a child? Now you call it spiritual manipulation cause I pointed out your error?

Is God an author of confusion?

As for the bolded, kindly quote where I said so.

bukatyne:
I like my Nigerian peeps sha.

If only they expend this much energy to ACTUALLY obey what the Bible says about marriage and life matters.

But no, they are religious today, natural tomorrow, cultural next tomorrow, liberal next week, traditional next month depending on what suits their mischievous stance at the moment

Lool @ the bolded- Nigerian Christians that if the tradition is against biblical view they will shift the biblical stance one side and go with tradition.


@ topic I still can't understand how this naming becomes an issue.I can't wrap my head around it.

I believe name given to a baby is more of spiritual sha. It is a very big deal for us the names are chosen prayerfully and should have a good meaning so first and 2nd names are never the names that was given to them by third parties.


Every other name (given by grandparents ) is listed on the naming day, we don't have a problem with that as long as it has a good meaning, and those names don't even enter the birth certificate. The grandparents sometimes decide to call the children by the name they gave them, no ish with that.

Both of them should agree naa, haba

Sixfeetbelle:




Suddenly there are two sides to all events because I pointed out that even the Bible itself did not give exclusive naming rights to only the father?

I am not surprised.

...when u have your kids, give the naming rights to your wife. That's your choice.

somehow:


Is God an author of confusion?

As for the bolded, kindly quote where I said so.

What makes think the couple consulted God on this matter sef?

I made a play of words using what you wrote nah. Didn't you notice?

Sixfeetbelle:


You should debate scripture with me cause I work with facts.

The book of Luke isn't amusing to me, even if it is to you. The angel in Luke 1 vs 31 tells her to name the child Jesus before he was even conceived. The Book of Matthew 1 Vs 19 downwards tells of an angel convincing Joseph to not divorce his pregnant virgin, but to stay with her and name the child Jesus.

A man who is set in his ways even in the face of evidence is arrogant. I don't need to point out anything to someone who works with opinion, rather than fact.

A woman is allowed to name her child if she will it, most especially if she gets a directive from God. If you're not for this argument, then I don't have anything else to say to you.

You've still not pointed out the parts of my comment that indicates "stubborn arrogant fellow with a rigid way of thinking". After you reply that, then the "conversation" can continue.

somehow:


Is God an author of confusion?

As for the bolded, kindly quote where I said so.

LOL, ignore that girl. Somebody that blatantly said Mary named Jesus is who you're arguing with. After I pointed out it was wrong, only God knows how much time she spent ransacking the Scriptures and Google to find out for herself.

If I had not said so, she wouldn't have known it was in luke and Matthew or anything about eight day

kalu61:
Africa culture place such responsility on the man first

But must it so?honestly women are neglected in so many ways in Africa.