Niyinficient:
Hello guys, it's the beginning of the year and as expected different churches begin the year with various Fasting and prayer timetable. My church prayer and fasting is currently on and the Lord has been so good.

A discussion abt fasting ensued btw a friend and I and he was trying to explain dat 6 to 6 fasting is btween the hrs of 6am to 6pm, while I disagree. I caught him eating around 1am wen we came back from night class way back in school and since, he eats at midnight during fasting period.

I have tried to make realise there is nothing like eating at dawn in christian fasting but he won't listen, pls guys can anyone shed more light?

Is 6 to 6 fasting just from 6am to 6pm?

Biblically speaking, a new daytime begins from 6am, that is from dawn. It is western time that begins a new day from 12 midnight.

12 midnight to 6am is still night time, biblically speaking. So 6 to 6 fasting is exactly that, 6 to 6. If you don't want to mix hebrew and western time together.

hockeyoilers:



Brother, I repeat, christians claim Jesus pbuh is God. So I ask if this true , why did Jesus order the rap.ing of women in Zecharia 14 : 2 ??

I really don't understand how your interprete the scriptures:

Please read the passage again:

Zechariah 14v1 -Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.

2  For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

This is what is called "The curse of the law". People reap what they sow. When you sow wickedness, you read wickedness. When you sow whoredom you reap the bitter after-pill of whoredom.

Judah and Jerusalem departed from God. Sacrificing their children to idols; and commiting whoredom among themselves and even with the heathens.

Jeremiah 3v2 -Lift up thine eyes unto the high places, and see where thou hast not been lien with. In the ways hast thou sat for them, as the Arabian in the wilderness; and thou hast polluted the land with thy whoredoms and with thy wickedness.

And God, after repeated unheeded warnings and rebukes, delivered them into the hands of their enemies; the Assyrians and the Babylonians. And God caused them to reap what they sowed.

So the judgment you see there in Zechariah 14v1, is the curse of the law; the people of Israel and Judah reaping what they sowed, the bitter harvest of their own wickedness and whoredom.

But even in the midst of all that judgment, if you read further, God also promised to have mercy on them, and judge the nations of Assyria and Babylon for crossing the line and indulging their hatred on God's people.

Zechariah 14v3 - Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

Zechariah 1v14 -...Thus saith the Lord of hosts; I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy.

15 And I am very sore displeased with the heathen that are at ease: for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction.

So God was not ordering anything amiss there. It was simply Jerusalem, reaping the harvest of the wickedness and the whoredom they have sown. It is the curse of the law.

Shalom.

hockeyoilers:
1- Jesus said " But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me." (Luke 19:27)

This is a parable of Jesus, vaguely showing what will happen to the antagonists of the kingdom of God (the beast, the false prophet and their armies) when Jesus returns to establish His kingdom on earth.

A more precise detail is in Revelation 19;

Rev 19v19 -And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

21  And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

When Christ returns to establish His kingdom on earth; the beast, the antichrist and their armies, and the sons of perdition that gather to prevent the Kingdom of God and to make war with Christ, will be destroyed by the sword of Christ's mouth (His Word).

But that will be for Christ to do, not christians. Christians are never told to draw sword against anyone as in Islam. We are told to preach the gospel and the Word of God to people now. The Word of God is the sword of the Spirit to christians.

And what all that means literally is; those who reject the Word of God now in rebuke, will face it later in retribution.

hockeyoilers:
2- He said "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but A SWORD " (Matthew 10:34)

Next time quote the verses in full. Don't just wrest or tear a verse from its preceeding and proceeding verses and give it an out-of-context interpretation.

Matthew 10v34 -Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

35  For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

See that? The "sword" Jesus said He brought is not the sword of violence, but the sword of variance (asunder and separation).

Because those who accepted Jesus as the Christ were rejected and will be rejected, even by family and friends and society. And that was the reality for many believers, especially for the early believers.

John 9v22 -These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.

Following Christ will cost you relationships, friendships and associations. And that is the sword of variance (asunder and separation) that following Christ brought, not the sword of violence.

Quote verses in full for a balnaced view, don't tear them out of context. That looks sinister.

hockeyoilers:
3- Jesus told his disciples to sell their outer garments and buy swords.

" He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." (Luke 22:36)

Again, quoting a verse without showing the preceeding verses to get the balanced view.

Jesus told His disciples to buy a sword to fulfil the prophecy of Isaiah that says "He was numbered with the trangressors" (Isaiah 53v12).

Luke22v36 -Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

37  For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, "And he was reckoned among the transgressors": for the things concerning me have an end.

Jesus needed to fulfill all the messianic prophecies concerning Himself to fully show that He is indeed the prophesied Messiah. And this was one of such prophecies.

He told them to get the sword to fulfil the prophecy of Isaiah. The sword was not even meant to be drawn or used. Infact, when Peter drew the sword, Jesus rebuked him and healed the person Peter hurt with the sword.

Luke 22v49 -When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Lord, shall we smite with the sword?

50 And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear.

51  And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.

See that?

I don't know if you're being naively ignorant or being deliberately sinister; but Jesus never preached, or encouraged christians to draw the sword or practise violence against anyone. Believers are told to bless those who curse them and pray for their persecutors.

You would really need to twist the words of Christ or deliberately misinterprete them to imply Jesus preached violence or taught jihad like Islam and Mohammed.

Shalom

AntiIPOB:
Before creation ,there was nothing like heaven earth,mankind,forest or animalkind etc.
God in his powers created heaven and the earth in six days and rest on the seventh day.GENESIS 1 and 2.
In GENESIS 3,the man and his wife,Adam and Eve disobeyed God and were sent out of the garden by God.
In GENESIS 4,Adam and Eve had two sons,Cain and Abel,but cain killed Abel.
This is my question,by the time cain killed Abel,there were only four people in the world,and in GENESIS 4:17,and Cain made love to his wife,that means,cain got a wife.
WHERE DID CAIN GOT A WIFE FROM?

Adam and Eve had daughters according to the scripture, but their birth and names were not documented like those of the sons.

Gen 5v4 -And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:

Since there were only siblings in the earth at that time, Cain most definitely married one of his sisters (a daughter of Adam and Eve).

See this;

Gen 4v16 -And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

17  And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch:

Look closely, the bible did not say Cain found his wife in Nod; it said Cain knew his wife there.

Meaning he already had a wife before he left for Nod (his sister, one of the daughters of Adam and Eve).

When did they marry? Scripture did not say. But the scripture did say this:

Gen 4v1 -And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.

2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

3  And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.

Meaning, between the time Cain and Abel were born in verses 1 and 2, to the time they brought their offerings to God in verse 3; there was a long time, "a process of time". Enough time for Adam and Eve to have had undocumented births of daughters.

So Cain could have married one of his sisters during that time, before he even killed Abel. Or that after he was banished, he married one of his sisters and they left for Nod together, to start a family.

Shalom

There's no day of the week that the devil or any demon created, for us to claim that sunday is the day of the sun god? Or that sunday worship is the worship of the sun god?

Psalm 118v24 - This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.

As long as that day was made by God, we can worship Him on it, and it is acceptable to Him.

Infact, the early church went to the temple daily and worshipped everyday;

Acts 2v46 - And they, continuing DAILY with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,

God created all the days of the week, so everyday is the day that the Lord has made; and we can choose to worship Him on any of those days. And it will be acceptable to Him.

Jesus Christ died on a passover day, but we can choose to partake of the Lord's supper and remember His death on any day we choose, and it will be acceptable unto Him.

1Cor 11v25 -After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, AS OFT AS YE DRINK IT, in remembrance of me.

We can choose to remember the Lord's death and partake of His body as often as we like, anytime we like, whether it falls on passover or on an evening or not.

Point being, under the new covenant, no day or time of the day is more important to God than the other, for us to worship Him or spend time in His presence acceptably.

Colossians 2v16 - Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Whether we worship God on sunday morning or saturday afternoon or tuesday evening; everyday is the day the Lord has made.

Under the new covenant, the emphasis on worship is no more on where we worship (whether temple or under a tree) or on which day we worship (whether weekday or sabbath); but rather on how we worship (whether in Spirit and in truth).

John 4v23 -But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

To God now, it is about how we worship, than about where we worship or what day of the week we worship. The revelation of the sabbath to the new creation is symbolic. It is simply teaching us about making time to spend in God's presence, both as an individual and as a church.

If I wake up at 1am to pray, it is not because God answers prayer or speaks better then than at 3pm, it is simply because that's when I have the time and quietness I need to pray and meditate.

Same thing for sunday worship or saturday. No day is owned by any demon. As long as our gathering is in His name, our worship is acceptable unto Jesus and He is in our midst -whether saturday evening or sunday afternoon.

Matthew 18v20 -For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. -irrespective of time or day or place.

Shalom!

Slikbae:
its self explanatory... Some people think that because they've given their lives to Christ, demons cannot possess them because of the presence of the Holy spirit.

My pastor in MFM (a very highly anointed man of God) said this, that one morning after prayers, while anointing himself with olive oil, he saw a demon walk out of him. He bacame surprised because he never he could house demons since he was a prayer warrior filled with the holy spirit.

Stop establishing doctrine with your opinion or giving people's experiences interpretations that cannot be found in or substantiated with the scriptures.

There is no where it is stated or even suggested in scripture that the Holy Spirit and an evil spirit can co-habit the same body at the same time.

This is what Jesus said about demon possession;

Matthew 12v43 -When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.

v44 Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, HE FINDETH IT EMPTY, swept, and garnished.

v45 Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, AND THEY ENTER IN and dwell there:

...HE FINDETH IT EMPTY ...AND THEY ENTER IN!

Evil spirits can only enter a tabernacle they find empty. They can't see the Holy Spirit in that temple and still enter, even if the believer is carnal.

They may shoot fiery darts at our soul and mind and body, which may or may not hit us depending on if we have our armour in place and we know how to use our shield of faith and sword of the Spirit. But they can only possess an empty temple, void of the Spirit of God.

A carnal or ignorant believer can be pressed, oppressed, surpressed, depressed and repressed by the enemy; but he can never be possessed.

If an individual ever needed to have an evil spirit cast out of him, then he is not a christian, and the Holy Spirit was not in him before that.

The Holy Spirit cannot share His temple (our bodies) with an evil spirit. A carnal or even a spiritually afflicted christian is not a possessed christian.

2Cor 6v15 - And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

v16  And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God;

1Cor 10v21 -Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.

I'm sorry, but if the story you told up there is true, that a demon walked out of your "pastor", then your "anointed pastor" is not born again much less Spirit-filled. He needs to become born again.

Personal opinion doesn't count, it is what can be susbtantiated with scriptures that matter.

Shalom

OLAADEGBU:
What year was Jesus born? When was Jesus born? If Jesus was born 4-6 BC, why doesn't it match with the calendar?

Jesus began His ministry in a jubilee year according to the prophecy He fulfilled at the beginning of His ministry.

Luke 4v17 -And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

v18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

v19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

v21  And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

The jubilee year is the acceptable year of the Lord, when every man is returned to his inheritance.

The beginning of Jesus' ministry was a jubilee year. And AD27 is the only jubilee year around the time of Christ's birth. The prior and next jubilee year was 23BC and AD76.

So if Jesus was 30years at the beginning of His ministry in AD27; then it means He was born in 4BC.

Then secondly, according to the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel.

Daniel 9v25 - Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

According to the prophecy, the time between when the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem would be given to the time of the Messiah the Prince would be 69weeks (or 483years).

And from the time the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem was given by King Artaxerxes in 457BC, counting down 69weeks (or 483years) to the Messiah the anointed (when Jesus was anointed) is exactly AD27.

So that tallies again. That Jesus began His ministry in AD27. Meaning He was born 4BC.

I think the reason it doesn't tally with the calender is the fault of Gregory. They obviously didn't study the scriptures carefully about the ministry of Christ enough to know it began on a jubilee year; and to then use the jewish calender to know which year falls into the jubilee year around the time of Christ.

I bet they didn't also study the prophecy about the 70weeks of Daniel to see the 69weeks prophecy of the beginning of the ministry of the Messiah. Or maybe they just didn't know exactly when the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem was given.

They might have thought it was the first decree given by King Cyrus (Ezra 1v1-4) which was halted by King Artaxerxes (Ezra 4v23-24) before it was now given again by King Dairus and Artaxerxes after prayers by God's people (Ezra 6v14-15).

If they had known when Jesus began His ministry -a jubilee year, 483years after the command to rebuild Jerusalem; they would only need to trace that year 30years back according to the scriptures to know when Jesus was born. And that would fall on 4BC.

Jesus was born 4BC, began His ministry 27AD at the age of 30; and died and rose 30AD (which is the middle of the 70th week when the Messiah should be cut off)

The 70weeks (or 490years) probation for the jews to return to God was over in AD34, after which God turned to the gentiles from that time.

Before then the gospel was first preached exclusively to the jews for the first three and a half years post-resurrection of Christ from AD31 to AD34.

Romans 1v16 -For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; TO THE JEWS FIRST, and also to the Greek.

That's partly why the first shall be the last; the first to hear the gospel will be the last to receive it. The jews will still receive the gospel. God is not done with them.

Shalom

vooks:


The details are way too much for any symbol.

There are alternating views on to its meaning.

Some contend that the vision was fulfilled in Herod's temple. But this was so tiny and it lacked several details given to Ezekiel(check the image)

Others reckon the temple is yet future. These are the so called Dispensationalists. But I can't find any purpose in bloody animal sacrifices post-Calvary, especially after reading Hebrews whose main argument is the superiority of NT over OT.

My take is that the temple was a conditional promise which which Israel never earned out of sin and which stands overtaken by the Cross. As such, the temple will never be built

When you cherry pick some aspects of the temple like Catholics are doing simply to prop your extrabiblical heresies, you end up in confusion

You're absolutely correct.

I believe the temple and the ordinances shown Ezekiel in those chapters were a conditional prophecy/proposal from God to the jews, for a post-exile and pre-new covenant sub-dispensation under the law.

Which was to span the about 490 years from the return from exile to the coming of Christ.

And the fulfilment of that prophecy was conditioned on if they repented, put away all their idols and return to God with all their heart and soul. Something they didn't do.

Ezekiel 43v9  -Now let them put away their whoredom, and the carcases of their kings, far from me, and I will dwell in the midst of them for ever.

10 Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern.

11  And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, shew them the form of the house, and the fashion thereof, and the goings out thereof, and the comings in thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the laws thereof: and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.

But they didn't turn to God with all their heart and didn't even build the second temple according to the measurement and ordinances given. And many other factors.

So the prophecy/proposal didn't come to pass and it will not come to pass again, since we are already under the new covenant now. And all the ordinances of worship that would have existed in that sub-dispensation has now been abolished by Christ's death and resurrection.

But indeed, nothing was symbolic in that vision. They were all prophecies of an intended but conditional literal temple and ordinances of worship for a post-exile and pre-new covenant era. Which didn't come to pass because of sin.

Shalom

vooks:


Brother Ayoku777,
Have you noted the circularity or dmand's reasoning?

In order for Mary to be the East Gate, it must be established as a fact that she never had other children. But the 'evidence' of Mary never having other children is Ezekiel's East gate which was to be shut after the Lord went through it!

I've read that vision of Ezekiel, and you're right, it is a literal temple. The gates don't symbolize Mary or Judah or any tribe. It is a vision of an intended literal and physical temple.

Shalom

dmandy:


Okay shalom too,

yet another theory. Its no longer a physical gate but twelve tribes of Isreal. Continue! And Judah was shut to be shut forever... not reproducing.

You call it theory, when there is convincing scripture to show that gates represent tribes in scripture.

Hebrews 7v14 -For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

Mary does not represent a gate in any scriptural universe, only in the universe of your assumptions.

Apart from Jesus Christ Himself who said He is the gate, the tribes of Israel are the only other things representing gates in scripture.

Shalom

dmandy:


Sir,

Stay back and enjoy more. God decided that one gate must always be shut. There is nothing you or anyone can do about it with your conspiracy theories.

And the lie is that Jesus passed through Mary down to earth?

How did you come about the interpretation that Mary is the gate? In the bible, the gates symbolize the twelve tribes, of which Judah, the tribe of the king, would be the Chief gate.

Rev 21v12 -And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:

It is the scripture that interpretes scripture. You don't use assumption to interprete scripture. I've given you a scripture that imply gates represent the tribes of Israel of which Judah is the chief.

What scripture did you use to prove that the gate represents Mary.

Please be lucid. I'm tired of assumption upon assumption.

Shalom

dmandy:


Shalom.

Deuteronomy 29:3/4 But until [heos] today Yahweh has not given you a heart to understand, eye to see, or ears to hear (NJB). Did Yahwey give them heart to understand after that day?


2 Samuel 6:23 And until [heos] the day of her death, Michal, daughter of Saul, had no children (NJB). This passage does not mean that Saul's daughter had children after her death.
Proberbly, they had children after she died.

John 9:18 Now the Jews did not believe that he had been blind and gained his sight until [heos] they summonsed the parents of the one who had gained his sight. Did they believe after calling the man's parent?

1 Timothy 4:13 Until [heos] I arrive, attend to the reading, exhortation, and teaching.
Was Paul expecting Timothy to stop reading after he arrived.

The main issue here is that the word 'until' 'heos' does not automatically translate that the opposite event took place after the termination of the until.

Since every opinion is debatable to you. Let me see the scriptures that you use to imply that Mary was a perpetual virgin.

Let me have those scriptures, and the intepretations that tended to that assumption.

Shalom

dmandy:


Exactly the reason why Jesus was called the first born. And he is the first born.

It is not obvious interpretation sir. It is the interpretation you want it to be. Now, when you forget that the passage was not originally written in English language.

You didn't see your father UNTIL you were twelve? This does not automatically mean that you did see him after you turned twelve. It's debatable.

The interpretation is obvious and clear. It is only vague to someone who wishes it could mean something else.

And this has nothing to do with english or greek or aramaic interpretation.

The word translated "until" in that verse is the greek word "heos" which is a conjunction -a word that denotes demarcation, where something stops or where something starts.

Let me give you another passage of where "heos" was used.

Matthew 2v14 -When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:

15  And was there UNTIL (heos) the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

You see the word again. Here it said Joseph, Mary and baby Jesus where in Egypt UNTIL the death of Herod. Which means after Herod died they left Egypt.

And that was exactly what happened. Check this out;

Matthew 2v19 -But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,

20 Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life

So, the statement that Joseph, Mary and baby Jesus where in Egypt UNTIL the death of Herod means after Herod died they left Egypt.

And that is the context also in which the earlier statement should be interpreted.

That Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary UNTIL Jesus was born means after Jesus was born they had sexual relations.

I honestly don't believe we are going to this lenght to prove a simple scriptural statement that has a very direct obvious usage in the Word.

Shalom

dmandy:
Shalom,

Dear Sir,

Jesus is called the first born according to Colossians 1:15.

Col 1v15 -Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

So according to you, the firstborn of every creature and the firstborn of Mary mean or imply the same thing?

Firstborn of every creature means Jesus is the first thing that came out of the Father, that is, the Word; which now created every other thing.

How is that the same thing with Jesus being the firstborn son of Mary. You just pick a verse, and run amock with any interpretation that suits your end.

This is a case of apples and oranges.

dmandy:
I never saw my science teacher again until he died? Did that automatically translate to me seeing him after he died?

Everyone knows its no longer possibe to see someone who is now dead; so the "until" there lacks the context of its usage in the case of something still possible.

Like in this sentences;

I didn't see my father UNTIL I was twelve?

It means I saw my father for the first time at the age of twelve.

Or this;

I couldn't drive UNTIL I was 28.

It means I started driving at the age of 28.

Then this;

Matthew 1v25 -But he did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born. And Joseph named him Jesus.

That is, Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary UNTIL Jesus was born.

The only interpretation that would not require us twisting scripture, is that the UNTIL explains when the sexual relation started. That is; after the birth of Jesus.

Stop comparing apples with oranges. Give verses their obvious interpretations.

Shalom.

dmandy:


Just go ahead and prove to me that the woman had other children. It's that simple.

According to the scriptures Mary was not a perpetual virgin.

Look at this scripture;

Matthew 1v24 -Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

25  And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

The verse said Joseph did not have sex with Mary until she gave birth to Jesus. What does that imply or mean? It means Joseph and Mary had sex after the birth of Jesus.

These are other translations of the same verse:

New International Version

Matthew 1v25 -But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

New Living Translation

Matthew 1v25 -But he did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born. And Joseph named him Jesus.

New American Standard Bible

Matthew 1v25 -but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.

That Joseph did not have sex with Mary until Jesus was born can only mean that Mary and Joseph had sexual relations after the birth of Christ.

Secondly, Jesus was called the firstborn of Mary in that same verse. Jesus would not be called the firstborn of Mary, if He was the only child of Mary.

Matthew 1v25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

If Jesus was the only son of Mary, He would not be called her firstborn. Would He?

Clearly from these verses, Mary had other sons, and they were not virgin births like Jesus. Because Joseph and Mary had sexual relations after Jesus was born.

Shalom

HCpaul:
THE CREATION THEORY

Creation comes from Hebrew word "Bara" - to create, which means to bring into being.
See Heb 11:3. All other places, MADE and MAKE are used.
Genesis 1:1 the creation account was brought into existence.

However, scholars proved that the creation account is divided into two major part:-

- Single creation account
- Double creation account

The double creation theory is quite voluminous, while we will only be accentuating on the single creation account.

The subject matter will be anchored by the creation day theory.



THE CREATION DAY THEORY

Claim: The world was not created in 7 days.

Proof: The day is the 24 hours period between two successive risings of the sun.
The word day is used in scripture in three to four ways:-

- The part of the solar day of twenty four hours which is light (the earth is moving round the sun).
- A period of twenty four hours: Matt 17:1, Gen 1:15.
- A time set apart for some distinctive purpose as day of atonement (Lev 23:27) and a longer period of time (II Pet. 3:8-10).

Some bible scholars have coined a term "Creative Week" timing of God instead of a 24 hours creative day.
These scholars could not understand how it was possible for God to create all these things and the developments that took place within six days.
The creative day is ap period of time equivalent to geologic era. The days referred to in Genesis were not interval days but figurative.

Day is a long period of time e.g, the day of the Lord Zach 12:14, Psalm 90:4, II Pet. 3:8-10 One day before the Lord is like a thousand years. It was supported that the heavens and the earth have already been created long time ago. Thd Bible says that just because of satan's rebellion, God disorganised date of heaven and earth. The one in Gen. 1:1 is believed as re-creation.

The day of Gen. 1:1 cannot be 24 hours but a longer period because there was no sun until the fourth day. It was believed that the sun is a sign just to calculate the day since the day of its creation but once there is no sun for 3 days , how do they then calculate the 24 hours as a day? How was the creation in the first 3 days possible, since there wasn't sun until the fourth day?



I want Bible scholars and theologians on Nairaland to answer the question.
Not for christian please, because it is an extra biblical fact.


Merry Christmas.

How did you arrive at that assumption at the bold?

God does not need the sun to know when the earth has made one complete rotation on its axis. Which is what defines one day.

A complete rotation on the earth's axis is what makes one day, whether there was sun or no sun.

So the fact that there was no sun until day three doesn't mean the day was still not the same lenght of 24hours.

See this;

Genesis 1v3 -And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

v4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

v5  And God called the light DAY, and the darkness he called NIGHT. And the EVENING AND MORNING were the first day.

Day and night, morning and evening were all created on day one; they pre-existed the sun. Meaning scripturally, the rotation of the earth on its axis is what makes one day (morning and evening) -not the sun.

And the earth's rotation on its axis is still 24hours. Sun or no sun does not make the rotation longer or shorter than 24hours.

If we know how great God is, and how powerful His word is, we will not be arguing about whether it is true He made the world in just seven days.

Infact He could have made the earth and everything in it in one single day. He just made them in seven to set a precedence of time and order, work and rest for man.

Let's stick to the word. God created the world in seven literal days. And it should not be a matter of debate for believers who know how powerful their God is, and who hold the scriptures in authority as the word of God.

One will need to come up with extra-scriptural assumptions to claim that God didn't create the earth in one literal week (seven literal days).

Shalom

vooks:
Let's assume angels pray FOR us as do the departed saints.

Departed saints did not pray for men under the old covenant, and they don't pray for us now under the new. There is not a single scripture upon which to base the assumption that they did then or do now.

vooks:
Do these praying FOR us automatically equal to us praying TO them?

Absolutely not! It doesn't. Someone praying for you doesn't automatically equal you praying to them.

vooks:
Going back to your position that in OT angels were mediators. Did OT saints pray TO angels?

There is no scriptural account (that I know of) of men praying to angels, even under the Old covenant.

Men conversed with angels in the bible, but they didn't pray to them. Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Gideon, Daniel, Zechariah, Mary, Peter, John etc; all talked to and conversed with angels, but they didn't pray to them.

Conversing with someone is not the same as praying to someone. People only prayed to God.

vooks:
Practically, supposing Ayoku is praying against depravity such as homosexuality and voks is engaging in the same. Is Ayoku praying TO voks or vice versa?

Two people praying for the same thing does not in anyway imply they're praying to eachother. They are both praying to God, just for the same thing.

vooks:
This is very important because when Catholicism is pointed to how detestable necromancy is, they respond by claiming that talking to the dead and praying TO saints in heaven are different.

Praying to departed saints or even asking departed saints to pray for you; is an extra-scriptural doctrine.

Its not a practise found in the bible or a doctrine admonished by the apostles. Only Jesus Christ our High priest prays for us from heaven. And believers on earth are only told to ask for the prayers of fellow believers on earth.

There is nowhere in scripture departed saints where mentioned as praying for saints on earth. And there is no account of where we are told to solicit for the prayers of heavenly saints.

Anything else is going above what is written. Necromancy and praying to saints in heaven are both wrong.

Shalom

dmandy:


It was angels that mediated between God and Moses (Man). Could this mean that angels are mediators between man and God?

Yes they were, under the old covenant. Angels beheld the face of God and interceeded for men under the law.

Read my posts from the first page of this thread. I explained it with scriptures.

Ubenedictus:
So been a mediator has little to do with appearing bodily in heaven. A mediator simply stands b4 God on behalf of others, it has nothing to do with 'appearing bodily in heaven'.

Moses was not a mediator between God and man, get your facts right. He was a mediator between the angel of God and the people of God (the jews).

It was angels that mediated between God and Moses. The law was ordained (commissioned and commuted) by angels to Moses.

Gal 3v19 -Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

To mediate between God and man, you need to appear before the presence of God in heaven on behalf of men. That is the scriptural context of a mediator.

Hebrews 9v24 -For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

That is a mediator between God and man.

Shalom!

Ubenedictus:
put simply u think d angel of d kids have stopped beholding the face of God, becos u think d new covenant means only Jesus appears b4 d face of GOD. Is dat a good sumary?

Angels can stand before God to worship or take instructions as errand spirits. But no longer to mediate as intercessors or advocates on behalf of men.

If you have scriptures that reveal they still do post-resurrection of Christ, feel free to share.

Your opinion does not count, we establish doctrine with scripture, and the teachings of the apostles.

Shalom.

Ubenedictus:
YOU are now spilting hairs, before whose presence do u appear when u interceed? d devil?

Ubenedictus:
U have managed to confuse the issue. Jesus is d sole mediator of d new convenant, does that anul intercesion?

Don't play dumb or try to get technical with me. God is omnipresent, so if you want to play the technicality card, technically we are all in God's presence everytime. Not only when we are praying, even when we are sinning. Because God is everywhere.

Anyone who is not trying to be sinister or play dumb, knows that what I mean is appearing bodily before the presence of God in heaven on behalf of men; which is the literal scriptural context of being a mediator.

And no human being, angel or heavenly saint does that under the new covenant, except Jesus Christ.

There is no scriptural account post-resurrection of Christ that shows angels interceeding for men, as they did under the law. Neither is there any epistle that admonishes believers to solicit for the prayers of saints in heaven.

The epistles only exhorted believers on earth to interceed for fellow believers on earth. And even doing that intercession does not make us mediators, because we don't appear before God's presence in heaven to do that; as our High Priest, Jesus Christ does.

Angels don't interceed for us anymore, heavenly saints don't interceed for us, and we are never admonished to solicit for their intercession. Earthly human can interceed for another earthly human, but not in the capacity as a mediator; to appear before the presence of God in heaven in any role on behalf of men.

Only Jesus does that.

Let's not go above what is written. The teachings of the apostles are the foundations of the tenets of Christianity. Let's build only on that. And not come up with what the epistles don't teach.

Shalom!

Syncan:



So this passage of the scripture : Matthew 18v10 -Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. , has it expired? Are you saying that Jesus statement there is no longer true, that the children's angels no longer behold the face of God?

Didn't you see the explanation I gave you about that same question? I answered you.

In capacity as mediators, which is to appear before the presence of God in heaven in whatever role on behalf of men; angels don't do that anymore.

Because that would null the scripture that says Jesus is now the ONE MEDIATOR between God and man.

Ubenedictus:
AYOKU77 it seem u have defined 'intercession' so narrowly so as to prove that Jesus is sole mediator. somehow u forgot that it will be biblically unsound to narrow down the definition since xtains are intercessors too.

I never denied a human being can pray for another human. If you have read the posts you will see all the scriptures I used to show that saints on earth can pray for eachother

Ephesians 6v18 - Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;

2Cor 1v11 - Ye also helping together by prayer for us, that for the gift bestowed upon us by the means of many persons thanks may be given by many on our behalf.

Phillipians 1v19 -For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,

But do we appear before the presence of God in heaven to do the intercession? Because that is what the mediator of the new covenant does.

The mediator of the covenant appears before God in heaven to behold the face of God on behalf of men.

The way angels did under the old covenant, according to Jesus;

Matthew 18v10 -Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

And the way Jesus now does under the new covenant.

Hebrews 9v24 -For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God FOR US:

No human being, angel or heavenly saint appears before the presence of God in heaven to pray, behold the face of God or mediate in whatever capacity for any man under the new covenant -EXCEPT JESUS CHRIST.

But the epistles did admonish saints on earth to interceed for one another, not saints in heaven. Even so, that doesn't make us mediators of the covenant. And we don't appear in God's presence for anyone.

Shalom.

vooks:


Study Zechariah closely and you will read the intercession comes from Jesus and it reminds you of he high priestly prayer of John 17.

Repeat
Angels have never prayed to God for men

Back to your tenous example
You are yet to demonstrate how Angels stand BETWEEN God and the children.

Jesus simply said that Gid treasures kids and has assigned Angels to each. When you get time, go through Revelation and you find Angels LITERALLY worshipping before God. It is a stretch of imagination to countenance Angels pleading with God on behalf of kids.

Now, go back practically demonstrate how the Law was mediated by Angels other Han what I said

Nawa o! So Jesus is the angel of the Lord that said "O Lord of hosts, How long..."?

And you think the angels of the kids beholding the face of God doesn't mean they are beholding it on behalf of the children?

How exactly do you interprete scripture?

I keep showing you scriptures of where looking unto God means for help and deliverance, and you say it doesn't mean the angels were beseeching God.

To mediate means to appear before the presence of God on behalf of a person or a place.

And that is what the angels do when they behold the face of the Father on behalf of the kids.

And that is what the angel that interceeded for Jerusalem and Judah in Zechariah did.

I don't know how you came up with the fact that Jesus was the angel praying there.

I can endure ignorance, but not arrogance. Twisting God's word over what is so obvious.

In the case of the angel that jesus sent to John, the angel was sent on an errand as a ministering spirit. That doesn't mean the angel appears before God's presence on behalf of John or any person, which is what mediation means.

They don't do that anymore, only Jesus does now.

That angels worship before God doesn't mean they appear before Him on behalf of any person or any place anymore. They are not worthy of that role anymore under the new covenant.

Disagree all you want, you can't give this verses another meaning other than the obvious.

To behold the face of the Father is to behold it for help and deliverance. And the angel in Zechariah prayed to God for mercy over Jerusalem and Judah. And please, please, that angel is not Jesus.

The scriptures cannot be broken. Let the word of God be true. Remove sentiments from its interpretation.

Shalom!

vooks:


My broda,
They say if you dig yourself into a hole the best way out is to stop digging.

You are busy mixing issues instead of admitting your error

INTERCESSION is simply praying for somebody else. Look up any agreed dictionary.

You claimed in the OT angels interceded for he living and attempted to support this but you failed.

How did Angels mediate the OT?
Just about every covenant in the OT is attended to by Angels whether it is Moses and the burning bush, Abraham and so forth. You see Angels all over in OT. But you never see Angels praying for men. They were agents through whom God gave His Law. A perfect example of this agency is Revelation. God sends His angel to John. The angel is not a mediator but a mere agent.

What you are doing is redefining intercession to cover whatever Angels did in the OT. To see your error, get any of the OT books and give me an example of Angels interceding

To behold the face of God or look up to Him is always for help.

Psalm 121v1 - I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help.

Psalm 17v15 -As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness: [and] I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.

Psalm 34v4 -I sought the Lord, and he heard me, and delivered me from all my fears. 5  They looked unto him, and were lightened: and their faces were not ashamed

Isaiah 45v22 - Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

We look up to God for help, for salvation (or deliverance), for satisfaction (or wholeness).

And I didn't need to add "on their behalf" for you to get that the little ones were the reason the angels were beholding the face of God. Jesus made that clear

The angels of the little ones were beholding the face of God for those little ones. And it is for help.

Angels interceeded for Jerusalem under the old covenant and beseeched God for Him to have mercy.

Zechariah 1v12 -Then the angel of the Lord answered and said, O Lord of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?

This angel was not questioning God, he was intreating God, to end His indignation against Judah and have mercy on Jerusalem.

And God answered the angel.

Zechariah 1v13 - And the Lord answered the angel that talked with me with good words and comfortable words.

v16  Therefore thus saith the Lord; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: my house shall be built in it, saith the Lord of hosts, and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem.

To interceed is to stand in the gap between God and a person or a place, for help for that person or place. And that is what these angels did for Jerusalem and for these little ones Jesus talked about.

The context in which Jesus said the angels behold the face of God is for those little ones, and its for help from God.

Shalom.

Syncan:
Meanwhile oga ayoku, since it seems voks have been enlightened by you, and he now agrees that it was intercession, abeg when did the angels of the little children stop "beholding the face of God on their behalf in heaven", or have they been disbanded?

The intercessory role of angels under the old covenant was in their capacity as the mediators (disposers and ordainers) of that covenant.

Acts 7v53 - Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

Gal 3v19 -Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

But according to the new testament epistles, Jesus is now the only one mediator between God and man

1Tim 2v5 -For there is one God, and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus

To mediate between God and men, is to stand in the gap before God on behalf of men in whatever capacity (advocate, intercessor, righteousness).

Hebrews 9v24 -For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God FOR US:

If there is any other person, that stands before God and to behold His face on behalf of men, other than Jesus Christ, whether angels or any heavenly saint; then Jesus would not be the only mediator between God and men.

And that would make that scripture wrong.

Under this new covenant, Jesus is our only mediator between God and men. Our advocate, intercessor, righteousness before the Father.

Hebrews 8v6 -But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is THE (not A) mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Hebrews 12v24 - And to Jesus THE (not A) mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

Jesus is THE only mediator between God and men under the new covenant. The only one that appears before the presence of God on behalf of men; as advocate, intercessor and righteousness. Not angels, or any heavenly saint.

Hebrews 9v24 -For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God FOR US:

Shalom

vooks:


You added the highlighted sir.
Jesus confirms what is hitherto recorded in the apocrypha, the concept of guardian angels, but guardian angels and intercession are poles apart. Angels are and were messengers of God not some conduits for prayers under any dispensation.

To behold the face of God or look up to Him is always for help.

Psalm 121v1 - I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help.

Psalm 17v15 -As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness: [and] I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.

Psalm 34v4 -I sought the Lord, and he heard me, and delivered me from all my fears. 5  They looked unto him, and were lightened: and their faces were not ashamed

Isaiah 45v22 - Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

We look up to God for help, for salvation (or deliverance), for satisfaction (or wholeness).

And I didn't need to add "on their behalf" for you to get that the little ones were the reason the angels were beholding the face of God. Jesus made that clear

The angels of the little ones were beholding the face of God for those little ones. And it is for help.

Angels interceeded for Jerusalem under the old covenant and beseeched God for Him to have mercy.

Zechariah 1v12 -Then the angel of the Lord answered and said, O Lord of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?

This angel was not questioning God, he was intreating God, to end His indignation against Judah and have mercy on Jerusalem.

And God answered the angel.

Zechariah 1v13 - And the Lord answered the angel that talked with me with good words and comfortable words.

v16  Therefore thus saith the Lord; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: my house shall be built in it, saith the Lord of hosts, and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem.

To interceed is to stand in the gap between God and a person or a place, for help for that person or place. And that is what these angels did for Jerusalem and for these little ones Jesus talked about.

The context in which Jesus said the angels behold the face of God is for those little ones, and its for help from God.

Shalom.

vooks:

Exactly how is this intercession for men?

Read the verse again;

Matthew 18v10 -Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven THEIR ANGELS do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

According to Jesus, from these scripture; He said we should not despise these little one, as though they are without help, because they have angels beholding the face of God on their behalf in heaven.

What does it mean to behold the face of God or to lift up your eyes to Him? Is it not for help or in supplication?

He wasn't talking about the angels just starring at God to look at Him, they are beholding the face of God relative to, or on behalf of these little ones.

That's supplication or intercession.

But we have a new intercessor and mediator now though, better than angels -Jesus Christ.

Shalom

daviddext:
You don't pray to God through angels or saint. It can not be proven in the Bible that saints and angels before God's throne pray for us. Apostle Paul, being saint wrote in Romans 8:26-27 that God's Holy Spirit makes intercession for us. It is heresy to say that angels pray for us. Angels only hold the incense according to revelations 8:1-4( which is the prayer of the saints "on earth". While the triumphant saints "before the throne of God" sing Holy Holy Holy to God day and night.

Under the old covenant, angels did interceed for man.

Matthew 18v10 -Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

But that was because under the law, angels were the primary mediators of the old covenant. They were the disposers and ordainers of the law.

Acts 7v53 - Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

Galatians 3v19 -Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

But now, under the new covenant, we have a new mediator -Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Son of man.

1Tim 2v5 -For there is one God, and ONE mediator between God and men, the man CHRIST JESUS;

We no longer need the intercession of angels or even of saints in heaven on behalf of the saints on earth. We have the intercession of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. And that is as good as it gets.

Romans 8v34 -Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

And there is indeed no new testament account of angels or heavenly saints interceeding for saints on earth. Neither are we encouraged in any epistle as believers to solicit for the prayers of angels or of heavenly saints.

The intercession of Jesus for us in heaven and the prayers of fellow believers on earth is all the new covenant allows.

Infact, we are not even told to ask Jesus to pray for us; He does that on His own, whether we ask or not, as our High priest and mediator. We only ask for the prayers of fellow believers on earth.

Ephesians 6v18 - Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;

v19  And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,

2Cor 1v11 - Ye also helping together by prayer for us, that for the gift bestowed upon us by the means of many persons thanks may be given by many on our behalf.

Phillipians 1v19 -For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,

Soliciting the prayers of angels or of heavenly saints is heresis and extra-scriptural under the new covenant.

Shalom.

analice107:
The Bible may not mention gambling in black and white. But in so many Scriptures, Christians or believers are warned from easy ways of making quick money.

Ok, what I see here is someone scrambling for flaws to justify her sentiments.

What you call easy money is relative to you. When Jesus told Peter to let out his net and he would see money in the mouth of his first catch, that was easy money too by Jesus.

When Elisha multiplied oil for the widow of the prophet and told her to sell it. That was easy money too, with no financial capital needed.

Why do you call easy money in these cases "a miracle" or "God's favour" but when it gets to gambling it is "swindling"? Just because something is not conventional doesn't make it wrong.

analice107:
Why do you Gamble? what is ur motive? is it not to get rich quick? A gambler does not have time for hard work.

When you gamble your motive is to swindle the other party to collect what he has. What do we call that? Covetousness. And I know that covetousness is a sin. another name for gambling is covetousness.

Where did you get the idea that the motive for gambling is to swindle? Two or three people drop money over a game of cards or chess or something, and winner takes all. How is that swindling?

Or you bought raffle tickets for a lottery, and you ticket number was the jackpot, how is that swindling?

Or you placed a bet on a team or a player winning a game or a tournament, and your prediction was positive. How is that swindling? Who did you swindle?

You see what I said that you're scouting for flaws to justify your sentiments?

analice107:
Prov 13:11 Wealth gotten by Vanity shall be diminished, but he that gathered by labour shall increase.

1Tim 6:10. But the love of money is the root of all evil; which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith with ma y sorrows.

Bro Ayoku, I wish I can tell you what Gambling did to my once, very successful Uncle.

Anyone who has eyes for big money, can do anything to trap it.

Now, you're showing the source of your negative sentiments against gambling.

You know someone whose life was turned upside down because of gambling.

I also know families that have been destroyed because of alcohol. But that will not make me add to God's word and say taking alcohol is a sin. Because that would be a lie. God didn't say that.

We should not let sentiments affect our doctrinal interpretation. Gambling or alcohol or money is not the problem. It is addiction. If you're addicted to money, even if you're in a formal business you will do sinful things. Same thing with addiction to gambling and alcohol and anything you over-do etc.

analice107:
Its addictive. And Bro Ayoku, pls tell me that Addiction is not a sin.

That's the point. Addiction to gambling is a sin, not gambling is a sin. Addiction to alcohol is a sin, not alcohol is a sin. Addiction to food (gluttony) is a sin, not food is a sin. Addiction to sleep (slothfulness) is a sin, not sleep is a sin.

Stop confusing addiction to a habit to that habit in itself. There are things that are not sin in themselves, but addiction to it is what is bad.

Got it?

analice107:
Well, you can say to me, "Sister, you are rigmarolling, give me a scripture that calls gambling a sin". Then I will also ask you to give me a scripture where masturbation is called a sin.

Will you now tell me that, because the Bible didn't mention it and didn't say its a sin, that makes it less sinful?
Gambling is just like masturbation.
lust first, then you masturbate. while doing it, you cast an image of ur desired opposite sex in ur mind. whoever you cast in ur mind, is the person you are doing it with.
so also with gambling, you lust and covet after all you can get with all that sweatless money. Then you go all out to even steal, borrow, obtain by tricks, lie in order to fulfil that desire.

Who told you masturbation is a sin?

Masturbation is only a sin if the object of your fantasy is not your husband or wife.

If a man and his wife, engage in phone intimacy coz of distance. That is not a sin. If the object of your fantasy is your spouse, then it is not a sin.

If the object of your fantasy is not your spouse, then the sin there is fornication, not masturbation -according to Jesus. Having lustful thought about someone not your wife or hubby, means are you're commiting fornication in your heart because the person is not your spouse.

analice107:
God wants us to work. Hard work is a virtue. Gamblers don't want to work. they want it now. The spirit behind it is foul. just like the spirit behind masturbation is unclean.

Hard work is a virtue, but that doesn't mean whatever you get without working for it is a sin or couldn't have been with God's help and favour.

Winning prizes in a lottery, or winning money in a board or card game, or from betting on a team or player is not a sin.

Just don't be addicted to it, just like you shouldn't be addicted to alcohol or sleep or food.

Shalom.

analice107:
And maybe you shd know that Gambling is a sin, and Jesus will be working against Himself to get involved in that.

okay, let's presuppose that his prayers were answers by God, does he now believe in God's existence? If he does. what kind of Atheist will he be?
this people are so used to computer games and robots, now they think that God can actually be a robot in their hands. very stupid.

How is gambling a sin?

This is not a trick question. I just want to understand the scriptural perspective behind calling gambling a sin.

I hear it a lot. That gambling, sport betting, lotteries, raffle draws etc are sins.

Is there a scriptural perspective behind why it is a sin? Or its just a personal moral sentiment turned into doctrine. Just like when people say taking alcohol is a sin as a moral sentiment, when scripture didn't say so.

Someone I know placed a bet during the Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquaio fight and he won some cash. But he said that some folks were giving him the guilt-trip that it is a sin.

I cracked my brain and searched my soul to see on what scripture I could condemn the act. And I had none.

You placed a financial bet on a player, you bought raffle tickets on a lottery, you put in money on a luck-based possible outcome. And you made some cash. How is that a sin?

This is not a trick question. I want to understand. Is it a personal moral sentiment or a deduced scriptural doctrine?

Shalom!