₦airaland Forum

MarkMiwerds: All praise goes to God, I am only His servant, as you are.

Good question! Why does God have to greatly multiply her sorrow in conception? My thoughts are, (mind you they are just my thoughts, not necessarily God's reasoning) that the sorrow would be great, as I inferred in the presentation, that Eve would know that she would be bringing a child into the world that, once perfect, now bore thorns and thistles along with hard labour. Contrasted with what Eve and her husband had before she ate of the forbidden fruit, one can see much sorrow in raising a child in poor conditions as opposed to the lap of luxury that the Garden was.

Again, good question! My thoughts once more... Yes, God cursed the Earth, even audibly. Not with swear words, mind you. Rather, He cursed it with a pronouncement of it producing that which inflicts pain and sorrow... "thorns and thistles shall it bring forth". I've been stuck with many a thorn, and I can honestly say I didn't rejoice when it happened. My first reaction was to pull back, then to minister to the affected area to ease the pain that the thorn had caused. Due to this curse upon the Earth, Adam would no longer see only good come from his hard labour as he did in the Garden. Now, his hard work could be choked out by unwanted plants.

Comparing all three of these pronouncements; that were upon the woman, the man, and the Earth as well, one can see God saying "You have brought me great sorrow this day, now sorrow shall be your lot.

It is interesting also, that the curse upon the Earth, "thorns and thistles" were instrumental in torturing our Saviour during His trial and in His crucifixion.

Again, good question! My thoughts... God allowed Eve to live because of Grace. As I said, He could have spoken a word and removed her completely. But we see in the second Chapter of Genesis that God put the woman and man together as husband and wife. They were now one flesh. God had given the woman to the man to be his help meet and his wife. To remove her would have left Adam incomplete.

We also see in the fifteenth verse of Chapter 3, the prophecy that our Lord would be born through Eve's family line. So, in my thoughts, Eve was spared that we might ultimately know Christ.


Again, my thoughts... The Law was given that man might learn to fear God. That man would see his depravity and dependency upon God for life.
Again, my thoughts... the journey from Eden to the wilderness, to the Cross was important. As I said in the reply to the last question above, it all pointed to the cross. It all showed the sinfulness of man, the deceitful heart and stubborn mind that all men have, and the need to submit to God as our direction, our source of life and all that is good.

Alwaystrue: Thanks for your patience. What the law could not do in that in was weak through the flesh, God did by sending his own grace (Jesus Christ) condemning sin in the flesh that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in those who DO NOT walk according to the flesh but of the Spirit.

The Law therefore is holy, and [each] commandment is holy and just and good. Did that which is good then prove fatal [bringing death] to me? Certainly not! It was sin, working death in me by using this good thing [as a weapon], in order that through the commandment sin might be shown up clearly to be sin, that the extreme malignity and immeasurable sinfulness of sin might plainly appear.
We know that the Law is spiritual; but I am a creature of the flesh [carnal, unspiritual], having been sold into slavery under [the control of] sin.

The law was evil to a sinful fleshly man because he could not keep it. Why? There was no spirit link to God which could interprete and bring to life the righteousness of it. So man used fleshly wisdom to interprete the law and ended up even more sinful.
Jesus died to connect us back to God and thus God's word falling on a spirit-led man who believes and obeys it is a pleasure to God. Grace is what shows us the righteousness of God's law thaf he spoke in His voice.
Remember, there was a place where Jesus said man was obeying traditions of men instead of God's law. It isn't the same as ordinances which had law of commandments in them. Exodus 21 to 23. Those were decrees contrary to us that Jesus abolished like eye for eye, do not mix with other people on earth, do not this and that and so many others in those chapters that were contrary to us.


We will be able to understand the law of God is love and till we know how each law of God applies to love we will keep thinking the law is not good. Our very faith upholds the law of God for its the law of the Spirit that a spirit led man follows through the help of grace because Jesus fulfilled the law. Its this same law that is being fulfilled in us as we walk in Christ. Jesus didnt obey the law like pharisees, he obeyed it by the Spirit to which it was said he had no sin or unrighteousness.





It was not recorded that Adam and Eve believed God and as such His Word was broken. Even believed the word of the serpent over the word of God. Adam believed the word of Eve over God and they translated it to action. Belief and action go hand in hand and that is why whem we believe Jesus who had no sin, we act like him and believe His words to us, taking his advice and doing His good pleasure.
Because someone doesnt believe Chrisy does not make the failthfulness of God without effect. God remains faithful. When God sent His Son to die for our sins and tells the world that they should believe Him and live but they reject such, God will remain faithful. The grace will remain available, whether or not man takes it. Man simply looses if he fails to believe God.

I quoted where the snake was raised up in the wilderness and Moses told the people to look on it and be saved. Those that believed the word and translated it to action by looking on were saved. Anyone who felt what effrontery, how can it save me and didnt look lost out by dieing. God remained failthful to His word.

All those in the Hall of Faith, heard God, believed and obeyed.
What did Abel do? Offered a better sacrifice than Cain for God testified of His gifts.

Enoch had the testimony he pleased God...he did stuff not recorded but they believed God enough to put it into actions.

Noah heard God and obeyed by building the ark even when it appeared foolish. He didnt waiver but acted in line with God's instructions.

Abraham obeyed by faith when he heard God who told him to go out to a strange land. He didnt just believe and sit at home. He put his believe into obeying.

Sarah after she laughed at the word of the angel but it did not stop her and pappy Abraham from doing the do which brought Isaac....lol.

Same Abraham obeyed the voice of God to sacrifice his son. He could have claimed i believe you Lord and not do now. God swore by two immutable things to bless Abraham....a blessing we all enjoy today.

They all believed and showed the belief. That is why Hebrews 11 shows, by faith they did this and that...it was by faith to the Spoken word.

Israel rejected the spoken word of God at Sinai preferring laws which they ended up unable to keep. GOD sent His voice again in Jesus Christ, words which God said if man did not heed, he would require it of them.

Jesus expects belief and obedience to His word. And the comforter He sent afterwards brings to our remeberance those words in the wholesome wisdom of it and guide is in how to apply it to enjoy abundant life...that is grace.

Thank you.

MarkMiwerds: 8. (Grace 2): The wonders of God's Grace

PastorOluT: @Goshen & Drummerboy,
I dont know if anyone has chosen topic 3, if not I will want to present on that.

Power of the Holy Spirit for xtian living.

striktlymi: Okay Goshen and Dboy.

I go with the topic chosen for me. Number 9 it is then.

DrummaBoy: BabaGnoni

(I was going to send a PM but decided against it).

I only got to read your submission now. I was on the road much of yesterday.

That presentation up there, to say the least, is excellent. For some of us who took a step out in faith to form an "ekklesia" outside an established "church" system, we find great comfort in your words. We also see that there are pitfalls we should guard against lest the "ekklessia" becomes a "church" too. I believe the question Gombs asked me on a special thread as to whether a church should practice democracy is adequately answered in the share description of the true root meaning of the word "church".

However, there is a little omission or maybe you didn't see it necessary, in the well written bullet points on the church history, where we are coming from: you left out dates! While you might not be able provide the exact date of when the events happened, you could provide a summary period. Like the century (eg: 7th or 18th century) or period bracket (eg: 50-100AD). This will help the readers a great deal. You may simply do an edit on the text.

Thank you for the effort in providing a historical perspective that hopefully will help theological discusses, especially the RCC/Protestants threads, a great deal. The rest I will state in a PM.

Thank you.

PS: I cannot seem to get that song off my thoughts: ... gam gam style; heeey ...." lol!

trustman: BabaGnoni,

I had a busy day else I would have commented earlier.
That was a fantastic presentation given the topic and number of words constraint.
Well done!

striktlymi: Still trying to figure out whether I asked the right questions or I understood your answer. Anyways, it would do!

Thanks!

DrummaBoy: Is this the gospel

striktlymi: Good one Alwaystrue, ihedinobi2 and BabaGnoni.

@BabaG

I was hoping your research would touch a bit on the ancestory and lineage of the modern day Christian.
As you may know already, I am a Catholic and we claim to be that Church founded by Christ.
A claim that is rejected by our 'separated' brethren.

In your opinion:

1) Do you believe that the Church Jesus founded got lost some time in history?

2) If yes, why do believe that Jesus would go through the trouble of establishing a community here on Earth only to allow it go extinct?

3) If no, then where is that Church today?

PS: Not trying to lead you on. Just a honest question.

DrummaBoy: BabaGnoni

- edited-
... there is a little omission or maybe you didn't see it necessary,
in the well written bullet points on the church history, where we are coming from: you left out dates!
While you might not be able provide the exact date of when the events happened, you could provide a summary period.
Like the century (eg: 7th or 18th century) or period bracket (eg: 50-100AD).
This will help the readers a great deal. You may simply do an edit on the text.

Thank you for the effort in providing a historical perspective that hopefully will help theological discusses, especially the RCC/Protestants threads, a great deal.

Thank you.
- edited-

DrummaBoy: Permit me to add.
...Truth is that biblical truths are not found on the surface; they are found by studious searching.
The reason why deception abound in society is because people love quick fixes; short cut to breakthrough; etc.
Scriptures does not encourage this...
https://www.nairaland.com/1825474/it-sin-spend-tithe-month/1#25493011

ihedinobi2: I'm very glad indeed to see a topic on Christian Unity. When I thought that we would be presenting on topics we ourselves came up with I decided on a topic on Unity.

May I suggest though that the topic be changed to Unity of Faith Versus Unity of Doctrine? I offer that because I think it is more universal and practical in addressing the current issue of apparent Christian disunity. I also consider that a united Christian voice comes from a united Christian heart.

DrummaBoy: Do you wish to have that topic for your presentation?

Because if you do, I will grant that you make the change in the topic and present on it.

If not, I will request you leave the topic that way as whoever might want to present on it may have no need for the change your are proposing.

ihedinobi2: Yes I would love to. I meant to mention that I had chosen it. Oversight on my part.

Thank you for the permission anyway.

Alwaystrue: With the help of God and His grace I will like to discuss:
(Grace 1): The Demands of the Law and the Supply of the grace of God.

trustman: Looking forward to a wonderful convention!

Yooguyz: Drummaboy, Goshen360 please am very busy at the moment, I would appreciate it if my presentation time is moved from 2:00 to 4:00.
Thanks in anticipation of your response.

malvisguy212: ok. maby I read to much, but one thing for sure, I know were am heading to with the exergies.

malvisguy212: that is what you believe ,that jesus don't want to travel by night,if jesus would travel by night, will he waited for two days?
somtin is not right here, he KNOW that the authority sought to stone him,
why dint he travel by night were they would have been sleeping?
I REAPET HE KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOIN. he want us to know somtin.

malvisguy212: you dint answer my question, are you christian?

malvisguy212: ok, I understand your point now,here is the fact:jesus had a good relationship with the family because the news say"lazarus whom you loved is sick"this mean he has a good relationship with the family,isn't it obvious that you here the death of someone you love so much, but you still waited for two days before goin?what dos dis mean? It mean, even if isreal were in tears, God will still Wait for two days[or two thousand years] before he reach out to them, God will not change his revelation.

Jesus knows that lazarus his dead before the messenger arrive,that mean jesus suppose to know that he will raise him from dead, the question is why did he wait for two days to raise someone he love so much? Strange isn't it? Yeah, HE KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOING.thank you.

Are you a christian?

malvisguy212: jesus always speak in parables,the new testament is like a foreshadowing event of things that will happen nowadays,
bible dint just say two days to wast space,
jesus himself know what he was doin,this is the point LAZARUS HAS BEEN DEAD FOR FOUR DAYS,
BUT JESUS WAITED FOR FOR TWO DAYS, WHY? ABI JESUS DINT CARE FOR LAZARUS?
NO , HE KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOIN, HE WAS TRYIN TO TELL US SOMTIN.

malvisguy212: I copy this from a web.
There are two possible ways to understand the sequence of events that
follow, depending on whether one
believes the Bethany where Jesus is
staying is in the south or the north. If
Bethany is in the south, as most scholars
believe, then it would take the messengers one day to reach Jesus and
one day for Jesus to reach Lazarus. Since
Jesus stayed put for two days and Lazarus
has been dead for four days when Jesus
does arrive, that means Lazarus must
have died on the same day as the messengers set out (cf. Barrett 1978:391).
If Bethany is a reference to Batanea in
the north the timing would be different.
It takes four days to travel from Batanea
to where Lazarus is. Since Jesus arrives
when Lazarus has been dead for four days, Jesus had waited until Lazarus died
before he set out. In either case the two-
day delay does not cause the death of
Lazarus, since Jesus could not have gotten
to him before he died, either because he
was dead before the messengers arrived with their message (southern view) or
because Jesus would only be halfway
there (northern view). In either case the
two-day delay does, however, insure that
Lazarus will have been dead for four days
when Jesus arrives.

malvisguy212: jesus always speak in parables,the new testament is like a foreshadowing event of things that will happen nowadays,bible dint just say two days to wast space, jesus himself know what he was doin,this is the point LAZARUS HAS BEEN DEAD FOR FOUR DAYS, BUT JESUS WAITED FOR FOR TWO DAYS,WHY?ABI JESUS DINT CARE FOR LAZARUS?NO , HE KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOIN, HE WAS TRYIN TO TELL US SOMTIN.