₦airaland Forum

^^^. Very good. Time to talk about regulated and unregulated tithes

At least, we are done with first fruits, 100-fold return, double portion return, using the parable of the sower to manipulate Christians into parting with money etc

Image123:
Scriptures twisted as usual. Paul wasn't on nairaland monkeying himself and gossiping or backbiting about dead people. He ACTUALLY withstood Peter to the face.
Two, Paul was right and Peter was clearly wrong, no debate.
Three, Paul corrected Peter in the spirit of meekness and love, not gloating like a rabid animal over Peter's mistake.
Four, Paul was Peter's mate as they were both apostles with marks and credibility. Unlike folks here who can't correct their kids to save their lives, but delude themselves with a calling to rain insults and jabs on ministers that they couldn't achieve a fraction of what they've done in three lifetimes. Spiritually, materially, academically and any other 'ally' there is.

I saw the truth To my questions online so kudos to all those who strive to put the truth in cyber space.

The issue here is even not so much of correcting the practitioners because most of them believe they are superior to other christians but thank God hagin remembered to counter that lie. Most of them are completely sold out to the mammon they make from continued practice of these wrong and deceitful 'doctrines' and its futile to attempt to correct them. Its like the case of a seller of fake drugs. While we pray and wait for NAFDAC to arrest them, we owe it a duty to our friends, family and the larger society to point out the fake drugs they sell and their modus operandi. I'm indeed glad that Hagin saw fit to join this crusade in his own little way later in his life.

So threads like this are more about pointing out the lies, deceit, abuse and false practices going on in the name if Christianity. I have no doubt in my mind that most of the flamboyant men drawing large crowds today are not interested in hearing the truth. If they were, with the way they invoke Hagin's name and books in their messages, you would have expected them to pay small attention to the contents of Midas touch but they do not.

I keep asking why none of them mentions "The Midas Touch" in their sermons. "an old woman is always uncomfortable when old bones are mentioned in a proverb" goes an Igbo proverb. I would guess this is the case with pastors who avoid mentioning "The Midas Touch". They must be swimming in guilt that's if they still have a functioning conscience.

So for me, I'll keep pointing out the lies, fraud, deceit and wickedness that are perpetuated anywhere I see or hear them and whenever and in whatever way possible. I'll try to leave persons out of it as much as possible henceforth but I wonder how you can shame the practice and it won't rub off on the practitioner. As much as Hagin tried to avoid it, he tagged them with some adjectives I use myself even if he avoided mentioning names.

Gombs:
Candour na,
The Bible does teach that when the Church returns with Jesus after the Tribulation and He sets up His Millennial Kingdom on earth, we will be inheriting all of the wealth of the sinners at that time. Where is bankruptcy here? Why would God want to bankrupt folks to get Christians rich?
You can conjure up theories you think I meant, especially the above bold and colored, even suggesting I eye and covet the riches of others is nauseating and slanderous.

I do know about the return of Christ, the millenial reign, the utopia of a new heaven and a new earth. All that have nothing to do with end time transfer of wealth. we are currently in the end times and now is when that doctrine claims all those things will happen. I dont want to further derail this thread but i would have wanted you to explain the mantraa ''we are taking over'' that i always hear from CEC folks. this wrong doctrine is also the bedrock for the wrong belief that the church will be basking in glory, wealth etc while waiting for Christ return.

All tithe threads...you stance there does not putting givings in churches in good light especially calling of ministers and ministries names. But these are immaterial now, I don't wan to derail further. Thanks

The churches who engage in these abuses and false practices should hold themselves responsible for whatever bad names they get. Is there another way of addressing a person engaged in crime? or is obtaining money through abuse and false practices not a crime? i encourage folks to give but shine your eyes well well. That's what Hagin is also advising in this book

So what did you do about it on nairaland? You created an impression all mega churches are fraudulent., if that's not the case, then fine. I'm glad you said you've learnt too from the book.

I didn't create the impression my brother. the mega churches gave themselves that appellation. To prove my point, when last did you see ''The Midas Touch'' in your church bookshop? Of course it can't be there for obvious reason

Which beggar has those? Are you calling your former GO a beggar? Or are you calling mega churches? Who exactly is the word 'beggar' conoting?

the word beggar connotes somebody who needs money and is begging for it. Do they beg like they need the money? if yes, then they are beggars

They should not tithe, no?
If by any means I seemingly supported End time transfer of wealth (a fact I know I didn't pray for some non christian guys to go broke for my sake), or crested the impression, I hereby tender my apology.

Do you mean until i pay tithe, i can't give to the body of christ?

on the bolded, It's well.

cheers

Gombs:
How is that End time transfer of wealth? When you for want? Christians of the future? If Jesus tarries, I'd still be walking this earth in 50years time.

In other words you believe Gates, Zuckerberg, Seun etc will lose their wealth to you and others? Then why are you denying? Do you not understand what End time transfer of wealth means?

Must God make Gates, Zuckerberg, Seun etc bankrupt, fail etc before he can provide for Christians? Must you eye and covet the riches of those hardworking people? So because you'll be here in 50 years if Jesus tarries, they must become poor for you to get riches?

You did not attempt the sentence Hagin putdown, maybe I should paste it again

If all Christians would simply tithe and give offerings, the Church would have more than enough funds to accomplish whatever it needs to do. 

Where do you think churches should get funding from, and how?

Until you can show where I've argued against giving to the body of Christ, the above quote remains immaterial to me.

You know my position on tithing and I expect you to know my position on christian giving. You emphasise this quote to make it look like the organised church lack funds as it is and I asked how lacking in funds is a ministry whose G.O personally cruises 4 private jets. Lack of tithe and offerings isn't the problem of the church; stealing, misappropriation, misplaced priorities etc are.

Would you give money to a beggar rocking an iPhone, a Gucci shoe, an Armani jeans and shirt in a range sport? That's how those flamboyant ministers who constantly whine about needing funds look.

Lack of prudence and accountability is NOT a viable reason not to give or encourage others not to.

Pls quote where I said people shouldn't give

Gombs:
my friend, try quoting things in full context. Now note what Papa Hagin thoght:

We shouldn't be so concerned about getting sinners' money transferred into our hands. Our concern should be getting their hearts transferred into the Kingdom. We should be focused on their receiving what we have (eternal life), not on our receiving what they have (material goods).

notice i highlighted it in the book as posted on this thread. I was not concerned or waiting to receive their wealth, or praying it to come to me.

Actually, you were very sure their wealth was coming to you today and today means the present. You even acknowledged this idea came from mainly one scripture. Once again see your own words

Gombs: It is mainly from
this one single verse that the “wealth of the wicked” is
conjured up for divine distribution to Christians living
today.

Tell Gates, Zukerberg, Seun etc it's a matter of time!

You believed this one verse was enough to assure you that. You were so sure that you even sent me to tell them that it was only a matter or time.

you quoted me half way, ignoring your question and the latter part of my post.

you wrote:



there my friend is why i told you from scriptures "they are not efficacious than anything Godly, for they will always store up for the righteous "

this is no way meaning i am praying for Dangote or Gates or etc wealth to come to me. I was not taught so. Interestingly, you for some reasons skipped the latter part of my post;

Folks can go ahead and read our exchanges on that thread. Thank God you didn't accuse me of remixing what you said. I only quoted the one pertaining to the subject matter. We were talking about so many things there. I put the link to the thread up. Folks are free to read it up themselves.

I stand by these words, and my post is in no way in support of End-time transfer of wealth.

Good for you that you're standing by those words and the words are there for whoever is interested. If you don't support that fraudulent doctrine, then I'm glad.

Meanwhile in that post you quoted form the book, why on earth did you not see this?



any comments?

Of course I saw the quote. Hagin should know (I'm sure he knew but didn't want to ruffle too many feathers) lack of funds isn't the problem of most of our big churches because folks are pressured to even give what they are not supposed to give as he admitted; lack of prudence and accountability is. Oyedepo my former G.O owns 4 private jets. Tell me here that you believe he truly needs them all. Do you have any idea of the cost of purchase and maintenance?

Gombs:
[size=20pt]Will There Be an End- Time Transfer of Wealth?[/size]

There has been quite a bit of discussion in the last couple of years about a coming transference of wealth from the world to the Church. The idea is based on part of a scripture that says,
" . . . the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just" (Prov. 13:22). Apparently, some have interpreted this to mean that the day will come when God's people will have plenty of money for the work of God—money transferred to us from the wealth of the worldly.

First of all, I really don't see anything about this in the New Testament, especially in terms of what we are supposed to be actively believing God for. And I'm always wary about building a doctrine or basic belief on a single scripture. Jesus said, ". . .in
the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may he established"
(Matt. 18:16).

I'm sure that as the Church does its job and gets people born again, there will be more people giving their tithes and offerings for the work of the Lord. But I think we need to be careful about coveting the world's money. We shouldn't be so concerned about getting sinners' money transferred into our hands. Our concern should be getting their hearts transferred into the Kingdom. We should be focused on their receiving what we have (eternal life), not on our receiving what they have (material goods).

Paul said to the Corinthians, "I seek not yours, but you" (2 Cor. 12:14). As a minister, he was not focused on their money, but on their souls.
The Apostle John said the following about some ministers who traveled with the Gospel: "Because that for his name's sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles" (3 John 7).

Other translations of this verse emphasize the point:

"... accepting nothing from the heathen" (Goodspeed)

". . . taking nothing from the people of the world" (Beck)

".. . and declined to take anything from pagans" (Moffatt)

"... and they accept no help from non-Christians" (Phillips)

Our job is not to try to get the wealth of the world. Our job is to faithfully use the wealth we already have to get the Gospel out. If all Christians would simply tithe and give offerings, the Church would have more than enough funds to accomplish whatever it needs to do. Statistics indicate that twenty percent of church members provide eighty percent of church revenue and that the average American Christian gives only six percent of his income to the Lord's work. Imagine where we would be if those percentages were where they ought to be! *** imagine where we would have been as a church if folks quit arguing tithes and seeds and offerings?

The Bible does teach that when the Church returns with Jesus after the Tribulation and He sets up His Millennial Kingdom on earth, we will be inheriting all of the wealth of the sinners at that time. I don't see anywhere in the New Testament where we are supposed to be focused on getting their money now. Instead, we should be concentrating on seeking the hearts of the unsaved and faithfully using the finances we already have.

The answer to the question heading of this post is no. I sure hope you agree with him and have corrected your thinking about it because see what you told me when we broached it during one of our discussions in time past.

Gombs:
Proverbs 13:22
Amplified Bible (AMP)
22 A good man leaves an inheritance [of moral stability
and goodness] to his children’s children, and the wealth of the sinner [finds its way eventually] into the hands of the righteous, for whom it was laid up.


It is mainly from
this one single verse that the “wealth of the wicked” is
conjured up for divine distribution to Christians living
today.

Tell Gates, Zukerberg, Seun etc it's a matter of time!

on this thread

https://www.nairaland.com/1189741/tithes-offerings/105#19933642

I'm glad Hagin mentioned this because this is the erroneous idea behind the ''dominion theology'' which is another branch of the WOF movement.

Lobeez:
@Gombs, what do you understand by "The concept of firstfruits is not used in the New Testament in reference to financial giving"

Hagin had to give ALL the context in which 'firstfruit' was used in the NT

There is not even the vaguest hint of it by any New Testament writer in reference to money or the support of ministers. 

"Firstfruits" in the New Testament primarily refers to Jesus Christ. He is the Firstfruits—the first One to be raised from the dead—and represented all those who would follow after him.
Other New Testament uses of "firstfruits" refer to the "firstfruits of the Spirit" in the life of the believer. In other words,
"firstfruits" refers to the initial working of the Spirit in a believer's life—the first evidence of His indwelling us. It refers to those signs of His Presence in us now, as compared to what He will do with us later when we have our glorified bodies. 

Another use of the word "firstfruits" is totally figurative. It has to do with the first individuals to be born again in a certain location.

Honestly i didnt expect Gombs to be arguing this. It's as clear as daylight.

Gombs:
Candour, from the above bold, understand what he meant by that first sentence, then in the context as used by the preachers he mentioned in the above part of your quote ie firstfruits are preachers monies, if he wanted to condemn it, he'd had plainly said so. But if you believe he did, fine. I don't think he did. Let's not argue please. I do not intend to derail. Chapter 7 is loading

Dont worry my friend. You can go ahead with chapter 7. I won't derail you. However, see another hint that First fruits has nothing to do with money in the new covenant. It's from the same page 136 and it's even embeded in your response to me

There is not even the vaguest hint of it by any New Testament writer in reference to money or the support of ministers

I wont be doing any injustice to the book if i break it down into 2 statements thus:

''There is not even the vaguest hint of it by any new testament writer in reference to money'' meaning first fruits has nothing to do with money

''There is not even the vaguest hint of it by any new testament writer in reference to the support of ministers'' meaning it has nothing to do with support for ministers

This is because the ''OR'' there is a conjunction that joins two statements together

Anyhow you choose to look at it, first fruits offering has no scriptural basis for a Christian

Gombs:
Hagin was not against firstfruits, he was against folks ie preachers saying they are priests now and the firstfriuts belongs to them.

Haba we shouldn't start again na!!

What does the below quote from page 136 mean then?

[size=20pt]Making a New Testament application of Old Testament technicalities violates every principle of Bible interpretation, especially when there isn't a single New Testament usage of the word "firstfruits" in the context in which it is being preached by some ministers.

[color=#009999]The concept of firstfruits is not used in the New Testament in reference to financial giving[/color][/size]. There is not even the vaguest hint of it by any New Testament writer in reference to money or the support of ministers.

"Firstfruits" in the New Testament primarily refers to Jesus Christ. He is the Firstfruits—the first One to be raised from the dead—and represented all those who would follow after him.
Other New Testament uses of "firstfruits" refer to the "firstfruits of the Spirit" in the life of the believer. In other words,
"firstfruits" refers to the initial working of the Spirit in a believer's life—the first evidence of His indwelling us. It refers to those signs of His Presence in us now, as compared to what He will do with us later when we have our glorified bodies.

Another use of the word "firstfruits" is totally figurative. It has to do with the first individuals to be born again in a certain location.
After examining many teachings that have led to misunderstandings and hurtful problems in the Body of Christ, let's look at the Biblical way to prosper.

Pls, first fruits offering (in money or whatever form) as a doctrine for christians has no single basis in scriptures. We've always said it and now Hagin has confirmed it. If you still argue this, i'll be very surprised.

Gombs:
Tithes, firstfruits, offerings, seeds (offer7, etc) partnership etc



Thanks, e no easy o!

On a side note, I get that churches reach far extremes in a particular thing, sometimes, the church is not at fault but a particular teacher in that ministry. Like Bidam rightly pointed out, some like my friends here (trustman, shedemidemi, Drummaboy aka WinsomeX, Kunle etc) discovered these excesses in whatever way either from concern or spite, and they too wanting to correct these excesses, took theirs to the other extreme too, they must have thought since too much of this is terrible, why not we just get rid of it altogether?

They took it to the extreme, and their communication was not from the spiritual, their weapons of warfare were carnal, I wish they were spiritual enough all these years. Hagin did all the corrections but never called anyone a thief or fraud or other insultive adjectives. Now, I am not saying I was right too, because I just thought these folks didn't like givings and are out to deter others, though alot of their team mates (atheists, pagans, etc) made them even look worse.

This created a large gulf. We who were for givings and maybe due to the fact we didn't address those who take it to the extremes, became team extreme givings, and those who took theirs to the other extreme side of the road, who seemingly would want these givings to stop entirely, hence the gulf. We then always had disagreements and animosity was created. We all got so engrossed in the disagreement, that we forgot the original motivation, which is to do good and bless folks and move the gospel. In our overzealousness, we may have lost the original truth.

I am not perfect, I may have been wrong in time past, but now, I've a balance, thanks to Papa Hagin. Even though in my church, my Pastor and Pastor Chris do not take givings to extremes, neither do they cook up gimmicks to raise funds. I had already know about cheerful giving during my NYSC, and I learnt from Pastor Chris that God is not a money doubler, you don't give because you expect, you give because you want to, and you love God ... I am aware, in some CE Churches, some pastor's take it to the extreme. But that's why we pray, right?

I must thank you for this book, you don't know how I've thanked God for the book, and prayed more for churches and ministers of the gospel. I've got a message now, the download site has increased traffic too, it has gone up more than 650, 000, but I feel bad, Hagin or his ministry deserves to benefit from the book, it's worth far more than free. I must be a partner in their ministry, I should give towards their work.

Folks, this is it... no more wars on biblical prosperity, I was never In support of extreme givings, but my not speaking out made me culpable, I have repented. God bless you all

This is a step in the right direction. However, Its just not about extremes, its about some practices that are [size=20pt]TOTALLY ALIEN TO CHRISTIANITY[/size] being bandied about in almost all churches today which Hagin pointed out e.g First fruits which you graciously admitted CEC does.

I'll find time to point out the others later.

@Nannymcphee, when i first encountered you on WOF thread, i assumed you were there to push trustman et al off course hence my offer to discuss with you on that thread (you know, like lead the bull out of the shop before it destroys things ). However, on that same thread, before long i realised you were at the point i got to in 2011 as in you were simply seeking truth desperately. Thanks for all your questions. thanks for bringing up this book. i have the E-copy now but will be looking for the hard copy to keep in my library.

I too have learnt a lot and will surely be making some adjustments. even though i do not agree with Hagin on some things, i'm the better and wiser for reading this book.

Thanks once again and also to Gombs, thanks.

Edit: Pls don't play this card

though alot of their team mates (atheists, pagans, etc) made them even look worse.

there's nothing like team mates with atheists and pagans otherwise í can also accuse you of a pact with a satanist who has been defending your course and that of Jo in the past few weeks

You highlighted the part in blue from page 134. i want to hazard a guess you intend passing the notion accross that Hagin was making a case for God-hood of mog (I stand to be corrected pls!!!)

"Someone might ask, "What about the fivefold ministry? Aren't they priests? Don't those in fivefold ministry represent me to God?" No, they're not priests. [size=20pt] They don't represent you to God; they represent God to you! [/size]"

However, i believe Hagin wasn't trying to prove God-hood of mog there (If you say that's what he was trying to do, i will further ask how harmonius it is with your famed 'god-hood of all believers' unless you want to say mog are a higher class in the 'god-hood of all believers' hence the capital 'God' to depict them). I say Hagin wasn't preaching that idea because see what he wrote on page 128

"I'm reminded of Paul and Barnabas. When they ministered in the city of Lystra, a lifelong cripple was raised up, leaping and walking. When the people of the city saw what had happened, they cried, "The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men." They called Barnabas Jupiter, and called Paul Mercurius. The Bible says the priests of the city brought oxen and garlands to offer a sacrifice to them (see Acts 14:8-18).
In order to restrain the people from worshipping them, [size=14pt]Paul and Barnabas had to run among the people and testify that they were[/size] [size=20pt]just men in the service of the Living God[/size]. [size=18pt]It seems there is something about human nature that wants to elevate certain people to god-like status.[/size]
The Greeks had a mythical legend about a king named Midas who lived in the eighth century B.C., from the same general area as Lystra. You probably remember his story as the king with the golden touch; everything he put his hands on turned to gold.
Well, just as the people of Lystra asked if Jupiter and Mercurius had come down amongst them, today it seems some people are asking, "Is Midas in our midst?"
Unfortunately, too many are ready to believe that if they put money into the hands of a preacher with the Midas touch, so to speak, he will somehow, magically, bring increase and multiplication of their finances. This can quickly degenerate into wrong motives or covetousness."

He clearly explained how Paul and Barnabas [size=20pt]rejected[/size] the notion of being called gods and he infact went ahead to caution against exalting people to ''god-like status''


other observations will come in later

Gombs:
Haba my friend... I seek the balance Hagin sought, didn't you read the opening post of this thread? Chapter 6 is next up. Wait for it bro

No wahala. I'm waiting

I don't think anybody needs to argue too much with Gombs. Hagin knew the reason he wrote that book. No matter the format my friend adopts in presenting it here, except he'll twist chapter 6&7, he can't obliterate the truth about this question by Hagin

"If You Get What You Want, Will You Want What You Get?"

That is the overall message Hagin sought to pass accross in that book. Its a miracle how my friend didn't devote a single line of commentary to that. Also I still wait to see the correlation between Jesus having 'nice' clothes and pastors living ostentatiously and in obscene opulence. Hagin also spoke on that.

I await the presentation on chapter 6, then we can properly take a trip into the inner sanctums of our 'churches'

My friend isn't seeking the balance Hagin sought. He's simply looking for a way to justify mog's excesses.

Ride on Gombs......na you we know

nlMediator:
Thanks for welcoming me back, my dear brother! Now I feel special!!

Hagin's position on the application of the Scriptures has been my understanding and approach since the earliest part of my christian walk. It makes it easier to know why, for instance, the ritual laws in Leviticus do not apply to us.

yeah you're right......and also things like first fruits offerings which some pastors preach to their members or adding 20% as penalty for defaulting on tithe payments.

The things plenty actually but i'm glad some of them were dealt with in the book.

nlMediator:
That has been the cornerstone of Hagin's and Kenyon's ministry - even before anybody on this thread was born! I can quote from several of his books - way before Midas Touch - where he says that our emphasis is on the NT. In fact, he and especially Kenyon are so Pauline you'd think some of our friends here are his disciples.

My brother, welcome back from the long absence.

Indeed I'm glad its the way he approached the bible. If that's how our pastors in Nigeria did approach the scriptures, we wouldn't be having 80% of the arguments we are currently having.

Some folks who say something similar like Hagin are accused of abandoning the old testament.

Image123:
Anyone that listens to Hagin knows that he sayS this often. It didn't mistakenly drop, neither is it a correction made before dying. He quotes the new testament off hand for a large part, and he usually describes how his new testament portion of his bible is more worn, and how they are the letters written to him. Nothing new or shocking.
demisquare on the other hand will eternally make excuses about how Hebrews is not for him, how Romans was written to Jews in Rome and similar balderdash.

@the bolded, Why do you think everything is a contest? Is there any chance that Shdemidemi who must have been very young in 2000 (residing most likely in Nigeria or UK) influenced Hagins thoughts in a book he wrote that year (in the USA)? Can't you identify a tongue in cheek statement?

I don't want to derail this thread but I need to correct this impression. See the verse below

Romans 1:7 KJV
To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Considering the way shdemidemi utilises Romans in teaching about grace, I will say you'll find it difficult to point put a thread where he said Romans was written to Jews.

Also is Hagins statement "I appreciate the Old Testament and benefit from it, but it was not written to me". the belief you've always employed when discussing and arguing with me and others?

Pls I don't want to further derail this thread

Gombs:
Boss chill, I'd get to that place. I benefit from the OT too Romans 15:4, but it was not written to me, the NT was written to the New creation under the new covenant. Now, let's not derail.

Shedemidemi crucified for saying that? Pull out a thread as proof please. I need see what he wrote

I won't pull out any thread if you can't remember but have you see any thread where he's accused of lawlessness? Or trying to tear out the old testament? Or saying for the christian today, our manual is the epistles, particularly that of Paul?

Let's not derail your thread further

Gombs:
My man, I have read the book, not to the end, but it keeps getting better. Can't wait to reach the end. In fact, I have endorsed the book, recommending it. I have no regrets.

Its all good then

God bless you for the above bold. Always knew you Are different even in the midst of our differences

You misunderstand plenty of my friends. I don't know any of them that preaches against giving to the body of Christ. The issue has always been about scaring, cajoling, threatening and manipulating people into giving by invoking scripture especially the old testament which Hagin confidently says ".....wasn't written to me"

In fact, see one part on page 172. I wonder if Hagin copied this from shdemidemi or vice versa. See the portion in bold

"The Old Testament was all the Bible there was for centuries. It was the Bible Jesus quoted from in His ministry. The Old Testament is valuable to me because it teaches me about God, the early history of the world, and how God dealt with His chosen people, the Jews. It contains the Law and the Prophets, the Psalms and Proverbs. I appreciate the Old Testament and benefit from it, but it was not written to me"

I wonder how many times shdemidemi has been crucified for saying the part in bold

Gombs:
If you are not going to discuss the book, you better keep shut, keep looking and laughing. I checked alexa.com, and the download site has got some traffic. I guess folks are downloading. You and your band do not like the book, because it encourages giving (wonder why you lot hates the idea of giving in church...ah! Folks should take to the poor only shey?) and what pains you all is that he mentioned tithing and he did not encourage ministers of the gospel to be uncared for, nor was he against their prosperity. You lot find all his backing in the Bible, yet, you must hate. If he hadn't, you lot would use sentences like...it's better imagined sef. Now, the new story is that he was afraid after Bakker was released, hence he wrote the book....bla bla bla.

Gombs my friend, its very obvious you've not read that book to the end. If you have, I doubt you'll be so optimistic and this fired up.

Pls don't skip any chapter o. Like pickabeau1 said up there, the book tries to balance itself. The first chapters 'seem' to help your case but the end isn't as friendly. The intro about King Midas is an idea of what the book is about.

Any Christian who discourages giving in a gathering of the body of Christ is wicked and doesn't know God. This should answer your accusation about folks who are against giving to God

Image123:
What shadows are we chasing? Were you not involved "in leaving the entire discussion"? Now, the joke went sour on you, you remember your roots? You should have displayed your definition of maturity and ignore, Mr do as i say not as i do.
You're shameless, you should at least apologise after you subtly maligned me and i gave you biblical evidence for my position/take on Elijah's. Instead, you'd rather save face and talk bold face, i pity you.

You're the shameless one if you find this a contest.

You said Elijah wanted to die because of Jezebel's madness and I pointed it to you that was wrong. Jezebel swore to kill him and he ran away. Why didn't he just submit to Jezebels enforcer if he wanted to die then as a result of Jezebels madness?

His plea for the Lord to take him arose from his belief that he wasn't better than his fathers who couldn't get Israel unto the righteous path. In fact he must have felt a worse failure for according to him, he was the only faithful Israelite left. Despair from feeling alone was the reason for his death wish.

If you're getting your fangs out because I admitted we must have seen it from different angles, then you're to be pitied.

All what you wrote in that post was irrelevant to what i've being saying on this thread, and i did not touch it. It's your vomit, not mine, and i have no intentions of addressing it.
You said i have a PROFFESSED LOVE FOR HAGIN. i asked you to tell me about it, please remind me of it. At least it is professed. You probably hope to brush that aside as well. That is the way you lie with carefully phrased words and deceive people who are not careful. ''Midas Touch'' has shown nothing against me. If anything, it has shown the deceptive nature of you and your fellows that were praising just some selected parts to the high heavens and not hinting readers of the parts you do not support in the book. You as usual just wanted to use the book as a tool to fulfil your own purpose, it is backfiring as we speak. There is no hypocrisy in asking for the link. Nanny initially said she would provide the link, i had heard of the book before. So when she started posting excerpts, i reminded/asked her for the link so i could access the book. It is that simple and plain. Only people with issues would read other meanings into that.

Hagin said there is no where Christians are asked to give first fruits under the new covenant, do you give first fruits or preach same? If you do, you're a liar.

Hagin said according to Matt 25:35-45, the poor represent Jesus and can receive in his behalf, have you ever countered this point in our numerous arguments? Then you're a liar.

Hagin said the curse of devourer for not tithing isn't for a Christian. Have you ever countered this point in your desperation over the years to defend the tithe? Then you're a liar.

There are many points in that book nails you guys to a very rocky place in case you're too scared to read it through. You'll discover soon. I advice you read it through before dancing because you might have to run away again when we are through with dissecting it. I'm sure its the first chapters you saw that us exciting you. That one is genesis. Wait until we get to revelation

On the Hagin 'love', I take it you DO NOT LOVE Hagin then? Say it here and I'll withdraw my statement in that respect.

Why do you think that i go begin vex? Any reason or proof for this raving thoughts and assumptions of yours? There was no dispute or debate about who first quoted who, i wonder why you spring up that fallacy. When you quote or mention a person in a post, it is taken for granted that that post is PRIMARILY addressed to, or requires the attention of the mentioned. Internalize that and stop playing smarter than yourself.

Go sidon jare. You're on a public forum and you think you're so important that folks should maintain a non existent exclusivity when talking to you. If any post rubs you the wrong way, simply ignore it.

Once again, this is a public forum and I write not exclusively for one person. Try and internalise that

Image123:
Candor ehhhhhhhh, you can fit argue blindly sha. To be mild on you, it is like Mr A says that If you wants to enter Nigeria, you go through Murtala Mohammed Airport. Mr B comes along and says Ta, you pass through Cotonou border side to enter Nigeria. In a way, we are both correct. Elijah wanted to die because of Jezebel's actions. It cumulatively led to his depression and discouragement. Talking of Bible study, here it is.
1Ki 19:2 Then Jezebel sent a messenger unto Elijah, saying, So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I make not thy life as the life of one of them by tomorrow about this time.
1Ki 19:3 And when he saw that, he arose, and went for his life, and came to Beer-sheba, which belongeth to Judah, and left his servant there.
1Ki 19:4 But he himself went a day's journey into the wilderness, and came and sat down under a juniper tree: and he requested for himself that he might die; and said, It is enough; now, O LORD, take away my life; for I am not better than my fathers.

Elijah saw the threat and ran, then went A DAY's journey and requested to die. This is as plain and straight forward as comprehension gets. But no wahala if you go for a far fetched answer. It's not damning, and its even correct in a sense, okay?
It was AFTER this wish to die that angel gave him food twice, then he went and journeyed FORTY DAYS and nights to Horeb. That is over a month, compared to the earlier one day journey after seeing Queen J's threat. It is here God was asking him for what he's doing there. And so forth.
1Ki 19:10 And he said, I have been very jealous for the LORD God of hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.


Apparently he was trying to save his life here(some others were seeking his life). He wasn't trying to die, he was strengthened earlier. Anyway, i'll leave it for you whatever you think, have the last word. You deserve it. Know sha, it is only you that knows whether you typed that post n.aked or not, after the order of Saul

as usual, you leave the entire discussion and start chasing shadows. if you believe the bolded, why the need for the long epistle? abi you're getting high BP? If you agree we are seeing it from different angles, then so be it. That isn't even material to the issue being discussed here.

Also with the persistent reference to an unclad Saul, i hope all is well with you?

It is irrelevant because it is irrelevant, deal with it if you please. i don't recall my professed 'love' for Hagin, tell me about it. You find it easier to lie these days and make false and baseless accusations. Is that the freedom and true gospel your fellows are always calling us to? i don't think i've read ANY Hagin book (i've heard him though). i didn't even read the portion nanny posted, i glanced through. i've heard of the book before and since nanny said earlier that she would give a ebook link or so, i asked her here. Hagin is not irrelevant to me, your burdens are irrelevant to me, NOTE the difference.

then let it stay irrelevant to you. Why this immaturity to always run back to your vomit? You claim a post is irrelevant but your itchy fingers will always betray you into replying. You didnt read the portion Nanny posted yet you hypocritically asked for the link? If it pleases you, you can deny Hagin now because ''Midas Touch'' has just showed you up for the liar that you are.

Na you get burdens my dear, plenty burdens that have made you very unstable.

When you quote or mention a person in a post, it is taken for granted that that post is PRIMARILY addressed to, or requires the attention of the mentioned. You can type your frustrations without mentioning my name, yes you can. At least you didn't mention me here. Learn from Jesus, you are too full of your self.

When i say you're confused and unstable, you go begin vex. who first quoted each other on this glorious thread? try and internalise this: you and i aren't having a private conversation. I've been telling you since forever that i post here for the benefit of the larger public. You quoted my post and i replied with the NL community in mind like i always do. If you find my post irrelevant, simply ignore it. Thats what i do. Thats what mature people do. You dont have to reply every mention. I don't. If that diminishes you, it isnt my fault.

WinsomeX:
What you do not realize is that some of Hagins protege would have thought that "Baba" was thinking carnally. That maybe old age had depleted Baba a bit of the Spirit. That's why the book was unpopular.

At least they should be bold enough to say it here abi are they fearing "touch not my anointed"?

My take on the text by nanny is that if Hagin condemned firstfruit, why are his people practising it?

The bible didn't teach it as a christian doctrine which is what he pointed out. As to why his followers and worshippers still preach it, I'll say its due to #thief-thief things

nora544:
The problem is that you will not find this book on the list of his books he has written.

look here and than I know why.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_E._Hagin

Chineke me!!! Nora directed me to wiki in German abi na dutch Wahala ya zo!!!!

Thanks anyway. I saw the list (with their English titles) but couldn't find 'Midas touch' there. Maybe that's why.

Thanks

christemmbassey:
@Oga Candour, a blessed Sunday to u sir! Hope family is ok.

Blessed sunday to you too my bro. The family is very OK. Trust yours are too?

Cheers

vooks:
What happened to this Hagin? Was he trying to correct his errors like Derek Prince and his submission to authority heresy?
I can't believe this is Hagin's work

There's a signature on NL i love so much. Its on Markmiwerds profile. It says

"An honestly mistaken man, when presented with the truth, Has two choices...Stop being mistaken or cease being honest."

I think the above quote happened to Hagin. He was a honest man who was wrong and decided to correct the wrongs when he discovered them thankfully before he passed on. A lot of the 'prosperity gospel' crooners of today have their consciences seared with hot irons and dead. They know the truth but will never admit it so they don't lose the gains of fraud and crookedness.

How do you explain the fact that for 3 years of attending WOF churches, I never heard of 'Midas touch'? I still buy books from LFC bookshop in my city(bought unmerited favour by Joseph Prince and a book on selling by Brian Tracy there some weeks ago) but I've never set eyes on 'Midas touch' there even once despite the number of Hagin books on display?

Could it be that they don't want any alternative view? Methinks this is the case.

vooks:
WOF fanatics are pressed to explain the glaring inconsistencies between what they teach and reality mainly that no Christian is either disease-free nor immune from poverty or that Christians generally are no better that non-Christians on these two parameters. It doesn't matter whether you are talking of individual Christians,churches or 'Christian' nations, poverty and sickness is a harsh reality you can't bury your brains away from regardless of the amount of rhema you can distill from Genesis to Revelation and your faith notwithstanding.

The biggest fraud is the excuses paraded to explain away the inconsistencies. A broke and sick and dying Christian is still 'rich' and 'in health' and the Word of God is not voided by the experience. The 'Word of God' here is nothing more than traditions of men in which they have invested heavily financially,emotionally and spiritually.

It helps to aks WHEN these teachings were introduced into the body of Christ. It also helps to aks what was believed BEFORE the teachings were sneaked in. It is the height of arrogance to purport to know more than the collective revelation of all Christians who lived before the doctrine was first introduced.

God heals and prospers whenever,wherever and whoever He wills and we can't talk Him down using His word and order him around like He was some sort of character in a video game like Temple Run. This is not a position of faithlessness but humility.

The only reason the adherents cling to these beliefs is because they can't entertain men they have invested so much into, men they trust being wrong.

Hear Hagin on the mathematics of starting 'sowing' with $1

"At the time of this writing, the man with the most financial wealth in the world is considered to be Bill Gates of Microsoft; his net worth is estimated to be as much as $85 billion. So a person for whom the hundredfold return worked as described above would have 1,176 times more money than Bill Gates!

If the hundredfold return worked literally and mathematically for everyone who gave money in an offering, we would have Christians walking around with not billions or trillions of dollars, but quadrillions of dollars!"

At least Hagin; their hero said this not me. Those who use Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and others to point out the lie of this 'gospel' are accused of being carnal. I hope they'll be able to describe Hagin in similar terms.

Those that will be wise will be wise.

Image123:
i no be Elijah, i queue for him back as it were. You know Elijah wanted to die because of jezebel's madness, not because of Candour. Abi you be jzbell? hahahaha.

No. Elijah wanted to die because he thought he was the only person with truth in Isreal. He ran from Jezebel because he didn't want to die then, after considering everything, he decided death was better than being alone in a fully 'pagan' Isreal.

Try spend more time studying bible instead of thinking and dreaming money

i didn't accuse you of saying anything, so it's a wonder why you want me to go to any trouble. Most of the rest of what you wrote is largely irrelevant to my posts on this thread. Take your burdens to the Lord and leave it there. i'm not the Lord, just His boy.

Of course it will be irrelevant to you just as 'Midas touch' escaped your radar despite your proffessed 'love' for Hagin until nannymcphee 'mercifully' brought it to your view.

Also, why do you always think you're the only one i write to when i post? Have you forgotten this is a public forum? Pls close your eyes to this post I beg you. Its surely 'irrelevant' to you. Others who need it will read it.

Cheers

I just read the chapter 6 of 'Midas touch' which nannymcphee posted and I now know the reason why for the 3 years I spent in WOF and the countless times Hagin's books were mentioned, not once did they make reference to this book.

I've said before that any pastor who teaches the 'prosperity gospel' of WOF is either ignorant or a thief. Till date, preachers on TBN, Daystar etc still preach the 100-fold return nonsense. God bless Kenneth Hagin for the courage he gathered to write this book before he died. Its unfortunate that those who almost swear by his name become blind, deaf and dumb when it comes to mentioning this book.

I must get this book as soon as possible.

Image123:
It's like queuing behind either prophet Elijah and prophet Saul na, lol. Both are prophesying but na prophet Elijah sure pass. Who can tell if you weren't breathing threatening and slaughter before you wrote that post until thankfully the Holy Ghost laid you down and made you prophesy till fellows ask, is Saul also among the prophets. i no fit say maybe you lay n.aked typing that post, na only you and God know that one, hahaha.

Hahahaha

If I naked prophesy, I sure say you being dey dig grave for yourself and asking to die out of anger Like Elijah before God said "relax image, you don't need to die because Candour spoke the truth"

On a more serious note, you both were on the same wavelength as it were(but Bidam sure pass jare). You said prosperity is not a sin, prosperity should not be preached against, some people are natural prosperous. You quoted Matthew 5:45 showing GOD prospers everyone including sinners, fallen nature can negatively affect one's prosperity. Knowledge, hardwork, diligence etc can prosper a person ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE. These were your points and i completely agree with them. Bidam said pretty much same (he said it better sha). He talks of an opposite extreme against prosperity, that shouldn't be. Says God's prosperity plan is available to ALL. He then defined prosperity in a sweet way. Told folks to stop bringing private eisegesis. Said any theology that enhances poverty without teaching biblical prosperity is demonic. These are what I'm for. Indeed, we can do nothing against the truth, i wish that could be said for all of us.

You see, you'll go to a lot of trouble and still come up empty if you decide to take a trip through my engagements on NL to bring out where I said poverty is the will of God for Christians. I can also confidently say I have not read anybody preach it here. If you have, bring out the moniker and I'll join in condemning the person.

@the bolded. If we agree that God's prosperity plan is available to all, then why are we still arguing? Nannymcphee said God will/can provide materially. This is the message in Phil 4:19. It talks of needs being met, not wants. A major problem the world has today is knowing the difference between wants and needs and its unfortunate that Christians have been sucked into that same hole. This leads men into piercing themselves through with many sorrows like Paul said, all in a bid to keep up with the Joneses.

The bible encourages work and God will bless the work. Who is blessed then and who isnt? The man can afford UI for his child, the one that can afford CU, the one that can afford Leeds or the one that can afford Harvard. Which of them isn't blessed? If the Harvard-able-to-pay father is the blessed, how many of you who preach this 'prosperity' thing can afford it? Why can't you afford it? Is it a lack of enough faith? The devil? Or God's wickedness? The funny thing is that we have plenty Harvard trained Nigerians but God placed a Nigerian university trained zoologist as president.

It was needs Jesus promised adding to us in Matthew 6:33, not our fanciful wants. A colleague of mine was driving a Honda 2008 but believed he had to drive a more recent jeep to feel arrived. He took delivery of highlander 2012 last year June but is now gunning for a range sport 2014 because he has to keep up with his mates.

What will it take for humans to be satisfied?

The tribal warlords have suddenly gone quiet. At least this crime will make us all do an introspection as Nigerians stained by the indiscretions and greed of our compatriots instead of hurling stereotypical insults and innuendoes at each other.

We can go all strong and blame the women for falling cheaply but loneliness and general vulnerability most times obscures sound judgement. These are always exploited to the fullest by conmen. I hope they recover fully.

My only sadness about this case is that the sentences aren't long enough for the crooks.

Image123:
It's Saturday morning, go and wash clothes or something, hahaha.

Wish I could. However, I'm at base trying to get a connection to my location. Back to work things bro.