₦airaland Forum

This is what happens when you have employers who are not educated enough in the way of safety to understand what LTI’s are. In civilized countries, the boss can even be sued if no compensation is given to the affected persons.

That’s really sad to hear. At least he has his name etched on the sands of football forever. His goal against QPR in 2012 will never be forgotten.

Looking forward to the time when heart diseases or any illnesses for that matter will be a thing of the past! Isaiah 33:24, Revelation 21:4

Amotolongbo:
Politicians and the religious leaders are the ones destroying this country.
Politicians come to church and mosques to donate money and other gifts, instead of the religious leaders to tell them the truth about the state of states and nation being governed, the will not. Instead, they start praising the politicians.
Religion is the tool being used by politicians to make the citizens docile

No truer words have been said.

TenQ:
ANd a proper understanding of Jude will require that you understand what befell the angels who left their abode
1. What does eternal chain mean in Jude6?
2. Are those Angels dead (like Sodom and Gomorrah citizens) ?
3. If they are not dead, where are they?
4. Is Jude 6 just a parable?

Parable? What parable? Did DappaD mention anything about a parable ?

TenQ, please stop making illogical statements. Why have you not answered the simple question I asked you ?
Since fire and brimstone means torment, then where did the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah go after their death ? Abi they went for round two in another invisible realm lol

Okay you agreed that Sodom and Gomorrah do not continue to exist since Jude 7 said they underwent eternal punishment. But the same lingo is used at Matthew 25:46, so who’s telling you the people mentioned in that verse will continue to exist?

P.S. I just joined the thread, I haven’t been here before.

TenQ:

You said the book of revelation were just parables and visions that should not be taken literally, so, I showed you that I not only quoted from Revelation but also from Matthew25
Why dont you first analyse Matthew 25:46 since you don't need to IMPLY any meaning or interpretation as in Jude 1:7
How do you explain away the DIRECT word of Christ in Mat25, with Jude 1: that is subject to interpretation
Matthew 25:46
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Lets look at
Jude 1:6-8
…6And the angels who did not stay within their own domain but abandoned their proper dwelling—these He has kept in eternal chains under darkness, bound for judgment on that great day. 7 In like manner, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, who indulged in sexual immorality and pursued strange flesh, are on display as an example of those who sustain the punishment of eternal fire.
What does eternal chain mean in Jude6?
Are those Angels dead (like Sodom and Gomorrah citizens) ?
If they are not dead, where are they?
Is Jude 6 just a parable?
NOW
In like manner with the Angels in verse 6, Jude described Sodom and Gomorrah (which doesn't even exist again)
If they don't exist again, how can they be on display as an example (no one can even say for sure the location of the two cities)?
I want you to relate verse 6 and 7 and correlater them well.
A paralel of Jude 6 is
2Pt 2:4-6
4 For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them deep into hell, placing them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment; 5 if He did not spare the ancient world when He brought the flood on its ungodly people, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, among the eight; 6 if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction, reducing them to ashes as an example of what is coming on the ungodly;
Where are the Ashes of Sodom and Gomorrah?
Now, compare with the direct teaching of Jesus in
Mathew 5:21
21You have heard that it was said to the ancients, ‘Do not murder’ and ‘Anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ will be subject to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be subject to the fire of hell.
Jesus specifically mentioned that the standard of God is even higher than the judgement of Murder:Such will be Subject to the Fires of Hell

TenQ:

In the same quote , You probably read matthew 25:46 didnt you?
Matthew 25:46
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Since the dead know nothing, can the dead be punished?
Doesn't this mean that only the living can be punished?

I wanted to comment on Revelation 14:11 but seeing that you’ve shifted to Matthew 25:46, fine then.
Like I said, it’s obvious you’re reading these scriptures with a mind already tainted by the hellfire belief. And that’s the reason why you think punishment is synonymous to torment.

When God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, he used fire and brimstone (Genesis 19:24) and it was also recorded that they underwent everlasting punishment by fire (Jude 7) so my question to you is, where are the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah now? Were they destroyed instantly then or are they still lingering somewhere after fire and brimstone rained on their cities ?

TenQ I believe you’re reading these scriptures with a mindset that has been tainted with the hellfire dogma.

So please permit to chip in my 2cents !
You’ve been quoting Revelation 14:11 and using it as a basis for a hellfire but there’s something you’re missing if we’re to be honest. Do you need my input on the matter ?

TenQ:

I believe I asked you several direct question to help you slow down and analyse the scriptures. Let me reiterate
Rev 14:11
And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day and night —those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”
1. What is a TORMENT knowing that the dead knows NOTHING!
2. Can I torment a dead cat?
3. What does it mean that they have No Rest day and night?
4. If the dead are deemed to have slept, how come these particular set of dead people have no rest? Job 14:10-12
Matthew 25:46
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Since the dead know nothing, can the dead be punished?
5. Doesn't this mean that only the living can be punished?
Five separate question that deserve short answers

The authorities should make a thorough investigation about the stuff this boy feeds his mind with. It won’t be far from violent movies and video games.

Workch:
If I see evidence I will accept it.
The reason you want us to accept it is because you are indoctrinated with a very low IQ. You cannot think for yourself and you only believe before thinking.
Just fucking provide evidence or stfu.

Was it you I quoted ? If you know what’s good for you, respect yourself.

Steep:
Take for example Newton that states that for there to be a change, then there must be a cause.
This simply means that all the changes we can see and observe has a cause, this is the backbone of science and all research works.
Since Newton law so far has being proven to be true as far as our visible and observable universe is concerned then the ultimate cause is not subject to this law and outside of it.
Is there any evidence to prove a creator does not exist because even science proved there is God.

The reason many people do not want to accept the existence of a Creator as a fact is either one of these three things.
1. They do not want anybody to be telling them what to do on morals and behaviour, that’s why they call the Bible an outdated book.

2. They think that if there was a God, then there wouldn’t be so much suffering we see around us(this is a genuine way of thinking, however the answers are still in the Bible) and some may conclude that if there was a God, then he just doesn’t care, which is another fallacy.

3. They claim the Bible is filled with unrealistic events especially the ones that deals with miracles(I’ll expatiate on this more later and show that scientific theories also fall in this category if we are to look at it from that angle).

For a fact, we do not even need to be looking frantically for evidence to prove the existence of a Creator because the evidence around us is too glaring to miss. The only constraint many people encounter is when they choose not to properly examine these evidences for themselves and they end up becoming atheists.

Nicenancy:

Acts 13:2
]As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”

OP please take note of what the following Scriptures say:

Hebrews 3:7,8
“Therefore, just as the holy spirit says, “Today if you listen to his voice, do not harden your hearts as on the occasion of provoking to bitter anger, as in the day of testing in the wilderness”

Hebrews 4:7
“he again marks off a certain day by saying long afterward in David’s psalm, “Today”; just as it has been said above, “Today if you listen to his voice, do not harden your hearts.””

The above Scriptures were both references to Psalm 95:7,8 that was written by King David

“For he is our God, And we are the people of his pasture, The sheep in his care. Today if you listen to his voice, Do not harden your heart as at Merʹi·bah, As in the day of Masʹsah in the wilderness,”


Did you realize that while the Psalm was written by David, Paul said at Hebrews 3:7 that it was the holy spirit who said those things ?
Well is David now holy spirit ? Or does that mean holy spirit is a person ?
NO! It basically means that God’s holy spirit was acting on David that was why he was able to make inspired utterances. See 2Samuel 23:2, 2Peter 1:21
That’s what happened at Acts 13:2, Saul was evidently the one speaking but made it clear that he wasn’t speaking of his own initiative.

haddeylium:

I agree with you
Politics is a great divider of nations and creates a huge disunity even among close friends.It makes perfect sense why Jesus denounced human government at every turn pointing to a perfect heavenly government under God to come.
That's why I will forever be grateful to Jehovah’s Witnesses for maintaining worldwide unity by following the example of Jesus and his Apostles in remaining neutral in politics.

I usually reason with people who find it hard to understand why I don’t get involved with politics as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses,
“If I were to support APC, how would I go and preach the good news to somebody supporting PDP? Fight would erupt instantly.”
So being neutral in politics gives one the freeness of speech to make God’s Kingdom known to all sorts of persons. Acts 28:31

Over the past few months, there’s been a fuss over who’s going to assume the governor’s seat in a certain state in Nigeria.
Governorship candidates took their campaigns to popular churches. This happens every election period with churches pitted against one another, supporting one person over the other. With some saying things like “It’s time to stop so-so&so church from being in power”.

The question I usually ask people is how these persons can really be classified as Christians seeing that their behaviour and conduct is nowhere near that of Jesus;
Who rejected an offer of rulership more than once? Luke 4:6, John 6:15
Who said that his Kingdom(government) was no part of this world and so his disciples wouldn’t get involved with political struggles? John 17:14-16; John 18:36

More pertinent is that these same churches would claim to be part of the body of Christ but love and unity in mind cannot be seen amongst them as is required of true Christians. John 13:34-35, 1Corinthians 1:10
Also, these churches who claim Christian do not advocate for God’s Kingdom with Jesus as King instead they push for humans as rulers. Psalm 146:3
What could be more antiChrist than that?

Times like these are when I’m grateful being a Jehovah’s Witness because of my neutral stand in matters relating to politics. The only government I will FOREVER support and advocate for is that which Daniel 2:44 spoke about. This was the government Jesus constantly preached about(Luke 4:43) and I follow in his footsteps as a true Christian by preaching and teaching about that Kingdom! Matthew 24:14

Much of the text is missing, but DailyMail.com translated part of the ancient language to read: 'In the years [or times] of our master, his holiness our bishop.'

I think this part of the OP was omitted by those drooling on the front page. Who was this supposed ‘bishop’ that was being worshipped ? Definitely not Peter nor any of the other apostles who rejected any form of worship/reverence directed towards them. Acts 10:26, 14:15; 1Corinthians 3:4-6

Anyways by 725C.E., Christianity had gone to the dogs since Catholicism replaced it so this cannot be used as historical evidence for true Christianity.

Authority1o1:
Intriguing.
Even the missionaries among them who came for evangelical purposes?
And by force, do you hint that not all of them who came made use of force? Does that singular attribute differentiate a percentage from all, or all as you highlighted.

They didn’t employ the subtle methods which the apostles Paul did in taking the good news to the nations. So in order to penetrate into some lands, these so-called missionaries intermingled with colonial masters which is not what Jesus or Paul or any other Christian in the first century did.
The first century Christians didn’t have friends in authority and that was the reason they were severely persecuted(Acts 12:1), so where does forming friendships and alliances with the political powers leave these so-called missionaries ? James 4:4

Authority1o1:
Intriguing.

Even the missionaries among them who came for evangelical purposes?

I didn’t stutter in what I said.

Authority1o1:
I admire the turn this is taking. But of a truth, I know part of what your point is before now. I believe any true christian who have made a contact with the Spiritual would be convinced that it's beyond politics or scheme.

Nevertheless, I'm quite ruffled by this: ...those white men who used force to spread their teachings in Africa were not Christians but were the ravenous wolves who would infiltrate the Christian congregation...

By 'those', do you make a reference to a particular set, or all?

ALL. As long as force was used, we can’t say that it was Christianity that was being propagated. Need reasons why?

Bola146:
That is why He is called unquestionable God, He does has he pleases and He can't be questioned

May I know who called God “unquestionable” ?

Authority1o1:

I deduce that you refer to an already-written bible of an already-established religion. At least, if I'm correct, you understand that in contrast to what many believe, neither Christianity nor the Bible were formulated by Whites to help them subdue Africa.
It's very sickening to keep on coming across the "White-man-religion" and "Bible-was-written-by-Whites-for-the-purpose-of-mental-subduction-of-their-colonies" mantras. Or do you align with the thought?

Christianity was established by Jesus Christ in the first century(Matthew 28:19-20) and after the first century C.E., Christianity lost its meaning throughout the Dark Ages when Catholicism and Protestantism became the order not until the last days in which we find ourselves that true Christianity has again come to the fore as the wheats have been separated from the weeds. Matthew 13:30

The point of my previous post was to let you understand that those white men who used force to spread their teachings in Africa were not Christians but were the ravenous wolves who would infiltrate the Christian congregation, the ones that the apostles Paul and Peter talked about. Acts 20:29-30, 2Peter 2:1

Authority1o1:
When People Say That The Bible Was A Weapon In The Hands Of Colonialists, what do they mean?
You may have made the assertion that Christianity is/was a religion used by the Whites, the imperial Europe in this regard, to abbett colonialism in Africa.
I have a lot in view, but what does that mean to You?

Jesus prophesied that after the death of his apostles, impostors would overrun the congregation and they wouldn’t treat the flock kindly(which indeed occurred after the first century) Matthew 13:24-30, see also Acts 20:29-30, 2Peter 2:1
These set of persons brought in all sorts of apostate teachings and practices of demons (1Timothy 4:1) e.g. Trinity, Christmas, hellfire and so on.

In the hands of the weeds(these false Christians), the Bible was used as a tool for domination and colonialism. In the hands of the wheats(true Christians), the Bible today is being used properly as a tool for building up a person’s life! Hebrews 4:12, 2Timothy 3:16-17

Mark 9:45,48 King James Version
“45. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: (...) 48. Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”

Mark 9:45,48 Aramaic Bible
“45. If your foot subverts you, cut it off, for it is better for you to enter the Life crippled than when you have two feet that you should fall into Gehenna. (...) 48. Where their worm does not die and their fire is not quenched.””


It is often the case that people use the aforementioned Scripture as a basis for a ‘hellfire’ but there are a few things to note which do not give credence to that conclusion.

First, the New Testament was written in Koine Greek and in this language, there is no such thing as a ‘hellfire’.
In fact, in the Scripture mentioned above, what is normally translated as ‘hell’ or ‘hellfire’ in most Bibles is actually rendered ‘Gehenna’ (Greek: γέενναν).

This was a place familiar to those listening to Jesus because in ancient Jerusalem, Gehenna was situated outside the city and this was the place where rubbish heaps were burnt and DEAD criminals not worthy of burials were incinerated. So they understood that the import of this place in Jesus’ statement was to symbolize the total destruction of the wicked not a place of torment.

Second, Mark 9:45,48 is basically an excerpt from Isaiah 66:24 which reads:

“And they will go out and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; the worms that eat them will not die, the fire that burns them will not be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.”” NIV

“They will go out and observe the corpses of those who rebelled against me, for the maggots that eat them will not die, and the fire that consumes them will not die out. All people will find the sight abhorrent.” NET Bible

Note the words in highlight. Dead bodies, corpses, are thrown into this Gehenna, not people who are alive.
So this Gehenna is definitely not a place of torment because you need to be alive to experience torment. Those who have died are in a state of unconsciousness. They can neither hear nor feel nor do any other thing. Ecclesiastes 9:5-10

The points made here are clear enough for any honest hearted person seeking truth. Because once the false belief of a hellfire is removed from the heart, it becomes easier to obey God’s commandments which will show that one has love for God(1John 5:3) and have a healthy/reverential fear of him, not the morbid kind of fear but the fear that leads to everlasting life. Proverbs 19:23

Yippeedaniel:
I don't have problems with the organization or whatever but some teaching are not it and the people inside are bunch of super pretenders.
The internal conceal problem. The sex n sex abuses of minor and more internal issues.

If it’s concealed, how did you get to know of it? Elders receive letters from the branch and yes there are PIMO elders who are tending towards apostasy yet when has there ever been any letter leaked that reports the organization concealing sex abuse cases?

Yippeedaniel:
Jw is only sweet and holy when outside. When you're in you'll understand. Been there for few years but it's isn't what it pretend to be.

That’s why newly baptized persons are advised to continue making spiritual progress in their service to Jehovah. If you are a baptized brother, even better. The reason is so as not to drift away or your faith becomes weak(Hebrews 2:1) because whether anybody likes it or not, the initial flair one has for the truth will fade away UNLESS the person keeps on striving to EXERT himself(Luke 13:24) and WORKING on his faith that will lead to salvation. Philippians 2:12

Your further posts on this thread shows that you’re on the verge of being caught by the snares of Satan the Devil(2Timothy 2:26) which are the lies of apostates(2Timothy 2:16-18) You are basically the only person who can get yourself out from that situation. 1Peter 5:8-10

Hypocrites and those who hide their true identity/live double lives are amongst Jehovah’s Witnesses, yes, but that doesn’t change the fact this is the way to everlasting life. Jehovah knows those who truly belong to him(2Timothy 2:19) so the ones who claim to serve God are only deceiving themselves and not Jehovah because he can read the hearts of men. Isaiah 29:13
Those who hide their true identity are liars and they will not cross over into the new world even though they may have claimed to serve Jehovah. Matthew 24:48-51

Omooba77:
Why do many people fear death? Death is just transition from one realm to another, if you have Jesus, going to heaven should be a thing of joy.
Death is the fear many join occultism, doing rituals and so on.

If so, what realm did Adam and Eve go to after their death? Genesis 3:19

Death isn’t the transition from one realm to another. Death is what it is! DEATH—the cessation of life, not an endless cycle of life. Ezekiel 18:4

Those who have died are in an unconscious state(Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, John 11:11) in the dust of the ground(Psalm 146:4) and the only remedy to death is resurrection. Isaiah 26:19, John 5:28, Acts 24:15

It’s pretty simple actually. If they were divorced, Zipporah would no longer be called his wife and Jethro would no longer be called his father-in-law. But as the Bible would have it, they were. The reputation of the jerry-curled clown is already soiled thus far, but for God’s sake, leave Moses out of this, he never had any problems in his marriage, neither did he marry another wife.

petra1:

Firstly im not in any Spot. Dont get petty on words. If the word divorce becomes an issue for you to embrace the bigger picture. let me compromise a little. lets use the prase. HE SENT HER PACKING.
That actually what the bible says. HE SENT HER AWAY! . Its common sense to know what thst means . the hebrew word their means divorce. i wasnt there to know they issue certificate. that will be petty and lame to hide under.
The truth is simple. MOSES SENT HIS WIFE AWAY . And he married another woman. period. If he accepts her back good for her.
many times when a woman is sent home. those who are mediating will still say "COME CARRY YOUR WIFE Back " or they say to a woman sent home "GO BACK TO YOUR HUSBAND"
The fact that they call them wife or husband didnt nulify the broken relationship. So dont get into semantics

petra1:

I believe I cleared you on that. The father inlaw mediated.
yes its possible. He was a man Moses respected. He was also a minister of God. A priest
Sure he was a more experienced minister and leader. moses was kije a son. I dont see any issue.


it doesnt matter. If you send your wife packing. She can still be called your wife.


some wives comes back after reconcilluation some dont. Some wives have come back 6 times and sent back home to their fathers house 6 times .
I’m still waiting for you to quote 1Timothy 3:5 let us see how it fits into your theory that one who ministers before God shouldn’t be held to account for conduct in his personal life.
If you have something to say about the verse go ahead
The jerry-curled clown is just one those persons Jesus referred to as men who impose heavy loads on others but are not willing to apply such things to themselves. Matthew 23:2-4
You dont have to be silly in your post. let stay on scripture please. your hairstyle is your choice. another mans hairstyle is his choice. if you admire it get the cream

Honestly I like the spot I just put you in.
Can someone please educate this guy that once a marriage is dissolved, the man and woman are no longer husband and wife?
You can see how you’re fumbling here and there, talking offpoint.

Let me resound it well for you. Numbers 10:29 called Reuel/Jethro the father-in-law of Moses which means that Zipporah (his daughter) is still Moses’ wife long after the circumcision issue. That’s the conclusion of that matter.

Your idea of Moses having problems in his marriage was only a smokescreen for the real problem here. You believe ministers of God shouldn’t be held into account for their conduct that’s why you tried to miscontrue what you did not understand regarding Moses.

And that was the reason for my quoting 1Timothy 3:5 which reads thus,

“(but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?),” NASB

1Timothy chapter 3 lists out requirements for an overseer in the congregation, so contrary to what you have been saying, a man who is desiring for such position is meant to hold to the highest moral standards and be able to show that he can appropriately keep his family under his wing, which the jerry-curled clown has not been able to do. That’s why he’s not in a good position to lecture others about what should go on in their marriages.

Your claim was that Moses divorced Zipporah, meanwhile the same Exodus chapter 18 and verse 5, says that Jethro brought back Zipporah to him at the mountain, Moses even called her “his wife” not “ex wife” after they were temporarily separated(given that Zipporah did not accompany Moses to Egypt).

A man divorces the daughter of another man, and the next thing you see is that man inviting the former husband of his daughter to a feast. If they were divorced, would that have happened? Would he have been of assistance to Moses in judging cases in Israel?
Think man!

One more reason why your thought process is flawed is that Numbers 10:29 still refers to Reuel/Jethro as the father-in-law of Moses, long after that circumcision issue. So why is that the case if Moses had divorced Zipporah?


I’m still waiting for you to quote 1Timothy 3:5 let us see how it fits into your theory that one who ministers before God shouldn’t be held to account for conduct in his personal life.
The jerry-curled clown is just one those persons Jesus referred to as men who impose heavy loads on others but are not willing to apply such things to themselves. Matthew 23:2-4

petra1:
it doesn't matter the translation. Moses divorced the wife after she insulted him calling him bloodly husband.
Exo 4:25 — Exo 4:26
25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. 26 So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.
The bible says Moses Sent her back or sent her away . some translations righty rendered it
Exodus 18:2 (BBE)
2 And Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, took Zipporah, Moses' wife, after he had sent her away,
You may kindly check it out in strongs Hebrew dictionary. it means Divorce
(Olive Tree Enhanced Strong's Dictionary)
h7964. שִׁלּוּחַ šillûaḥ; or שִׁלֻּחַ shilluach; from 7971; (only in plural) a dismissal, i.e. (of a wife)
divorce (especially the document); also (of a daughter)
So dilligent study on the passage shows He divorced her. Other books and manuscripts like the book of Jasher throws more light on his Divorce
The Father inlaw intervened and brought about reconciliation
Definately not thesame woman. The Cushite Ethiopian woman is a new wife. why would Aaron complained of Moses Marrying a non Jew. He married Marian when there was no law. Nobody complained but he married the cushite against the law hence the complain. Ask yourself why would they complained of a Marian being a non jew many years after marriage and bearing children. it doesnt make sense. Its the new Gentile wife that was unconstitutional.

petra1:
Numbers 12:1 (NKJV)
​1 Then Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married; for he had married an Ethiopian woman.

Other translations put it this way.


“Miriam and Aaron began to talk against Moses because of his Cushite wife, for he had married a Cushite.”—New International Version

“Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had married a Cushite woman”—English Standard Version

“Miriam and Aaron rebelled against Moses on account of the Cushite woman that he had married.”—International Standard Version

The above Scripture doesn’t say that Moses took a second wife. Let’s get the timeline straightened out.

While Moses was on his self-imposed exile, he married a woman(Zipporah) who was not even an Israelite to begin with(Exodus 2:21) so this is what suggests that it is the same woman mentioned at Numbers 12:1.

So where is the law that was being broken here? Like I said earlier, the father(Jethro) of his wife, honored the true God(Exodus 18:10) so the evidence that household followed suit is glaring.
After all, Rahab/Ruth were not Israelites yet they married Israelite men because they feared the true God(Compare Joshua 2:12, Ruth 1:16), this was the same with Zipporah as seen from her actions. Exodus 4:24-26

You also said Zipporah left him after this incident, so why was she still being called Moses’ wife at Exodus 18:2? Do you not know that according to chronology, the books of Exodus and Numbers were written one year apart?

Moreover, did you go over the 1Timothy 3:5 like I told you to? The reason is so you can dead the thought that those who minister before God can live wayward and morally debased lives with no one to hold them to account.

Maestro21:
I was about to make the mistake of educating you then I realized you are from the sect of the blind, dull, dumb and irreverent.
So I decided against it.
Bye.

Hian. See me and problem. Weren’t you the one who quoted me in the first place?
See person wey I no even send.

petra1:
He said if a wife leaves a man the man is a failure and if he is a minister. He has no business teaching people.
got his attention to the fact that a minister teaches by the anointing of God and not personal exoerience.

One of the qualifications of a man taking the lead in the gathering of his fellow believers is that he should set a good example. Perhaps you would do yourself a lot of good by going over those requirements at 1Timothy chapter 3 and pay attention to verse 5.

Moses through who the Law came once had marital issues. His wife left him after the circumcision Saga. he took another wife against scriptures and married a non jew as second wife.

Do you have some other Bible where these things are stated therein? Because as far as I’m concerned, all of what you just typed here is not found nor is the reasoning conveyed in any respected Bible translation.

our friend argued that moses was not a teacher. and i made him understand moses was law giver , teacher , judge yet whatever personal experience doesn change his calling in God. a minister teach by the word.

That “our friend” is my brother in the faith. See, Moses has no business standing as mediator between God and men if he didn’t adhere to high moral standards that’s why he was chastised by God when he displayed poor judgment(Numbers 20:13) so God did not bend the standards even for Moses.

All you have to know is that Moses never broke any law because he didn’t take a second wife! That’s just what you assume he did.

Maestro21:
1.That Moses married a woman by the law - that he should not have?

2. That Moses sent away his first wife?

1. Do you know that servants of God in the past before Moses used to select marriage mates amongst those who worshiped and respected God? Genesis 24:4
In that light, was Jethro the father of Zipporah one who honoured the true God or not? Exodus 18:10
Which suggests that the household likewise did the same?

Moreover I fail to see how this has any relevance to what I asked—it would rather suggest that you think Moses violated some law and that the jerry-curled clown posing as a pastor can get away with something that Moses wasn’t guilty of?


2. In what portion of the Bible did you get to know that Moses sent away Zipporah ?

petra1:
There is nothing like failure in Marriage . Its just your organization doctrine that need to align with the bible .

Moses should have been a failure according to your doctrine.

you dont need to be in marriage to teach on marriage. if a partner leaves you it doesn't change anything about you. if you must ascribe any failures at all . well maybe the person who left . But the truth is life is a choice . what you call failure is not and ministry is by the holy spirit and the word.

Can I know what you mean by the words in bold? Been following the thread and your whole argument seems to be hinged on this line of reasoning that doesn’t exist in the Bible.