bigfrancis21:


My brother ehh, sometimes you just gotta deal with trolls.

It dealt with itself already,what with all the foolishness it littered this thread with.

bigfrancis21:

Like I said you are not brain worthy to prove anything to you.

Jesus,you're just realizing this?. Give it a rest,stop giving the thing attention.Its

DavidTheGeek:

Your stuupidity is outta this world.

If he wants to pay "tithe", then he should do it the way the bible asked him to pay "tithe" - pay it to the church.

Giving to the needy is not "tithe".

Actually,giving to the needy is tithe.Unless you want to tell me God himself doesn't know what He's saying.Deut.14:29,26:12
Nowhere in the Bible did God command paying tithe to the 'church'.Tithe was never money,but agricultural produce,Deut.14:22-26.
The practice of bringing such produce to the temple,to be distributed to the Levites who had no inheritance and the needy, was instituted by King Hezekiah of Judah.It wasn't an ordinance of the Law.That practice was what Malachi alluded to,the quote of which you people have grossly taken out of context.

AnonyNymous:

My concoction? I laugh! This is getting really funny. You keep putting your ignorance on display! There is an Act of Barnabas, an Epistle of Barnabas, as well as a Gospel of Barnabas. Its better to plead the fifth and admit your ignorance on a topic instead of further ridiculing yourself. It exists, my friend. Scanned leaflets are included in the book Lost Christianities. Whether or not it is authentic as the old testament book of Enoch, or as fake as many of the 'letters' of Paul is not what we're talking about. It exists, and you claim nothing of such has ever existed. Ignorance is a DISEASE.

Such an object of pity you are.
Again,first rule about being caught in a hole or pit is to stop digging.
And no,I'm not falling for that your shiny object strategy.Works only on kids like yourself

AnonyNymous:

Maybe English comprehension is not your forte! Here is what I said about your response on the book of Thomas which is on this thread for anyone to see:



You said the book of Barnabas does not exist, now you said it existed, but its fake. I think you're the real liar here! Please do not quote me again.

Child of idiocy,I don't need to conduct further research on the Gospel of Thomas,I have a copy here.
The Gospel of Barnabas,as you posited,does not exist.Your concoction never stood the light of scrutiny.
The other acknowledged, but non canonical gospels include the Gospel of Mary,Gospel of Philip,Act of Peter,Testimony of Simon.Heck,there's Act of Barnabas too,but never Gospel of Barnabas
You really are not bright at all.Not a sharp tool in your family shed,I'm sure
You first read about it in a book,now it's a 'professor' of Christian studies.
Dude,the first rule about being caught in a hole is to stop digging.

AnonyNymous:

I didn't drop any reference to the book of Thomas, I told you that all you've heard is from one source, investigate and do proper research as to why it wasn't included in the bible. Learn about the Piso family and the new testament.

.

Oh Jeez.
Atop being dumb,you turn out a liar too.A very bad one,at that
I quoted you the first time,no way you can edit that post now.Your words are now on the marble,so to say.

Pray tell,how could a relatively recent concoction have existed when the bible itself was compiled in the 4th century?.
Heck,scholars both Christian,muslim and secular had consigned it to the bin it belonged,excepting the Islamic fundamentalists who concocted it in the first place.
You do well to leave this thread and run,child.This proved way over your grade.
Now,like I'd advised earlier,get back in class,stay there and learn.

AnonyNymous:

Are you really this dumb? A google search will save you from all this embarrassment na. The Gospel of Barnabas can even be downloaded on the play store. I originally read about it in the book 'Lost Christianities' by an American professor and then did my research.

As opposed to you saying it does not, and has never existed. You have absolutely NO idea of what you're saying.

Not only are you dumb,but your idiocy has no equal.
BTW,I see you quickly dropped reference to the Gospel of Thomas.Not only did you not know anything about it,but it would have clobbered you to death with it implied support of the Canonical gospels.
An excerpt from it:
'Let one who seeks not stop seeking until one finds.When one finds,one will be disturbed.When one is disturbed,one will be amazed and reign over all'.(ref Luke 11:9,Matthew 7:7-.

For any other person following this narrative, his so-called Gospel of Barnabas exist in a 16th century manuscript,written in Italian,Islamic websites and in an 18th century partial manuscript.
The bible,on the other hand was first compiled at the Council of Hippo,393AD.

AnonyNymous:

Actually, YOU are the ignorant one.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas

Of course, those are the reasons they will tell you. . . but have you done your research? Please don't try to sound so high and mighty when you actually don't know much of what you're talking about.

Wiki,that's your source?.
For real?.
Man,your ignorance has no part 2.
Did you even read the wiki page you're so quick to wave as your evidence?.
The bible was first compiled at the Council of Hippo,393 and your so-called Gospel of Barnabas manuscript first surfaced in the 16TH CENTURY, in ITALIAN. Not Aramaic nor Greek,not even Latin.And written in conformity/synchronicity with Islamic texts?
Man,get back in class.This time,stay there and learn.

AnonyNymous:

I am not a Christian, I'm a deist, but it will anger you even more to know that not all the letters of St. Paul are even authentic. Although I am non religious, it will be foolish to ignore the fact that the person called 'Jesus', if he ever existed or not, gave some good guidelines for human morality with a few exceptions. Just like Buddha, Zoroaster, Confucius, etc. Most of these were clearly contradicted by the 'letters' of St. Paul. Hell, the synoptic gospel isn't even reliable. . .Look for the Gospel of Thomas or the Gospel of Barnabas (Removed by the Roman Catholic church) and just try to go through them. Or at least read summaries from people who have read them completely.

The Gospel of Thomas is a collection of loggias or sayings of Jesus and actually confirm all Jesus was quoted to have said in the Synoptic gospels.
Reason why it was not included in the by Bible compilation was that its authorship could not be confirmed,not its provenance.
There is not and never has been any book called the Gospel of Barnabas.
For one so quick to accuse others,you really are confoundedly ignorant.

I see now why they said stupidity run in certain genes.
A very poor attempt to divert attention from the walloping Southwest political leaders got from their Fulani masters yesterday.

EnEnPeecee:
Baba, where actually do you belonged?
Pdp abi apc

He belongs with anywhere belle face. You guys should have long realized that.

Scholar8200:
Now, Earthkumy, consider the analysis below and kindly share your thoughts:

Jesus had 12 disciples who were Israelites and He never bade them deal with ancestral curses. However, hear what he said to those who rejected Him:





29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.

31 [size=14pt]Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.[/size]

32 [size=18pt]Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.[/size]

33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Matthew 23:29-35

Now these are my points:

1. The pharisees appeared to be doing a good or perhaps remedial action but it only made them more guilty;Why? they had the sin of unbelief(Major cause of condemnation John 3:18)
2. The eligibility of the pharisees to be partakers of an inherited judgement stemmed not from what they tried to do to exonerate themselves but their rejection of Christ and unbelief.
3. The disciples who were at the scene were neither referenced openly as being also guilty being Israelites, nor exhorted privately to do something to be free. Why? They believed on Jesus and were free from condemnation, Jesus also pronounced them clean.
4.Vs 32 shows that they, by their self-invented conciliatory measures (whole persisting in unbelief) were linking themselves as partakers of the sin of the perpetrators.

What am I driving at?
1. The sting of death (ultimate curse of the law) is sin; if a Christian is having these issues, the first inclination should not be deliverance but examination in His Presence. Just as unbelief (a great sin) made the pharisees able partakers of their fathers' sins and the curse it deserved, there might be certain sins that may be unchecked in the believer's life. It may not be deliberate, active sin. Perhaps an outstanding restitution, holding back from giving ourselves God (due to unbelief), withdrawing consecration once made, unwitting participation in the sin of others etc
-David had a 3-year famine thank God he inquired of God and saw that there was an unmitigated injustice to be rectified;
-Joshua lost a battle thank God he humbled himself before God and saw that a member of the church had flouted God's express word;
-Jehoshaphat's investment failed because he maintained unequal yoke with a sinner not because he was Asa's son. etc

Are these similar to the action of the Pharisees? NO! the Pharisees rejected the Lord and busied themselves with what was neither commanded in the law of Moses nor revelations of the prophets.

2. Ignorance (in-law to unbelief). God said His people are in captivity not because the enemies are stronger or that they have a legal right but because His people were ignorant.

I am here to learn.

God bless you.
Also,check out God's word in the Old Testament, long before Jesus,in the book of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel 18King James Version (KJV)
18 The word of the Lord came unto me again, saying,
2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge?
3 As I live, saith the Lord God, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel.
4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
5 But if a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right,
6 And hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, neither hath defiled his neighbour's wife, neither hath come near to a menstruous woman,
7 And hath not oppressed any, but hath restored to the debtor his pledge, hath spoiled none by violence, hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment;
8 He that hath not given forth upon usury, neither hath taken any increase, that hath withdrawn his hand from iniquity, hath executed true judgment between man and man,
9 Hath walked in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he shall surely live, saith the Lord God.
10 If he beget a son that is a robber, a shedder of blood, and that doeth the like to any one of these things,
11 And that doeth not any of those duties, but even hath eaten upon the mountains, and defiled his neighbour's wife,
12 Hath oppressed the poor and needy, hath spoiled by violence, hath not restored the pledge, and hath lifted up his eyes to the idols, hath committed abomination,
13 Hath given forth upon usury, and hath taken increase: shall he then live? he shall not live: he hath done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon him.
14 Now, lo, if he beget a son, that seeth all his father's sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like,
15 That hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, hath not defiled his neighbour's wife,
16 Neither hath oppressed any, hath not withholden the pledge, neither hath spoiled by violence, but hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment,
17 That hath taken off his hand from the poor, that hath not received usury nor increase, hath executed my judgments, hath walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live.
18 As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, spoiled his brother by violence, and did that which is not good among his people, lo, even he shall die in his iniquity.
19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.
20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?
24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.
25 Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?
26 When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.
27 Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.
28 Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
29 Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the
Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal?
30 Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord
God. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.
31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
32 For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.
King James Version (KJV)


There's nothing like ancestral curse in a Christian's life.That's paganism garbed as Pentecostal doctrine.



Olabestonic001:


I get the your words.
Pre-2012, was there any of these things you mentioned? No, there was none. So, what went really wrong?
First, the 2012 January 1, subsidy removal package was something the SW won't understand. Worst still, GEJ mentioned cabals and rather than face them, he face Nigeria masses. Two, GEJ ensured the persecution or prosecution of Tinubu at the CCB, that causes a political friction btw him and the Tinubu camp. We ain't really care about Tinubu's issue though, but his camp picked offense. Three, the Boko Haram menace and how GEJ handled it. And lastly, the way GEJ bad mouthed all Yoruba elders (calling them "Garage touts", he more than undid himself on that. He goofed by that statement.
The Igbo issue is basically that of crying more than the bereaved. They tot a fight against President Jonathan ('President', used deliberately) was against them. And maybe they tot the SW really hard them.
On the IPOB
palaver, it was obvious that obvious that the campaign became suddenly High Pitched after GEJ loss. Yoruba's suspected that "Biafra or death" a blackmail tool. Though, its only a foolish Yoruba man that will celebrate the loss of any man's life. NDA is been understandable but SW also suspected blackmail. Using violence as blackmail is something a Yoruba man will never like.
However, a Southern, Middlebelt and Northern minorities will serve us all better.

Buhari removed subsidy and didn't fight any cabal,why was Jonathan's own different?.
BTW,I'm guessing Saraki's CCT travails n more under Buhari is a compliment on Yoruba 'leaders',whereas Jonathan putting Tinubu on the dock is abomination.
Biafra agitation has been on since Obj era,gathering momentum under Jonathan, yet there was no official shooting of unarmed protesters n no one cheering such killings on,until SWers thought they'd gotten to power thru Buhari.
Yar'Adua's government caused the BH insurgency, yet the man was humane enough,enlightened enough to know that force of arms will achieve nothing in the SS,only Justice would.
Your guy came in,with his 5% n bombings,and you guys cheered him,believing such would secure your collective exploitative rights in the delta.
Now,your chickens have come home to roost and you now want us,whom you've maligned,to trust and ally with you against your erstwhile allies and partners.

Ona yin shi jin.E o ni bo n' be

saintmark88:


Maybe it's d title premier of north thts deceiving u, okay I'll change the phrase, he was made d military commander of d northern region

Kid,time you went back to school.And this time,stay there and learn.
Before you do though.......The four Military Governors appointed for the regions by Ironsi were:

1.Lt.Col Hassan Katsina - Northern Region.

2.Lt.Col Emeka Ojukwu - Eastern Region.

3.Lt.Col David Ejoor - Midwestern Region

4.Lt.Col Adekunle Fajuyi - Western Region.

Hassan Katsina later became Chief of Army staff during the course of the civil war.
I didn't realize he changed his name from Nzeogwu then,according to u.

saintmark88:

You can't argue with history and facts right??

Nzeogwu made premier of Northern region is your history and fact?. In what alternate universe do you live in?

DropShot:

I did a comprehensive study of 2015 election.
In 2011, Buhari won only the core North states (about 7 or 8 of them) and not all, despite being in opposition.

In 2015, the rigging machime of PDP in the SE/SS was responsible for nearly 95% turn out in those regioms compared to less than 60% across the nation. If not those "special circumstances " (apologies to that Rivers Returning Officer), the gap between PMB and GEJ in that election could have been more than 3 million votes.

PMB's performance in the NE/NW in 2003, 2007 and 2011 was because he didn't have the support of a strong national political party and the Northern elites then. Now that he has a party with the spread, and his own political allies, don't expect anyone giving him any close battle in the NE/NW in 2019.

Will you get off that weed you've been smoking?.
SE/SS 95% turnout in 2015,really?.
Anambra alone returned less than 400,000 votes total out of a possible 1.85million and that's 95% turnout to you.
I'm starting to see what they say about Awo's 'free education' being true.

giles14:
op pls amichi is in nnewi north

Amichi is in Nnewi South.Nnewi North is a single town local govt.

fuad99:
I don't no why some of us could decide to be so myopic in reasoning.... Nothing is complicated in this...If PMB is not satisfied with the nominated CJN he can reject and ask the council to forward another name...That is why he is commander in chief

Commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces,not Federation.
Get educated,cure yourself of ur ignorance.

The President cannot reject a validly-made nomination by the NJC,only the Senate has that power. The 'shall' in that section binds him.

We all witnessed the outcome of Amaechi trying to go outside the recommendation of the NJC,as pertain to the Chief Judge of Rivers state.

recession is just a word - kemi adeosun

Headline shouts 30 girls,while story said two.
Bloggers and sensationalism.

amaechi1:


Please, seperate the sentialional heading by our media and look at the merit of the content. Becaause Mr President understand the separation power that is why he asking for their approval. How do you deal long bottled neck or breaucracy in doing business in Nigeria.

Who is going by sensational headline?
The National Assembly can amend any provision of law within 2 days if the president wants,barring constitutional amendments.
Why would the president now ask for powers to unilaterally amend or repeal laws not to his liking,ostensibly for 'economic' purposes.Do you kids know what dangerous slippery slope you're supporting on social media just for five thousand naira stipend?.
Powers of budgetary provisions virement too,without recourse to the legislature.What are we now,crazy?.
Constitutional separation of powers was instituted the world over for a reason and it is to be held sacred,inviolable.
Obama got America out of a recession with a Republican Congress n never muted such crazy idea.He used the laws n tools at his disposal.The APC is the majority in the NASS,he should use it to achieve his aim if its actually altruistic.

No president needs usurping the powers of the legislature in order to shore up the economy.That's dictatorship in the making.What am I even saying?.Its blatantly anti-constitution.The power to make,repeal or amend laws lie squarely with the legislature.APC,the president's party,has a majority in both chambers,he should use it to push whatever economic policy he has,not seeking absolute power garbed in economic emergency nonsense.
Hitler started out like this too and before they knew it,the Reichstag was gone.

Unintelligent report,from an unintelligent fellow,using an unintelligent source.

I really hate commenting on such idiotic and asinine thread as this,but let's have some things clear:

1. The man Chinakwe,though Igbo-sounding,is Niger-Deltan.

2. He named his dog Buhari,out of admiration not spite.

3. The complainant is from Niger,not Nigerian.

4. He connived with a Sergeant Musa and the DPO.

5. Their actions has left the Police a laughingstock and the Ogun police authorities furious.

6. Nothing in the world can cure the idiocy and plumb stupidity that is Omenka and bats such as he

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2016/08/named-dog-buhari-trader/

So long as Nigeria remains a federation,you can't scrap the Senate.The Senate represent the States and equality of the states in the federal arrangement.You guys should go back to school and learn basic governmental systems before making shows of yourselves on public fora

gratiaeo:
The op is a goat

Stop insulting goats,Mr.

Igboid:


Pazienza is in hibernation, Igboid is here for now, just try and take him as you see him.

If possible,kindly post the excerpts on the Ibos,Ikwerre and Elechi Amadi thread.Some people need education.
That is,if you haven't done so already.

The truth,and nothing but the truth

The Yoruba nation has for long been Ichabodized,and no amount of media whitewashing can erase that fact.
I really pity the younger generation being sold on such lies though

blackpanda:



The so called "region thing" as u pointed is whats provided in the constitution. Incase u dont known the constitution is the grundnorm and prescribes what fed character is. Ok

Now run along!

There's no "region" anything anywhere in the constitution,but states.
There should be a limit to the lickspittle you guys do online.
Jeez!

blackpanda:


How does this not reflect federal chaacter Pls show me the region that was omitted?


1. Obinna Chukwuemeka Agbugba (Abia)

2. Salisu Umaru (Adamawa)

3. Inyan Udo-Inyang (Akwa Ibom)


4. Okeke Vivian Nwunaku (Anambra)

5. Liman Munir (Bauchi)

6. Ndem Jane Ada (Benue)

7. Mohammed Hassan Hassan (Borno)

8. Martin Nyong Cobham (Cross River)

9. Janet Omoleegho Olisa (Delta)

10. Itegboje S. Sunday (Edo)

11. Olatunde Adesesan (Ekiti)

12. Lilian Ijeukwu Onoh (Enugu)

13. Manaja Tula Isah (Gombe)

14. Ngozi Ukaeje (Imo)

15. Bello Kazaure Huessini (Jigawa)

16. Enoch Pear Duchi (Kaduna)

17. Garba Baba (Kano)

18. Usman Bakori Aliyu (Katsina)

19. Umar Zainab Salisu (Kebbi)

20. Momoh Sheidu Omeiza (Kogi)

21. Kadiri Ayinla Audu (Kwara)

22. Balogun Hakeem (Lagos)

23. Inusa Ahmed (Nasarawa)

24. Ibrahim Isah (Niger)

25. Bankole Adegboyega Adeoye (Ogun)

26. Ibidapo-Obe Oluwasegun (Osun)

27. Ogundero Sakirat (Oyo)

28. Eric A. Bell-Gam (Rivers)

29. Attahiru Halliru (Sokoto)

30. Rahmatu A. Dunama (Taraba)

31. Musa Saban Mamman (Yobe)

32. Kabiru Bala (Zamfara)

33. Adamu Onoze Shuaibu (FCT)

34. Demenongu A. Agev (Benue)

35. Toko Ali Gongulong (Borno)

36. Ibrahim Hamza (Katsina)

37. Kenneth C. Nwachukwu (Imo)

38. Queen I. Worlu (Edo)

39. Emmanuel Kayode Oguntause (Ekiti)

40. Paragalda Ilyasu Audu (Adamawa)

41. Lawan Abba Gashagar (Borno)

42. Olufemi Abikoye (Kwara)

43. Habu Abubakar Gwani Ibrahim (Gombe)

44. Rabiu Akawu (Kano)

45. Nonye Udo (Anambra)

46. Odeka Janet Bisong (Cross River)

47. Sonaike Adekunbi Abibat (Ogun)

No Bayelsa,Ebonyi and Ondo,yet a state like Borno has three nominees.Is it that you're blind or just being intentionally obtuse?

lalasticala,FP worthy thread