₦airaland Forum

InesQor:

I believe when something, anything, someone is transferred from the heavenly realms to the earthward realms, it simultaneously exists in both dimensions.

The earthward component is NEVER enough to entirely swallow the heavenly substance, but it FULLY represents it.

Like DNA represents a biological unit.

If I take   a  cell sample of a man to extract DNA and lock it away in a petridish in a cabinet,

does this mean the man wont be able to leave the lab because he is locked in my cabinet?

Lets consider this instance: when the Father sent the son, was the WORD not still in heaven?

Of course the WORD was in heaven yet manifested in the flesh and dwelt among men. Ditto the Holy Spirit of God. He lives in the new man, and yet He is in heaven.

The man could leave but can the DNA? Would the DNA be able to unlock the cabinet?

. . . a bit flawed but right in a sense

Samson, Bezaleel, Aholiab, King Saul etc had flavours and not the full flavours of the Spirit of God

We never had the complete or full essence of the Spirit of God until now

Yes it was sent but it can be shut up from receiving - if you know what I mean, there

The Holy Spirit sent is like a Widow of Zarephath thing or experience

The buck stops with you. Turn off the tap or dont turn up with more vessels 

Always sending, always flowing from heaven Holy Spirit. What an amazing and unselfish God

By the way. What is the distinction & differences between :

- the Spirit of God that hovered over the earth,
- the Holy Spirit,
- and the spirits of God
(e.g. the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD)

InesQor:

This thread was created to discuss the following:

nuclearboy:

@Inesqor:

I've been waiting for Viaro to come back before asking this but my patience is waning.

"Origin of Sin", "Inerrancy of the Bible", "Trinity" etc all seem to be much the same TO ME as discussing "freedom of the press". They remain semantics.

The issue is what exactly is the "message" of the scripture, the "meat" of the Gospel.

What exactly is the Gospel itself and what were you/I/the "Sons of God" created for?

I have some weird theories which I'll defend with my life

and today, I shared them for the first time ever with a much loved member of this forum though not on the forum but private mail.

Whats your take on the above?

nuclearboy:

Lets create a new thread for it. Please would you do the honors and create it? I'm behind you.

I think NL is about to get the shock of its existence and many "christians" a wake up call

e36991:

@nuclearboy

Incidentally I actually have a plausible conjecture on this too (i.e. . . . what were you/I/the "Sons of God" created for?)

Used to be baffled over it (i.e. the "What were we created for and Why?"

Single verse in the bible made the penny drop

InesQor:

Alright, let the ball roll!!!

. . .  await your views on this. Meanwhile, I will start off with mine

@InesQor & nuclearboy

. . . respects to both of ya

Yall know yall been blessed for your labour of love

The message, core or meat of the gospel to me, is self explanatory

I believe the gospel ties with the "What were we created for"

but the Why, my main concern, in a bodacious way seems to tie in with something else (i.e. a key event that created a vacuum and need)

Lets do some analytical explorations and verify the mind of God concerning the product - MAN

1) What is man created for? >> Easy, self explanatory

2) Why is man to be created? >> Not that easy or self explanatory. Its more than: "Have Dominion" "to love God" "The love of the Father" etc

3) Where is man to be created? >> Easy, self explanatory

4) How is man to be created? >> Easy, self explanatory

Good place for a pause, here.

Joagbaje:

The holyspirit is not in heaven. But in us on the earth. Check the scriptures.

chukwudi44:

The above quote is from our highly learned pastor of CEC PLC in the link below

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-524364.32.html

I created this new thread because I didn't want to derail the previous one

and would like our dear pastors to show me passages of the scripture which says that the holy spirit is not in heaven

@^^^

It is an audacious and ruffle feathers claim

and I think I empathise with him

John14:26 BBE:
But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name,

will be your teacher in all things and will put you in mind of everything I have said to you.

It is obvious where Joagbaje is coming from and what he based this on

Jenwitemi:

Can i make a couple of guesses?

We were created to grovel on the ground in front of "him" in total submission and worship?

To caress "his" overblown cosmic ego? Was that the penny that dropped?

Jenwitemi

Grovel?  . . . total submission & worship? Caress ego?

Nah. That's a myopic thinking.

It's rather simple and far from your off the cuff and warped remark

Jenwitemi:

Oohh! Brilliant! Bravo! We are getting technical now to prove the grand design of the divine kind! Impressive!

Please answer the following questions;

1) Who are the designers?
a) God according to the ancient jews;
b) God according to the pope?

2) Who is doing the "waterfall model" as you put it?
a) God according to the ancient jews;
b) God according to the pope?

3) Who is doing the testing at the last stage?
a) God according to the ancient jews;
b) God according to the pope?

4) Who is doing the acceptance of the "modell" in question?
a) God according to the ancient jews;
b) God according to the pope?

@Jenwitemi

"Won o mo pe, ore mi yi, ti giran" literally "This is a toughened cookie friend"

Ah-ha, you go talk your own now. Why not

Do I sense gusto laced with sarcasm

Sorry you'll have to salivate a bit longer for the answers

PS:

4) Who is doing the acceptance of the "modell" in question?

should be

4) Who is doing the acceptance of the "modell" product (i.e. man) in question?

InesQor:

  [img width=70 height=70]http://www.legaljuice.com/yawn%20big%20funny.jpg[/img]

Who invented the wheel? Who cares? You all use it anyway and you can't do without it.

Sin is any Contrived Deviation from Divine Design.

ROSSIKE:

And just WHO gets to decide what this ''Divine Design'' is?

The pope?

Some character in a Jewish book?

A pastor?

You?

InesQor:

This is simple. The Divine Designer knows. He does not need to "decide"

ROSSIKE:

I'm sorry but it's really not quite so simple.

You are fronting a religion that claims to KNOW what the ''divine design'' is. They produced ''commandments'' supposedly emanating from God. They claimed to have hosted no less a personage than the ''Son of God'' himself in their homeland, insisting that all must worship this character or risk eternal damnation.

They, in other words, have positioned themselves as representatives or emissaries of the Creator of the Universes. Through THEM all his laws come down to us ''Gentiles''. Through THEM his ''saviour'' and ''Only Son'' comes. ''Angels'', when they remember us, stop over in THEIR land.

They also claim that THEY are the ''chosen people'' of the Creator of the Universes.

In effect, THEY tell US what the ''Divine Design'' is, something you're trying to avoid admitting.

But I put it to you that it is in fact THEIR design, and not any ''Divine Design''.

Anything truly ''Divine'' cannot predicate its dissemination on bloodshed, on crusades, jihads, and slave drives, or on the blind acceptance without proof, of claims made by a group of middle easterners, especially a group that admits to wholesale massacres of its neighbours throughout its history, all on the command of this same allegedly ''Divine Being'' with a ''Divine Design'' they claim to represent.

So again, I ask you, WHAT is the DIVINE DESIGN, because unless you KNOW what this is, you cannot talk about SIN.

@ROSSIKE

The Divine Design is a product (i.e. man)

The waterfall model (i.e. sequential model) was used in developing the product - man.

The thing with this model is that testing is done at the last stage, in block (i.e. not until after the design, when the product coding has been written)

Normally the acceptance of the product though is subject to it satisfying all specifications (i.e. the requirements, functional, technical and design specs)

InesQor:

In that case, I guess sin is like a failure.

The sin nature is like a bug.

(Temptation is like a fault following a bug's procedural processes?)

Argh Im feeling lazy right now. 

@InesQor

I LURVE YOU MAN! 

Pardon the edit please

Temptation or thoughts is like a defect or fault in the component or system's coding (i.e. the statement/decision/condition procedural processes)

^{- Gimme five, high five} 

nuclearboy:

@Inesqor:

. .  . what exactly is the Gospel itself and what were you/I/the "Sons of God" created for?

I have some weird theories which I'll defend with my life and today,

I shared them for the first time ever with a much loved member of this forum though not on the forum but private mail.

Whats your take . . .

@nuclearboy

Incidentally I actually have a plausible conjecture on this too (i.e. . . . what were you/I/the "Sons of God" created for?)

Used to be baffled over it (i.e. the "What were we created for and Why?"

Single verse in the bible made the penny drop

Oh well didnt want to but caved in

- a bug is an action of a user that produces an incorrect or unexpected result
- a fault is a flaw in a component or system that cause it not to perform its function
- a failure is a deviation of a component or system that prevents it for performing an expected delivery, service or result
NB a bug leads to a fault and fault to failure but importantly not all faults necessarily lead to a failure

InesQor:

This is simple. The Divine Designer knows. He does not need to "decide".

InesQor:

This is simple. The Divine Designer knows. He does not need to "decide".
LOL!  You've got jokes, man!! None of the above, bro! Because a bug, a fault or a failure is never the fault of the defective part.

Note that I said CONTRIVED. It is a deliberate and purposeful deviation, even if done ignorantly.

InesQor:
I found this here: http://www.theopedia.com/Talk:Sin

The interpretation of the word "sin" as being an archery term for missing the mark, or going astray, is interpreted from the original Aramaic word "khatatha" . Jesus's tongue was Aramaic and most translations that we know, e.g. The King James version, were translated from Aramaic to Greek and then into Latin and finally into all the other languages. Words got lost or changed in translation. It makes sense that going astray could be misconstrued to mean doing wrong, when really what it means is missing the aim. The word "khatatha" was shouted out to let the archer know he'd missed the mark and to try again. So, the archer then reassessed, concentrated and did his best to hit the mark accurately.


Originally, Judaism held that there were three kinds of sin. The generic Hebrew word for any kind of sin is aveira. Based on verses from the Old Testament, Judaism describes three levels of sin.
Pesha or Mered - An intentional sin; an action committed in deliberate defiance of God;
Avon - This is a sin of lust or uncontrollable emotion. It is a sin done knowingly, but not done to defy God;
Cheit - This is an unintentional sin.

---

---

But whichever way, sin is sin is sin, none is greater or lesser. No cadres. Sin is a contrived deviation from original (divine) design.

It is a Missing of the mark.

@InesQor

Ah-ha! Was actually just horseplaying because the sin with deviation and design part resembled testing terminologies

I am actually familiar with the "missing the target and archery" illustration either from off the net or from watching one of these satellite channels

Nice, theopedia has been bookmarked  

InesQor:

  [img width=70 height=70]http://www.legaljuice.com/yawn%20big%20funny.jpg[/img]

Who invented the wheel? Who cares? You all use it anyway and you can't do without it.

Sin is any Contrived Deviation from Divine Design.

@InesQor

Looks like that was lifted inspired from leafing through BS 7925-2 Glossary of Software Testing Terms

OK, going by that, so what would sin be?: Is it a bug, a fault or a failure  

Benstino:

Your proof is not biblical rather your own illustration.

Pls can you prove in the bible where it is written that there was a royal decree that satan flouted.

Concerning this, anything apart from a biblical view is meaningless.

@Benstino

I anticipated this response a few moves post back and was expecting an outburst much earlier than now

So tell me.

1) What are your definitions of sin?

2) What is a decree?

2b) What is your definition of law?

3) What was found in satan?

4) Do you agree that sin is the transgression of the law?

4b) Do you agree that all unrighteousness is sin?

5) If yes to #4, then by deduction, satan must have transgressed a law in heaven. Yes or No?

5b) If yes to #4b, then by deduction, satan must have done an unright thing (e.g. try to seize power without legal authority) Yes or No?

6) Is it possible for satan to commit sin without a law or decree already in place?

7) If No to #6, then explain why.

Psalm 119:117-118 NIV:
¹¹⁷Uphold me, and I will be delivered; I will always have regard for your decrees

¹¹⁸You reject all who stray from your decrees, for their deceitfulness is in vain

Psalm 119:117-118 BBE:
¹¹⁷Let me not be moved, and I will be safe, and ever take delight in your rules

¹¹⁸You have overcome all those who are wandering from your rules; for all their thoughts are false

. . . before the garden of Eden, God has always been in the business of rules, commands, statues, decrees, laws etc

vescucci:

I have been wondering about these things for ages and have decided once before that the answers may not really matter.

But the doggone questions still come back to me. I wanna hear other people's views.

I'd appreciate it very much if only opinions are given and no scripture is quoted or even alluded to.

1. Can God read our minds? Does He know what we think and conceal in our hearts?

2. Does He judge us on these thoughts? Is there such a thing as an unclean thought?

3. Is God truly omniscient?

4. If so, does He merely know or can He change whole courses of events?

[img width=150 height=200]http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/alex-quigley/straightjacket.jpg[/img]
      ^{Way to handle the difficults
               - ". . . screwed"}

. . . well, suppose boolean answers would suffice then

- Nodding sideways is No. Nodding up & down is Yes

1) Yes
2) Yes. Yes
3) Yes
4) Yes. Hmm, kinda No & Yes

Benstino:

You used government as an instance

but it is irrelevant because God has not instituted the laws (thou shall and thou shall not) before lucifer sinned.

The laws were instituted when he created man.

@Benstino

Whatever the King utters, says or speaks is law

Have you not heard the phrase "The King's word is Law"

Benstino:

Read my first post on how sin came through desire.

Besides what was the object of conflict that God didn't remove which made Lucifer to sin?

e36991 post #28:
. . . Whether in Heaven or on earth, when improper desires are conceived, they finally end up giving birth to sin, after elevation to lust.

There surely must have been a law in heaven not to usurp, for sin to be found in Satan

Anyways, by default, sin is activated and becomes live when a law is transgressed . . .

Never mind reading your post, how about checking my quote that earlier than yours casually alluded that desire(s) gives birth to sin

The referenced quote also includes a response to your concern (i.e. the object of conflict) - a royal decree that Satan flouted

Unless a law is transgressed it is impossible to sin.

SMHx2

Deep Sight:

I have TWO questions for you. But we will take them one at a time.

Here is the first -

Isaiah 45 verses 5,6 & 7:

⁵ I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
⁶ That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
⁷ I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

As a Christian, how do you explain away verse 7 above?

Does it not lend biblical credence to that which lagerwhenindoubt has posited?

That is the first question.

@^^^

Has similarity with Exodus 7:3

"And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, . . ." so states Exodus 7:3

Explaining Isaiah 45:7, is a doodle for all those with the ability to suss out or able to tell how God hardened Pharaoh's heart

How is darkness created, how is evil created?

- Remove or switch off the light (i.e. absence of light), permit disharmony.

HE the LORD does all these things . . .

Ddozo:

I am weary of the expectation from a typical pastor's wife. Is her duty church-bound or family-bound?

If she shy's from becoming a prominent figure in church, it is said that she's not spiritual, if she is devoted to her church, she is said to neglect her family.

If she tries to do the two efficiently, she'll burn-out? What is really the clean cut duty of the Minister's wife?

Is she bound to be the women leader, sunday school coordinator, choir moderator, etc?

Is it okay for her to be satisfactorily (to members and other pastors as well) a church member and wife? Your contribution is seriously sought? Thanks

@Ddozo

It is expected they be available and open to God’s calling in their life

Among other women in the Bible, the life of Zipporah can be checked out and used for a precedent

lagerwhenindoubt:

. . . there is a Tree of Knowledge (Evil) . . .

lagerwhenindoubt:

@e36991 I stand corrected Tree of Knowledge (Good and Evil)

just following the train of thought that God gave clear instructions that they should not eat from the Tree of Knowledge Alone in the entire Treedom.

So we have one "Good" Tree and One "Good and Evil"

My question to you is - To what purpose?

Notice the question marks at the end of Evil it is not a statement but a query open-ended

@LagerWhenInDoubt

Yeah but the "query open-ended" could misguide and mislead to wrong error of thoughts

"So we have one "Good" Tree and One "Good and Evil . . ." quoting you

No. Not one "Good" Tree and One "Good and Evil"

but rather in the correct syntax, we had one Tree of Life and one Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil

"My question to you is - To what purpose?" another of your quote

- This is a rookie question and it has been previously flogged on NL.

With one tagged with a caveat emptor, the trees purpose revolved around sovereignty

-  dependence or independence,  maintain ties or separation etc

lagerwhenindoubt:
Just a niggling thought, why is good Good and evil Evil. 

In Genesis 3 we find the account of Evil, a being in the form of a serpent who deceived the first woman into disobeying God.

The first account of an “Evil” being (not his intentions)

who is capable of deceiving the whole world and who is the very embodiment of malevolence throughout the entire Bible

- the inspirer of evil in countless persons and situations across all of human history.

Surely Evil (as generally perceived) pre-dates creation and as we have learned,

that it must have existed before the Angels whose existence predates earth and man.

Satan (Personification of pure evil) was created with the awareness to conceive Good and Evil so he could not be the origin.

The existence of Evil is in constant contention for the non-existence of God as popularly held by some quarter of non-believers .

for me it simply challenges the singularity of God and the Universe.

. . .  for each Tree of Life (Good),  there is a Tree of Knowledge (Evil) 

For Good to pre-exist, Evil must be (or following pretty closely behind)

@^^^

"Why is good Good and evil Evil?" was the question

Well, good is Good because God adds and becomes Good (i.e God increases to Go[b]o[/b]d)

Evil is evil because the devil steal, kills or destroys and becomes evil (i.e. d[/b]evil decreases/descends to Evil)
[b]for each Tree of Life (Good), there is a Tree of Knowledge (Evil)?

This is talking from the four compass point of the mouth with a dodgy display of theological scholarship

The Tree of Life is simply the Tree of Life

The Tree of Knowledge (Evil) is not only a tree of the knowledge evil (i.e. experience evil via the mind or senses) alone

but of the knowledge of Good & Evil which incidentally ultimately leads to death when eaten without expressed consent

Both centrally positioned & unguided trees had and served a purpose

"For Good to pre-exist, Evil must be (or following pretty closely behind)" - this is true

and highlights the significance and roles of both trees in the garden

For Good to pre-exist, Evil must be?

True, eat of the Tree of the knowledge of Good & Evil,

and become active and start the journey of experiencing good and evil (e.g. become exposed to pleasure & pain, sweet & sour, happy & sad etc)

Benstino:
This is my opinion and anyone who isn't happy with it should just post his.

God did not create pain or death.

Now starting from when Ferdinand verbiez started the discovery of car in 1673 till 1885 when carl benz accomplished it,

they invented the car and the car has a will to go any direction it turns at.

When the car turns towards a road, it moves on but when this car turns towards a rock, it eventually collides.

Then did carl benz invent car collission?

@Benstino

Carl Benz didnt create the car-collision

but he created a collision waiting to happen by not removing all objects of conflicts that will allow the car to not commit a collision during its life cycle

The collision was there waiting and likely to happen. Well, as you put it, depending on the will of the car?

Carl Benz created the collision that the car committed

Distinguished sin creation and sin committing,

its similar to governments creating crimes that offenders or criminals commit

Government create crimes by passing laws. Citizens commit a crime by flouting the laws

That "thou shall not . . ." is God creating the sin by utterance or like

only that the sin is dormant and inactive (i.e. crouching at the door with desires to ensnare) waiting until a weak-will sinner transgresses the law

Sin is not taken into account where there is no law. God must have instituted a law against usurping which satan flouted

nuclearboy:

Isaiah 45 verses 5,6 & 7:

⁵ I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
⁶ That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
⁷ I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I  the LORD do all these things.

@^^^

In Genesis chapter 1, it is noticed that only God is used through out when giving the creation overview

In Genesis chapter 2:4 onto chapter 3, after an initial 3 use of God, a transition from using God to the LORD God is used

In Genesis chapter 4, a transition from using the LORD God to the Lord is used

In Genesis chapter 5 onwards, there is a mix-match of using only God or the Lord

For what purpose or reasons is God, Lord God, Lord used particularly in these circumstances, chapters or verses

Why is only Lord used, why only God used, why only a juxtaposed Lord and God in certain instances?

What objectives is the narrator hoping when interchangeably using these different nouns

Benstino:

Sin can't just come into existence.

God himself never created sin but . . .

@Benstino

Really?

Tell me, how did DEATH come into existence?

Who created PAIN, DEATH, etc

4one9:

Been wondering, the origin of sin was when lucifer (satan) was sent to earth after his fall.

He wanted to be greater than God and occupy Gods position,

Where did the thought of him wanting to be greater than God come from (the thought is a sin)

since satanism and sin started after lucifer fall (rebel against God),

does it mean that d spirit of sin has existed b/f lucifer decided to rebel against God or wat?

I mean where does satan get that sinful thought of him wanting to be greater than God?

(dont knw hw to explain my point better but hpe u grab wat i mean)?

Intelligent response only.

nuclearboy:
Jenwitemi:

Inesqor has started to explain but let me try to give another perspectivenon this issue.

Until God made laws and said, "this is bad", there was NO sin or transgression possible. Once laws were in place, sin became a possibility.

The choice of doing right or wrong belongs to us. As long as we are tempted and do not act on the temptation, we remain free of sin.

Satan acted on his instincts and decided he wanted more than was his due.

That was the onset of sin. Its like saying a gun kills. No, people kill. And they don't just kill (in this case) - they DECIDE to kill

Deep Sight:

You need to come up with something more plausible.

You say that "Satan acted on his instincts". . . without bothering to wonder from where such instincts arose?

From where did all things in existence arise?

nuclearboy:

@DS:

Replace "instincts[" with "desire" if that will butter your toast

@4one9

Dont expect this submission to do a dissertation on your posting

Please recognise that ALL things, things in heaven and on earth, were created by God.

Only by God and none else . . .

Examples such as DESIRE, SIN, DEATH, PAIN, etc were created by God,

Some of the deliberately fore-mentioned examples were created live

and some were dependent on others before going live (i.e. their activation from dormant state depends on others already running)

Now unchecked and uncontrollable desires are not right, especially when there is a law against that particular position or object of desire

Note that Lucifer and Eve had a vice in common - LUST

- LUST is an increasing and uncontrollable thought; DESIRE,

which if left unchecked leads to going after the object of thought or desire in an unrightful way or means by whatever means neccesary

Understand that each (i.e. Lucifer and Eve) developed improper desires (i.e. improper and unlawful thoughts)

They had the thought themselves, just the same way you have thoughts and like this thought to submit your post.

The thought came from within them, not from anywhere else and definitely not dropped in by God

In effect, the fact of the matter is that, Satan had the thought all alone without inducement or outside help

4one9, importantly note, it is when desires or thoughts turn to lust, that it becomes  sin^{Ref: Matt 5:28}

Whether in Heaven or on earth, when improper desires are conceived, they finally end up giving birth to sin, after elevation to lust.

There surely must have been a law in heaven not to usurp, for sin to be found in Satan

Anyways, by default, sin is activated and becomes live when a law is transgressed

Death was dependent on sin and in tandem was only activated on earth when sin rolled in . . .

It is a privilege to think, a special enjoyment

- to have thoughts, to consider things, to deliberate things, to reflect, to plan, to have ideas

This is a right or immunity not enjoyed by others or by all

and a right that should not have been misused nor abused by anyone whether one is Satan, Eve, man etc . . .

The popular adage goes "Eni ma yo, a yo, ti a ba gbu ounje sinu epo epa"

Good place for a Tik-Tak, here

Bottom line is, there isnt any room for blame games or finger pointings .

Satan, Eve, man etc are answerable to God and accountable for individual sin(s)

@^^^

Homosexuality or sexual relationship between persons of the same sex, though condemned in the Bible, is gaining ground in many Nigerian churches with pastors involved in the ignominious act, a Lagos based bishop has disclosed.

Bishop Charles Ighele, General Superintendent of the Holy Spirit Mission Church also known as Family Church located in Akowonjo, a suburb of Lagos, South West Nigeria, revealed that he has delivered some pastors out of the abominable act.

The bishop who teaches family intimacy on television said in an interview: “Gay relationship or marriage is completely evil. Everywhere in the bible, homosexuality is condemned. You see, there is this laissez-faire attitude, people are free and do what they want. This western culture has also affected the church. But gay marriage or relationship is evil and completely anti-Christ.

“Some found themselves in it. Some were initiated into it. For your information, we have helped many gays out of it, including pastors.”

Ighele said that gays need help as they are grappling with forces beyond their control.
“I don’t condemn gays. Homosexuality is evil but I don’t call gays demons. It’s just like somebody who has malaria parasites, he needs help.  These people need help and it’s a very serious help. Most of them who had come to us or their partners had come to us, both lesbians and gays, we have helped them out. When you get close to them, you will have mercy on some of them,” he said.

The bishop has also set up a matchmaking agency to end late marriages among Christians in Nigeria. The agency is called Charles and Carol Matchmaking Agency.  The bishop’s wife is Pastor Carol Ighele.

He said: “We have set up a matchmaking agency to solve the problem of late marriages. It’s a dating agency. Already people are coming in. We are passionate about it and I can tell you that there are quite some professionals who cannot leave their offices from morning till night. We will not be matchmaking them, but linking them.

“We call it linking Abraham’s children, linking God’s children the Abraham’s way.  Just like Abraham’s son, Isaac, was linked to Rebecca. We carried out some studies and we found out that in those days, my parents and grandparents, all their marriages were through linking and a lot of them survived and they did better than today where we pick people along the road. We want to offer some services. You are linked, you know yourselves and the picture is clear.

“I believe in early marriages. There is a time for one to be born, nine months to carry a pregnancy. There is a time for everything that nature has arranged for certain things to be done at a certain time and when that thing is not done at a specific period, there is lack of confidence. Pressure begins to overtake you. I believe that there is an age when people must get married. I believe in early marriages.”

Lagosians who spoke with our correspondent this morning said the matchmaking agency is not a bad idea.

“There is nothing wrong with a matchmaking agency. I even believe it’s a good idea because it’s for a noble purpose. It allows young men to find young women and then develop the relationship which can lead to marriage. But the idea of the agency must be carefully handled because it is prone to abuse,” Kemi, a busy banker who works on Lagos Island but lives on the mainland said.

She added: “The pastor should just expose the guys to the ladies. He should let them develop their relationship and choose marriage on their own,” she added.

“The agency should have some checks to prevent abuses by unserious minded individuals who may want to take advantage of the agency,” said Ifeanyi.

—Simon Ateba

Ascony:

very good thought,

now this is the point where they will tell u that its all a mystery u will never understand.

@^^^



[center]_{"ǝsǝ ıs oʞ 'uıɟos o ıʇ nlI" - ʍɐl ǝɥʇ ɟo uoıssǝɹƃsuɐɹʇ ǝɥʇ sı uıS˙uıs sı ssǝusnoǝʇɥƃıɹun llɐ}[/center]

mrinfo:

. . . The money was a "headache," they told the paper

--mainly, it brought anxiety over the prospect that "crooked people" might take advantage of them.

Several people called them out of the blue to ask for money when the news first broke that they'd won the jackpot

So they began an $11 million donation spree to get rid of it and help others . . .

@^^^

O ma se ooo 

but have they not heard of "anonymity" eh?  

na2day!:

Oh! i weep for this country  

See hunger in action!

If this had happened overseas, U'd will see conservationist trying desperately to save the poor brute's life and crying if unsuccessful.

But here in Lagos, na free wack, chai!  

@^^^

You think na only for naija similar happens, huh?

Overseas? How about closer home?

Check out how this dead bull elephant in Zimbabwe in less than 2 two hours ended . . .

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A9580F000005DC-564_634x286.jpg
^{Fallen giant: The corpse of the bull elephant lies undisturbed in deep scrubland in Gonarezhou National Park}

---

---

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A980EF000005DC-236_634x369.jpg
^{The desperate descend: Within minutes, starving villagers arrive at the carcass}

---

---

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A985BE000005DC-0_634x507.jpg
^{Battle begins: Soon, the villagers are fighting to get the urgently-needed meat}

---

---

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A85631000005DC-750_634x449.jpg
^{Audience: People gather on a hill a short distance away to watch village men get to work}

---

---

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A983FE000005DC-133_634x286.jpg
^{Brutally effective: Nothing goes to waste, with the skin, trunk and ears all removed}

---

---

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A987DD000005DC-604_634x444.jpg
^{Starving: Zimbabweans grapple with each other as they set upon the elephant to get meat}

---

---

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A989ED000005DC-375_634x326.jpg
^{Stripped: After less than two hours, only bones remain. Even these will later be taken}

---

---

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A96C30000005DC-290_306x423.jpg https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/12/article-1257292-08A97F68000005DC-939_306x423.jpg
^{Desperate: A blood-spattered villager
and, right, the spot where the bull elephant lay is completely cleared just 24 hours after it was found}
[center]https://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj195/drew2two/Fly.gif[/center]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1257292/The-Mail-apologises-readers-pictures-speak-eloquently-politician-desperate-plight-starving-people-Zimbabwe.html

Bastage:
. . . The main reason I can't stand Dan Brown is that he totally distorts religion but presents it in a way that makes gullible people swallow it.

kokoye:
It is not his fault some people are gullible. 

Same with the church today unfortunately. Some pastors present their cases in usch a way that gullible people swallow it hook line n sinker

@^^^

Inspite of the half truths, distortions, fiction and falsehoods

Dan Brown's novels are good enjoyable reads that can be revealing

Take "The Da Vinci Code" for example, talking about an object of seduction and romance - the rose

the Da Vinci code:
"The Rose has ties to the five pointed pentacle of Venus and the guiding Compass Rose.

By the way, the word rose is identical in English, French, German, and many other languages.

Rose,  is also an anagram of Eros, the Greek god of sexual love . . .

The Rose has always been the premiere symbol of female sexuality.

In primitive goddess cults, the five petals represented the five stations of female life?

birth, menstruation, motherhood, menopause, and death

And in modern times, the flowering rose's ties to womanhood are considered more visual

. . .  the blossoming flower resembles the female ittybits,

the sublime blossom from which all mankind enters the world."

In the same novel, he gives some information about phi (i.e. 1.1618)

and why it is called The Golden Ratio or Divine Proportion

What really beats me is how do readers miss the below disclaimer

Dan Brown's Disclaimer:
“This book is a work of fiction.

Names, characters, places and incidents are product of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously.

Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental.”

http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/18061/:
Some of the book’s inaccuracies may be no more than mistakes, if glaring ones.

For instance, Angels & Demons depicts Santa Maria della Vittoria in Rome at Piazza Barberini, a half mile from its real location.

More problematic is a key reference to a tile in St. Peter’s Square pointing “West,” supposedly a clue pointing the way ahead in a 400-year-old scavenger hunt — a tile that is actually one of a circle of 16 tiles aligned to the points of the compass pointing in every possible direction.

Even more damaging, in a way, is Brown’s account of the Passetto di Borgo, the hidden passageway between the Vatican and Castel Sant’Angelo.

The passetto is an elevated passageway, but Brown describes it as an underground tunnel beneath the streets of Rome

— not only in the novel, but on his own website, in a Q&A billed as an “interview,” purportedly explaining how he himself was inspired to write Angels & Demons:

“I was beneath Vatican City touring a tunnel called il passetto — a concealed passageway used by the early popes to escape in event of enemy attack.”