₦airaland Forum

Nah, I did not make an assumption. I formed that view based on two things: (a) your choosing immediately to refer me to Joagbaje/Oyakhilome's interpretation, and (b) my experience of your posts and actions in the past.

One example, I'll ask it as a question: do you still believe that Christians should not pray to or through Jesus Christ?

Snowwy:
Ofcourse not.
DId I or did I not show you my interpretation from the bible or did I tell you Joe's interpretation was right?

I think you should stop making everything about Jo or Pastor Chris and respond to other posters who might have another interpretation as should be.

Please for once make it about the scripture.

You come across a piece of scripture for the first time (apparently); my expectation would be that you would take your time to go and study it; but you immediately referred me to Joagbaje's (i.e. Oyakhilome's) interpretation! What do you want me to make of that?

OK, I'll leave it and just say this: go and take your time to study the passage (independently and free from RoR); use a concordance to trace related concepts and scriptures --- then form a view.

Then come back and say if you believe that Abraham's righteousness was because he "worked" for it or was a gift.

^^^ And once you have Joagbaje's or Oyakhilome's interpretation, that is the end of the matter?

^^ Don't go and answer the two questions I've been asking! Remember what I said: if you remain evasive on them, you prove yourself to be a liar once again for denying aletheia's post.

OK try this one then: Rev 13:8

All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast--all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world.

^^^ Was Christ not slain before the foundation of the world?

Snowwy:
@Enigma,
Thanks for the maturity of posting the scripture. There are actually a lot of other scriptures in the New Testament that shows that we can receive the righteousness of God as a gift through His Son Jesus Christ.

My question to Nuclearboy was how did the 3 men he mentioned have this 'gift' when it was clearly stated that the gift is received through Jesus Christ. I quoted the scriptures as to why they were seen as righteous but Nuclearboy mixed it up and turned on himself.

There is a clear difference between the two and this was what I needed to understand.
However, not surprised he acted as he is known to act in the forum. Very immature.

Easy: Christ was slain before the foundation of the world. In addition to what I posted before, ponder also:

2 Timothy 1

So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of me his prisoner. But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, 9 who has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time,

Titus 3

4 But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life.

Surely, you are not going to say that Abraham "worked" for his own righteousness, for his own salvation

Ephesians 2

8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.

Joagbaje:
Pls read my earlier post. I explained everything there. It was nominal

Please give straight answers (or I am justified in the view of you as being deceitful with your posts):

1. Was Abraham saved?
2. was Abraham saved without the death of Christ?


Please realise that if you are still evasive, then you were lying when you denied the truthfulness of aletheia's post.

@Joagbaje

1. Was Abraham saved?
2. Was Abraham saved without the death of Christ?

Well, Oyaks could indeed be their mediator! Remember, both Oyaks and Joagbaje have told us that Jesus is not our intermediary.

Please don't tell them that the Bible says that Jesus is our mediator!

nuclearboy:
^^ You honestly expect Jo to answer those questions? . . .

Of course that's another one of his fraudulent tactics: he keeps saying "let's discuss scripture" --- but when you refute him well, he will slink away quietly, wait a few days, then start the very same falsehood again.

Nuke

There is a lot these people do not understand. What you find is that people like Joagbaje, Eddie long, Creflo Dollar, Oyakhilome etc are able to fool people simply because people do not think carefully, they do not read the scriptures carefully and, critically, they do not read the scriptures holistically. Thus it is very easy for Joagbaje and co to string a few passages together, give an interpretation filled with poison, and yet many will swallow it hook, line and sinker.  See an example (which I'm sure many will soon defend https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-687483.0.html#msg8498248)

The Bible says faith is a gift --- was it a gift under the New Testament or under the Old Testament as well? The Bible says Abraham's faith was counted for him as righteousness --- does even that not fall within the category of a gift (even if we say faith under OT was not a gift).

A man says, Enigma I believe in you and I count that for him as making him entitled to one of my cars. . . .

Meanwhile consider Joagbaje's duplicity again (and at Joagbaje please prove what I am about to say wrong). When aletheia said Joagbaje claimed that Abraham was not saved, Joagbaje denied it and he subsequently took my bait that what he said was that Abraham was not "born again"; so he had not said that Abraham was not saved. Now consider the below and its implication:

Joagbaje:
If we assume the Jews were saved already on the basis of the law ,we should also remember  Gentiles were also converted to Judaism, like  cornelius and the ethiopean eunuch . so if the Jews were born again by works of the law ,the Gentiles who  were converted to judaism also should be counted born again under the law. We are still left with the question, if they could have been saved without the death of christ, he didn't need to die .

Besides ,paul made it clear that the gospel brought salvation to Jews and Gentiles . . . .

So (especially at Joagbaje):

1. Was Abraham saved?
2. Was Abraham saved without the death of Christ?

[quote author=Demain_man link=topic=599711.msg7696071#msg7696071 date=1297244948]This joagbaje knows how to distort the bible no be small.

Infact, for him ''It is better to receive than to give'' ![/quote]When people challenge Joagbaje vigorously, some people see it as picking on him: thankfully there are still many who see Joagbaje for who and what he is. Let us consider his use of the Bible below!

Joagbaje:
Matthew 17:26-27
26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. 27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.


If Jesus could settle tax collectors unjustifiably just to avoid trouble, we should not assume every settlement is based on guilt. We shouldn't get exited at the fall or shortcomings of others.

[color=#990000]Galatians 6:1-2
Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. 2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.[/

We should cross our hands till the outcome of the full truth . Creflo Dollar did right. That's the bible.

Sooooooo, because Jesus "settled" tax collectors, Eddie Long is justified in using his congregation's money of anything between 4 million and 25 million dollars (latest rumoured figures) to hush up also "settle" for homosexual affairs (ok, alleged) with four very young boys in his "church".

Oh, what a pastor is Eddie Long!

Oh, what a pastor is Joagbaje!

By the way maybe there are four types of "tithes" after all, or even five?

Remember we have not yet added the Abram-Melchizedek tithe; neither have we added the Jacob (promised) tithe.

It seems we are beginning to head into 50% (or 52%, thanks to that too know zikky) territory here!

If there are three types of "tithes", and one of them is below

Deuteronomy 14

23 Eat the tithe of your grain, new wine and olive oil, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks in the presence of the LORD your God at the place he will choose as a dwelling for his Name, so that you may learn to revere the LORD your God always.

then, when last did any tithe preacher preach that as it is important to learn to revere the Lord your God always, every month you must take a tithe of your income and throw a party and jollify yourself with it. Oh, and you should do this in church every month! Why? If storehouse now equals "church" what about "the place where God chooses as a dwelling for his name"? That has to be the church too kẹ! Therefore, every month "tithers" should throw a "tithe party" in church and jollify themselves with a "tithe" in addition to paying the Malachi "tithe" into church.

Meanwhile, give me a bit of time to work out how we sort out the third "tithe", you know the one --- that one for widows, orphans etc. Come to think of it, I don't recall any "tithe" preacher telling us we should do that one or how!

Hmmm anyway ṣha, we now know that every month, "tithers" must pay at least 30% in tithes! Cool.

ogajim:
According to Creflo, tithe is just the beginning and is not part of GIVING:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8-V1gvyb_c

I find the chap quite despicable.

@Joagbaje

Regarding your "gospel", so

1. Was Jesus "born again"?
2. Did Jesus go to hell where he was tortured by satan and demons?


I'll confine myself to these two examples for now and leave other things that you have said or not denied till later.

JeSoul:
Foul! how do you know they knew how to 'dictate'? prove me wrong.

How do you know that they knew how to "dictate"? 

They couldn't have "dictated" because the gospel and epistles contained big words, big grammar, and this unlettered people couldn't have known those big words and big big grammar. 

Seriously, for a minute, people see what they want to see. Let me give you an example: even in my grandfather's time, some one who had only studied up to "Standard Six" would be considered "unlettered" compared to a secondary school let alone a University graduate. Yet what do you say to the level of literacy and even competence in "big grammar" of the Standard six of yore.

(Nowadays graduates write "given" for "giving" and vice versa; I have even seen some of the "highly intellectual" people here write all sorts including writing "been" for "being" etc etc; anyway, I digress)

The bottom line is no one has proved, perhaps no one can prove, that X did not write that epistle or the other. They can make claims, they can have their "academic or scholarly orthodoxy" --- but where is the proof? A case of all hat and no cattle and all that.

The sciolists jumping on the band wagon of course do not consider the limits of textual/higher criticism. By the way did Shakespeare write all those things or was it Marlowe or Bacon or . . .?

From one perspective I take NLMediator's point that many, some being unaware of Joagbaje's history here, will think it is Nuclearboy who is in the wrong. Those of us who now know Joagbaje and in particular his methods well will understand why Nuclearboy will feel that no duty of confidentiality is owed. It pains me to also say that Joagbaje is a double-dealing and double-faced person who projects the image of "meekness" and "maturity" for his own purposes. In any event the history of his posts shows that he is himself guilty of what he is now protesting about.

By the way, in relation to Joagbaje's "gospel", aletheia was quite right though Joagbaje is dissembling once again. In fact I can bet I know one of the tactics he will use: he will say for instance that he did not say Abraham was not saved but that he only said he was not "born again" and so on ad nauseam.

The bottom line is that Joagbaje's "gospel" stinks as it is full of disguised, sometimes even barely disguised, poison.

The below concerns wine consumed when commemorating the Last Supper ("Holy Communion" and almost certainly the type of wine that Jesus drank.

1 Cor 11 (edited)

20 When you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat, 21 for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk

^^ Even if they couldn't "write", has anybody heard of amanuenses? In fact in one of the epistles, it was clear that it was dictated and the "dictator" later put his hand/signature. In Romans, Tertius stated clearly that he wrote down the letter for Paul.

In any event neither Ehrman's scholarship nor his arguments are new.

Oh I posted this the other day under a different, supposedly more catchy, title.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-686262.0.html

I wonder more about the congregations of each of Dollar and long: is the brainwashing that bad?

Here is one of Joagbaje's "masters" defending Eddie Long!   

Watch him use very similar language and ideas as Joagbaje in his defence of Long.

Also watch him insult his congregation calling them "negros" and his reaction and manipulative 'recovery' on realising what  he had said.

EDIT use this link for video http://hiphopwired.com/2011/06/08/pastor-creflo-dollar-defends-his-%E2%80%9Cbrother-in-the-lord%E2%80%9D-bishop-eddie-long-video/

http://www.theroot.com/buzz/video-creflo-dollar-bishop-long-had-wreck

Hebrews 7

Verse 5

And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

Verses 11 & 12

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? 12[b]For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.[/b]

Verses 18 & 19

For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. 19For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

In other words: "tithing" has been "disannulled" (abolished) along with the Levitical priesthood on which it was based: both have been replaced by the bringing in of a better hope (which makes things perfect) and by which we draw nigh unto God.

Well, according to that Deuteronomy passage: "tithes" should be used (a) to jollify yourself and your family in the presence of God and to rejoice, (b) and sometimes shared with Levites, widows, orphans etc (i.e. the needy) so that God may bless you and the work of your hands.

If anybody finds a place where the Bible says "tithes" should be given to a "church" or to a "pastor", let them produce it. (PS Forget the "storehouse" thing when trying to do this exercise)

Very good essay.

The problem highlighted by the author is present basically in all institutional churches though it is less bad in some than others.

The problem has been taken to new levels by some today who do not stop at titles but go another step by attributing some mystical powers to "pastors" and so-called "ministers". Take the example of someone saying the other day that  "a minister has ability to make men rich". Alternatively, they suggest that the "pastor" or "minister" knows all and is to be consulted on almost everything ---- who knows, maybe even before a person sleeps with his wife!

Principle of exchange at work!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYAja9xKOgk


[flash=400,300]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYAja9xKOgk[/flash]

sammhi:
joagabje,
that guy is right. he surely understand the scriptures. however, the truth is these things(419 pastors) were predicted by the lord himself ,  read matthew 24: 3-27. the fact that you raise the dead does not even guarantee your salvation. it is the love you have for God and for your Neighbour. read mat 23: 7
it is wrong to come in the name of God and defraud people.
Ask yourself :why are these pastors so eager to show off the miracles?especially on tv?  why are these pastors opening churches everywhere and placing their pictures on bill board? is the church about them or about christ.? Read i cor 9: 16.
reason  well: the church is not about individual but about christ,  whoever God uses must be humble and ready to wash the feet.of the flock ,  are these pastors doing so? do they know the homes of their flock  and  how often do they visit them,  Jesus said: go ye and preach the gospel but they say :com ye the gospel is with me
recall that Elisha refused to accept the gift of Naaman because the healing is not from him but from God .
christianity is being adulterated today because  many of these pastors are actually competing on who has the most wealth,  dont u see it?
we need to speak against such. paul was a lawyer  but turned a tent maker so he could have more time for the ministry  . we cannot be peddling the word of God and think it is alright.

Subconsciously, you have highlighted the difficulty that we have and why what Joagbaje is trying to do simply cannot work. The example is this: the passage in your quote that I have highlighted is understood traditionally and by most of Christianity in the way that you have used it: I say now, and I ask him to prove me wrong, that Joagbaje will come to tell us that the passage only applies to Jews and not to present day pastors!

In a nutshell, while it is true that Christians have always had doctrinal differences the prosperity "gospel"/word of faith doctrine takes things to another dimension including evident deception and scripture manipulation for filthy lucre's sake. And they want us to keep quiet in the face of that!

E no good to be mumu!

From http://www.wsbtv.com/news/28137253/detail.html

Posted: 4:12 pm EDT June 5, 2011Updated: 4:26 pm EDT June 5, 2011
LITHONIA, Ga. -- Megachurch pastor Bishop Eddie Long talked big money during Sunday’s sermon and revealed New Birth Missionary Baptist Church had just been audited.

Long asked members of the congregation who could make $500 or $1,000 donations to give those seed offerings.

Go to recoup all that moolah used to settle dem four boys. So, maga must pay.

Also http://www.ajc.com/news/dekalb/bishop-long-announces-start-967907.html

^^^ Interesting piece on the antichrist http://www.keyway.ca/htm2004/20040711.htm

Very interesting reading.

When people say "just criticise once and move on", it is simply another element of the deceit or, to be more charitable, poor thinking. The poison and bile of the false teachers is being spewed and poured out in massive volume everyday and is always in your face. Even now that it is being met by some opposition, people are still being misled daily. Imagine if we kept quiet, soon people will be completely desensitised to the poison and bile and believe that the poison is the Christian norm.

Joagbaje comes here everyday, more or less, with one poison or other from Oyakhilome and intends us to keep quiet; some of his supporters are trying to blackmail people by saying they don't preach the gospel etc.

Only yesterday, Joagbaje ran away instead of being honest and decent enough to acknowledge that Oyakhilome was wrong to say non-tithers are robbing God --- since Joagbaje himself seemed to acknowledge that non-tithers are not robbing God.

The other time he came with another Oyakhilome bile that people should not pray to or through Christ. Some of his initial supporters slunk away when the nonsense was exposed. Where was the integrity to come back and say "maybe something was off with the teaching".

Joagbaje says we should not name call: he forgets he was the one who introduced the phrase "spiritual vagabond" to describe some of us. But "when God would catch him" he himself gave us the definition of "spiritual vagabond" and it turns out that Oyakhilome fits very well into the definition ---- hence some of us continue to refer to Oyaks as spiritual vagabond.

Nah,  Joagbaje instead of trying to use style to shut up those who will not stand for poison and bile, first go and deal with the doctrine that you are have imbibed and that you are putting out here.

Also deal with your arrogance and pride: if you can come here, as you have done before, and say the apostle James was "a baby Christian" and that you and opaks Oyaks have more "revelation knowledge" than him, please expect nothing but utter contempt from the likes of me. If you drag Jesus down to your level and elevate Oyaks (or even yourself) above Him, as you often do, expect nothing less than utter contempt from people like me.

'Nuff said.