₦airaland Forum

dare2think:
l recommend this book for u------Prosperity by Fredrick K.C price, Gods will is properity by Gloria copland
pls go get dis books and deliver urself from dark knowlede



Whate qualifies these books to be the source of good knowlegde?

The books are written by false teachers using God's name to defraud mugus.

newman5203:
IF IT IS 4 PERSONAL USE AND SO WAT?

kENNETH COPLAND
CREFLO DOLLAR
JOYCE MEYER
MIKE MURDOCK
FREDRICK K.C PRICE
BENNY HINN
PAULA WHITE
ALL HV PRIVATE JETS
RECENTLY kENNETH COPLAND GAVE AWAY THE 27TH JET ARE A SEED.IF U ARE GETTING MAD because IT IS 4 PRIVATE USE U AND YOUR GENERATION YET UNBORN MIGHT NO HAVE ONE

Every single one named above is also a false teacher using God's name to defraud mugus.

No one in either category is worthy of emulation let alone adulation by Christians.

Amujale:
. . .

Oba ti nje Olu
Oba ti nje Olorun Oba
Oba ti nje Olodumare
Oba dugbedugbe bi igi adaro
Oba to tuwoka se  oun gbogbo fun awon eleran ara
Adeda
Aseda
Alewilese
Oba to gba agbara lowo alagbara
Oba to gba'de lowo Alade
Oloruko egbagbeje
Oba ti mbe ki bebe fun ara ti e to d'aiye
Bebe Nla
Al'obalebioro
Oba Ajiki
Oba Awoki
Oba Afaki
Oba Arinki
Oba Asaki
Oba Agunki
Oba Akoki
Oba Atoki
Okiki Ola
Okiki Oola
Afunilounjemap'ebi
Asorefunimagb'ege
Aj'oruko gbogbo, nibi gbogbo, l'ojo gbogbo
Agbomatepa,
Adagba-maparo-oye
Awuwomasegbe,
Agbomatepa

"Oba ti a ko le ki tan",

Indeed, Awamaridi*


* Hmmm, come to think of it, can it be said that Olodumare as awamaridi is a concept not known to Christianity or other religions?

[quote author=C_Ronaldo link=topic=641603.msg8083711#msg8083711 date=1302298181]. . . Have read about KENNETH COPELAND or you are not interested. He is a minister of the gospel too, do you know how many jets he has given out as gift?[/quote]Look, Kenneth Copeland is a demonic heretic and an anti-Christ; do yourself a favour and stop following such people!

OK -- the wail again then: keep on with your intellectually poor or dishonest style if it makes you happy.

^^^ If the cap fits, wear it mate. Keep on with the pathetic intellectually poor or dishonest style if it makes you happy. 

thehomer:
. . .
You're free not to take them seriously. . . .

Yep, and not take them seriously I will indeed.

^^^ Well, you are making too much sense and many people do not like that kind of thing; they prefer the twisting/distortion of the Bible and will tell you that in those passages Jesus was supporting or advocating or maybe even commanding tithing for Christians.

See another pastor's actions at this link

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-641905.0.html


Court Orders Pastor to Repay 68 Million Pounds to Bank!

A United Kingdom High Court in London has ordered the former CEO of Intercontinental Bank and pastor of the widely-known Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), Erastus Akingbola, to forfeit nearly seventy-five million British pounds to the bank. . . .

Analysts say Mr. Akingbola's case reflects pervasive greed not only in Nigerian financial institutions, but often in her places of worship, where flamboyant pastors are perennially preaching messages of prosperity.  There is also persistent collusion between government and bank officials, one form of which involves governors and ministers transferring key accounts to specific banks with which they have worked out a profitable arrangement.  It remains to be seen if RCCG will issue a statement condemning Mr. Akingbola. . . .

From: http://www.saharareporters.com/news-page/uk-high-court-orders-rogue-banker-erastus-akingbola-surrender-%C2%A368-million-loot-intercontin


UK High Court Orders Rogue Banker, Erastus Akingbola, To Surrender £68 Million Loot To Intercontinental Bank

A United Kingdom High Court in London has ordered the former CEO of Intercontinental Bank and pastor of the widely-known Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), Erastus Akingbola, to forfeit nearly seventy-five million British pounds to the bank.

Pastor Akingbola was arrested in 2010 after he returned from the UK, to which he had fled after his financial shenanigans were revealed by the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission was called in to prosecute such former bank CEOs who were found to have been involved in bank fraud.

According to the UK court judgement obtained by SaharaReporters dated March 24 2011, he will forfeit sums of £8,540,134.58, £68m and £1.3m to Intercontinental Bank.  The bank had approached the UK court after it successfully obtained a freezing order against huge sums of monies paid into various shell companies set up by Mr. Akingbola in the Cayman Islands and in which members of his family were beneficiaries.

The fraudulent payments saw Akingbola transferring huge sums of money from Intercontinental bank in 2009.  The payments, known as "1st Fuglers Payments", "Tropics Payments" and "2nd Fuglers Payments", together the three payment led to the transfer of a total of £80 Million; monies that were used to purchase expensive properties in the UK and beyond.

Mr. Akingbola siphoned most of the funds in dubious transactions between his shell companies in Nigeria within just six weeks through an illegal shares purchase scheme conducted by some of his companies.  Forty-one million pounds (£41m) of the money was looted by Mr. Akingbola in one day alone, on 11 May 2009.

Analysts say Mr. Akingbola's case reflects pervasive greed not only in Nigerian financial institutions, but often in her places of worship, where flamboyant pastors are perennially preaching messages of prosperity.  There is also persistent collusion between government and bank officials, one form of which involves governors and ministers transferring key accounts to specific banks with which they have worked out a profitable arrangement.  It remains to be seen if RCCG will issue a statement condemning Mr. Akingbola.

Last October, the former Chief Executive Officer of Oceanic Bank, Mrs. Cecilia Ibru, was convicted of bank and securities fraud by the Federal High Court in Lagos, and was stripped of 199 assets and funds worth nearly N200 billion, much of which she had salted away all over the world.  On one street alone in the Upper Marlboro area of Maryland, United States, Mrs. Ibru bought at least six palatial homes in 2009, and they were registered either to herself, or to such close relatives as her son, Obaro, her daughter Janet, or her daughter-in-law, Kemi Da silva.  Despite the grievous nature of her crimes, however, Mrs. Ibru was sent to jail for only six months.  Even that slap on the wrist was "suffered" in the cushy confines of a medical facility that is built like a five-star hotel.

This is the Lord's doing and it is marvellous in our sight.

Of course many mumus will still continue to go to the man's "church" ----- many of them in their molues and okadas. Very clever people, indeed. 

thehomer:
Are the people proposing them not Christians? Did they not get their information from the Bible? You see when you try to claim that some are "True Christians" but not others, you are simply going for the no true Scotsman fallacy because you are trying to exclude Christians who actually produce and believe these prophesies. Really, is there any single belief that all Christians hold?
. . .

This is all I need bother to reply to: it shows your typical modus operandi --- make up a straw man argument for your opponent and then shed a lot of sweat knocking it down! Ask yourself where in my post I said or even suggested that some were "True Christians".

Look, have the decency and honesty to look for sound and worthwhile bases to criticise Chrsitianity or to challenge Christian doctrine; at the moment your fulminations are not worth taking seriously, to be honest with you; they are that pathetic!

Let's face it this kind of approach to criticising Christianity is intellectually dishonest or intellectually poor and/or "unscientific" and, for that matter, coming from those who harp on about science and all that.

Any intelligent and honest person will acknowledge that the vast majority of Christians globally do not take these kind of things/prophecies seriously and thus would not impute or interpolate such things to Christianity generally or as a whole. An informed person, particularly an informed and honest critic of Christianity will also know and note that many Christians do not even believe in "the rapture" doctrine, especially as often depicted in recent times, in the first place.

Interestingly, I do not see our friends applying the same standard when it comes to their so-called science; e.g. the tendency is to dismiss scientists who do not go along with their 'orthodoxy' such as evolution etc.

I really find this kind of straw man and caricature approach to criticising Christianity to be pathetic. I can respect genuinely intellectual, honest and well considered criticisms of Christianity but not this kind of nonsense.

Jenwitemi:
. . .
Actually, i am not joking. It is an accurate depiction of what the christian religion is. A personality worshiping cult. You better shine ya eyes before it is too late for you, o enlightened one.

This kind of statement should normally be ignored; but, contrary to my better judgment, here is a question: do you not want to reconsider/qualify that statement --- as not doing so risks opening you legitimately to a charge of ignorance or dishonesty?

Many thanks for the clarification, m_nwankwo.  Stay blessed.

Of course the tithe mongers like Joagbaje and CEC in particular are as dishonest and disingenuous as they come.

This same Joagbaje gleefully pronounced "Jesus didn't function under the New Testament" ----- yet he will say he is relying on the example of Abraham for the New Testament Christian --- so it was Abraham who "functioned under the New Testament" --- and of course only in relation to "tithing". Nonsense.

^^^ Actually it is a common over simplification leading to a misreading to assume that once we love our neighbours we automatically love God.

This is where it is important when people speak of "the whole counsel of scripture".

First, you only need to read 1 John 4 through to the end (and see in particular verses 15 & 19) to know that you can in fact separate loving God from "loving neighbour". The better view from the Christian viewpoint is that "loving neighbour" is a consequence of loving God in the first place. if you love God you will love neighbour; compare if you have faith, you will do good works ------ its the same kind of concept.

Further on this separation read further 1 John 5 which actually specifically sets out what it means to love God.

@m_nwankwo

Could you please clarify something for me? You said:

[quote author=m_nwankwo link=topic=634923.msg8033390#msg8033390 date=1301679053]On earth, it is possible for an atheist to love God without being spiritually conscious of it. However if such atheist continues in the manifestation of the love of God, either later in this earthly life or in the beyond on in another earthly life the emanations of the love of God that vibrates in his spirit will also permeate his earthly brain such that he also becomes conscious of the existence of God while in the physical body. What counts is how our spirit is close or far away from the will of God.[/quote]The clarification I seek is on how the person becomes conscious of the existence of God in the beyond. Taking aside the reference to "the beyond", I can see how some of the rest of the bit I've quoted can fit within Christian conceptions. ((Before expanding the point, here I note that my very first post on this thread should have had a qualification in respect of point 1 in that post))

What I mean is this: within Christianity it is also held that God's love draws people even while they are sinners; thus even an atheist is subject to the call of God, the call of the Spirit of God; that atheist may eventually expressly acknowledge God but here, apart possibly from the idea of purgatory, Christianity sees that acknowledgment as occuring on this earth (I will leave aside the idea of "another earthly life" and issues of reincarnation).

^^ As for this thread, I've said all I need to say for now. You can find my views on the questions you raised by using the search engine here. BTW I doubt if you really mean to refer to Matthew 23:35.

Three important messages of Jesus

1. Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God
2. To inherit the kingdom of God, you should love God with all your heart etc and love your neighbour
3. Behold I stand at the door and knock, if any man opens the door I shall come in and dine with him

Each requires in the first place an acknowledgment of God -------- I will argue that each of the latter two (i.e. 2 & 3) will either guarantee and/or (at least) evidence no 1. This is part of the all important spiritual angle.

The issue concerning the parable of the Good Samaritan has been dealt with ---- it was a parable to help answer and identify "who is my neighbour?" not a parable in itself answering "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

One last point: in any event even the Samaritans acknowledged "God".

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12888421

Jordan battles to regain 'priceless' Christian relics

They could be the earliest Christian writing in existence, surviving almost 2,000 years in a Jordanian cave. They could, just possibly, change our understanding of how Jesus was crucified and resurrected, and how Christianity was born.

A group of 70 or so "books", each with between five and 15 lead leaves bound by lead rings, was apparently discovered in a remote arid valley in northern Jordan somewhere between 2005 and 2007.

. . .

nuclearboy:
First, the issue of blackmail - NO, IT IS NOT BLACKMAIL. The Bible says we know a tree by its fruits - I didn't say that. The Bible did! So I call upon your fruit to JUDGE- it will justify or to condemn you as saying the truth. That is the common ground - that our fruit shows who we really are.

What is weak and manipulative is trying to make things look like people are targeting you personally or trying to make issues impersonal - The CHRISTIAN walk is personal as you know and Jesus Himself made it so. Your attempts to make it impersonal are what is manipulative and childish. FRUIT shows WHO WE ARE!

The Bible's Words are to be rightly divided as "wetu" did. Yes, a man can call Jesus Lord ("Jesus I know, Paul I know but who are you" also did, didn't he?) but what then did Jesus mean when He said He would say He NEVER knew them and that they were workers of iniquity to men who supposedly did great things in His Name? Are you saying those men would do great things in His Name without saying "Jesus is Lord"? Or are you saying Jesus was lying? Again, you are long on boasts but short on truth if you believe al that is necessary is "confession". Actually, the Biblical understanding of "confession" is true ACCEPTANCE that lives what it says.

You personally, I do not know and so it was a figure of speech when I say you live a dirty life. What I meant is simple - your claims are directly contradicted by your "FRUIT" (I love that word). Would you again like me to list some things CEC is known for in society? Or things that you personally have done here? That is your fruit, not the words you mouth! As they say - TALK IS CHEAP!

You judge by "doctrine"? Okay, judge Robert Liardon and Odulele by doctrine. Now consider their their homosexuality and perversion - what does that say about them? What does it say about their doctrine now when their life is examined? Lies ehn? And what does it say about you but that you are affected by fine speeches even when coming from white-washed Sepulchers. I do not judge a man by his words (doctrine) but by his life and fruit. That is God's standard. It may seem harsh to you but it is God's Standard and we see it from Genesis through Revelation.

If love believes all things as you said, you should believe me that pastor chris is a liar since his fruit is lies.

Why do you put "even if there is an element of truth" in fyneguy? Obviously, even you know he doesn't add up. 419 is 419, leave the stories and that is normal fruit of your idol, pastor chris. Basically, what we say is it is a scam not the truth of his life.

You, a "Pastor", a supposed MOG, are asking me to name a perfect church?   Wonderful?  Answer - The church of God is those He called out.

It is not a named congregation and you not knowing that only shows how shallow your theology is. Ecclesia - the called out ones - THAT is the church. And I NEVER mentioned Deeper life as a perfect church. That is a lie and another fruit of pastor chris. But you can prove me wrong and show where I said it - my posts are there. What I said was totally different. Why are you CEC so eager to lie? Why is it so easy for you to tell lies and make yourselves out as victims?

Stop making noise about energy and its uses - what Gospel are you preaching? This money, health, control, "I am God" nonsense? Is that the Gospel of Christ?

The Apostles lived a life that drew men to them. They showed love, care, the power of God and men saw their light and came to it. Which is what Jesus requested - be a light and the power of God WILL confirm you in signs and wonders AS HE WILLS, not as you decide or claim!

You sell a brand - You prey on fear of poverty (pay your tithes and believe and you'll be rich). You prey on the helpless needy (come to the healing school and we'll heal you but you will "show" your faith by dropping cash). You prey on desperation (just bring more and more and of course, if nothing happens, it is their fault, NOT pastor chris). You have only built an army of the blind led by the blind.

But now, the end is near!

+n

Wunderbar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

wetu:
@Joagb[aj]e
. . . You can post as many scriptures as you like but the fact is that false teachers will still come in the name of Jesus . . .

Consider what someone said not long ago.

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

I am suggesting you read the book --- whether you borrow or buy it. Moreover, I am saying that the book is written in a simple style. You want to try an "intermediate" work of the author like this article (full text and not link to buy) linked below let alone talking about some "heavier" works.

http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Galatians_Exegesis_Theology.htm

^^^ Go and read something more sensible mate.

Try the simple one in the following link and read what someone who really knows a thing or two about these things says about the incidence concerning "the party from James" etc etc http://www.amazon.com/Paul-Everyone-Galatians-Thessalonians-Testament/dp/0281053049

@Iluvnet

Indeed and agreed by and large; also, I too thought that post no 53 by SirAbbey was very instructive.


@Joagbaje

In other words you have no proof let alone reliable proof as requested. If you have an honest intention, you could start your reeducation by reading that link provided by ysg4real; here again:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_the_Just

^^^ Where does one start with you??

You don't even know what you are talking about yet you assert them arrogantly! OK let me take just one or two things:

Joagbaje:
@enigma
James was never with Jesus, he was a pharisee

Please prove this with reliable evidence.

Joagbaje:
he was not one of the apostles.

Did James become an apostle at any time? If so, when did he become an apostle.

Joagbaje:
He didn't believe in Jesus until after the cross.

Again prove this with reliable evidence and do NOT twist that passage.

Joagbaje:
He was a force among the Pharisees. When he got converted , he had Judaism mixed with his Christianity.

Again, prove this.

I will leave the rest of your post - all rather tiresome and in fact I am beginning to wonder why I am again wasting time with you.

Joagbaje:
@Enigma

There is no comparison of person. I didn't make statement like that. We judge doctrine and not a person. J[b]ames wasn't perfect. He made obvious doctrinal errors [/b]which paul corrected.[/b]

Could you please identify the "doctrinal errors" that James made and where Paul "corrected" them?
 

Joagbaje:
James was just a man like anyone else. I think it is idolatry to feel we are lesser than them . It simple biblical discussion we are having. and it's scriptural to judge doctrine and not a person. 

It is not disrespect to compare a man's teaching with body of truth. It's a welcome idea. . . .

Do you expect sensible people to compare James who was with Jesus and learned first hand from Jesus with a person like Oyakhilome? I put it to you again that only idolaters of Oyakhilome would think of holding Oyakhilome in higher regard than the apostle James.

Sensible people would bear in mind that, assuming for one moment that he is a genuine Christian, Oyakhilome is using a Bible of which his understanding of some parts is grossly limited by the fact alone that he is 2000 years removed from its origin; sensible people will realise that a person like James who lived through the very era of the gospel daily and saw and was part of Jesus' ministry is not the kind of person that a person like Oyakhilome should be compared to.

^^^ It is idolatry to esteem someone like Oyakhilome above the apostle James.

It is idolatry to be ready to disrespect someone like James but to see nothing whatsoever wrong or questionable in the teaching and/or practise of Oyakhilome.

And as has been pointed out it is idolatry to get up in arms when someone "insults" Oyakhilome whereas you don't do the same when God, be it the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit, is maligned.


It gets worse (remember last time I used that phrase? )

It is idolatry to esteem Oyakhilome above Jesus Christ ---- maybe without even realising that this is what you are doing; nonetheless you have done this many times.

On this Board/Forum, the worst idolaters in terms of worshipping their head honchos are the members of Chris Embassy; others who make idols of their head honchos here are still far behind you CEC people.

[quote author=petres_007 link=topic=630124.msg7979886#msg7979886 date=1300996526]

Enigma:
Meanwhile in that passage notice how the Apostle Peter spoke of the elders among the people without focusing on some head honcho "pastor".

Hmm,  you noticed too, eh?? 

The early church ran a system with multiple mature Christians serving as elders or overseers.[/quote]In fact in the New Testament the original word, Poimen, is translated as "pastors" (and notice the plural) in the KJV only once i.e. Ephesians 4. In other instances it is translated as "shepherd" (singular) or "shepherds" (plural). In most instances (other than parables) when the word is used in singular form it refers to Jesus Christ Himself e.g. "the Good Shepherd", "one fold one shepherd" and "the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls".

In Ephesians 4 where we find "pastors" it is actually a compound word "pastors and teachers" but this passage which is often misused with wrong interpretations of "five-fold ministry" is still using the various terms in collective form. Moreover, as you have noted, it is clear from the New Testament that Church leadership was usually in the hands of elders/bishops/presbyters (used interchangeably) and some of these elders in the earliest days included the apostles for a start and secondly some of them also were prophets, evangelists and pastors and teachers.

In the Old Testament the KJV uses "pastors" a few (maybe 5?) more times but it is easy to see that it is used primarily as a figure of speech drawn from herdsmanship. Truly it is mostly used as a noun but that noun is also descriptive of the function of the "pastors". Thus the word "pastor" can also be used as a verb such as: "Pastor" my sheep" which also = "Shepherd my sheep" also = which "Take care of my sheep"  

The critical point therefore is that the task of oversight in the Church is given to bishops/elders/presbyters (all three used interchangeably in the Bible) who are all basically jointly/together to pastor/shepherd/take care of God's people i.e. members of the Church.

Nowadays you have some megalomaniacs, some of them self-appointed and/or "spiritual vagabonds", calling themselves "Pastor this", "Pastor that" or "Pastor the other" --- unfortunately we also indulge them by also calling them that, I suppose unavoidably sometimes for politeness' sake.

Next time a person calls himself "Pastor X",  maybe we should ask him if he will also answer to "Shepherd X" or indeed "Take care of X". 

May I ask:

1. What is Christianity?

2. How would we know that a person is a Christian?

3. If a person complies with what James said in 1:27 do you not think that person would indeed be a Christian?

4. (3 above in other words) Is a person who practises this pure and undefiled religion not therefore a Christian?

^^^ Well the apostle James did not think that "religion" is of the devil; I think he knew much better than those teaching that "religion" is of the devil!

James 1:27

KJV
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep himself unspotted from the world.

NIV
Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

Meanwhile in that passage notice how the Apostle Peter spoke of the elders among the people without focusing on some head honcho "pastor".