₦airaland Forum

debosky:
The same verse says he was rich then he became poor for our sakes. So if anything is overriding, the 'original' state of Jesus (i.e rich) should be what we look to.

So when and where was He rich? AND when and where was he poor?

debosky:
Is the discussion strictly about WoF circles or our own thoughts on whether Jesus was 'rich' or not? . . .

The discussion  is first and foremost about what the bible teaches ---------- as far as we can ascertain with the best of our intellectual and spiritual faculties. However, tied to that is combating twisting of the truth of the Bible --- especially when such twisting is with a sinister motive.

Historically, the most respected Church/Spiritual leaders, theologians, scholars and historians have held the consensus that Jesus was poor materially. See the example given by davidylan that only a poor family will sacrifice turtle doves instead of a lamb; also, read the article I linked to and see further discussion of the community and background into which He was born; the biblical account of His life also show no indication that He was materially rich. This is the biblical teaching. If this is being twisted there is no choice but to combat it; in any event, combating it is unavoidable unless one fails to declare the truth revealed by the Bible.

That He had his needs met is beside the point; of course He had his needs met. But that is not to say He was rich. Overriding all of these in any event is that the Bible says expressly that He was poor or how else do you want to interpret 2 Cor. 8:9?

nuclearboy:
. . .
Seriously though, I wonder if it is not that "brand" of christianity that the DeepSights of our time stare fixatedly on and thus miss the true message and carriers of the Gospel.

This is the point, isn't it? This is why sometimes it seems Christians are fighting with one another all the time. There is sooooo much misrepresentation of the faith --- sometimes out of good intentions but mistakenly or sometimes out of sinister motives as with some of the WoF leaders and other wolves in sheep clothing prosperity "gospel" preachers. This is also why Jude urges us to contend earnestly for the faith delivered once and for all to all the saints. A not commonly noticed point is that virtually every book of the New Testament warns against false preachers and corrupters of the gospel!

nuclearboy:
. . . Acceptance is not word of mouth but way of life etc.

But the definition does not come from us, but God! In the case above, it came from GOD, not me!

nuclearboy:
@DeepSight:

Another way of saying the above -  The clothes he was wearing were Levite. He was not!  On the other hand, the samaritan clothes were samaritan but his conduct was levitical.

If he were "truly" Levite (christian not a signboard), he'd have done what the samaritan did. And thats what we've been saying from eternity. But the situation is not one you decide/judge yourself

These are extremely good points. Let us start with us fortunate ones who are able somehow or other to expressly place our trust in Jesus Christ. Even we are supposed to show that we are born again by our actions. This was the point that the apostle James was making that some misconstrued that he was preaching justification by works. His point was "you show me that you are truly justified by faith --- when I see your works conforming to the actions of a justified (or "born again" person."

For those who died before Jesus Christ, for many today who do not know or understand the biblical gospel but who truly and honestly in their heart love and trust the One Eternal God Almighty, the likelihood is that their lives and actions will reflect that love and trust - just like the good Samaritan. I have no doubt that the Almighty God will respond to them and "born them again". Indeed perhaps their lives and action reflect God's love because they are already "born again" ------- since the "borning again" is done by God Himself and who knows precisely in all instances when God does the "borning again"?

From Romans 2 (ideally read Romans 1-5 or better all of Romans including the glorious Romans 8 )

13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

What about John 10:16

16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.

Speaking personally, you will never hear me say anyone has gone or is going to "hell" (whatever that is) or eternal damnation. Only God knows!

Words of Jesus in John 3:3

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Words of Jesus in Matthew 8:11

And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

Joagbaje, you were saying? Or perhaps you have better revelation than Jesus Christ Himself?

Think veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery carefully!!!

@Joagbaje

Very quick question and, hopefully, it is simple enough.

What is the difference between justification and righteousness? In other words how does a person become justified and how does a person become righteous?

Thanks for those last two posts, aletheia. It seems clear now that Joagbaje cannot really deal with the question of how Old Testament saints were saved hence his avoidance of explaining his own statement on the "provision" that was made in the OT; accordingly, I guess we are better off explaining basics to him as you just did.

@Joagbaje

You only open yourself to ridicule if you continue with your claim that Old Testament people "were made righteous by works"!!!! See the scripture put up by aletheia:

Rom 4:2  For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
Rom 4:3  For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness."

Is it not clear that Abraham was not justified by works? What led to Abraham's justification was his faith in God which was counted for him as righteousness. I hope you believe in the Trinity We will be within reason to suggest that by believing in God the Father, Abraham had believed in Jesus Christ even though Jesus Christ was yet to come in the flesh.

With regard to the forgiveness of sins in the Old Testament: I wonder how you can deny that sins were forgiven in the Old Testament despite the abundance of evidence of people whose sins were forgiven (including some that had been already pointed out on this thread) such as the publican, the woman caught in adultery, the paralytic (Mark 2:5), even David after the Bathsheba affair despite the death of the child (or was it not the same David and Bathsheba who had Solomon and who was thus in the lineage of Jesus Christ?).

Also, make a distinction between forgiveness of individual sinS and justification unto righteousness. Even when the OT Jews used to make an "atonement" with animal sacrifice, did they not commit sinS between one sacrifice and the next sacrifice. Remember that some of these sacrifices were done annually. Thus if Mr A sacrifices an animal on the first of January and by March and April he had committed lots of sinS and he dies in June before his next sacrifice, was he justified or saved by his last "atonement" through his last animal sacrifice? Or perhaps his eternal destiny was based on something more than the "atonement" done by his last animal sacrifice. Go back to Abraham for a minute, was Abraham justified by "atonement" through animal sacrifice ------------ or something much more i.e. his faith in God?

I will leave these for you to digest for now so as to keep things simple.

Joagbaje

I have seen your most recent questions and I will happily answer them -- BUT only after you have addressed this point that I have been asking you for three days or so now!

Joagbaje:
I explained this yesterday , there was provision for forgiveness under OT. which ran till Jesus died.  Now that Jesus is highpriest . The Jews can no longer recieve forgiveness by levitical system now.

What was this provision?

I'm afraid I have to ask again: how did David obtain forgiveness after the Bathsheba affair? Or, if you like what provision exactly did he use "for [his] forgiveness"?


PS You have just made another blunder; you are just full of it really!

Joagbaje:
You should know That standard of righteousness has changed in NT from OT. Men were made righteous by works back then, but now men are made righteous by faith in Christ by being born again.

That is sheer nonsense and shows your ignorance!!!!!!!! I will deal with this later also after you deal with that issue of David & Bathsheba and "Old Testament provision".

debosky

It is all well and good that to you the question is irrelevant. To the Church as a whole and even to individual Christians, it is not irrelevant and should not be irrelevant. The false claim on that question makes a mockery of the Christian faith and leads to false doctrine. To my mind any Christian should be seriously concerned about the twisting of such a very important passage as 2 Cor 8:9!!! Additionally, perhaps if you were properly familiar with WoF doctrine and practice resulting from various falsehoods including those "outlandish" statements and worse, you might see the point that the Christian community, the Church, cannot afford to regard that question as irrelevant.

 

EDIT Here is an interesting read on the topic: Was Jesus Rich?

nuclearboy

You are right; it has just occurred to me (to rephrase an old joke) that the Rhapsody of Realities was the bible version that even the apostle Paul himself used!

debosky:
Was Jesus rich?
. . .
The question to me is irrelevant . . .

I'm afraid the question is not irrelevant. The prosperity "gospel" justifies its own existence in part on the basis of its answer to this question.

In fact, it is answering this question contrary to the previously almost unanimously accepted answer that forms part of the justification of the prosperity "gospel".

There are various false teachings flowing from how you answer this question; how do you like it:

- the misuse of "though He was rich He was made poor that we might be rich" (robbing that passage of its gloriousness)?

- spreading the lie that because Jesus rode a donkey (on the ONE occasion) and a donkey was the best form of transport at the time, that is why a WoF head honcho should drive a Rolls Royce (or the best car)?

- the lie that Jesus wore designer clothes [or equivalent], (yes, a WoF head honcho actually said this)?

- the lie that Jesus had a nice house, a big house (again said by a WoF head honcho)?

---------- all these and more to justify the prosperity "gospel", fleece the flock and turn people away from the true gospel and we say the answer to the question is irrelevant. No, if we say the answer to the question is irrelevant we would be to be complacent!

aletheia:
2. He makes the claim that God has shifting standards of righteousness. So by his (addendum: Joagbaje's) understanding Abraham, Moses, David, Elijah, Elisha, et al, were justified by different standards from believers in Jesus Christ, not understanding that both OT and NT saints are redeemed by the blood of the Lamb.

This is the crux of the matter!!!!!!!!!!!! This is what I was coming to!!!!!!!!

The "blood of the Lamb"; the blood that was shed for ALL; the blood that was shed for us even whilst we were still sinners!!! The same blood that indeed is the source of the redemption of both Old Testament and New Testament saints!

Joagbaje:
I explained this yesterday , there was provision for forgiveness under OT. which ran till Jesus died. Now that Jesus is highpriest . The Jews can no longer recieve forgiveness by levitical system now.

What was rthis provision?

I'm afraid I have toask again: how did David obtain forgiveness after the Bathsheba affair? Or, if you like what provision exactly did he use "for [his] forgiveness"?

Pitiful as ever!

If Jesus seamless robe was that much of a standout ----- how come it was not so easy to identify Ho=im Him that it took a kiss from Judas to indicate which one of the men was Jesus?

@Joagabaje

I will explain salvation to you if you want. But only after you address the matter below which I have raised twice already now!


How did David obtain God's forgiveness after the Bathsheba affair?

What about Psalm 51? What does that do?

I am tired of debating basic ABC/123 Christianity with these ignoramuses; once again, I wish they hadn't come on this thread but agree with Jesoul that we have at least exposed their ignorance for the sake of sane people reading this material.

Anyway, to soothe my spirit I take comfort in the below:

http://www.hymnsite.com/lyrics/umh098.sht

1. To God be the glory, great things he hath done! 
So loved he the world that he gave us his Son,
who yielded his life an atonement for sin,
and opened the lifegate that all may go in.

Refrain:
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord,
let the earth hear his voice! 
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord,
let the people rejoice!
O come to the Father thru Jesus the Son,
and give him the glory, great things he hath done!

2. O perfect redemption, the purchase of blood,
to every believer the promise of God;
the vilest offender who truly believes,
that moment from Jesus a pardon receives.
(Refrain)

3. Great things he hath taught us, great things he hath done,
and great our rejoicing thru Jesus the Son;
but purer, and higher, and greater will be
our wonder, our transport, when Jesus we see.
(Refrain)

Joagbaje/CEC/Word of Faith disease laid bare (by a former WoFer, Rhema graduate who studied under Hagin at that!):

From http://faithpreacher..com/

The word of faith has been studied and rejected by the Church's most esteemed scholars, theologians and ministers. The word of faith is not found in the writings of the Church Fathers. It is unorthodox. The word of faith can only be crafted by taking scattered scriptures and twisting them to fit through one passage of scripture: Mark 11:23. Word of faith ministers ignore mountains of Bible passages, even entire books of the Bible, such as Job. Why? They have to. The word of faith does not fit in with the whole counsel God's Word. It is a teaching of half truths and the redefining of terms. Many of the passages critical to word of faith teaching are taken out of their context and setting. Others passages are completely buthchered to line them up with word of faith doctrines.

The innocent WoFers are a confused and ignorant lot while the leaders are despicable heretics.

This Joagbaje who is denying "atonement" will soon turn around and tell you there is "healing in the atonement" using Isaiah 53. It is what aletheia calls the Humpty Dumpty syndrome: a word is what I want it to mean; if this means I want to use the word white to describe what everyone else can see is black then white it is; I could of course be inconsistent and next minute, use the word white for another thing that everyone can indeed see is white ---- madness!

Somebody who does not even have English comprehension now becomes a master on how Greek and Hebrew words should be translated! Prideful and arrogant ignoramuses! Katallage ko, katallage ni!

valchris10:
Hmm! Holiest and righteous judges who are nt guity of any sin and have received  d divine responsibility of condeming n judging those for whom christ died. Kudos from "heaven". I hav a qst 4 u. Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? To his own master he falls or stands, yea and God is able 2 make him stand. More so, i believe that d joblessness n economic crunch is realy taking a pathetic taul ön you So i suggest that u stick your hungry dumb n numb brain in søme other begarly activity outside Gods' b4 your forward untold damnation 4 touching Gods' anointèd. I Apologise  if i was a litle rude, actually tryin 2 tell 2 stalk your poor tails between your feeble malnourished bønes n  get lost before u appear late. O.k.,

You don't need to be sorry about being rude; just show your post to your man opaks Oyaks aka Nigeria's heretic-in-chief and he will be proud of you. Unless his body-guards won't let you get anywhere near him? Or you have a special pass?

When you realise that man is not "god" we can talk; until then I will just be wasting my time - since that is at the root of your problem!

In addition to nuclearboy and Inesqoor's recent posts:

How did David obtain God's forgiveness after the Bathsheba affair (pun intended)?

What about Psalm 51? What does/did that do?

Joagbaje!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you getting cnfused again so soon? I genuinely thought you had started to see the light yesterday. I was hoping to move on to atonement and I will do so pretty soon because I'm getting tired already on this rather simple non-controversial issue --- except for you!!! One more go on remission and forgiveness:

Here are two passages I gave you earlier: what does "forgiveness" mean in these two passages? To save time, I put it to you that it also means remission of sin[b]S[/b]!

Ephesians 1:7

In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace

Colossians 1:14

In whom we have redemption through his blood, [even] the forgiveness of sins

REMEMBER also that you could not find a passage that speaks of remission of sin (singular)!!!!

Zikky

Good question. First, I take it that all Christians agree that God is a God of glory, a God full of glory. Creation alone testifies to the glory of the Lord. Have you wondered that our earth that seems so 'big' is rather small when you place it in the context of the universe and the cosmos. Yet our God is bigger than all of that i.e. bigger than all of the universe/cosmos. That kind of God is a God of Majesty. Heaven and earth are full of His glory, hosanna in the highest.

Now this God is spirit, transcendent and immortal.

Man is mortal -- so, we shall all die. But as Christians we have hope ---- hope of resurrection. When we are resurrected, we too become immortal in that form of us. In that immortal, resurrected and saved state, we share some and some only of the glory of God -- we cannot share in His full glory.

Now, I am willing to make another concession that I had not made so far on this thread deliberately: in this mortal state, as Christians we can talk loosely of already sharing in God's glory because as long as we are led by the Spirit we are sons of  "god" God. But we are not "gods" and talking of sharing in God's glory as sons of God is only talking of sharing it in that loose sense. The Bible says what we have is a deposit, the full realisation comes later and that is our real hope.

Now for more on the meaning of the glory of God, see the link below; pay particular attention to the Hebrew word 'Hadar' and Greek words "doxa" and "doxazo" (ever heard of doxology?).

http://www.blueletterbible.org/search/lexiconc.cfm?Criteria=glory&x=0&y=0&st=any

luckyCO:
god not GOD!

Same difference!

luckyCO:
God placed us in Lucifer's position after his rebellion, so if I used the word of the Bible and I should not be seen wrong.
Consider Mth 5:48, LEV 11 : 44-45,1 Pet 1:15-16, can any human being achieve that if not God achieving it in you?
If God is inside you doing His work, what will you be then?

As I said, that was always your main problem and why you are having the unnecessary difficulty with the song. When you are able to see that man is not "god", your problem with the song will fade away!

Joagbaje:
Yes they were

So now you agree at least that "remission of sinS" = "forgiveness of SinS"! Hallelujah!!!!!!!


Now on to atonement and before we dissect it ask yourself this question: Why does every Christian denomination (except you and CEC and some parts of WoF) regard Jesus' sacrifice as "atonement" right from over 2000 years ago i.e. right from the very early church

I have not missed your point.

Even though Isa 42:8 says "give", it is still right to sing 'you will never "share" your glory' -- because of the WHERE and WHEN question that you keep refusing to address. Hint: distinguish between time and eternity and you might be able to see why "never share" can be accurate.

On the tangent that has developed --- when you say man is "god" you are equating man with God. This was always your problem and it is why you are having such unnecessary difficulty with the song!

You say "sin" and "sin[b]S[/b] were used interchangeably. What of "remission of sinS" and "forgiveness of sinS" ---- were they not used interchangeably?

EDITED For example does "forgiveness" in the two passages below not in fact mean "remission"?

Ephesians 1:7

In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace

Colossians 1:14

In whom we have redemption through his blood, [even] the forgiveness of sins

luckyCO:
My major concern is why the bible says in Peter & John that man can share God's glory but from your propositions you don't support what the bible said.
If a man can share God's glory at all, then why not accept that in the song GIVE should be used instead of SHARE which is clearly stated in the bible.

You have not answered the simple question or studied the simple issue of WHERE AND WHEN[/B] a christian will share in God's glory! Second, perhaps you did not see my earlier post #22 on this thread?

luckyCO:
I must not to be a member of Christ Embassy before I quote what is in the bible nor believe what I saw; the true message of Christ.

When a question was thrown to Christ, in response He asked them Is it not written in the book that you are gods, ?

Jesus' statement is from John 10:34; he was quoting Psalm 82:6; read Psalm 82:6 & 7; go back and read John 10 and understand who Jesus was talking to and whether He was not rebuking them. Christians who claim they are "gods" are either ignorant or heretical, I'm afraid.

luckyCO:
Are we in agreement now that those who changed the song from [b]SHARE to GIVE are in consonance with the bible?

Again, see my earlier post (#22); the concern is that we sensed a direction of equating man with God because of the promise to share in His glory; that concern has been realised by your claim that man is "god"!

luckyCO

As I suspected you are a member of Christ Embassy and a WoFer who believes himself to be a "god" --- one of the "gods" that shall die like men according to Psalm 82:7!

Leaving that aside: OK the Bible says a Christian will share in the glory of God ---- when do you think that will happen? Immediately, he becomes a Christian? Later in his Christian walk but still in this life? Or in the world to come when the kingdom of God comes?

@Joagbaje

I don't know how long it will take you to deal with the last set of questions but to save time could you also address the following:

How many times was the word rendered as "remission" (KJV) used in the New Testament and could you please point to the verse that talks of remission of sin as opposed to remission of sin[b][size=14pt]s[/size][/b]?

Joagbaje:
1.Jesus's sacrifice paid price for sin of the world
2.propitiation is appeasing God's mercy
3.Remission is absolute wiping away of sin as though they never existed.
4.forgiveness is pardon for sin

OK

You say Jesus' sacrifice paid "price for sin of the world"?

1. Did Jesus sacrifice achieve propitiation?

2. Did Jesus' sacrifice achieve remission of sin?

3. Did Jesus' sacrifice achieve forgiveness for sin?

4. Did Jesus' sacrifice achieve atonement?

OK, I will ask a few questions together to keep things brief.

1. What did Jesus' sacrifice do?

2. What is propitiation and what did it do?

3. What is remission and what did it do?

4. What is forgiveness of sin and what does/did it do?

OK

What did reconciliation do for man?