₦airaland Forum

pickabeau1:
And so it begins - the e fights

Gombs u need to act as a moderator and let us come to our own conclusions

vooks:
They were his no doubt but they were forcibly put on him hours to his death. Even a marine invertebrate can see that these garments are NO indication of Jesus' wealth status. If a firing squad puts an Armani suit on you before dispatching you, does that make you rich seeing you had expensive suit at the point of your checking out?

vooks:
Did anybody suggest that Jesus wore rags? Or is that a strawman argument?

vooks:
Luke 23:11 (ESV)
11 And Herod with his soldiers treated him with contempt and mocked him. Then, arraying him in splendid clothing, he sent him back to Pilate

Matthew 27:28 (ESV)
28 And they stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him,

Mark 15: 17 (ESV)
17 And they clothed him in a purple cloak, and twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on him.

Whether they shared the clothes for memorabilia or to gain sell them off, those garment/robe was not His'. The fact that they did this on a bloodied garment suggests its high value

Candour:
I don't think anybody needs to argue too much with Gombs. Hagin knew the reason he wrote that book. No matter the format my friend adopts in presenting it here, except he'll twist chapter 6&7, he can't obliterate the truth about this question by Hagin

"If You Get What You Want, Will You Want What You Get?"

That is the overall message Hagin sought to pass accross in that book. Its a miracle how my friend didn't devote a single line of commentary to that. Also I still wait to see the correlation between Jesus having 'nice' clothes and pastors living ostentatiously and in obscene opulence. Hagin also spoke on that.

I await the presentation on chapter 6, then we can properly take a trip into the inner sanctums of our 'churches'

My friend isn't seeking the balance Hagin sought. He's simply looking for a way to justify mog's excesses.

Ride on Gombs......na you we know

nannymcphee:
John19:23-24
23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts to every soldier a part [b]AND also his coat[/b]now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.
24 They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.

Jesus garment was torn into four parts & shared amongst the soldiers, it was the coat that was not torn, that's what they were referring to. They didn't want to tear the coat hence the casting of lots. but the garment was shared. Check the italicized line

Oh thanks for the insults, unfortunately I'm not dyslexic neither I'm I twisting scriptures

trustman:
Alright 'BOY', I'm waiting.

PastorKun:
Are you a dunce or can't you read the quoted scripture that stated clearly the garment was put on him by Herod and his goons

trustman:
Maybe you should quit being cynical yourself
and don't be overly excited.

LambanoPeace:
Olodo rabata, read your Bible
John 19:23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

Read the post of nannymcphee you quoted, you'd notice "my clothing" "my garments" "my clothes"

Are you guys having brain malfunctions this morning?

PastorKun:
Another thing that these WOF charlatans deliberately omit is that the garment Jesus wore to his crucifixion was not his own but a garment worn for him by Herrod to mock him as king of the jews.

Luke 23:11

11 Then Herod and his soldiers ridiculed and mocked him. Dressing him in an elegant robe, they sent him back to Pilate.

nannymcphee:
here again is a statement that people throw around without looking at the scripture, just because a minister said it.

the reason they gambled for his coat was in fulfillment of scriptures and not because of the quality of the clothes

Psalms 22:18


(AMP) They part my clothing among them and cast lots for my raiment (a long, shirtlike garment, a seamless undertunic). [John 19:23, 24.])

(ASV) They part my garments among them, And upon my vesture do they cast lots.

(CEV) They took my clothes and gambled for them.


(KJV+) They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

(LITV) They divide My garments among them, and they made fall a lot for My clothing.

(YLT) They apportion my garments to themselves, And for my clothing they cause a lot to fall.

so whether or not the clothes were clean or dirty or stinking, they would have still casted lots and have it shared, SO THAT THE WORD OF GOD MIGHT BE FULFILLED



As for the above, this word will come into play MEMORABILIA

1: things that are remarkable and worthy of remembrance
2: things that stir recollection or are valued or collected for their association with a particular field or interest

serial killers are known to do this and they dont pick that which is most expensive

besides what benefit will a shredded piece of quality designers cloth material of a condemned criminal be to a roman soldier?


bottom line: Jesus garment was torn and lots were casted for it, for the sole purpose of fulfilling scriptures

nannymcphee:
the reason why we are in this state today is because the pentecostal circle has taught the minister infallibility "the pastor cannot be wrong in what he teaches"

so when you question any teaching, you are then asked who are you to question such? what do you know? are you saying you know more than so and so?

when a ministers teaches wrong, people have a hard time believing its wrong, how could he be wrong, this man that has done great and mighty works(I have a video showing the great billy graham saying "JESUS ISNT THE ONLY WAY", A lot of folks will not dispute that simply because of the mans record, afterall when it comes to issue of altar call, i dont think anybody beats his record.

I didn't want to comment here but i'm forced to



the above quote is irrelevant, the scriptures never showed that the any of the prophets were homeless or didnt have a place of abode(whether its outright ownership or rent). whats important is that they had a place to sleep. if the disciples had houses, why will Jesus be homeless?

People who use this point to buttress that Jesus was rich because he had a house normally use it to describe ownership and not tenancy. Jesus was not a pauper, neither did he live a live of penury, he had his needs met supernaturally and for crying out loud he was a carpenter(so he wasnt without skill) BUT never did he for once live in OPULENCE as the present day church will want all christian to live in

As for this


people that live under the bridge can also say this, afterall should they travel and are returning to that town, the above is what they will say

Oyinprince:
Got dat from a Whatsapp group.
Shoulda taken permission before I posted, hope I didn't go against any law

Oyinprince:
I downloaded the book already. I av to finish d one I'm reading b4, but this summary just wanna make me jump to read it

pickabeau1:
OK...so basically there is nothing wrong..

All is fine and dandy

No problem....


Let's see what the book addresses then

Goshen360:
After you go say you wan teach me. Not that I'm not teachable but by God's grace, I'm a student of the word under the Spirit of truth. This is exactly what happens when you copy men and panel beat scriptures. You're still using the OT to interpret the NT. Isaiah was talking about or remembering them of obedience TO THE LAW of Deuteronomy 28. Listen here...as regards that verse you quest. Obedient is required in the NT but it is NOT obedience that causes something to happen but obedience to what is already done in the finished works of Christ.

So you are saying, IN ORDER FOR ME TO EAT THE GOOD OF THE LAND, I HAVE TO OBEY but the NT says, in order for me to partake of what is already available, I have to believe AND BE OBEDIENT TO THE FAITH OF THE SON OF GOD. It is by His Obedience that everything I receive by believing or by faith happens, not by MY OWN OBEDIENCE to cause it to happen or to make me eat\partake of what is available.

Lemme go sleep. I will join this brainwashing thread if I can.....

pickabeau1:
OK...I can't make it more plain than it is....

I am saying the scriptures quoted and Jesus life showed faith to meet needs was the focus
How did we get to a point where the church is now a place of wealth and commerce and property grab.


Its a two fold question


Do you agree the church is there if yes

Then How?

pickabeau1:
Rephrased

When did pastors start the wealth race from a point of needs being met

Some give testimony of what God has done but u feel its like a boast

tuns2s:
I almost challenge it at a point while reading down, but your good summary takes it all...

nora544:
JESUS WAS RICH

The following are some of the reasons people believe Jesus was rich:

The wise men from the East made Jesus wealthy at his birth: The Rev. Creflo Dollar, senior pastor of World Changers Church International in College Park, says the Gospel of Matthew proves that Jesus was the recipient of wealth at his birth.

“In the book of Matthew in Chapter 2, the kings came to him, and they bought him gold, frankincense and myrrh.”

Jesus had so much money that he needed a treasurer: The New Testament describes Judas as the “treasurer” for Jesus’ disciples. “Why would a band of 12 men need a treasurer if they didn’t have some treasures,” says Bishop Johnathan Alvarado of Total Grace Christian Center in Decatur. “You need a treasurer when you have surplus.”

Jesus wore expensive clothes: In the 19th chapter of John’s Gospel, the Roman soldiers who crucified Jesus are depicted gambling for his “seamless” undergarment. Alvarado says Jesus wore garments that were a “nobleman’s garments.” “If his clothes were a poor man’s clothes, why would centurions gamble for it?” Alvarado asks.

In a sermon titled “Jesus Was Not Poor,” published on the Web page of Harvest Church, it is written:

I call your attention to Mark 14:3-7. Jesus is dining in the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came with an alabaster vial of very costly perfume of pure spikenard and broke the vial and poured the contents over His head. There were some that were indignant and said, “Why has this perfume been wasted? For this perfume might have been sold for over three hundred pence, and the money given to the poor”. Jesus said, “Let her alone; why do you bother her? She has done a good deed to me. For the poor you always have with you , and whenever you wish, you can do them good: but you do not always have Me.” Jesus did not count Himself among the poor because Jesus was not poor! He was not necessarily wealthy (in natural terms) but Jesus Was Not Poor! — The Disciples Were Not Poor!

JESUS WAS POOR

The following are some of the reasons people believe Jesus was poor:

Roman soldiers gambled for the clothes of many condemned criminals.
“It was ordinary for prisoners to be stripped naked and looted by soldiers,” says Sondra Ely Wheeler, an ethicist at Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington, D.C., and author of “Wealth as Peril and Obligation: The New Testament on Possessions” (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, $20). Wheeler says the soldiers also were gambling for the robe Herod placed on Jesus to mock him. “I’m sure that was expensive — he got it from Herod.

The text doesn’t say that Judas was a treasurer, only that he held the common purse: Neither the King James nor the New International Version of the Bible calls Judas the “treasurer.” The NIV calls him the “keeper of the money bag,” and the King James says he “had the bag.” Scholars say he held the money not for Jesus but for all the disciples, a common custom of the time for itinerant preachers. “To call Judas a treasurer is like looking at two kids who go to the movies and calling the one who holds the money the treasurer,” Wheeler says.

Jesus did not have a lucrative occupation: Crossan says the Greek word in Matthew for Jesus’ occupation has been translated into carpenter, but a more accurate translation would change the word to a laborer.

Jesus and his disciples were poor, according to archaeological evidence: Eric Meyers, a professor of archaeology at Duke University and editor of the Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, says he has personally excavated the village of Nazareth where Jesus lived. He pointed out that the Bible says Jesus was so poor that he couldn’t afford his own tomb for his burial. “There is no way to speak of wealth in that context,” he says. “This is living at the margins of society, eking out an agricultural existence.”

http://claudemariottini.com/2006/10/25/was-jesus-rich-or-poor/

pickabeau1:
So far so good.. a lot of the same things we know about faith and prosperity

A lot of it has centred on how his needs were met even though he never asked.His and his kids were met and the congregation supplied the needs of the pastor when his ministry started

The exposition on Jesus not poor is ok but a bit long but i can understand what he is trying to do

I will wait for the chap 7 and co..pls notify me however i have some questions

1. The message as it is written so far seems to be for a preacher or man of God. I will like to hear more on how he translated it to the layman
It is easy for a man of God who is loved and has a powerful ministry of signs and wonders to be blessed. This is not limited even to Christianity. The man of God should also want his followers to be blessed as against a focus on self using his spritual authority

2. I will like to highlight the words of the man of God here


The focus from his exposition on Jesus's life shows that Jesus knew his needs will be met.

so he never worried

I get that
When did it change from trusting God to meet the needs of men of God and living in that faith to a naked grab for wealth, wealth acquistion and oppression of the laity by these same men

Everytime I go to church, its always a boasting session or the other..God gave a car, land , jet etc

3. How can the common man assess this prosperity or is it for the preachers alone

nlMediator:
My dear brother, I took a short break from NL - to retain my sanity! Glory to God, I got a few things accomplished in the process. Thanks for noticing my conspicuous absence!!

nlMediator:
That has been the cornerstone of Hagin's and Kenyon's ministry - even before anybody on this thread was born! I can quote from several of his books - way before Midas Touch - where he says that our emphasis is on the NT. In fact, he and especially Kenyon are so Pauline you'd think some of our friends here are his disciples.