₦airaland Forum

frosbel: I rephrase to say :


Jesus is the Son of GOD who came to reveal the Father to us, he is not that God , he is the Son of GOD.

Anyway , let's not bring Trinity here again.

Thanks.

When we or scripture say Christ is the Son of God, what does that mean?

@ Enigma,

Thanks for your response. I always love to fellowship with you anytime any day as a brother. Well, as per what you replied. There's actually where I'm dragging this thread to and that was the whole essence of 'questioning' Ola one after the other because I know within me he will answer as things are except he wants to manipulate things.

First is, we all sin daily. Whether we that call people Judaizer or those called Judaizer and we will sin tomorrow (future).

2. That we teach grace doesn't mean we abuse it to those of us who understand grace. Sin is sin, small or big whether those trying to adhere to the teachings of the law of Moses or those teaching grace. For instance, me as a person (I use myself as an example because I don't have business into other's 'personal lives) I DON'T STEAL, KILL, ROB, SLEEP WITH ANOTHER MAN'S WIFE and don't do the what people tag 'big' sin but how about anger that lead to saying what I shouldn't say? I do it at times - that's sining in words. Me, not doing these 'big' sin, does that make me better than a Christian who does those 'big' sins seeing that we both commit one sin or the other?

3. God is the one that defines what sin is and is not. Many things we Christians call sin that is not explicitly defined as sin by God might be bad habit or so from another man's perspective but not necessarily sin from God's perspective.

4. You have heard my grace teachings many times. Nowhere do I teach abuse neither have I read people like shdemidemi taught on abuse. In fact, I read one of his post that says, Grace is our gift of liberty\freedom and also follow up and said, Grace is NOT a license. That's exactly what it is. Any body that misunderstood that is on his own.


5. My main aim of questioning Ola and that's the point or where I will continue this thread with YOU, possibly. The point and where I'm dragging this discussion is: when a Christian sin AFTER becoming a Christian, does such sin REMOVE or TAKE AWAY his\her sainthood and righteousness in Christ knowing that there is still possibilities to sin tomorrow? This is all about the Devil attacking our righteousness in Christ AFTER becoming Christians and we sin or will sin tomorrow and this doesn't mean I say this to encourage sin, I just said there's something (sin) I can NEVER do anymore in my lifetime.

@ Frosbel,

What do we or people call scripture 'interpretation'?

I believe this is what it is:

Scripture A says certain thing on a subject and scripture B says another thing on the same subject. Now, 'interpretation' is RIGHTLY DIVIDING these TWO scriptures, that is, saying what both of them says WITHOUT ONE CONTRADICTING THE OTHER. If you can't do such explanations to bring two such scriptures together, then one is not rightly dividing.

In follow up to the above. If one scripture says Jesus is God and another says he is man. What possible 'interpretation' can we therefore give to these two scriptures so one is not looking like its lying and another is saying the truth for we know scriptures don't lie?

The best interpretation is to say Jesus is God becoming a man. How did this happened? We were not told otherwise, I would have told you but we have this testimony, the Word was God and the Word 'became' flesh and dwell among us. If he 'became' and dwell among us, to do that, there will definitely be a lineage from which he will be born and so we have this testimonies - he is the seed of the woman; he is the seed of David; human ancestry of the messiah etc. He cannot just jump from heaven to earth.

Enigma: @Goshen360

To some of us reading, you are sometimes puffed up about your knowledge of scriptures or your ability/intention to "teach" the scriptures! Is it possible that you might be sinning (i.e. committing a sin) when you are so puffed up? Consider whether some forms of pride may be sin!

Yes! It is very possible that I am sinning when I tried to teach. Sin could be in words, thought and deeds. Hence, 1 John 1:8 is true to that testimony in the present tense.

Enigma: When you pray, do you ever ask God for "forgiveness"? If you do, then forgiveness of what?

God is no more in the business of reminding people of their sins like under the law where their sins are reminded of them yearly. When Christ said forgive us our trespasses as we forgive others, Matthew 6:12 that is the message of "under the law". The message of under Grace is, we forgive others BECAUSE WE OURSELVES HAD BEEN FORGIVEN. Under the law, it was a shadow, the condition for receiving God's forgiveness is for the people under the law to forgive other, then they can receive forgiveness. Under Grace, we receive forgiveness because of what Christ had done.

New International Version (©2011)
I am writing to you, dear children, because your sins have been forgiven on account of his name.

New Living Translation (©2007)
I am writing to you who are God's children because your sins have been forgiven through Jesus.

1 John 2:12

The truth John is teaching in 1 John 1:8 is a conditional truth "if" we . . . And what happens "If we DONT"? Does that mean we will still not receive forgiveness of future sins or the present or past sins? Confessing our sins is conditioned and is not a requirement for our forgiveness. God knows we will sin in future and now and therefore does not remind us our sins to defeat our righteousness in and through Christ.

Enigma: Do you follow Jesus' suggestion on prayer to ask God to forgive us our trespasses (i.e. sins)?

I have answered this above. That was a message of and to people "under the law" until our forgiveness is secured through his death and resurrection and blood. Colossians 1:14; Ephesians 1:7. Jesus could not have being teaching the revelation of the FINISHED WORK because it is not yet finished at that time. When it was FINISHED ON THE CROSS. The message of the NT began. Hence, Jesus' suggestion was conditional - forgive us our trespasses AS WE forgive others. After the finished works on the cross, the LORD revealed through the Apostle, it is not longer forgive other because you want to get forgiveness from God BUT now, forgive other because you yourself had received forgiveness THROUGH CHRIST....(because of His finished works)

New Living Translation (©2007)
I am writing to you who are God's children because your sins have been forgiven through Jesus.

1 John 2:12

New Living Translation (©2007)
Instead, be kind to each other, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, just as God through Christ has forgiven you. Ephesians 4:32

Therefore, I don't follow Christ' suggestion (shadows of the law teachings) to forgive others because I want to receive forgiveness BUT I follow Christ's revelation (revealed truth of the NT) to the Apostles to forgive because I myself had RECEIVED forgiveness AND HAD ALREADY BEING FORGIVEN.

When did this forgiveness took place? When he shed His blood ONCE and for all, not like yearly blood of goats and bulls under the law.

New International Version (©2011)
In him (Christ) we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace

Ephesians 1:7

Enigma: Or are the people who pray to God for "forgiveness" also "Judaizers"?

I will not judge anyone on this question. The reason is because, every man does things based on their knowledge. I will not call them judaizers based on this act but anyone enforcing the keeping of Mosaic law on Christians are those the bible called Judaizers and I only follow after the words of the Bible.

Enigma: I will recommend that you revisit the passage below:

1 John 1:8-10

8If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

10.If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Note "sins" in red (plural)

Was John only referring to "sins" committed before we became Christians?

John is not using this scriptures to teach a Christian cannot sin even after accepting Christ as LORD and Savior. On the contrary, he is saying a Christian can sin and have sinned in the past tense (v10). I believe verse 8 is a present tense sin and it is possible a Christian can sin in words, thought and action while we still live in this earthly tabernacle. So, it is verse 10 that refers to sins committed BEFORE we became Christians for ALL have SINNED and come short of his glory and saying we have not SINNED in the past tense is calling God a liar.

Enigma: Or was he also referring to "sins" that we might be committing even after becoming Christians?

If John was referring to sinfulness after becoming a Christian, was he also a "Judaizer".

Verse 8-9, I believe is in the present tense or present continuous tense that refers to sin we commit in words, thought and action. Verse 10 is sin of the past. John cannot be a Judaizer in this context because he wasn't forcing any keeping of the mosaic law here in his writings. I believe you know who Judaizers are and why\when we use that context?

Amplified Bible (AMP)
[My precaution was] because of false brethren who had been secretly smuggled in [to the Christian brotherhood]; they had slipped in to spy on our liberty and the freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might again bring us into bondage [under the Law of Moses].

Galatians 2:4

Amplified Bible (AMP)
10 For there are many disorderly and unruly men who are idle (vain, empty) and misleading talkers and self-deceivers and deceivers of others. [This is true] especially of those of the circumcision party [who have come over from Judaism].

11 Their mouths must be stopped, for they are mentally distressing and subverting whole families by teaching what they ought not to teach, for the purpose of getting base advantage and disreputable gain.

Titus 1:10-11

When I call some people Judaizers, I know the context on which I call them such names. It is based on their teachings on the above scriptures not what John was saying in 1 John 1:8-10.

Enigma: I will repeat a word I once mentioned on a thread discussing "law" and "grace" - balance.

Like shdemidemi said and I completely agree 100%. Grace and law don't balance. They are like water and oil that cannot mix. Completely different one from the other. We have been free from the bounds of the law of Moses. We can't be justified by faith and want to keep it by the law. We are not saved by obeying any law but the just shall live by faith, not by keeping the mosaic. The reason why many are still sinners is because they make laws for themselves or put themselves under the mosaic kinds of law and when such is broken, it becomes a sin for sin is the transgression of the law but where there is no law, there can't be sin. The death of Christ terminated the bound and obedience to the law (Romans 7:1-6, emphasis on verse 6. Please read from Amplified Version) and we left with obedience to FAITH . . . in Christ. (Galatians 2:16; Romans 1:5; Romans 16:26).

Finally, I bring from the TWO DESCENDANTS together. That is, I bring MARY and JOSEPH together. Hence we have MARY + JOSEPH.

At this point the record, nowhere in these genealogies does it say, "Joseph begot Jesus" which is similar to what is said of all the foregoing persons; it says, "Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus" Jesus was born of Mary (Galatians 4:4), and not of Joseph, since it was prophesied that Christ would be the seed of the woman and would be born of a virgin (Gen. 3:15; Isa. 7:14).

Christ could not have been born of Joseph because Joseph was a man and a descendant of Jeconiah (from one line of the descendants of DAVID), none of whose descendants could inherit the throne of David according to Jeremiah 22:28-30. However, Mary was a virgin and also descendant of David (from another line of the descendants of DAVID) according to Luke 1:27, 31-32; and as such, she was the right person of whom Christ should be born according to prophesy. The marriage of Joseph and Mary brought Joseph into relationship with Christ (as a legal father, not as biological father) and united into one the two lines of DAVID for the bringing in of Christ, as shown in the steps above.

Goshen360: Now, with DAVID. The genealogy splits into TWO.

1. NATHAN

2. SOLOMON.

I pick and continue on #1, NATHAN.

NATHAN (Luke 3:31; 1 Chronicles 3:5)

to

HELI (Luke 3:23-24)

to

MARY (Genesis 3:15; Isaiah 7:14; Galatians 4:4)


Hold your place there while I pick from #2, SOLOMON.


SOLOMON (Matthew 1:6)

to

JECONIAH (Matthew 1:11-12; Jeremiah 22:28-30)

Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah. Jeremiah 22:30

What the confusion is here is simple.

1. The man ALREADY HAD A CHILDREN (SEED) hence there won't be "for no man OF HIS SEED shall prosper. If he didn't already had children, then Matthew 1:11-12 will be LYING TO US.

2. The curse of "Thus saith the LORD, write this man childless . . . is ONLY limited to IN HIS DAYS or IN HIS LIFETIME (niv). When he died, the curse died and is null and void and therefore, not extended anymore to his seeds. Therefore, we have we have Matthew 1:12-15 to be TRUE that

JECONIAH

to

JACOB (Matthew 1:12-15)

to

JOSEPH (Matthew 1:16)

Here (in Matthew 1:16) the genealogy says that "Jacob begot Joseph" but Luke 3:23 says, "Joseph, the son of Heli". Luke's record was "according to law" (a literal translation of "so it was thought" in Luke 3:23. You can read many other translations on the phrase, "so it was thought"), indicating that Joseph was not actually the son of Heli but was reckoned his son according to the law. Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli, Mary's father.

This is a case according to Numbers 27:1-8 and 36:1-12, in which a regulation was made by God that if any parents had only daughters as heirs, the inheritance would go to the daughters, who would then have to marry a man of their own or same tribe in order to keep their inheritance within that tribe. Even such a regulation in the Old Testament is related to the genealogy of Christ, showing that all Scripture is a record of Christ.

Therefore, when the genealogy slitted into TWO with DAVID into NATHAN and SOLOMON, it is still WITHIN THE TRIBE OF JUDAH AND DESCENDANTS OF DAVID.

to be continue

Because of time, I have been thinking on how to make this teaching simple and very clear. Now, what I'm going to do is bring all the accounts in the 3 gospels together and make bible references to them, if this will make the post clear and short. Remember, Luke's account traced back to God (Luke 3:38) and John start from God to man. (John 1:1-3, 14). Therefore, lemme combine all the 3 account and pin point on the important people of PROMISE in the genealogy.

GOD

to

ADAM (Luke 3:38)

to

ABRAHAM (Genesis 26:4; Galatians 3:16)

to

ISAAC (Genesis 26:4; Matthew 1:2; Luke 3:33-34)

to

JACOB (Genesis 28:14; Matthew 1:2; Luke 3:33-34; Romans 9:13)

to

JUDAH (Genesis 49:10; Matthew 1:2; Luke 3:33-34; Hebrews 7:14; Revelations 5:5)

to

JESSE (Isaiah 11:1; Luke 3:31-32; Matthew 1:5-6)

to

DAVID (Luke 3:31-33; Matthew 1:5-6; 2 Samuel 7:12-13; Jeremiah 23:5)

Now, with DAVID. The genealogy splits into TWO.

1. NATHAN

2. SOLOMON.

to be continue

Okay, @ Frosbel and all,

Here I come!

First, you must understand we want to look into a genealogy of Christ 'according to the flesh or human descendant' and there are 3 gospel accounts (Matthew, Luke and John) that dealt with this genealogy we want to look into. There's no conflict nor contradiction at all, taking all the 3 gospels together. To have 3 gospels narrate same genealogy means to have 'adequate information' and line them all together like putting some pieces of information together and make them whole. That's what I'm going to do here.

And we begin the explanation now:

The record and\or revelation of John's Gospel is the the Gospel of the God-Savior. It begins from God and comes to man (John 1:1- 14), emphasizing Christ's divinity to attest to His DIVINE-human status. The genealogy of Matthew and Luke's Gospel, the Gospel of the Man-Savior. They begin from man and traces back to God, stressing Christ's humanity to affirm His HUMAN-divine status. He was born a man to bring God to man that He might accomplish redemption to bring man to God. In Him God and man are joined together and we read, IN HIM DWELLS THE FULLNESS OF THE GODHEAD BODILY. Colossians 2:9.

to be continue

frosbel: Goshen , where are thee !!

I heard thy voice and I was afraid, so I hid myself.


I'm at work bro. Will get off in 1 hour time from time of this post. If you have time, you can wait for me; if not, go sleep and I explain line by line and also, I will try come online early tomorrow morning before I go to work again. Only Thursdays and Fridays my off days for now, it might change in future.

OLAADEGBU: Before you jump to other questions, first sort out your repentance.

Is this the answer to my question. Remember I told you people are reading this all over the world.

Now, let me start with myself. I have repented of my old way and my sin, now believe in Christ. The Spirit bears witness with my spirit that I am a son of God. Have I committed one sin or another since I got saved? YES!

Is there possibility I will commit any sin in future? ABSOLUTELY YES! That's where the verse Enigma quoted comes to play - if I say I have no sin, truth is not in me and I make God a liar.

Now, I have honestly answered my own question. Kindly answer the same question please:

Goshen360: Interesting!

Now, since AFTER you repented and got saved (faith in Christ), have you committed one sin or another (past tense). 2. Do know if you will commit one sin or the other (future tense)?

@ Enigma,

I will respond to your post later in the day. You should read by the morrow.

OLAADEGBU: Repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

Interesting!

Now, since AFTER you repented and got saved (faith in Christ), have you committed one sin or another (past tense). 2. Do you know if you will commit one sin or the other (future tense)?

DrummaBoy: ^The righteousness that exceeds that of the pharisee is the righteousness of God, Romans 1:16;17, that can only be obtained by faith in Jesus Christ.

Your problem, and those of all other tithe paying faithfuls is that you cannot see righteousness beyond what men do. Read Romans 3:21-31, there is a righteousness from God that doesn't come by what U do but by FAITH. Any other work that is acceptable to God is founded on that righteousness.

You are the one ignorant of the righteousness of God and is going about to establish ur own righteousness by what U do, Romans 10.

In fact and truth, just because of this your responses above, I just can't hold it no more than to login and give you 10000000000 LIKES. You see my brother, many Christians don't know how to rightly divide the word. They don't also know Jesus being born under the law had to 'code' the message of the NT so he can then 'reveal' it to the Apostles. Paul would say, 'mysteries REVEALED unto me...'. If it's not coded, what is there to reveal.

I feel ashamed somethings that in this age and time where bible and technology abound, many are still ignorant of rightly dividing the word. I have many teachings for God's on interpreting all what Christ said 'under the law' to the people of God but am tied up with no enough time for me considering work and other activities. For instance, Jesus said, 'you must be born again' under the law but the question is HOW? NOT what being born again is or is not. It therefore the epistles that tells you the HOW to be born again which was coded under the law. The law is a shade and shadow and many walk therein and they stumble at the truth.

The righteousness of Christ by faith is a product of the finished work of the cross and it revealed in Christ AFTER HIS DEATH AND RESURRECTION and there EXCEEDS THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES....which some still think a Christian had to follow.

Thank God for you bro.

carzola: Please just got a calling from are lord, i'v been reading the bible and Books but i dont seem to find the answer i ask for.. What is ur take on it what can i do?

Which call or calling are you still talking about? Every Christian is already called.

But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you. 1 Peter 5:10

When people say they are called or have a calling, I just laugh at them. I'm not judging your calling neither am I saying it is not true. But you are saying the right thing in a wrong way or with the wrong choice of words. Just says, God is SENDING you on a particular assignment or mission. So you just received an assignment from God.

Peace!

Bidam: Ok,enof of your silly little pranks,it is also clear that you don't have anything to say here.Have you finished with frosbel on the deity of Christ? If you haven't then you re doing a great injustice to yourself and to God.

Sharrap Prophet Bidam, PhD. Just talk say you no know this little thing and make I school you but I must collect that tithe from you too because you don dey collect tithe too long from people and you no efen know thing. Wetin you come dey collect tithe for naw? .

Anyway, these things are simple. I will use this thread to liberate our brother Frosbel on the deity of Christ and begin to parallel it to Joseph genealogy he requested in this thread. I will do that when I come online next, later in the day today because the 12 hours wey Frosbel give you go don pass by then. Honestly, it's very simple.

OLAADEGBU: Answer the question. Have you repented from your sins?

What is sin and who is a sinner? Okay, lemme go dig it up again for you: https://www.nairaland.com/1304111/what-sin

OLAADEGBU: What Is Sin?
May. 26, 2013

"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4).

The Bible warns that "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23), and "the soul that sinneth, it shall die" (Ezekiel 18:20). These are strange days, however, and there are many "that call evil good, and good evil" (Isaiah 5:20). Who is to say what is right and wrong, when even our U.S. Supreme Court implies that there are no absolutes?

God is the one who defines sin because it is He who will judge sin. The definition is multifaceted, for sin takes many forms. Most basically, as our text says, sin is the transgression of the law--not just certain laws, but all of God's law. "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10).

But there must be more than just formal obedience to God's commands, for "all unrighteousness is sin" (1 John 5:17). Furthermore, there are sins of omission, as well as sins of commission. "To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin" (James 4:17).

When there is no specific law or command to guide our actions in a particular situation, the principle to follow is that of faith--that is, the confident inward assurance that we are doing that which honours the Lord, for "whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Romans 14:23).

[size=14pt]There is much more that could be noted, but it is clear that no one could ever measure up even to these demands,[/size] "for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). All of us deserve the wages of sin, "but God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8 ). [size=14pt]Now "the righteousness of God without the law is manifested. . . . Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ"[/size] (Romans 3:21-22). HMM

For more . . . .

Lemme extract one of your definitions of sin and I quote below:

God is the one who defines sin because it is He who will judge sin. The definition is multifaceted, for sin takes many forms. Most basically, as our text says, sin is the transgression of the law--not just certain laws, but all of God's law. "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10).

First, Most basically, as our text says, sin is the transgression of the law

If sin is the transgression of the law according to the text you quoted. What happens when\where there's no existing law? Would there still be sin because there will be nothing (no law) to transgress against right?

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

International Standard Version (©2012)
for the Law produces wrath. Now where there is no Law, neither can there be any violation of it.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
The laws in Moses' Teachings bring about anger. But where laws don't exist, they can't be broken.

Weymouth New Testament
For the Law inflicts punishment; but where no Law exists, there can be no violation of Law.

Amplified Bible (AMP)
For the Law results in [divine] wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression [of it either].

Expanded Bible (EXB)
because the law can only bring God’s anger [wrath]. But if there is no law, there is nothing to disobey [no transgression/violation;  the law points out sin, but it cannot save from sin].

Romans 4:15

Second, you said in the above article:

. . . not just certain laws, but all of God's law. "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10).

Look at the contradictions in your same article:

[size=14pt]There is much more that could be noted, but it is clear that no one could ever measure up even to these demands,[/size] "for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). All of us deserve the wages of sin, "but God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8 ). [size=14pt]Now "the righteousness of God without the law (that is, does NOT require keeping the law) is manifested. . . . Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ"[/size] (Romans 3:21-22).

Do you see that? Now, do you or can you keep ALL or THE WHOLE LAW? The whole or all 613 LAWS OF GOD GIVEN THROUGH MOSES, do you keep them all or can you keep them?

OLAADEGBU: Have you repented of your sins before you start to lead someone out of his "errors"?

Which sin? Didn't you just said,

OLAADEGBU: For your information, a saint is not a sinner and a sinner is not a saint.

Even the people you mentioned in your OP, you 'infer or refer' to them as saints but still sinners. Can a dog be a dog and at the same time be a goat? Being a dog is (1) by nature and (2) by birth. By birth, we are sinners through Adam and by same NEW birth (you must be born again), we are made saints\sinless\holy\righteous\justified. We also carry a new nature in Christ. A new Identity or you think holy scriptures is just mere words that means nothing? Now, before you start dribbling around here, lemme dig up your PhD article that says the same thing I'm saying here: https://www.nairaland.com/1337734/made-christ

OLAADEGBU:

OLAADEGBU:
Made in Christ
June 26, 2013

"For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him" (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Many men would boast of being "self-made" men, but no Christian can do this. Everything we are that is truly worthy and eternal was made in us by God through Jesus Christ. Our text is clear on this. We have been made righteous in Christ, but this was only because God made Him to be sin for us.

When He made us righteous in Christ, He also "made us accepted in the beloved" (Ephesians 1:6). Furthermore, we were "made nigh by the blood of Christ" (2:13). The contexts of these passages make it abundantly clear that our being made righteous, accepted in Christ, and nigh to God, is all of grace; we did nothing to merit such privileges.

This is not all. At the same moment, He also has "made us meet |'fit'| to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light" (Colossians 1:12). That we in our poverty should be made joint-heirs with Christ once again is only by His unmerited grace. "Being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life" (Titus 3:7).

In promise now and in full reality later, He has "made us kings and priests unto God and his Father" (Revelation 1:6). Positionally, we even share His throne, for He "hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:6).

Without Him we are nothing; but in Him we have all things. He is "made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption" (1 Corinthians 1:30). Truly, in salvation as well as in creation, "it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves" (Psalm 100:3). HMM

For more . . . .

I've highlighted the salient points in your article to your attestation. Just as I was MADE sinner by Adam and your opening text in the ^ article says, God MADE Christ who had no sin TO BE SIN FOR ME, Ola, can you tell me\us what sin I still have if someone had already been MADE SIN FOR ME? And your text in the article also declared me righteous "in Christ" and Christ took my sins and divinely exchanged it for righteousness - The "IT IS FINISHED" works of Christ!

OLAADEGBU: Speak for yourself.

Speak for myself? Let people read you loud and clear. You 'first' said you are a saint and so am I.

Goshen360: Ola, are you still a sinner or a saint as a Christian?

OLAADEGBU: A saint. [s]You are yet to answer my set of kweshions[/s].

How then should I speak for myself? You and I both agree we are SAINTS of God.

OLAADEGBU: What makes you a saint?

Ola, people are reading and don't under estimate how far things said on this forum can go. I asked you how did you (and I) became a SAINT? You turned around and said I should speak for myself after you already said you're a saint and so am I. Are you no longer a saint? Are you now a sinner? Okay, lemme answer the question - How did we became a saint and\or what make us (you & I & all Christian who believe in Christ) SAINTS OF GOD.

For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Romans 5:19

I did absolutely NOTHING to become a SINNER, it was BY THE DISOBEDIENCE OF ONE MAN - ADAM because the whole human race was IN Adam when he sinned. In the same way and manner as the first Adam, I did NOTHING to be a SAINT, RIGHTEOUS, JUSTIFIED etc, it was BY THE OBEDIENCE OF MAN - CHRIST because everyone who believes and is "IN" CHRIST is a NEW CREATURE, not after the order of Adam anymore. This is how you and I became SAINTS OF GOD. So, because we have come to Christ, believe in Christ and we are IN Christ, we are MADE saints, righteous - it is the gift of God!

^ Why you so much derailing the thread you started yourself. A very interesting thread for that matter. The thread is 'saints and sinners'. Leave all these NDE and OBE talk alone, let's focus on the topic, saints and sinners. Thank you.

Goshen360: How then did you and I became SAINTS?

@ Olaadegbu, I'm still waiting for the answer to this question above please so we can continue. Thank you.

I will like to follow up with my little contribution.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. 1 Corinthians 4:1

. . . as of the ministers of Christ

First, it refers to the early Apostles but by extension of plurality; it also includes those who ministers Christ. Who are these ministers of Christ. Christ is the mediator of a new and better covenant by his death, burial and resurrection making way for the new testament. Hence, minister of Christ are those who ministers Christ, preaches and teaches the new testament and the finished works of Christ.

Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 2 Corinthians 3:6

If a man is not ministering the new testament which Christ is the mediator, such is not a minister of Christ. Therefore, ministers of Christ are ministers of the new testament\covenant.

. . . and stewards of the mysteries of God

The ministers of Christ who minister the new testament are stewards or custodians or managers of the mysteries of God. This mysteries is an already revealed one, no longer hidden. Colossians 1:26; Ephesians 1:9, 3:4-5; 1 Timothy 3:9. What is so precious about the 'mysteries of God' that it had to be put or ENTRUSTED to the hands or care of 'ministers of Christ' and what exactly is this 'mysteries of God'? I will save that for another time.

Now, here, the Apostle had ESTABLISHED a truth and that truth is, ministers of Christ are ENTRUSTED with mysteries of God and he then carry into verse 2: They are required to be FAITHFUL.

Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. 1 Corinthians 4:2

He just told us that ministers of Christ are STEWARDS of the mysteries of God and here a stewards (ministers of Christ) be faithful. Why is faithfulness required towards the mysteries that is entrusted to them the ministers? This 'faithfulness' is an adjective. It speaks of a man and\or persons who show themselves faithful in the transaction of business, the execution of commands, or the discharge of official duties. This means, a custodian can go astray from being faithful to what was entrusted to him and become unfaithful and manipulative and mismanaging the MYSTERIES of God that is entrusted to him. One who is called a minister of Christ must be one who discharge what had been entrusted to him faithfully without bending or manipulating the mysteries that had been entrusted to him.

^ Okay bro.

JesusisLord85: You really should not jump in on something as trivial. I will say no more as the gentleman asked me kindly.

Not as you think my brother. I actually wanted to correct that on the other thread where you first made the statement saying something like "so shedemidemi is the one in the video". But he never said he is the person. Anyway, no e-blows. Just my observation.

okeyxyz: Why is @obadiah(aka buzugee, aka WMD, aka doctrine terrorist, etc) not invited here??

^

frosbel: Sorry Pal, I forgot you specialise in the history of the Tithe ,and it's application to the modern age.

Bidam, you see your life?

Bidam:

Yes, I see your face...efen your head. E be like say na gorimapa you get o. # and rolling on the floor#

Bidam: When infallible proofs abound in scriptures concerning the preexistence of Christ you now ran away to open this thread abi? I am not a historian.I leave that to you to make the research,you re quite good at it.

Bidam, no make me vex o. This is not history matter o, na bible study matter be this one naw. You don too collect tithe for you not to know this little matter joor. O ya, show yourself joor, explain this 'token' matter for the brethrens.

JesusisLord85: But was that not you in that youtube clip you posted? I had thought the lady referred to you as a minister

You are jumping to conclusion on empty air. Read between the lines. Did he tell you he was the person in the video or that is your assumption?

Bidam, don't run away o. I can see you peeping o. I even see your face.

DrummaBoy: Hello guys, I am still expecting your response on this thread

https://www.nairaland.com/1365427/invitation-theological-discuss-one-corinthians#16905012

Make I go see!

frosbel: Teach me Bro, I am not an expert !

I have seen a few of us peep in and take off

No bro. You need send APOSTOLIC TITHE on this one before I unveil it or make you wait for Bidam to come unveil. Afterall, Bidam being collecting tithe (even though he's not from the tribe of Levi). So make him come do the work for all the tithes he being don dey collect.

Tgirl4real: What is OBE?

You need stay in vogue here on this section o. You want make we recruit you here ni? OBE - Out (of) Body Experience.

Tgirl4real: Hehehehe

Goshen, you are a 'wicked' saint.

I want to (by the grace of God) lead our beloved brother out of some errors...if only he will allow me for once. This is going to be systematic, slowly and then APOSTOLIC.