₦airaland Forum

nlPoster:
Are you referring to abortion? Like in ectopic pregnancies?

So because of ectopic pregnancy, all abortion should be okayed.

Hedonisco:
Better in what sense exactly? With all that is going on? With all the comparative indices that are now plain to see?

Blind obstinacy plus malicious ignorance is a very messed up combination.

Some of you just prefer to wallow in your stubbornness for the mere irrational sake of it, without any iota of sensible justification.

Some of us simply do not understand a democracy. I think you'd do better with kings and worship. In a democracy, there a check and balances. It's not compulsory to be a sycophant because of a one day vote. Election is a choice between candidates, every one has a right to choose. We have chosen well and there is absolutely no regrets for booting out the clueless PDP. Now, if and when APC misbehaves, everyone should be able say so. We should not all be femi adeshinas or reuben abatis or garba shehus or this other fat man from Ogun state who refused to say the truth because they are in power.
Nigeria would have likely ceased to exist if Jonathan had won. Everything was going down south without control under him. He was the literal carpenter bleeding the patient uncontrollably. But Buhari the retired midwife that was expected to be a better option in the absence of a doctor/surgeon got there and is massaging the patient, sobbing and saying it is well. The patient Nigeria needs more than that. If you think I'll call back the murderous carpenters, you need to start thinking.

Holy Ghost fire consume them, Holy Ghost fire consume them, Holy Ghost fire consume them, Holy Ghost fire consume them. All the bad belle around us, Holy Ghost fire consume them. Amennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.

Needless to say, the second term of President Buhari has been a total disgrace so far. Maybe our democracy is just not okay for second terms. Most second terms in Nigeria are worse than the first.
I still stand by the fact that President Buhari is a better candidate than GEJ or Atiku. That doesn't stop me from saying he's doing bad or well. He was not elected to be worshipped or always agreed with. He was elected to do better than previous.

anonimi:
The dilemma is not with him.
The dilemma is with those who don't want to agree that they made a mistake choosing the worse of the two options in 2015.
Anyway, this is some confessional progress

I've always maintained even before 2015 that PMB became president that he's not the Messiah but a better option than GEJ. I still stand by that till tomorrow. PMB is better than GEJ or Atiku. Unfortunately, there's no better person the major political parties are offering us. I'll take Osinbajo, Sowore, Oby, even Duke or Moghalu over PMB any day if they have a viable platform like APC or PDP.

MuttleyLaff:
Image123, dont tell me, you expect, "maybe we should not mention that pastor again", to come here defend himself, when he has minnows, loads of small and insignificant persons at his beck and call, in "the organization" to do the snarling and give brusque responses for him, erhn? I am sure the pastor whose name we should not mention, knows that, why keep a dog(s) and bark yourself? lol. Who, in their right mind, does something like that, erhn?

So, yes, I concur 110% and without reservation, that it will be a waste of space, waste of internet ink like my brother from another mother, CaveAdullam will say, waste of your valuable and precious time to reply to this other fellow that's gone berserk so sure of herself or himself? You've made the right judgement to please use your time more profitably than with him and his likes.

Lol, you got me laughing there.

Lol, Ola this one na joke.

Wouldn't it be a waste of space to reply to this other fellow that almost went berserk so sure of herself or himself?Let me use my time more profitably.

drakeli:
If you asked me, I would tell you I’m against women wearing trousers especially in a culture where trousers are generally not acceptable. But my opinion changed when I traveled to a different clime where wearing trousers is culturally normal especially because of the cold weather. It gets so cold such that people including myself are wearing two to three pairs of trousers to protect our legs against frost bite. I can’t imagine myself wearing up to three pairs of trousers together in winter without anyone knowing in order to keep my legs warm and expect a woman to be wearing skirt in the same weather condition. That could cause a serious health implication for her legs. Wearing skirts or gown in such weather condition exposing your legs can be dangerous. Some people have had their legs cut off due to frost bite. Thank God, there’s no such weather condition in Nigeria.

Well done sir. We are the local people now that have not passed and don't know anything outside what is happening in our small and little minute hometown village. Well, it should gladden you to note that the Bible wasn't written by my brother or in our hut. As a matter of fact, people have been living and surviving all over the world for centuries without even slacks. Women just started wearing slacks like we know it less than hundred years ago sir. Don't let them deceive you again sir.

MuttleyLaff:
You again, not unusually got hold of the wrong end of the stick. I do not agree to your "reason". Of course I strongly expect men to have and exercise self will. I strongly expect men to develop self control or self-discipline, so the point that, just like in that Alsatian dogs and casually walking by cat, they will be able to keep it together and not be tossed to and fro by the waves and get carried away by anything in a skirt. Case in point, Joseph showing strong will power and Potiphar's wife

Unfortunate Muttley, the Bible is not written for your expectations or for Josephs alone. It is written for the whole of humanity, the major part of which is weak.

Image123, I know and understand you to be a honest moG, which is why I am doing an "Aquila and Priscilla" with you

Image 123, recall I mentioned that Pastor Chris is not fully woke, yet he did cover the subject with enough depth & aplomb I must say. I further said his submission though wasnt feeble, yet where he majorly left out and what made his edification insufficient and not enough is where he left out the idolatory pagan ritual custom that cross dressing is associated with. Here is where I'll could agree with you that its not the kind of watertight defence to this "gospel" of cross dressing, or the kind pastor Chris gave.

As I previously advanced, even though you dont find it an agreeable thought, the underlying reason of concern to God about cross dressing, is to do with the association with idolatry practices and pagan ritualistics done, when and with wearing clothes of the opposite sex that is detesting to God. This is what God dislikes and says its an abomination, period. Any other twisting and turning naa wash ojaare.

This your gospel of "idolatory pagan ritual custom that cross dressing" is not a new thing or a big thing like you are carrying it. Anyway, i should come back to it later. Maybe we should not mention that pastor again, i see one of his fans almost lost it already for the fact that i mentioned him. We need to love our naybours.

It seems you are making a point that crossdressing is rooted in idolatry, good of you.

Image123, you still dont get it. The answer is not and never will "it is wrong" because the response should be binary answer

Image123, fyi, "Are you saying Mrs Image123and any of the Misses Image123 dont wear and/or havent ever worn a pair of trousers/pants ni?" requires a Yes or No answer and not "it is wrong"

Brother, i know you know that I'll say it again. It is wrong. What they may do or not do is not the standard or the point. Yes or no doesn't change your viewpoint or God's viewpoint, does it?

OK then Image123, what's the alternative "revelation" for why, as said in Deuteronomy 22:5, God, detests anyone who does cross dresses, hmm?

i didn't say there was an alternative revelation, kindly read me correctly.

You were trying to absolve yourself, so you slipped in, "i think it will interest you, and perhaps stop you from further copying and pasting some of your questions, to note that i have very close/dear female ministers and 'mentors' that wear pants/slacks."

Are you saying Mrs Image123and any of the Misses Image123 dont wear and/or havent ever worn a pair of trousers/pants ni?. This question will never go away, until answered correctly lol

Absolve from what, Ogini?

Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head (i.e. Leviticus 19:27)
Men not to trim or clip off the edges of their beard (i.e. Leviticus 19:27)
Men not to have long hair (i.e. 1 Corinthians 11:14)

Without micing words, that's exactly what you are doing Image123. Now how many out of the three verses above do you adhere to

Good to see that you heard yourself nicely, i guess it wasn't funny hearing. Now you attempt a fallacy on me. i may as well quote you fallaciously to disobey any and every old testament scripture that i feel like. Right? Don't i just love this.

Image123, it is a man made idea, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. It is you teaching human rules after turning God laws on its head!

Image123, you already know me that I dont venture into subjects I havent a watertight understanding of and this how I can show you verses in 2 Kings and Zephaniah that explains Deuteronomy 22:5 away as nothing to do with your "it is something very practical and visible" version of event, but as I always maintain, has to do with cross dressing done and used for idolatrous purposes, meaning men wearing women’s clothing, and vice versa as part of an idolatrous rite

Fortunately for us, this is not watertight just opiniontight. And again, your opinion is not a revelation by the way. It's one of sundry explanations of the verse that we ourselves have made before.

If it makes you feel great, then carry on making light of it that way

i do not make light of it,it is an obvious fact that there are not many Josephs or strong men in every generation of billions of men. There's a prayer of Lead us not into temptation, as it's obvious to the Lord that not every person can withstand temptation without falling.

Image123, you've prooftexted 1 Peter 3:7 with this your "the woman is a weaker vessel" comment. C'mon now, the burden is upon the man in 1 Peter 3:7 and not the woman

I brought up "So? Dont men go about shirtless, dont men go about sleeveless showing bulging biceps ni?" because you first advanced "#4, it has subtly empowered and spurred on the feminism agenda over the decades."

Brother, the FACT is that the woman is a weaker vessel. Wearing of pants have subtly deceived some to think otherwise. Now, that's revelations for you, lol.

[img]https://s3/images/ObamaMuttley.gif[/img]
I wish you drop the blinkers and start seeing reasons too.
How do you mean, I dont agree?. I dont agree to what exactly?

You don't agree with me that women should not wear slacks. Or do you?

Are you trying to say, you're a weak man. If you are able and capable to stand firm, whats stopping other fellow men from doing so

The true test of a man's character is what he does, at seeing a näked woman, à la the King David way or a reminisce of something similar, when no one is watching

i'm not speaking for myself, how can i? Everybody cannot be me obviously, i'm sure that you agree. That's the reality. And it's good you mentioned king David. Even the great king failed to do a Joseph when it mattered. The women should help these many weak men. That's Christianity.

There is nothing evil, bar the idolatrous purposes connection, in women wearing men clothing and vice versa. Image123, please dont be a hypocrite.

Hang how do you mean "i believe women should be ready and willing to do away with meat" smh. I guess, left to you we should enforce a Taliban slant on this matter of ready and willing to do away with "meat", like no bikini wearing at beaches or swimming pool sides, no female Olympic or other games sport dressing showing flesh abi? All because the men can keep their fly zipped up. Right?

It is someone like you who will rather the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was not näkedly put and openly left in the attractive centre part of the garden of Eden. You'll be saying why couldnt and/or didnt God cover the tree up.Your reason will be because the tree is attractive and tempting to Adam and Eve. Dry laugh

i'll reiterate that my point is that it is wrong for women to wear slacks. i've yet to discuss sin or hell or evil or heaven with you on this thread. Don't put weed in my pocket like the yorubas will say. All things are lawful but not all things are expedient or necessary.
BTW, that tree wasn't attractive until satan insinuated it was. That's BTW anyways.

anonimi:
www.nairaland.com/attachments/10512073_9975028screenshot201908051754522jpeg6d2c8380650803ee36e511dbdd084658_jpeg334f375ce7fa3b754f306adbeb3991b1

This is truth till date, though PMB is in a dilemma whether to beat the record or not.

DonMekino:
let me ask the op.....
if I use 1000 and enroll for WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE and I go n answer the ten questions.... does the money become unchristian?
I did pass through the valley of shadow of death to earn it ooo

If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?
This scriptural question gives you the answer. If the foundation is laid in unrighteousness, there is a fault, AVOID IT.
I'll give you three scenarios.
One, a quack doctor, with a doctored degree works in a real hospital for years. He's now familiar with standard practice and doing well in the general hospital.

Two, a lady cheated and fornicated her way to a degree certificate and into promotion. She's been earning proceeds from that bank job for over five years now,but no more cheating and fornicating.

Three, two men rob a bank and used the proceeds of the robbery to invest and start a big business. They're no more stealing today, their business is blooming.

These three scenarios. Do you find them okay? Do you think it's a good model for people to "make it"?
Your answer will answer your question to the OP hopefully it's a genuine question. Not a Pharisee question to justify yourself.

Yinmu squared. While i appreciate evangelism which is our calling and most Christians have stopped doing, don't be deceived or carried away by the drama. Rather be challenged and go to preach the gospel.

What is the meaning of all these? Is this christian gyrations or what?Are these followers or members or fans going home more prepared for heaven or just flexing?

Edybleketara:
hope u know most of those so called Christians are actually atheists, as Image123 can attest to.

People just want me to talk sha.

RandomGuy48:
So, I'm curious. To argue that Deuteronomy 22:5 in the present day disallows women to wear trousers, one must assert that trousers are perpetually only a man's clothing at any time in any place. If this is indeed the case, one would expect there would have been early statements of it by Christians. But all anyone seems able to point to are statements made in the last century or two. True, that was when more women started wearing trousers so there was greater reason to talk about it, but as far as I can tell there's complete silence on the point prior, which doesn't seem to support the idea that pants are always considered a man's clothes and thus women are forbidden by Deuteronomy 22:5 to ever wear them.

So here is a question. What is the earliest time anyone in the history of Christianity that someone specifically stated that a women wearing trousers is an inherent violation of Deuteronomy 22:5? Anyone know?

Anyone know if you have interest in obeying Deuteronomy 22.5 at all, whatever meaning it may truly have?

LordReed:
https://pm1.narvii.com/6711/4c5bf7840bf165491bda5e63c744feae116a1576_hq.jpg

You've got things wretchedly mixed up.

OLAADEGBU:
.

Lol

LordReed:
An atheist? A human being?

A wretched sinner.

hakeem4:
well I can write anything I like and place it in the bible or Koran and call it a fact. If there’s no evidence for it then it isn’t a fact!

no matter the amount of belief doesn’t make something a fact!

Go ahead dear, make a try. You think it is as easy as writing HaKeEm4wAsHere on the wall of your hostel?

The summary of what you have written below is that you agree to my 'reasons' but you strongly want/expect men to be self controlled or disciplined. How you came out so easily is what i'm not sure of, maybe due to our mutual respect for one another though. Because i expect a kind of watertight defence to this "gospel" of trousers, not the kind pastor Chris gave or that you are giving. Let's be over careful of turning the grace of God into lasciviousness, in order to excuse immoral ways.

MuttleyLaff:
Not a good enough excuse or reason to start acting like a broken vinyl record player now, or is it Image123

Here we go again, answer the question instead bleating "it is wrong" lol.
The question that you gave a wrong answer to, excuse the wrong pun, is:
"Are you saying Mrs Image123and any of the Misses Image123 dont wear and/or havent ever worn a pair of trousers/pants ni?"

i already did, but you don't seem to like/want the answer.

Oh oh, there are distinctions now. We have exceptions now. Ah when it depends, we then can pick and choose where they wear it and what she wears it for. Hmm interesting revelation

It is not new sir. There are usually clauses and explanations to rules. Like you are giving your idolatry/cross dressing "revelation". You can be naked in your bathroom, but not everywhere. It is not partiality or double standards, it is discretion.

Listen to yourself Image123. You sound similar to just like the far right racist, patting himself on the back with the comment: "I think it will interest you to note that I have very close/dear blacks as friends and mentors". Smh. lol

Again, firstly and lastly, i will say that i am not talking about salvation or judgement or eternity. Note that clearly and markedly and foundationally, lest you 'fall'. A racist cannot have black friends and mentors, except racist has changed meaning.

Though Pastor Chris is not fully woke, he did cover the subject with enough depth & aplomb I must say. There wasnt anything feeble. What he majorly left out and what made his edification insufficient and not enough is where he left out the idolatory pagan ritual custom that cross dressing is associated with. That's the underlying reason of concern to God about cross dressing. It is the association with idolatry practices and pagan ritualistics done when and with wearing clothes of the opposite sex that is detesting to God. This is what God dislikes and says its an abomination, period. Any other twisting and turning naa wash ojaare.

The truth is too difficult to believe

And this is doctrine from where? In your words jokingly "This is a man made idea, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Teaching human rules after turning God laws on its head!" Did you hear yourself nicely?

This is a man made idea, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Teaching human rules after turning God laws on its head!

It's not a doctrine, it is something very practical and visible.

[img]https://s3/images/Imaam.jpg[/img]

Whats the matter with the saying then: "Look the other way" This exactly what those men in the above photo ought to be doing now

Image123, in one of my previous work life, I have countless times, walked into stark näked women, though I looked at them yet I didnt see their näkedness, this is because I looked past them before advising them to quickly go put on a robe or go tie up a cloth wrapper

I truthfully agree that it was my missus attractive backa and sensual figure that got my first attention before her intelligence after getting to know her that. Other women flaunting their figures, is no excuse not to have self control, self restraint or self discipline now erhn? I know you'll agree to this and if so, who really has a problem here then, hmm? Too many weak men, shallow men all over town.

Not to say much, let's pity the Too many weak men, shallow men all over town. We both agree that they exist, and GOD knows.

So? Dont men go about shirtless, dont men go about sleeveless showing bulging biceps ni?

Two wrongs don't make a right. The woman is a weaker vessel, according to the Bible and according to experience.

and you have a problem with that. How has them masturbating with themselves wronged you or how has something like that taken a minute of your life erhn? I am only asking ni ooo, jor, biko no vex oo.

Good that you also see reason, just that you don't agree.

[img]https://s3/images/MuttleyFearless7fe1b418d5834f7c.jpg[/img]
Image123, please ignore the fearless cat in the above picture, that's a red herring, the real objects of interest in the above picture, are the self-disciplined Alsatian German Shepherd dogs, staying in their stations and not going chasing after the bold and without a care in the world taking a stroll in a beautiful bright sunning vitamin D day cat. That is the beauty of self-discipline, captured in "a picture is worth a thousand words" taken shot.

Some cats can be left to guard a fish without eating it and some can be given a bowl of milk to guard without licking it.
Now, if one is not fortified, if one is not grounded in the word of God, if one is not standing on the word of God, if one loses focus on God, if one hasnt the regard for God in him, like Joseph had (i.e. Genesis 39:9) and if one is not self disciplined, then one is giving the devil a freehand and easy access to try and exploit weakness or dent(s) in ones armour.

One has it or one doesnt has it Image123. You see Image123, one needs to grow and build up self restraint. King David lacked enough self-restraint, this is why upon seeing a näked Bathsheba, he was unable to restrain himself unable to hold it back together, look the other way, vacate immediately that vantage high point he was at seeing Bathsheba. The test of a man, just like in the garden of Eden is to have something too attractive and tempting before him to see how or how not he will resist. lol. There are too many weak males about who call themselves men, they are nothing than fake men, lol

Again, you see reason, thank God. i'd have thought i was hallucinating or something. Sorry, we live in a world where Josephs are one in a million literally. The Word of God is written for all, not for 'one in a millions'. That's why women should try to help the weak. i'm convinced it is wrong because of the above given reasons. It recklessly neglects new testament principles of abstaining from every appearance of evil, of trying not to be an offence or stumbling block to others. Not everything is expedient, and like Paul, i believe women should be ready and willing to do away with meat, seeing it makes many fake men.

hakeem4:
You made a claim that when we die we would face judgement. My question is how did you know?

The Bible, how else?

LordReed:
So if you violate other things from that same Deuteronomy what does that make you?

What you are of course.

MuttleyLaff:
I heard or read you the first time saying it is wrong, so no need repeating.

But you are asking again na.

Image123 nwanne, if I didnt know you not to be that sort of person, I would thought you seem to have ducked the questions:
Are you saying Mrs Image123 and any of the Misses Image123 dont wear and/or havent ever worn a pair of trousers/pants ni?

It is wrong.

Is it wrong for Mrs Image123 to wear your t-shirt, polo shirt, boxer shorts, wrap your towel round herself, put on your socks, put on your jogging bottoms, hmm Image123?

It depends on where they wear it and what she wears it for.

Out of curiosity, why Image123, are you saying it is wrong for women to wear a pair of trousers/pants.

Advance warning Image123, I have previously said to Michellekabod2, that I am quite sure she does know that the Old Testament Deuteronomy 22:5 verse that is banded about and waved in people's faces, specifically is about the idolatory pagan ritual custom that cross dressing is associated with. That's the underlying reason of concern to God about cross dressing, it's the association with idolatry practices and pagan ritualistics done when and with wearing clothes of the opposite sex.

Good question. Again, firstly and lastly, i will say that i am not talking about salvation or judgement or eternity. i think it will interest you, and perhaps stop you from further copying and pasting some of your questions, to note that i have very close/dear female ministers and 'mentors' that wear pants/slacks. Like Michellekabod2 has well stated, pastor Chris' reasons (which is a majority's reason for supporting women wearing trousers/pants) are not ample or sufficient. They are very weak. i say it is wrong among many reasons because one a woman should not wear what pertains/belongs to a man. Whatever underlying reason you may think for God saying it. Two, it erodes the distinction of the sexes/genders. Three, slacks actually reveal more of a woman's figure than conceal it. i say this not as a "killjoy" of some sort, but because from experience i've heard people argue that slacks cover properly/more than skirts. It actually gives a lot to the imagination than you would truthfully agree. Four, it has subtly empowered and spurred on the feminism agenda over the decades. Five, and i kid you not, from hearsay, some folks actually wear them to masturbate as they walk. Six, unfortunately, i need to say this because it's you you know. If not, you know i won't say it. i don't know whether you use afose to make me confess sometimes. God forgive my past and many menS past and present, for we have seen many a butt cleavage and undies forcefully because some pants wearing lady sat in front. It's almost impossible especially jeans trousers. Now muttley, ask God to forgive them and you too for you have been forced to such. With these few points of mine. i hope i have confused you that wearing pants is wrong. Thanks.
i have close.

LordReed:
And the reasons are?

We don't speak the same language na. How do you expect to understand me? How do i expect you to understand me?
Okay, let me give you one. Deuteronomy 22v5. This is for you alone oh, stay in your lane.

Michellekabod2:
I don't see anything wrong in trousers but the alibis pastor Chris gave are not ample to support wearing of trousers.
Why do people draw a margin between the old and new testament to support their points? Many Christian's have told me that Paul teaching on women's role in the church are his opinions,but those same people make references to his teaching as "word of God" when such teachings suits their arguments...

Exactly.

MuttleyLaff:
Image123, I think you're nitpicking and was hypercritical about this man's short video clip. Almost everything under the sun, in the traditional or old-fashioned era years ago, was a big issue for everyone and not just them, BLW alone.

Lastly, there is nothing wrong in women wearing trousers/pants Image123. Are you saying Mrs Image123 and the Misses Image123 dont wear and/or havent ever worn a pair of trousers/pants ni?

i'm saying that it is wrong.

hakeem4:
do you have any evidence for this your judgement day claim or it’s just something you were told about

Evidence for a future event? Do you smoke weed?

petra1:
NICE VIDEO ,THANKS

I guess you fully agree, pastor Chris cannot err. Can he?

Let all the transgender be allowed into female sports please. We don't want transgender by convenience. Put them in the front line where it matters. They must have full rights since they are not right.