₦airaland Forum

shdemidemi: 20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.


That clearly state where they still have problems with Paul's gospel. They agreed gentiles have no been called by God, but they believe there as to be restrictions and instructions according to the Jewish Order of doing things. Paul's message is clearly different, with Paul it is Christ plus nothing, with them it is Christ plus tradition. Paul calls Jesus plus tradition 'bondage'.

But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

source of the difference is Christ cos Paul was put in the office of the Holy Spirit as a mouthpiece-
Galatians 1:11,12

"But I certify (I guarantee) you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man (in other words, he didn't go to school or seminary some place and learn it). For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the (instruction? No, but rather the) revelation of Jesus Christ."

Paul says that he wasn't taught it, and that's why he's separating himself from the Twelve throughout the first two chapters of Galatians. He wasn't taught it by the Twelve or anyone else, but rather everything that he lays down in his preaching, teaching, and writing, he received by revelation. The Lord revealed these things to Paul in such a way that even when you go on into Galatians Chapter 2, Peter and the eleven couldn't comprehend what Paul was talking about. It was way beyond anything they had ever heard.

The apostles had no problem with Paul and his teaching and ministry. Their letter was approved by the Holy Ghost Himself. All the apostles messages were the same albeit different vessels. No one was supposed, expected, or encouraged to trust in tradition either jew or gentile. All the apostles had their messages from Christ. Jesus said of Peter "flesh and blood have not revealed this to you, it was God".
Again, there is no scripture that says that anybody did not comprehend. That one is your own self made assumption.

flourishG: i have a question.what exactly is this verse saying?Romans 2:14 says the gentiles do not have the law, that is the law of Moses or the written law and this verse 12 says those who sin without the law will perish without the law and the Jews who are given the law and sinned under the law will be judged by the law.Are Gentile subject to the law of Moses that was given to the jews n will be used to judge them or what? Thank you sir.

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
Now, romans 2v14 does not say that the gentiles do not have the law. Of course, some gentiles had the law. the Ethopian eunuch had the law and was reading it when Philip the evangelist met him. It appears that this gentile church that Paul was writing to had the law. They knew as it is/was written. There were gentiles who searched the law to see whether these things were so, there were gentiles who studied to show themselves approved. What the verse actually says is "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law". It's a clause statement. Naturally, all jews are expected to have the law. but there are gentiles who do not have the law. Not all gentiles, though majority. Now, WHEN gentiles who do not have the law. This is a category. When the gentiles who do not have the law do A(by nature the things contained in the law), B(these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves) happens. that's what the verse says.
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Are gentiles subject to the law of Moses? Yes, they are subject to the law of God, as the transgression of the law is sin, and all have sinned. Are gentiles subject to the covenant of God with Israel, through Moses? No. except they want to be i.e prosylytes. Its like asking if illiterates are subject to the law of gravity. Or if atheists are subject to the law of giving(Give and it shall be given you, basically). They are both subject whether they know it or not. The physics student, and student of the Bible is equally subject and should know better and take most advantage.
i
On judgement day, there will be a book of life to judge every man, whether jew or gentile.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Hope this answers your question.

shdemidemi: You are a joke, I am out of here.

This gave me a long and hard laugh, hoping not to wake anyone. The new testament is not the Bible, but the Bible says there is no person named Abraham! As in, folks don't read/try that at home stuff.

flourishG: i have a question.what exactly is this verse saying?Romans 2:14 says the gentiles do not have the law, that is the law of Moses or the written law and this verse 12 says those who sin without the law will perish without the law and the Jews who are given the law and sinned under the law will be judged by the law.Are Gentile subject to the law of Moses that was given to the jews n will be used to judge them or what? Thank you sir.

I'll respond to this soon, thanks.

shdemidemi: Read your book of Acts and your Galatians , you would realise apostle Paul did not learn His message the same way the rest did. He was not with the rest of the eleven in all those three years but He was given a ministry the rest could not comprehend. Peter James and John did not write to the uncircumcised, their letters were to the Jews scattered all around, Paul had a ministry to the uncircumcised which he got through the risen Christ.

You are right that all scripture is profitable, some for our learning, some for reproof, some correction, some for our learning. Everything in the bible is not for doctrine, thanks.

Who told you that the rest of the apostles or disciples could not comprehend Paul's ministry or message? i understand that most were initially not ready to preach it or obey it, but to say they did not comprehend it is quite ludicrous. Acts 15 talks of a letter written by other apostles to gentiles. Barnabas was also an apostle who preached to the gentiles. All the apostles were given ministry to teach all nations by the risen Jesus. All scripture is profitable for doctrine, says Paul.

Alwaystrue: @Image, Candour, Drummaboy, others I would like to understand what you mean by calling the name of the Lord in vain though. We have an All powerful name Jesus that knees bow at its mention that is why we should call that name in praise, worship, in times of need etc. Personally calling the name of either Jesus, God or Holy Spirit as a swear word or in situations where He won't be glorified is a no no.
Saying Oh dear is much better than saying Oh God at every exclamation. Swearing too isn't right as even the bible says so. I feel if many know how powerful the name of the Lord is we will respect it.

adding to what has been said, calling God/Jesus in vain includes the use of the name in incantation or as a kind of potion or ritual.

Ajasnoop: People still get rescued without mentioning the all powerful name. If i mention the all powerful name before I sit an exam, will my success be down to my mentioning the all powerful name? will I fail I do not mention the all powerful name?

Don't get me wrong there is power in the name but people misappropriate this an ascribe every single piece of good fortune to mentioning the all powerful name.

kambo has answered, and so have you. The name of Jesus is all powerful.

shdemidemi: Answer my question, so I can give you another angle to see grace from the story of Noah like I did with the parable of the prodigal son.

Luke 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
This scripture alone should normally be enough.

Of gentiles.
Acts 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent.
Acts 26:20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
2 Corinthians 12:21 And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.

It should be known that there are different concepts involved in salvation, As simple as salvation is, it inherently involves faith/belief, grace, atonement, forgiveness, repentance, and redemption. These are all different concepts involved in that one simple package of salvation. Theology can bring out the complexity and intricacy however.

bukatyne: You are not getting the point or closing your eyes to it. Some Deeper lifers said dressing outside the usual mode of DL dressing is wrong and sinful. Someone even tried to analyse the bride's dressing 'no mascara, no powder, no lipstick' etc. meaning the poster feels those things are wrong. You and co are saying that these things are allowed per location hence the talk of holiness. This means that if a DLer like 'the friend of the bride' relocates to a branch where Love's dressing is deemed modest, she will believe the members have 'backslidden' or 'not born again'.

There are generally two issues on this thread:

1. Non DLers: Is this not hypocritical, would any random member be allowed to dress like this? FYI, we do not see her dressing as wrong. e.g. bukatyne;

2. DLers: There are two schools of thought.

i. Different dressing are allowed in various parishes or areas e.g. image123 etc.;

ii. All DLers dress alike and Love must have backslidden/ not born again/ not married in DL etc. e.g. Olowotee etc. An extreme view is the pictures were photoshopped to cause controversy e.g. friend of the bride

na wa oh, we still dey here? Couple sef don forget wedding. I'm not here to talk about what deeper lifers have said to anyone, i don't do gossips. I'm talking about what i can see and quote on this thread. i said I've seen a deeper life wedding where a wedding gown and veil was used, and which was more extravagant than this one. That it is not a first or partial but something practised in north america before this wedding. You have tied their dressing to holiness, not me. The issue is that you have also rated dressing as a major benchmark for holiness. i don't know what the 'friend of the bride' may do, I'm not into conjectures/guesswork. I'm talking of what you have done, equating different wedding dressing in deeper to different levels of holiness. i confidently restate that random members of deeper life (whatever that means) have been allowed to dress with wedding gowns and veils and flowers in that region.

frosbel: You can never satisfy Pharisees , even with straight answers.

shdemidemi: @frosbel
Answer the questions mate, to the shame of the devil

funnily pathetic?

frosbel: The onus is on you to rightly decipher the word of God.

Jesus is present wherever 2 or 3 are gathered by means of the Spirit of God.

Eternal life is something that Jesus gives to all worthy servants who endure to the end , who do not draw back to perdition or who fight the good fight of faith.

Unfortunately your church or denomination has encumbered you with false doctrine , such that you find it difficult to understand these basic truths .

I was among you before and was used to repeating the same rehashed nonsense that was passed down to me from church leadership and dead tradition.

Wow, you somehow managed not to answer two straight questions.
1. Is Jesus present everywhere? yes he is, no he is not, I don't know.
2. Do you have eternal life? yes I do, no I do not, I don't know.

Ajasnoop: People still survive more intense exposure without mentioning the all powerful name.

The one on ground is Drumaboy mentioning the all powerful name and getting rescued. Deal with it.

sounds like poppycock so far.

frosbel: But people are now beginning to see through your religious hypocrisy and want no more of it.

When we start following man made rules we have gone back under the law.

you mean people that cannot tell if they have eternal life, or if Jesus is present everywhere or not? Such people have more serious issues to fix than to 'see through' me positively or negatively.

erroneous dogmatism, what does that mean?

shdemidemi: That is where you miss it, you will end up mixing everything together which eventually leads to confusion-

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

You need to rightly divide the word at all times, the epistles are the books mainly for church doctrines. The book of John, Peter , James and the Old Testament books are all books for our learning not for doctrine.

Yes Jesus is the same like God is the same at all times but their programmes are not stagnant but progressive -

For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles— 2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you,

This dispensation of grace is totally different from the dispensation of law or of revelation or of conscience.

Your criteria is more of divisive than rightly dividing. The apostles wrote at the same dispensation and taught that all are one in Christ. All scripture is profitable, not only paul's epistles.

manmustwac: @post
Your situation reminds me of a youtube video I saw.
1) You survived unscathed so naturally you'll give the full glory to God.
2)Let's say u survived with minor injuries you will still be saying give God the glory
3)You survived with serious injuries and will be maimed for life you will still be thanking God that you'll alive
4)You didn't survive your injuries and you died. Then it will be God has plans for him in Heaven. He has gone to a better place. May his soul R.I.P blah blah blah.
So as far as God is concerned its a win win situation isn't it? Here's the video


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0EEKfTnfvA&feature=share&list=SP9D1CD5CDC7C1C4B7

Who should he thank, you?

obadiah777: AHHH I SEE YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF ALLEGORY. ALLEGORY IS USING FICTIONAL CHARACTERS TO PRESENT A SCENARIO. THE FICTIONAL CHARACTERS WOULD BE ABRAHAM HAGAR AND SARAH AND THE SCENARIO BEING PRESENTED IS THE TWO COVENANTS CURRENTLY PERTAINING TO ISRAEL AND THE HEATHENS

Stop this nonsense, your teachers should be very ashamed to read you. That something is allegorical or symbolic does not ultimately mean that it doesn't or didn't exist. The national flag, coat of arms are symbolic of something. A ring may be symbolic, or a dress, or a gesture. A nation may be symbolic, standing for this or that, so also a company or a man.

DrummaBoy: You know, Olaadegbu, I thought you are a reasonable fellow but alas you are proving more and more to be what I suspect: a hypocrite!


What are we saying and what are U saying? If U were so concerned with how I survived electrocution, U could have said so and leave your 'advice' ON THAT THREAD and not derail ur own thread with what is not.

The issue is outward adornment, if U have forgotten, and here U are reminding us we are hell bound bc we don't dress deeper life but the question is: ur pastor's son's wife dressed like us; is she hell bound too? Or Kumuyi has forgotten to teach his family what he has for decades indoctrinated a whole church. 1TIMOTHY 3:4-5.

This is the unreasonable post. Ola made no pointers to his church in the OP and most of his similar OPs. You are the one trying to reduce it to denominationalism by continually attacking kumuyi or deeper life. You are trying to blackmail the messenger instead of considering the message. If you have issues with deeper, go to their church as Ola has invited y'all, or at least vent your frustrations on any of the threads concerned.
Proverbs 25:9 Debate thy cause with thy neighbour himself; and discover not a secret to another:

kumuyi's son and dil are not kids but adults if indeed you know your bible. And they have not dressed like you, whoever you are.

shdemidemi: my brother 1 john 3:9 is not a letter to the church, John was very much a believer that was still soaked in the law and jewish tradition. I am quite surprised, considering the fact that you are quite familiar with the Pauline epistles.

Of course, a gay person can be a Christian. A Christian is simply a believer of the gospel, nothing more .

i don't care who any of the letters or books are written to. My concern are the contents of the Word and how it affects me. Its similar to listening to the news. What happens even in another country may affect decision and policy world wide.
John3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Very clear and straight forward, Jesus the same yesterday, today and forever.

shdemidemi: 3 What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? 2 Much in every way!

Look at the above question and the response that followed with the exclamation mark and other questions asked in this book. You might just understand what I am saying and it makes everything clearer.

In subsequent chapters, you would realise a question could be asked more than four times, even after the apostle explained it. Just look into it though, may God open our eyes of understanding.

A writer asking question and answering them is a persuasive style of writing not uncommon. It doesn't necessarily mean that more than one person is speaking. Nonetheless, no wahala, it doesn't change the message.
Even some expository form of writing use this technique. see the link for instance, note the problem and solution pattern.

http://www.stanford.edu/~arnetha/expowrite/info.html

bgirl: What about the fornicating christians, adulterous christians? Are they not christians? Corrupt christians? If you have to be free of sin to be a christian then I guess there are no christians in the world.

1 John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

bgirl: So why don't we wait for the day of reckoning instead of passing judgment. Isn't adultery a sin? Fornication? When will we criminalize them? Hypocrite.

Can you be clearer with your post and line of thought?

The three men at the back seem to be laughing at my oga at the front oh.

frosbel: what do you think ?

Shameful how you wriggle and twist like a snake at very simple, straight forward questions like "is Jesus everywhere?", "do you have eternal life?" etc. Even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge indeed.

frosbel: NOPE.

He is the Son of GOD.

So, is Jesus everywhere?

frosbel: what do you think.

Jesus is the omnipresent God. What do you think?

frosbel: Engage your brain for once . he is present through the Spirit of Father Yahweh, who is everywhere, no ?

SMH.

So Jesus is present everywhere? i need to be clear so as not to misquote or misunderstand you. Is Jesus everywhere?

Ajasnoop: Is this divine intervention or are the volts on the gate not strong enough to kill you? while you had a lucky escape it's a bit foolhardy to attribute every piece of good fortune to the intervention of the almighty.

not strong enough indeed. People have died from less intense exposure. God mercifully saved him from "devourer". You read the impact of the mention of the all powerful name, right?