₦airaland Forum

MaxInDHouse:
There is nothing like Yes/No it's either you obey God's word or disobey!🙂

My question to you is not about God's word. My question to you is whether the leadership of JW did what this post claims the leadership did.

Let me repeat the question. Did JW leadership give JW members the permission for blood transfusion?

If you don't answer the question, I will ignore your further mentions.

MaxInDHouse:
That's why i said the post is misleading because we are living by Bible standard as those taking the lead among us guides.
So if anyone trusts in the scriptures he or she will submit not to them but what is found written in the scriptures! Hebrews 13:7🙂

You have not answered my question.

Did the leadership of JW give JW members the permission or approval for blood transfusion?

Your answer should be either "Yes", or, "No".

Those who think like you said Soludo's re-election was a key to Akwa's release.

Propagandists.

Some of your points are fallacious. Is joining the choir or becoming an usher ungodly? Going to church regularly or once in a while is not automatically ungodly. Going to church regularly can be godly and going to church irregularly can be ungodly.

MaxInDHouse:
Nobody approves blood transfusion for anyone it's scriptural guidance about health {Act 15:28-29} but many don't get it clear that's what the update is all about.
If my own blood will be safely kept out of my body and transfused back there is nothing wrong according to the scriptures but on no group will i accept blood from someone else.

Do you get it now?

The post says that the leadership of JW has approved blood transfusion for the members of JW. My question is, did the leadership give the approval or is the post lying against the leadership?

MaxInDHouse:
You people are so eager to jump into criticism of faithful servants of God yet when you discover you're wrong you'll start changing the subject.

What is the topic all about, faith or health?

We are talking about health and God's word is clear regarding the topic:

External blood is not good for your health, that's what we are talking about not just transfusion.

Do you get it now?🙂

Let me understand your exact point. Have the leaders of JW not approved blood transfusion for their members?

MaxInDHouse:
For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things:  to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!” Act 15:28-29

What has HEALTH mentioned got to do with sacrifice?

I am not sure you know the topic under which you have been dropping these comments.

MaxInDHouse:
The OP is misleading but since people like you don't care to Make sure of all things {1Thessalonians 5:21} i will help you.

The scriptures says:
"Abstain from BLOOD"
Genesis 9:4
Leviticus 17:11, 14
Deuteronomy 12:16, 23
Act 15:20, 29; 21:25

In all the above God's word is talking about blood from external sources not your own blood that could be drained and transfused back into your body!🙂

Where you quoted in the Bible is talking about sacrifices, not about medical treatment.

After many of their members have died in ignorance? This one is even worse than the other church that rejected television but later began to buy satellite.

Well, change is constant. But has their religious book that inspired the barbaric idea of rejecting blood transfusion been rewritten?

Whether this display is good or bad depends on the source of the fund.

If the money was legally and genuinely sourced, I celebrated the people and prayed that God will make them richer.

If the fund was fraudulently generated, I do not celebrate the people.

Hmmm!

Some religious people with their immoral attitudes.

But wear your bullet proof or be surrounded by brave civilians before the filming. Many or most of those officers are eager and ready to k*ll.

Declared wanted?

"Unauthorized access"? Did he force himself into the palace? Or, was the palace left without guards?

I am not his fan, but I think that declaring him wanted is extreme.

meobizy:
Well, it means in 2026, women still have zero power despite all the talk of feminism. Wasn’t he the queen’s guest? If Elizabeth granted Ishowspeed access to Buckingham palace, who would make noise? Let’s get things right in this side of the world.

My response is not intended to be a condemnation of you. You are logical, but there's a fact you missed. In the Benin kingdom, the king is the highest authority. In Buckingham, the queen is the highest authority. This is why it is controversial for the queen to be the one to invite or authorise an important personality into the Benin palace. If a king invites an important personality into the Buckinham palace without the queens' consent, it will be controversial. So, what is perceived as inequality in favour of men against women in the Benin kingdom exists in favour of women against men in Buckingham. Are you advocating for equality for both men and women or are you mistakenly or deliberately saying that the inequality should be in favour of women in all parts of the world? My own take is that Peller is not at fault here and should not be declared wanted unless it is proven that he forced himself into the palace. The queen or whoever granted Peller access into the palace should be the one to be punished, not Peller.

It is wrong to assert that women have zero power. In the Benin kingdom, there are so many high-rank men that are commanded by the queen. And the queen has so much authorities over so many women in the kingdom. If women have zero power in the kingdom, the queen will not have any authority even over any of her fellow women.

Everything has a limit.

Na entertainment abi na business carry Peller enter the palace?

1.
Mr. X is frugal. He will likely embezzle all for himself.

2.
No man of integrity associates with the ruling party.

You are in a tight corner.

FatimaAbubakar:
Typical Nigerian. They hardly read thoroughly before dropping shameful comments on public forums.

Nothing is shameful in my comment. My comment would have been shameful if the year the man earnes the money was part of the caption of the post. My comment would have been shameful if I tried to deny the fact that I didn't pay attention to the pay slip. As the first responder pointed out the year the salary was earned, I quickly admitted that the pay was poor. Now, can you point out what is shameful in my comment?

pdppower:
You can see that the pay was in 2024. Do you want to tell me that 133k was a high salary for a PhD holder in 2024?

I did not carefully look at the payslip to spot the year. You will be right if you blame me for not paying attention to the details on the pay slip. But my comment is not wrong. I said that whether the payment is poor or high depends on the period. Since he was earning the amount in 2024, the pay was too poor.

Whether they pay was high or low depends on the period. There was a time that 20 naira was greater than 5 million naira of today.

Added:
Toxic and depressed people who look for every slight opportunity to attack their fellow human beings are attacking me as if I said something bad here. I do not have all the day to spend on this forum, that was why I did not pay attention to all the details on the posted pay slip. I simply said that whether the pay was good or poor depends on the period he earned the amount. Why not simply tell me that the pay was in 2024? Why are you quoting and attacking me as if I have said that the pay is good in 2024?

FarmilyFinance:
You've Missed My Entire Points Of Starting The Thread.

This Topic Was Created MAINLY On The Grounds That "WARS Are Created By Ruling Monsters Who Are Evil Men And Are Allowed By Naive Men."

The bolded part in your response shows that I clearly understood your point. Replace those bad leaders (monsters) with women, let's see if the world will be more peaceful.

Your post is trying to convince your audience that men are more monstrous than women. My comment counters your posts by explaining that men are not more monstrous than women, that it is either women are more monstrous than men or women and men are equally monstrous.

In your post, you said that there will be no war if men feel the pains that women feel during pregnancy. What narrative are you trying to push with that statement? You are trying to say that men are causing wars because they do not know how painful pregnancy is and that if women are in the leadership positions that are occupied by men, there will be no war. That is what you are trying to say. But you are totally wrong.

Many women that know the pain of pregnancy have used assassins to eliminate their husbands. How many men have used assassins to eliminate their wives? Many women that developed hatred for some men just because of mere misunderstandings have used false allegations of rape to either kill the men or put the men in prison. How many men have falsely accused women of ordinary theft because of hate? Many women have rendered men poor by destroying the men's business and the property just because of a misunderstanding. How many men have destroyed women's business because of misunderstanding? And this is you trying to convince us that the world will be more peaceful if women replace men in the positions of power.

My mother is a woman and I have sisters. I am not trying to condemn women. The point is, let us admit the weakness of women. Women are more emotional than men. To be emotional means to act with instinct rather than with reason. Acting with instincts is more destructive than acting with reason. Pregnancy is very painful. But let us not act as if women will be better than men in the positions of power.

You are not wiser than God. God knows everything and created man with his own features and a woman with her own features. You sound as if men fight wars because men do not know the pain of giving birth to a human being. Do not twist the reality. Even the men that go to the warfront are not pleased to be there. Men are the ones fighting because women are not strong enough for that kind of task. Wars are not caused by the soldiers fighting the wars, but by top leaders. And if you dare make a woman a top leader, there will be more wars than the world has ever witnessed.

Are you aware that the men that leave their families behind and go to war are more terrified than the women that stay at home and miss their husbands that have gone to the warfront?

The same women that go through the pains of pregnancy kill many men with false allegations of rape. The same women kill many human beings through abortion or by giving birth and dumping the baby by the roadside. If the pains of pregnancy cannot stop women from doing these things, what makes you think that women are kinder than men?

I have never seen a father that it please is to see his child die. I am not trying to trivialise the pains that pregnancy causes women. But we have to admit the fact that while women feel too much pains during the pregnancy, men's pain in raising children last for over 30 years. He struggles to take care of the pregnant wife, after childbirth, he struggles to take care of both the mother and the child until the child is old enough for the mother to possibly assist the father in the struggle. And when the child is becoming an adult, the father gets depressed if he has not acquired a lot of property that the child can inherit.

You make it seem like women suffer more in this world. The burden of bringing a child into this world and raising the child is equal on men and women.

There is a popular Pentecostal Church ("Somebody shout Halleluya") that does what they call pastors welfare offering or ministers welfare offering once every month.

When a jobless person that manages to buy a big bible tells you that God has called him into a full-time ministry, the person will be depending on church members to feed, using the Bible that says that a prophet shall feed from his job. This is why many of them claim to be prophets, seeing and saying rubbish and misleading their gullible followers.

Lawyer sef wan cash from Church as Church dey cash out from the society.

Keep upgrading.

This forum is great.

But, when will Edit History feature be added? Also, dislike button is necessary.

Ruth15:
. Ok,poor man

A rich woman that depends on poor men for survival.

Ruth15:
. Initially stranded!!! Because I later sorted it out and we walked out like nothing actually happened. But lessons learned.

Only poverty could be responsible for both your initial dependence on the guy and the delay you experienced with the payment.

Ruth15:
. Honestly,the worst argument to ever have is the one with a poor man. So lemme just leave you alone because it's very obvious you're in a romantic relationship with brokeness .

No rich woman will get something on credit hoping that a man will pay for her, and when the man refuses to pay, she will be stranded.

Ruth15:
please stop taking sides with your gender because this is ungentlemanly and this is something every sane mind shouldn't condone.

I take sides with truth. The truth is that his refusal to pay your bills does not mean he is poor, and your friends depending on him shows how poor you are.

Ruth15:
. Only broke men will have problem with paying the bills of the woman they hanged out with . I know of men who personally splashed millions of naira on their first dates. So please stop making it look like it's all men that have a personal romantic relationship with poverty.

1.
Network or bank issues can never get rich women stranded.

2.
How does his refusal to pay your bill mean he is poor?

3.
The fact that two of your friends had to depend on the guy shows how poor you are.

Should talking stage be an extortion or exploitation stage?

Ruth15:
1.
I told him I'd be coming with two of my other female friends

2.
Unfortunately my bank was having network problem.

We all know the category of women that use these two formats.

Misterone:
People that can't even choose the right girlfriend will be talking about choosing a president!

Success in choosing girlfriends doesn't guarantee success in governance.

Failure in choosing girlfriends doesn't guarantee failure in governance.

That church that has its banner tied to the Catholic signpost probably criticises Catholic but could not do without the Catholic sign post. 😂

You are about to marry a dictator. She is highly sentimental and filled with too much arrogance.

No be only Redeem wedding first, bear her papa name too.

One thing is clear, she doesn't value you as much as a woman should value her husband. That's why she is giving you the conditions. You will be the wife in the marriage because she will never be submissive to you. But why don't you want to leave her and go for someone that accepts your Catholic faith? Let her go for a Redeem brother for a Redeem wedding.