₦airaland Forum

salt 1: Apostolic Faith Church teaches and believes in eternal heaven and eternal hell.Soon, some earth-shaking events will occur: the trumpet shall sound,the Lord Jesus shall appear and the righteous dead shall be raised. The overcoming christians shall rise with the righteous dead to meet the Lord in the azure above. That is the first resurrection. In the second resurrection, all godless people will be raised for judging and be cast into everlasting lake of fire.
Mock and sneer what you like, I BELIEVE!

the bible speaks about heaven,moon,stars, sea earth and their locations but the location of your so called hellfire which ought to be the reward of the unfaithfuls according to u cannot be located either in heaven, earth, nor under the earth. guy wake up, read ur bible well u 'll see that these fake pastors that are out for money had either realise therir error and stop preaching it or they now dumped it cos it is not a good marketing preaching to their devil given busness.

kingpinwon: Hell is real my people but God is not the one that makes it, we humans do that ourselve... We make hell ourselve.... What you sow, is what you will reap.

where is the location my friend?

staggerman: Jesus did not send anyone to preach about hell, death and lake of fire. He sent His disciples to preach about the KINGDOM OF GOD (RIGHTEOUSNESS, PEACE AND JOY IN THE HOLY GHOST)

so, na now them know their error abi?
the truth is that there is no such place like hell fire.

symbian phones can do all androids does that's why nokia abadoned it for windows phone. ha ha ha! olodo

because women are easily decieved.

Aploko

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court will on June 21, 2013 decide whether to set aside its earlier
judgment affirming the election of Dr. Emmanuel Uduaghan as the winner of the Delta State
governorship election held in April 2011.
Justice Tanko Muhammed, who presided at the hearing of the application filed by the
governorship candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP), Chief Great Ogboru, seeking to
set aside the court\'s judgment which affirmed Uduaghan as the winner, fixed the date after all
the lawyers had addressed the court.
Ogboru\'s lawyer, Dr Dickson Osuala, said the apex court should not have struck out his client\'s
appeal having found that the judgment of the court of appeal was a nullity.
He asked the court to set aside its decision delivered in March 2012 because, \"it amounted to
putting something on nothing,\" he added.
He said having declared that the lower court judgment was a nullity, the proper order to make
was to hear Ogboru\'s appeal or remit the case back to the lower court for fresh hearing.
However, the court drew his (Osuala\'s) attention to the fact that Ogboru\'s initial counsel, Mr.
Sebastine Hon (SAN) had earlier filed and withdrawn a similar application and that the new
application would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.
Osuala, in reply, told the court that Hon withdrew the application without the authority of his
client and under suspicious circumstance. Justice Tanko however warned Osuala not to cast
aspersions on Hon and that as a lawyer, he had the right to do his client\'s case as he
deemed fit.
In his response, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) who appeared with Chief Alex Izinyon (SAN) for
Uduaghan said that Ogboru was bound by Hon\'s withdrawal of his application.
He cited cases to show that a lawyer had the authority to conduct his client\'s case and that
since Hon was briefed by Ogboru to represent him, Ogboru could not be heard to say that his
application was withdrawn without authority.
He said: \"A lawyer is not a steward or servant of his client. He does not need the authority of
his client to make concession or compromise.\"
He urged the court to hold that Hon acted with authority when he withdrew the application.
Olanipekun asked the court to dismiss the application because there must be an end to litigation.
Lawyers for the Peoples Democratic Party and the Independent National Electoral Commission,
Mrs J.O Adesina (SAN) and Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) respectfully agreed with Olanipekun and
called on the court to dismiss the case and award cost against Ogboru.
Adesina said in so far Hon had the authority to represent Ogboru, whatever decision he took is
binding on the appellant. Adopting the same stance, Ikpeazu said that the applicant proceeded as
if there was no proceeding on 15 October 2012, the day that Hon withdrew the application to set
aside the judgment, he ought to have first set aside that which had transpired.
He said: \"Without doing that, the concession made by Hon and the order made by my Lords
following that withdrawal remained binding on the applicant.\"
Replying on point of law, Osuala said that it was not the law that he must first set aside the
earlier order striking out the suit. He argued that since the earlier application was struck out, his
client had the right to come back to court.
He also informed the court that Ogboru had written to the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria to
protest the withdrawal of the application by Hon.Meanwhile, the Supreme Court will on June 21, 2013 decide whether to set aside its earlier
judgment affirming the election of Dr. Emmanuel Uduaghan as the winner of the Delta State
governorship election held in April 2011.
Justice Tanko Muhammed, who presided at the hearing of the application filed by the
governorship candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP), Chief Great Ogboru, seeking to
set aside the court\'s judgment which affirmed Uduaghan as the winner, fixed the date after all
the lawyers had addressed the court.
Ogboru\'s lawyer, Dr Dickson Osuala, said the apex court should not have struck out his client\'s
appeal having found that the judgment of the court of appeal was a nullity.
He asked the court to set aside its decision delivered in March 2012 because, \"it amounted to
putting something on nothing,\" he added.
He said having declared that the lower court judgment was a nullity, the proper order to make
was to hear Ogboru\'s appeal or remit the case back to the lower court for fresh hearing.
However, the court drew his (Osuala\'s) attention to the fact that Ogboru\'s initial counsel, Mr.
Sebastine Hon (SAN) had earlier filed and withdrawn a similar application and that the new
application would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.
Osuala, in reply, told the court that Hon withdrew the application without the authority of his
client and under suspicious circumstance. Justice Tanko however warned Osuala not to cast
aspersions on Hon and that as a lawyer, he had the right to do his client\'s case as he
deemed fit.
In his response, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) who appeared with Chief Alex Izinyon (SAN) for
Uduaghan said that Ogboru was bound by Hon\'s withdrawal of his application.
He cited cases to show that a lawyer had the authority to conduct his client\'s case and that
since Hon was briefed by Ogboru to represent him, Ogboru could not be heard to say that his
application was withdrawn without authority.
He said: \"A lawyer is not a steward or servant of his client. He does not need the authority of
his client to make concession or compromise.\"
He urged the court to hold that Hon acted with authority when he withdrew the application.
Olanipekun asked the court to dismiss the application because there must be an end to litigation.
Lawyers for the Peoples Democratic Party and the Independent National Electoral Commission,
Mrs J.O Adesina (SAN) and Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) respectfully agreed with Olanipekun and
called on the court to dismiss the case and award cost against Ogboru.
Adesina said in so far Hon had the authority to represent Ogboru, whatever decision he took is
binding on the appellant. Adopting the same stance, Ikpeazu said that the applicant proceeded as
if there was no proceeding on 15 October 2012, the day that Hon withdrew the application to set
aside the judgment, he ought to have first set aside that which had transpired.
He said: \"Without doing that, the concession made by Hon and the order made by my Lords
following that withdrawal remained binding on the applicant.\"
Replying on point of law, Osuala said that it was not the law that he must first set aside the
earlier order striking out the suit. He argued that since the earlier application was struck out, his
client had the right to come back to court.
He also informed the court that Ogboru had written to the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria to
protest the withdrawal of the application by Hon.Meanwhile, the Supreme Court will on June 21, 2013 decide whether to set aside its earlier
judgment affirming the election of Dr. Emmanuel Uduaghan as the winner of the Delta State
governorship election held in April 2011.
Justice Tanko Muhammed, who presided at the hearing of the application filed by the
governorship candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP), Chief Great Ogboru, seeking to
set aside the court\'s judgment which affirmed Uduaghan as the winner, fixed the date after all
the lawyers had addressed the court.
Ogboru\'s lawyer, Dr Dickson Osuala, said the apex court should not have struck out his client\'s
appeal having found that the judgment of the court of appeal was a nullity.
He asked the court to set aside its decision delivered in March 2012 because, \"it amounted to
putting something on nothing,\" he added.
He said having declared that the lower court judgment was a nullity, the proper order to make
was to hear Ogboru\'s appeal or remit the case back to the lower court for fresh hearing.
However, the court drew his (Osuala\'s) attention to the fact that Ogboru\'s initial counsel, Mr.
Sebastine Hon (SAN) had earlier filed and withdrawn a similar application and that the new
application would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.
Osuala, in reply, told the court that Hon withdrew the application without the authority of his
client and under suspicious circumstance. Justice Tanko however warned Osuala not to cast
aspersions on Hon and that as a lawyer, he had the right to do his client\'s case as he
deemed fit.
In his response, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) who appeared with Chief Alex Izinyon (SAN) for
Uduaghan said that Ogboru was bound by Hon\'s withdrawal of his application.
He cited cases to show that a lawyer had the authority to conduct his client\'s case and that
since Hon was briefed by Ogboru to represent him, Ogboru could not be heard to say that his
application was withdrawn without authority.
He said: \"A lawyer is not a steward or servant of his client. He does not need the authority of
his client to make concession or compromise.\"
He urged the court to hold that Hon acted with authority when he withdrew the application.
Olanipekun asked the court to dismiss the application because there must be an end to litigation.
Lawyers for the Peoples Democratic Party and the Independent National Electoral Commission,
Mrs J.O Adesina (SAN) and Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) respectfully agreed with Olanipekun and
called on the court to dismiss the case and award cost against Ogboru.
Adesina said in so far Hon had the authority to represent Ogboru, whatever decision he took is
binding on the appellant. Adopting the same stance, Ikpeazu said that the applicant proceeded as
if there was no proceeding on 15 October 2012, the day that Hon withdrew the application to set
aside the judgment, he ought to have first set aside that which had transpired.
He said: \"Without doing that, the concession made by Hon and the order made by my Lords
following that withdrawal remained binding on the applicant.\"
Replying on point of law, Osuala said that it was not the law that he must first set aside the
earlier order striking out the suit. He argued that since the earlier aplication was struck out, his
client had the right to come back to court.
He also informed the court that Ogboru had written to the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria to
protest the withdrawal of the application by Ho

posted my mistake please ignor

kessyur: I am glad u acknowledge the church as the mother church, hence the reason for all to be brought in. "Ewobi" like u.

matt. 24: 24,11

I advise you to go for s3. there are many free android apps available more than ios apps which mostly paid for.

iphone doesn't transfer stuff to non iphones

iphone only reads words & excell docs. it doesn't edit it, all s3 does

highlighting and copying web pages is better in s3

s3 and other android phones are more user friendly and easier to operate

the status Bar notification makes notifications to be quickly accessable

s3 battery is replaceable ( ie if u have extra battery) iphone is not

s3 uses external sd, lphone doesn't.

from the forgoing, I advise u to go for d s3 or any other high end android phon.

subscribe with *440*4# then send. thts all. u ll be subscribed immediately.
I did made a new subscription two days ago but was given the normal 1 gb.