₦airaland Forum

MuttleyLaff:
SMH at your "Was Peter also a babe in Christ?"
Must have been some italo cross reading or reading comprehension thing going on there

italo just answer those questions or just let the matter rest,
as you dont really want to bring the Eunuch into this
or ask for the reason why this Eunuch was so bent and insisting of performing this external ritual or rite
because if you do, I might breathe down heavily on you
and drag you, screaming down heavier truth paths, you dont necessarily want to tread, about the Eunuch,
or at least not for now, heavier truths about the Eunuch you dont want to hear or know.

What meaningless banter!

You suggested that the Eunuch demanded water baptism because he was only a babe in christ.

Peter's audience in Acts 10:47 already had what you call 'true baptism' yet Peter was the one that brought up the idea that he had to baptize them with water, not the people.

So was Peter also a babe in Christ? If not, what is your reason for his demanding it.

From where did he get this teaching?

Where are the "other places" that They learnt to baptize with water?

Twistaray:
Oo please close yaa mouth.

Ilorin it is not yoruba, stop speaking with both mouth.

You said they colonised Yoruba... When you are talking bout colonialism Fulani colonised Ilorin not yoruba as a whole (ilorin is a section in yoruba kingdom) and Lagos was colonised by Benin people right because they accepted Benin so now are they claiming to be Edo or Yoruba... If you answer that then you win and why is it that the fulani other battles with Yoruba Kingdoms were not won by them and why is it that they are unable to defeat the 5 kingdoms in Ogbomoso now and why is it that they lost the battle against Ile-Ife and Ede
Why is it that the Benin allows yoruba to have King in their Land till today benin today has 2 king One is a Yoruba and the Other Edo....

Binis and Fulanis colonized Yorubas. Or are in people of Ilorin and Lagos now chinese?

Tell us where the word Yoruba came from if not from your Fulani slave masters.

Who is the Yoruba king in Benin?

The person wan die?

Twistaray:
Ngozie, run run run run.
Oba akinolu is coming for you

Don't worry brafraud is on the way.. we don't want u in our land anymore we are done using you. Any refusal or stubbornness? Laggggggon

https://www.nairaland.com/2306559/non-indigenes-lagos-must-respect-hosts

As we speak, millions of Igbos are in Lagos, in their country, trying to make a good life.

Your Oba has failed because 500000 people voted against his will and none entered the Lagoon.

Yorubas are all mouth, no action.

And he said if it didn't happen, he's not the son of his father. God knows from which man his mother got him from. Anyway, she's a Yoruba woman. No surprise.

Kill yourself if that's too painful.

macof:
look at this fool that doesn't even understand Bini proclaiming two obviously different names as one name answered by one man
I already told you that bigotry would shrink your intellect. ..look at the stupidity you are already displaying

I already told you go and do the needful if you are so obsessed with Oduduwa

Imadoduwa and Izoduwa are the same name. Same meaning.

Tell us the meaning of Oduduwa in Yoruba and if it is the same as Oodua.
Even the word "Yoruba" is a name derived from "Yoruba," the slave name your Fulani slave masters gave you. Not so?

macof:
lmao you this igbo fool. .. to think I actually mistook u for a Bini

I should have known as the Binis are much more reasonable than you lot.
as you are no yoruba or Bini I have no obligation to explain or narrate the Lagos history to you. ..you are free to believe what you wish, afterall a bigot cannot accept the fact that he is wrong

why is it that igbo bigots cannot face yoruba but rather use Bini to fight their nonsense ethnic war?

Whether I'm Edo, Igbo, Hausa, Nupe...or even Japanese.

Binis colonized Lagos. Fulanis colonized Ilorin.

I don't know why these simple truths are making you contemplate suicide.

VirginFinder:
Did Lagos govt write the web content? A dullard did!
Watch, it will soon be edited.

No, the Cameroonian govt wrote it, then the Chadian govt uploaded it on the Lagos Govt official website by force.

Are you happy?

macof:
shut your mouth you idiotic fool.
who are you to speak for Bini?

Bini are very traditional people and take their tales very seriously

again I would tell you that Yorubas don't claim Oduduwa "fell" from the sky(note the word "fell" is inappropriate). this is a recent claim by foreign scholars who were told anything by elders to get them away

if you want to know about Oduduwa so much, go get initiated
an uninitiated outsider like you cannot know such things


so you are so stuupid that you cannot tell that those are two different names?
if you wanna claim something be consistent and stick to one

1. Binis know the difference between tales and reality, however importantly they might take the tales.

2. Imadoduwa and Izoduwa are the same name/have same meaning.

3. Are you saying Oduduwa didn't fall from the sky? What then? He trekked from Mecca?

MuttleyLaff:
You, Syncan et al, keep making references to the Apostles and about their water baptisms
and I have, asked all several questions that stay unanswered,
so I'll repeat a few here again, thereby giving you, Syncan et al another opportunity to address them:

How were all those baptisms carried?
Were they full baptism as in full immersion in physical water or not?
How were each or individual physical water baptisms carried out by the Apostles done?

I don't know whether it was immersion or sprinkling that the 3000 were baptized but I know it was with Physical water with the invocation of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

How do you say the 3000, St. Paul, Lydia's family, the Jailer's family were baptized? By Spirit, water or word?

MuttleyLaff:


On the day of pentecost that 3000 were baptised, where, which place and how was this done?
Considering the time of day, how long did it take to baptise each of those 3000?

I don't know the place.

But I know that, by sprinkling, it could take as low as 5 seconds to baptize one person. Going by that, the 12 apostles could have baptized 250 persons each, which would make the whole exercise last only 20mins. Very feasible...regardless of time of the day. If all 120 believers joined them in baptizing, it would take only 2mins.

MuttleyLaff:
Final question, in this current dispensation, what is the present format or mode of carrying out and doing water baptism?
What form of physical water baptism do you subscribe to?

Baptism with water, (whether sprinkling, pouring or immersion) with the invocation of the Holy Trinity, as in the days of the apostles.

Now please answer me questions...including the bold.

MuttleyLaff:
https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
Look at you asking "where did Philip get the teaching that he had to baptize the Eunuch with water, if not John 3:5"

Of course it was from John 3:5 and other places
but recognise the Eunuch, at that point in time, was a babe in Christ, you surely dont expect Philip to force feed this new and enthusiastic convert with:
"Erm, you know Mr Eunuch, it's not phyical and literal water, but the water actually is the baptism or immersion with the word of God"

Philip went along at the level the Eunuch was and obliged the Eunuch's request for the physical rite

This your excuse is too lame. That Philip only baptized the Eunuch because he didn't want to force-feed a babe the true baptism.

Peter's audience in Acts 10:47 already had what you call 'true baptism' yet Peter was the one that brought up the idea that he had to baptize them with water, not the people.

Was Peter also a babe in Christ?

From where did he get this teaching?

Where are the "other places" that They learnt to baptize with water?

Manufacture more lame excuses.

Barnabaseloka:
Don't you see how you have constructed your own definition of infant baptism in order to have a foothold to heresy? Luke 18:15 talks about 'that He might TOUCH (place His hands on or bless) them. It never mentioned the word 'water', not to talk of infant baptism. Even Jesus was not baptised when He was dedicated in the temple in Luke 2:21-24. Therefore do not give your own definition to a word in order to back up that which is unscriptural.
As regards the Gentiles and their conscience, I have replied you in my previous post. So go and enjoy it.

Are you saying Jesus doesn't touch people at baptism?

Barnabaseloka:
Bro. get rid of your pride and accept the truth when you come across one. [s][/s][b]
Only those who are BORN AGAIN are required to go through WATER BAPTISM.
[/b]It is not for those who WILL be born again after WATER BAPTISM. Learn to study rather than holding tenaciously to what you cannot explain and balance with other passages of the scriptures.

To be born again is to be born of water and Spirit which is baptism.
That is why Jesus and his apostles went and baptized immediately after the teaching.
That is why Philip baptized the Eunuch.
That is why the apostles baptized entire households based on the faith of the parents.


Nowhere does the Bible say the Bold.

MuttleyLaff:
Thank you! That will do me

Hmm, here we go again

OK, I'll have a bit of, another go, at this, because Philip, a Jew, was proselytising a Gentile, the Eunuch.

Countless places, case in point is that John 7:38, you admitted up there, to not necessarily being physical water

Where did Philip get the teaching that he had to baptize the Eunuch with water, if not John 3:5?

The guy did not deceive her because he didn't say his peni.s is big.

Small penis is not a disease.

sportsmaster:
Nice one bro.
That guy (scholar8200) behaves like he knows everything and he does not seem to know much..

That how i explained in one thread that "righteousness is by faith" in the New Testament..
He(scholar8200) said that the righteousness standards are higher in the New testament..
Even Abraham ,Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness.Gen15:6,Rom4. Righteousness is by faith.
If righteousness came by the law,then Christ died in vain.
It's as simple as that.

I pray for you bro "that you Grow more and more in the Knowledge of the Jesus"Eph1:16-19

Chew this:

James 2

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

MuttleyLaff:
I dont have any gripes where water is physical water
I have continually made known my concern is only and only is about verses like John 3:5 and John 7:38 where water there is not literal or physical water
Just for the record, are you saying John 3:5 and John 7:38 is physical and literal water?
So? Have you got a problem with what I wrote?
Did something or all parts of it rattled your theology?
If any, what worried you in what I wrote?
What would you have the apostles say or do here:
https://www.nairaland.com/2383797/saved-faith-water-baptism/3#34882532
Syncan we are grown ups.
I have very crucial and deciding questions posed to you go unanswered
I asked if you're familiar with John 7:37-39 (i.e. particularly the instructive & revealing bit in verse 39) & also left you two translations, still nada
and here you are asking "do you mind telling me when or what year/era water baptism became obsolete"

John 7:38 is not necessarily physical water.

John 3:5 is physical water, otherwise where did Philip get the teaching that he had to baptize the Eunuch with physical water?

Secondly, where was hydatos ever translated as "word" or "spirit?"

Barnabaseloka:
Why have you mentioned my name again? Is it b/c I refuted what you wrote by not contradicting the scriptures which you wanted me to? You hold on to a particular passage/s which otherwise contradict/s other passages that some people quoted. Do you call that balanced understanding? Bro. do not read any passage and go with the meaning in it when there are other passages that will help you understand them clearly. This is what is called STUDYING the scriptures which you see as CHANGING the word.

Luke 18:15 talks about little children or infants or babies as you said coming to Jesus for Him to touch them. But it did not talk of infant baptism.

What is infant Baptism, if not bringing infants for Jesus to touch?

2. You still haven't said anything about Gentiles being judged with their conscience or not. Have you not found a way to change Romans 2? You need more time?

Barnabaseloka:
Do you know that John 3:5 you have been arguing unnecessary about does not talk about 'baptism' but one being 'born again'?

Peter has told us one of the 'means' through which one is born again, which is the WORD of God in 1 Pet.1:23 that I have quoted. Then the other 'means' is through the Holy Spirit. These are the two that are stated in John 3:5 as 'water' and the Spirit. One becomes BORN AGAIN (repenting and believing in Jesus) before WATER BAPTISM. At the point of being born again, one can be filled with the Holy Spirit before one is baptized. Being 'born again' preceeds 'baptism'.

When one has been born again through the WORD of GOD one hears and believes and through the Holy Spirit, then baptism takes place. Know that baptism does not make one to be born again but the word of God and the Holy Spirit. It is not everywhere we see the word 'bread' that it signifies the 'body' of Jesus. So also, it is not everywhere we see 'water' that it signifies 'physical' water or talks about water baptism. People who are baptized are those who have been born again and not those who will be born again.

If 'physical' water, the Spirit and the word of God signify 'water', how will you conclude that the water in John 3:5 talks about 'physical' water and baptism?

You should try re-evangelizing all the apostles...they went and baptized with water after John3:5 teaching...and continued to baptized with water after Pentecost.

You understand Jesus more than them.

VirginFinder:
Bullshiiiit!

Whoever wrote that must be someone like you in the govt.

The governor/Oba of Lagos can NEVER approve of such garbage.

It's possible those who own Lagos are not even aware of it.

Read the OP.

Then go and fight the Lagos Govt, not me.

disumusa:
how long will bastard ibo gorrilla keep claiming river state, lagos, fct, warri,jos. Their is inferiority complex with ibo, very embarasin

y

disumusa:
ibo are looking for a rich place like lagos to called home, you are just a bastard and no man son, claiming anothers man land. Ibo shame,shame, on you cannibalis. You have no home.

I'll refuse to degenerate into a cursing match with you. I know Yorubas are champions at that, but I mistakenly thought only your market women were that despicable.

Twistaray:

Seems you are not a nigerian abi ngoze?
Where were you and where have you been?
http://www.punchng.com/opinion/lagos-is-not-a-no-mans-land-but/
Na wa for you oo
http://www.premiumtimesng.com/opinion/142210-lagos-the-igbo-and-the-servants-of-truth-by-femi-fani-kayode.html
Anyway, yoruba are up now
http://www.premiumtimesng.com/opinion/142210-lagos-the-igbo-and-the-servants-of-truth-by-femi-fani-kayode.html

I found that Orji Uzor Kalu was alleged to have said that Lagos is no man's land just like Lagos Govt said.

Igbos fought to leave Nigeria, Yorubas fought to have them stay in "one Nigeria."

Now, they are in Nigeria. Lagos is their country. They don't owe you anything for being in Lagos.

disumusa:
pls yorubas consider ibos as indegen they have no place to call a home

It's the so-called Lagosians that have no home. What they claim as "home" is no man's land according to Lagos Govt.

Twistaray:
Oooh really?
Where were you then when your brethen open their mouth wide, shouting ; lagos is a no man's land?
Kanu and co?
You are a joke

Every part of SW is consider a no man's land and do you know what that means? No as you people thought. It simply means, SW/lagos a home for all.

Accommodating oo

A no man's land indeed.

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2014/12/deportation-of-igbos-fashola-wins-case/

Provide evidence that Kanu and co said that.

I have proved that Lagos Govt said that.

VirginFinder:
Did they really say that?

What they meant was that no single Yoruba subgroup can claim ownership of Lagos.

"Moreover, modern day Lagosians have so intermingled that no single tribe or people can claim it even though the predominant language is Yoruba."--Lagos Govt.

Keep lying. It's in your blood. "Oduduwa fell from heaven."

Twistaray:
You were quick to shout 'yoruba'.
I'm glad I have been able to ironed that out.
Abi where were you when you god(ojuwku,imuwku) flee with his mini skirt to abidjan?

This thread has nothing to do with Yoruba or Ojukwu.

This thread shows that Lagos Govt considers Lagos a no man's land.

VirginFinder:
Didn't Britain also subjugate Bini and Nigeria? Did that make Binis and Nigerians Britons or their lands British or 'no man's land'?

The bolded has sure put an end to the debate on who owns Lagos.

I never said colonization made Lagos no man's land. It was Lagos Govt that called Lagos no man's land.

Go and fight them, not me.

macof:
you are very right.. only lying "scholars" or ignorant fellows would say Oduduwa "fell" from the sky

but have you addressed urself and talked about the Ogiso coming from the sky? you cannot condemn the rather "untrue" claim of Oduduwa the King coming from the sky (as the Coming from the sky bit refers to the creator God of the same name and not the king) while you go back to ur hut to proclaim the Ogiso came from the sky and gave land to people.. even gave Europe to the Europeans,
address that nonsense first

why are you lot never consistent with your lies? today it's Imadoduwa tomorrow its izoduwa

1. Binis know that is a fairy tale. They separate fact from fairy. Their history and Tradition is very detailed. There's cultural and archeological evidence all over the place.

Yorubas call Oduduwa's skyfall a fact because they are too dishonest to admit that he came from Bini...or that they don't know where he came from.

2. Imadoduwa is Izoduwa. Same name.

Twistaray:
Yoruba or lagos/ilorin?

You said they colonised Yoruba... When you are talking bout colonialism Fulani colonised Ilorin not yoruba as a whole (ilorin is a section in yoruba kingdom) and [b]Lagos was colonised by Benin people [/b]right because they accepted Benin so now are they claiming to be Edo or Yoruba... If you answer that then you win and why is it that the fulani other battles with Yoruba Kingdoms were not won by them and why is it that they are unable to defeat the 5 kingdoms in Ogbomoso now and why is it that they lost the battle against Ile-Ife and Ede
Why is it that the Benin allows yoruba to have King in their Land till today benin today has 2 king One is a Yoruba and the Other Edo....

I will be here waiting to counter these online false assumptions. Ngozie

The bold is enough.

Save your remaining meaningless epistle for another day.

macof:
very false claim here. please go learn about the Idejo chiefs of Lagos who rule lagos underground with the Oba of Lagos as a figure head

Bini and Awori live together in lagos, not that Bini subjugated Awori
there was no subjugation at all but a friendly relationship

today those Bini lineages are Awori and not Bini. ..hence they are yoruba
most of my friends are of Bini descent yet while acknowledging their Bini ancestry they identify as Awori (Yoruba)

You mean Bini Prince Ado came to be King over Aworis and just because Binis and Aworis were friends?

Tell that to the Marines!

brocab:
Lets read this together.
Luke 18:15- And they brought unto Him also infants, that He would touch them: But when His disciples saw it, they rebuked them.
Vs 16 Jesus called them to him and said: Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God.

Of such is the kingdom of God.
You can see the children were brought to Jesus as an example, they either were to respond to the gospel as they grew older.
Or they believed as you believe in baptism at birth-like when Jesus laid his hands on them, you believe you are Automatically saved.

Vs 17 "Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it."
This verse say's it all, Jesus had showing us another example-we as adults need to humble ourselves as little children to be teachable, by our Father in Heaven.

Matthew 18:2-4, And Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them.
Vs 3, and said: "Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of God.
Another example, converted to become as little children.
Vs 4, "Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

As you can see whoever humbles himself as a little child. And those who enter the kingdom of heaven have to believe, repent, be baptised and live a new life.
Peter at pentecost makes it clear that the promise was for that generation and their children, on the basis of repentance and baptism which could not be applied to their children until they were old enough to even understand.

Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent, and let everyone of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remissions of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Babes haven't the slightest idea what sin is.
Vs 39-"For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are a far off, as many as the Lord our God will call."
So Peter said: all those who the Lord chooses, and so far it seems the Lord has chosen men, to become his disciples, men who have humbled themselves as children to believe in the gospel.

How about this scripture.
1 Corinthians 14:20-Brethren, do not be children in understanding; however, in malice be babes, but in understanding be mature.
Don't be angry, no-one is lying, we understand you haven't received to word of God clearly, but we are only here to help someone in need.

So you see, you believe as a child you were brought before the lord, baptised as a babe, which shows this does not save you, you need to make that final decision, a mature person would consider making a choice, turning him or herself over to the Lord in humbleness as a child, and becoming a born again Christian, only to follow after Christ, and learn about the scriptures.

We love ya brother..

Call me when you succeed in changing the word in Luke 18:15 from infants to children.

You're still a learner. Ask Barnabaseloka how he changes scripture to suit his heresies.

VirginFinder:
At least, Yoruba and Bini agree that Oranmiyan, Oduduwa's grandson instituted modern-day Bini monarchy.

However, Oduduwa's origin remains controversial.
There is no proof to buttress the Yoruba and Bini standpoints on the matter.

Hence, let us leave Oduduwa's origin which divides us and stick to what we both agree on!

And we both agree that Binis subjugated Yorubas in Lagos without a shot.

VirginFinder:
At least, Yoruba and Bini agree that Oranmiyan, Oduduwa's grandson instituted modern-day Bini monarchy.

However, Oduduwa's origin remains controversial.
There is no proof to buttress the Yoruba and Bini standpoints on the matter.

Hence, let us leave Oduduwa's origin which divides us and stick to what we both agree on!

Oranmiyan didn't institute it. He was installed there by Bini people.

Did Buhari institute his present presidential tenure?