₦airaland Forum

chiogo:
Yeah D Wade played well but he didn't embarrass us rather, his team mates 'cause he got most of the scores and they still only beat us by 9 points.
Just means his team mates are slacking. 

We'll get 'em in Boston tomorrow!!

Word!   We lost that game on free throws. Missed like a gadzillion in the 4Q.

chic2pimp:
Hehehe. Dude is making Fisher look like an old aged pensioner .

Hehe AARP will be sending extended publications to Fisher this offseason

oh and one more thing, Bawo, please tell Joking Noah to zip it and stop whining. This is the NBA and it doesn't stand for National Babies League. If Shaq is elbowing him, then elbow back and suck it up like a man not whining to the media that the refs don't call it . . . weak men, nuthin worse than that 
and ditto to Dwight Howard to. Constantly in foul trouble and complaining. Geez. When did the playoffs get populated by such cry babies?

bawomolo:
the lakers usually play well at home so they should be ok, the rockets gave them similar wahala too.

Don't be so sure. The Rockets are nowhere close to as talented as the Thunder.

In the series last yr, the rockets were getting smacked by double digit wins in LA. As A-40 just pointed out this series could easily be 3-1 if Durant had made that shot in LA. I've been singing the Thunder's praise since few pages ago - good to see they have not disappointed me


[quote author=A-40 link=topic=344420.msg5954575#msg5954575 date=1272297718]@Jesoul
Maybe the Spurs are not as over-the-hill as we thought not with young hustlers like Blair & Hill obviously they have had enough of the behind whooping we have been givin em. They just seem hungrier and more aggressive. Marion & Butler where supposed to be the cure but they are looking more like the disease at the mo. Both Dampier and Haywood are not protecting the paint and when we take shots at the other end there is no one hustling for offensive rebounds. Clearly they believed their own hype.[/quote]And that's really the bottomline. Its all about hustle and SA is winning in that dept right now.

As for the Thunder mehn[b] that Westbrook is an athletic beast[/b]! Looking back now if Durant had made that shot in game 2 the champs would be staring down the elimination barrel. Looks like Artest's game 1 stunts where a fluke afterall

And imagine he's only in his second season. The future is so bright in OKC.

bawomolo:
kobe needs to take a summer break. that old body of his can't handle too much stress anymore. remember he and KG came into the league straight from HS.

Yeah Kobe is beat down. Finger, knee, back . . . both he and KG have logged so many miles. Odom, Gasoft and co. cannot ride on his coat tails forever, if they don't step up, then its time up.

lol@re-loaded, trading a fragile forward and overrated big man is reloading? mav fans keep on fooling themselves. the mavs are just too soft in the paint.

Hehe, reloaded - that's what the press release stated now lol. I think the additions were solid as evidenced in their good play since the all-star break. I guess they weren't expecting the Spurs to play as hard as they have. As far as I'm concerned, the Mavs are a better team - on paper. If they lose, its because they gave it away, not because the Spurs are that good.

[quote author=A-40 link=topic=344420.msg5949965#msg5949965 date=1272224716]Durant,Green and Westbrook! Those niggas are the future. If they get a decent center NBA is in trouble[/quote]An understatement self. If they can keep that core together for the next few years, barring any injuries, they will be perpetual contenders. It is not fair putting Westbrook vs. Fisher, just not fait to that old man at all kai, see schooling.

Lol, wow. Who woulda guessed.

-LA tied at the waist with the lowly Thunder, including absolute murder in the last game. (Bawo you now see why I used Kevin Durant interchangeably with Kobe? KB is shooting like an absolute scrub. He says his knee is bothering him)
-Denver down 3-1 to an undermanned Utah team?
-the re-loaded Mavs on the brink of elimination to an old, over-the-hill Spurs team?

  na wa oh. Mavs fans eya, lol, e go betta.

Petres here you go. Click reply and quote this post to see the appropriate code/format.
[flash=600,500]http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=688111496234161611&hl=en&fs=true style=width:400px;height:326px allowFullScreen=true allowScriptAccess=always type=application/x-shockwave-flash> </embed>[/flash]

Chiogo, just call me prophetess jesoul  I happen to think Big baby is a better match-up for O'neal than KG is. KG had the length, Davis has the hustle and size.

Chic2pimper why you stressing my girl and Celtic fans worldwide? its not every day we dish out 30pt thrashings in the playoff - shitty opponent or not, so ejo allow us revel in the moment before we get ousted in the next rd by a furious Cav team.

Bawo you are just special. I was going to recommend deliverance for you but A-40 says we should go easy on you. For the sake of your mental health, me I'm personally praying una get Wade 

Great win for the Jazz. But Denver will still take the series barring any injuries to their core. Utah manages to remain a perpetual contender every year in the playoffs because Sloan makes them play hard. Unfortunately they've been on the same gear for like a zillion years now. It ain't changing this year.

Chicago, una try ehn.  You'll hafta play a darn perfect game and Cleveland really suck to win one game. I don't see that happening. But hey miracles still dey happen so u get small hope.

No Garnett for game 2. No problem. Watch big baby use every inch of the massive backside to dismiss O'neal in the paint  Btw, RaSheed, this is what you were brought here for . . .

Spikey

Max and Vesc, just come with your tray of kola and gin and a small stack of cash, that will suffice for the first round of appeasement.

Lol "Intimacy and the city"    another person was lamenting a while back about "B.reast cancer" being changed to "Bosom cancer" lol

The other day I was posting from Titus 2:3 in the bible, I shortened it to "Ti.t 2:3" . . .  it showed as "Bosom 2:3" I was like what the . . . until I remembered "ti.t" also has another meaning 

*insert another hiss here*   I even forgot self. There was a scene in Repo Men where on the news they refered to "another war in Nigeria" and they were sending more troops etc etc etc
  I don't understand hollywood's new fascination and obsession with casting Nigeria in a combative negative light as a perpetual war-zone. Useless lot.


As for the Malaysian keyboard . . . hmm . . . JK, sometimes cheaper ain't always berra. Or were you going for "different"? as Vesc how that's working out for him And ehn, this your new typing will take some getting used to, I've.actually.come.to.like.the.old.way . . . feel.free.to.revert.on.a.few.occasions.just.for.memories.ehn

^ MyJoe, good point about what constituted atonement in the OT, is not the same as in the NT.

However, Joagbaje has a severe predilection, a frightening penchant for re-defining the meaning of words as we've seen a few times on this thread alone. I am certain he is again re-defining "atonement", but if he asserts otherwise, my apologies will be expressly delivered.

But you right self, there are far more pressing things begging his attention . . .

Analytical:
@JeSoul,
I have been around, mostly reading, but dropping a line once in a while!  Hope you are cool?  Keep loving the Lord.

I am well oh my brother. You should post more you know your entries are always of great value.

I quite understand the points made by everyone as I went through all th e inputs.  Not, it's not lost.  Mine was to reiterate that the early church met as large congregation and also from house to house.  Moreso when some were saying the size of a church (note: believers not building) shouldn't be more than can meet in someone's house and citing it as the sole practice in the early church.  That is not the complete truth . . .
It was when I read your comment I realized I probably gave that impression.  I was trying to draw attention to the fact that the early believers actually gather together as single congregation as well as meet in their houses, weekly.

Awesome, thanks for highlighting that. I guess we weren't consistently stressing that. Thanks!

---

away4real:
Sis, okay point taken, but I still have this question then "how and where do we reach the unsaved?". Lets note that if for example me, you and Kunle meet to go evangelising (then we the "church", ie people not building) are going to be in some way "fellowshiping" or let me use a less contentious word "talking" with the unbeliever, in my opinion thats the church meeting.

my brother, I think now we're getting too technical. Jesus said "go out and make disciples". We are witnessing every second to the people we're with at work, at school, at the grocery store, even here online by our words and actions. "Reaching the lost" does not have to take on the modern connotation of an organized group of people, heading out to the street to hand out tracts - and just because they are a group of christians - together - does not mean they are having "church" at that very moment. I hope this makes sense?

My point being then that the presence of the unconverted has nothing really to do with the church or our fellowships, their presence does nothing to hinder or dilute our gathering, for point of emphasis their presence does not turn my fellowship with you and Kunle to a social gathering, it does not. So why then are we somehow concerned that there are many of the unconverted in the big church gatherings, It does not make those gatherings in any way a club or social gathering.

Several points in there.
From the chapter in 1 Corinthians 14, we readily see that a gathering of "church" is a group of believers - an occasionally an unbeliever might come in curious

  ^this is very very different for a regular church goer, that hears the gospel(hopefully) every sunday, but yet remains unchanged, unsaved, but continues to participate in the religious ritual of "going to church". What purpose does that serve to the body of Christ? or to the unsaved man?

Rev 3:14"To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:
      These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God's creation. I know your deeds, that[b] you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth[/b]
 
  We see how God feels about those who are lukewarm, aka the church goer who has not committed himself to Christ but yet maintains an outward form of righteousness by "going to church". Furthermore, the chances are high that that church he is attending does NOT preach the unadulterated gospel of Christ. When Jesus spoke - people had 2 reactions to Him, they turned to Him or they turned away from Him. If the true gospel is being preached, they will either be convicted and turn to God, or be angry (just like the crowds Jesus spoke to) and walk away. Not just sit on the fence. Anyways I don talk tire Godbless!

There is so much to comment on on this thread, but I will start here:

Joagbaje:
God has a system of dealing with people through a leader at a given time and not altogether as a group.From Moses ,Joshua, David, Jesus and to the church. It is Gods system.
Deacons and elders that were ordained were stil accountable to[b] the pastor who is the head[/b].

*the last time someone made this gross statement, this happened https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-397372.0.html*

Joagbaje, sir, all you have to do is to please show us the scripture that says "the pastor is the head of the church". Thank you.

nuclearboy:
@Jesoul:

You want a "god" to answer to a man? Have you fogotten that platforms differ? One is arguing from ROR and the other from the ordinary Bible - agreement can never be found!

Lol "ordinary bible" kai! na so e don reach?

Another problem you can solve for me, Jesoul is to let me know - where can I learn to read Aramaic, Hebrew and Old Greek? I hate being an illiterate when it comes to "the original revelation knowledge meanings of the words" in scripture. Be a good sis and point me in the right direction

Nuclearboy, honestly, these past few days you have been cracking me up  I must thank you sincerely for the good laughs. Na me you dey ask for "greenk and amamaic and hinbrew"?  oga, you suppose find Viaro or InesQor. Me, na only English I sabi. Even when them tell me say my name close to the Hebrew word for 'blood' I reply say "oh okay, dats cool" and waka go.

I have hardly scratched the surface, barely grasped the rudimentary concept, scarcely began to comprehend the greatest commandment "to love God with all my heart, soul and mind and to love my neighbor as myself" - when I finish understanding that one, I go go learn greek and hebrew. So keep those website links when you get them aight.

  Anyways sha . . . these might be useful: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm AND http://www.greekbible.com/  I've missed road ended up there a few times in a misguided effort to "get the true meaning" of some words 

Joagbaje:
Altheia pls get off my back! You are the confused person.The word used for Atonement in Romans is not the same as OT in meaning. I don't want issues with you because you are not a discussant but a typical Nigerian street fighter without fruits of the spirit.

Pastor, can you please explain how this can be so? And can you also point out how many other words mean one thing in the OT and another in the NT . . . maybe "blood" or "spirit" or "die" or "God" have different meanings under the different dispensations?

Also Aletheia is not on your back now. He just wants you to explain biblically the things you are asserting here. Please do oblige him.

bawomolo:
you forget the men from the aching grandpa's. the boys shall grow someday but the grandpas don expire for boston

And let us see how the kindergartener's will do too. Hopefully ya'll can eek out one game ehn

So the playoffs are all set. Let the wheat be seperated from the chaff . . . the men from the boys 

East Coast
CHI vs. CLE
Sat 3:00 PM ET

CHA vs. ORL
Sun 5:30 PM ET

MIL vs. ATL
Sat 5:30 PM ET

MIA vs. BOS
Sat 8:00 PM ET

West Coast
OKC vs. LAL
Sun 3:00 PM ET

SAS vs. DAL
Sun 8:00 PM ET

POR vs. PHO
Sun 10:30 PM ET

UTH vs. DEN
Sat 10:30 PM ET


Oya make your picks

If there was ever a thread worthy of being resurrected - this is one.

away4real:
Sisterly, thanks, i do totally agree with you and am sure many christains desire a church that is worthy of our lord. But I have long ago learnt the church will not be a perfect place until our lord comes, with that in mind I am always slow to speak when it comes to some matters.

Spoken like a wise man .

@ @ InesQor please if you still have any input please help, though Jesoul has explained clearly the rationale, so we really[b] cant [/b] say that the unsaved are meant to be reached outside the church.

Oh but we can Away.

If we've established that the church is primarily and mostly for believers, and it will be rare that unbelievers will be in their midst - then InesQor is not wrong in saying "the unsaved are meant to be reached outside the church". Meant - being the operative word.

Now if InesQor had said "the unsaved cannot or should not be reached inside of a church" then that will be wrong.

Few comments.

1. Dude is brave for going in front of the world and talking about this.
2. I don't think these kinds of issues of "demon possession" should be discussed on a national tv show or that it should've been allowed to be taped/recorded.
3. Dude is only 16 I woulda guessed him to be at least 27.

Brotherly , there is no one verse that says "the church is for christians only", see

  1 Cor 14: So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand[h]comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"

So here we readily see the[b] church [/b] was the gathering of believers. However, this is not to say an unbeliever is banned completely from going in as indeed we see the above. But it is worthy to note that this is a sharp contrast from today where most "churches" are an all-purpose social gathering spot for pretty much everyone. Cheers!

wyt:
i sugest we hav online bible discussion here in NL,
let pick a date and time. what do you guys think?

Isn't that what we're doing already?

lasgidi4rv:
@ Jesoul: I can understand your apprehension of meeting at the home of "strangers" as you put it. Now of course you feel comfortable with the friends you already hang out with. May I ask if these friends share the same spiritual beliefs as you? Being a part of a church body affords you the opportunity to meet other belivers who share your faith. Iron sharpens Iron, so you may begin the step towards closer relationship by suggesting that there be small group meetings at the church premises. At least that way, you are on neutral ground and then go from there.

2 good points in there.
Of course my friends are christian - as should every christian have christian friends. Secondly, you're right the church is a good place to meet other believers (most of the time, cos these days ). If I were new in a city, the church would be the first place I would head to.

Lastly, you should read through the thread as we've discussed small groups within large churches in detail. Godbless!

away4real:
@ InesQor, please you made the below comments in one of the pages on this threads. Can you provide scriptures to back the statements in bold. Thanks.

The unsaved are meant to be reached OUTSIDE the church, not brought into church to increase attendance, and then cajoled with an altar call and threatened with hell fire into making a decision, and then told to keep paying 10% of their income to guarantee their continuity in God.

It's putting the cart before the horse. I pity the horse, I guess.

Away4real, this is an easy question. And you'll have your answer if you can tell us who the bible says "church" is meant for.

- was church in the scriptures the gathering of christians? (occasionally an outsider would come in)
- or was church the gathering of all kinds of people? saved, unsaved, still deciding etc?

Keep in mind the apostles taught at all kinds of locations as did Jesus - these were not "church" - and church being clearly shown as the gathering of believers to build each other up and serve each other in love.

Zikkyy:
I guess i miss this part. I have to agree its much easier achieving this with a smaller group.

I have one concern though; This approach will be effective if you live in an exclusive area in Victoria Island, Ikoyi or even Ikeja G.R.A where privacy is guaranteed. Let say you live in mushin and you have this small gathering for fellowship. Your neighbours observe and offers to join in, you accept and before you know it you hitting a membership size of say 100, what will be your reaction to such situation?

Do you announce that the membership size is getting too large and achieving the original purpose will be difficult and propose a breakup into more clusters?
If you do this, would you prefer you stick to your old friends (i.e founding members)?   

Lol, see this Zikky. When that time comes, all the options will be weighed and the most reasonable choice will be made.


Analytical,
  long time! how you dey? as always you have shed some good light on the topic. Few comments:

Analytical:
Folks,

Just to make some quick observations:

The scriptures made it clear that the early church not only met from house to house (smaller groups), they actually also met in large congregations using upper rooms (more like halls in the upper floor of buildings), Solomon’s Porch (a large space within the outer court of the temple) that can take a large gathering etc.  They all couldn’t have been living in Solomon’s Porch!

Perhaps it got lost within the thread that the small-churchers are not against large meetings at all. Not at all. However the weekly gathering that we have come to call "church" is what we're saying the size should be as small and manageable as possible. There is plenty of room and examples of mass gatherings as we see Jesus and the apostles doing. And it not so much they must meet in a "house" but moreso the gathering of an intimate group. Hope this makes sense?

Check the Church at Corinth below and notice how distinction is made between when they come together as congregation and when they are in their houses:

1 Cor 11
18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.

20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.

22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.

I don't think the location or making a distinction between house and church is what Paul was going for here . . . but rather saying, "you can eat and drink to excess while at home alone, don't do it while in church" - and church being the operative word connoting "the gathering of believers", not insinuating the church cannot be at a house (as we indeed already know of several in the scriptures that were located at houses).

  I hope I didn't misunderstand you , please correct me if I did. Thanks and Godbless!

Doyin mind yaself oh lol, it wasn't even brutal enough as attested by this:

obinna5000:
I heard "Repo Men" did poorly at the box office. It had a production budget of $32 million and it made only $13 million in worldwide box office.

[quote author=N.I.Gboi link=topic=429243.msg5892637#msg5892637 date=1271269056]@jesoul,my question is why you don't know them personally?[/quote]Because I only see them on sundays? its not possible for me to know 1000+ people intimately. I haven't even finished knowing my own big family well self, talk less of others.

We are talking of true christianity here,right? Jesus went to the house of publicans,tax collectors and other 'wrong' people.did he know them personally? Yes there are many sinners in church today,but what makes you think the other person is an unbeliever when you've made no move to know them?

My brother, you're mixing several things here.

-Church is not for the unsaved. The scriptures are so clear about this. Church is for believers to come together in fellowship and build each other up. It is the modernization of church that has turned it into an all-purpose social gathering for all kinds of people.

-Outside of church, I have zero problem associating with whomever. We are afterall to live like Jesus and be a friend to the destitute and hopeless. We are called to make disciples of all men. And after they are saved - this is when they should be going to church.

Maybe i misjudged what david said,but correct me if am wrong,he seemingly down played God being a loving God when talking about God being a consuming fire.(think it was somewhere about the cinema church)

Okay I think I know where you're refering to now. He said that in response to an article of a church that meets at a movie theater and all they were talking about was "God loves us and wants us to have a good, comfortable life etc etc" the typical prosperity gospel type of mentality. And David was simply trying to show the other side of God - that He is also a consuming fire. Hope that makes sense? thanks!

sleekymag:
JeSoul, i actually went through the whole thread

oh okay my bad sawwrry

though i must have skipped KunleOshob's analysis which u just posted. However, his conclusion (first highlighted bold below) appear to answer the question while his own personal thoughts (second highlighted bold below) is contradictory. It appears he just wants to justify his normal bias against large churches,

I see what you mean and I understand. I believe what Kunle (and many others including myself) are trying to say is that large churches in and of themselves are not wrong - but - in large churches it is almost impossible to fulfill the very purpose for church in the first place - which is intimate fellowship between believers. Not for crusades, praises and worship, offerings etc.

  But the very purpose of church as we see in the very examples of the early church was coming together, sharing in communion and meals, building each other up, serving each other, discussing the bible in depth, and using our gifts to help each other.

The whole point of this thread is that the above ^^ is almost impossible to do effectively in a large church setting. And in light of that, what is the point of having a big church in the first place? I hope this makes sense. Thanks!

I don't even need to add anything, aletheia you have gone where I was going to go and done way better.

Oga Deepsight, don't you see how this is coming off?

-you say the gospel of John has been corrupted.

-but yet you quote from it when it supports your position

-but when it is quoted where is contradicts your belief, it should be taken with a grain of salt

so in essence, we should only read the entire bible literally where it suits you? and dismiss the other parts that don't as corrupted or symbolic? dude, like seriously? 

^claiming? lol, David what planet do you live on? Pasitor Jo Agbaje is a well known pastor of CEC here on NL.
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-423566.0.html

sleekymag:
Some of these churches we see as big churches today also have these cell fellowship structures in place. In fact, the leadership of one that i attend always emphasizes on the importance of being a member of the house fellowship as its virtually impossible for him to know the state of the flock (members), but the house fellowship structure provides that platform, and you can exhort, ask questions etc. In the old testament, when Moses was leading the entire people of Israel, his father in-law told him to appoint leaders over the people (leaders of ten, leaders of hundreds, of thousands and so on), it all makes the job easier and allows for easy leadership-followership experience.

Sleekymag, you obviously didn't read the first page. House fellowships have been discussed throughout the thread in fact

KunleOshob:
The large size of churches we have today actually don't have any scriptural basis, however i would not condem it as wrong but true fellowship is lacking in churches of such large size. In the early churches they used to share meals, there was always feasting which formed an essential part of the fellowship but today it is completely missing except for the occassional holy communion were tiny rations of bread and "wine"[as opposed to full meals] are given out in observation of Jesus commandment. The mordern church as tried to re-enact the close knit fellowship which the early church had through house fellowships and house cells but the sharing of meals is mostly missing in these fellowships and some of them still collect "offerings" which they re-mit to the church for what ever purpose. But large congregations [not churches] are not entirely unscriptural as Jesus used to have several open air sermons in which thousands were recorded to attend. A very obvious example was when Jesus fed 5,000 men after one of his sermons. In summary i won't condenm large church congregations as long as they provide a platform for true fellowship, but then again large congregations are unnecessary as i don't see any benefit in it for the congregation themselves apart from the intituitional church that stands to make more money from a larger congregation.

nuclearboy:
WOFers' are not really smudges! They are more like thick black paint over a vehicle windscreen with the words - "minimum speed 100MPH. Just trust in pastor chris" - on the opaque interior of the glass. Can you imagine a supposed pastor misapplying the Bible and deliberately changing the meaning of God's Word. We used to say Muslims derailed threads with distraction - this is mastery at its peak and they have nothing on him! I'm greater than John. Only me has forgiveness. Others cannot be forgiven. You're insulting me by correcting me. So why didn't Peter say same when Paul corrected him? And no wonder your pastors are having children from all over their congregations. Soon too, banks will ask if you are CE so they know if they are safe employing you

Rubbish! I wish I could put a box of christmas bangers inside your nostrils and set them off.

And yes, Jesoul, EVERYTHING JESUS SAID BEFORE HIS RESURRECTION IS OFF NO IMPORT TODAY because there is better revelation knowledge now! . Shey the Bible said "Jesus wept" abi? Today, He would outright faint

Kai! I felt the shockwaves from that lashing    Nuclearboy, no make them vex you too much ehn. But that "I am greater than John" quote was really . . . just wow . . . may God have mercy.