₦airaland Forum

I really love what i am seeing from Denver. As for the Clippers it never ever pays to cheat the process.

Nauttyprof:
I will stop this back and forth with you as I can see that you have just chosen to be one sided in your thoughts and all you quote from the Bible has nothing to support his wrong view on virginity.

When it comes to TRUTH, it is COMPLETE in every sense, when tested, questioned and examined, it does not change from the TRUTH. The word of God is that TRUTH and not your opinion or view.

Your problem is that you believe so much in him than going through your Bible to study.

Pure in heart does not translate to being pure or the virginity he brought to it.

Bible says Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God. Maybe you should also read Psalm 24 to understand what Jesus meant. We use verses in the Bible to explain another and not giving it your own thoughts process. Bible alone speaks.

Finally, when the Bible says study to show thyself approved it never meant that you impose your thoughts on His word. Rather His words are to work on you which will achieve a workman that is not ashamed as stated in 2 Timothy 2:15. However, see 2 Timothy 3:16-17 to better understand 2 Timothy 2:15 you quoted.

It is teachings like his that brought in many doctrines causing issues because it was gotten from reasoning and not allowing the word alone to speak.

I won't respond to any comment from you as you are bent on upholding error than what the Bible says. Virginity won't make you see God but what Jesus said Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God. Being pure in heart facilitates your relationship with God.

N.B I do not in anyway belittle the importance of virginity as I once passed through that phase but my point remains that only the Bible should speak. You could be a virgin and still be far away from God because it is only the pure in heart that will see God which is what you can't personally do except by the help of the Holy spirit working in your heart.

Ì do not know the man from Adam, neither have i ever had the same opinion as he just stated. But i can see through my own ignorance and agree that another human had a thought that i have never considered and simply agree that he has a point. The fact that you can blatantly paint anybody with the brush of he is against the scripture without using scriptural principles says more about you than him. The bible admonishes us to test every spirit, not accept or reject every spirit, but to test them and see if they are in line with God.



PS:
There was an island in the pacific that missionaries went to speak the word to, on getting there they found out that the animal Sheep does not exist in that island. After staying for a while they also observed that the animal that the people over there value the most is the Pig. So when it came time to try speaking the Gospel to them in all the places the bible says sheep they had to replace it with Pig for just that society.
The question thereof is were they wrong in making those changes? The bible in no were used pigs in a positive language but for those people that was their most cherished possesion.
It is people like you who when they had the story did not even bother to ask whether the message of Jesus was heard, but first started berating the missionaries for daring to change not the message but a word.

The Gospel message is simple Christ has died for our salvation and through him we are free. IMHO anyway it takes a man to get to that salvation is justifiable unlike the people of the world out target as christians is not the means, but the end goal. So if an individual needs an habit to facilitate his relationship with God, as far as the Gospel is concerned that person is doing. Condeming without even first understanding what you condemn is just a shame.

Nauttyprof:
Why are you defending a man above the Bible? Are you saying his words are right than what the Bible says?

Do you also know that he quoted wrongly too? Or do you want to tell me he is right biblically by what he quoted?

Being pure and being pure in heart, are they the same?

You are the one who didn't weigh every possibilities which is why he is also wrong because I have also shown you the other side of a virgin too.

Besides, why do you exalt man above God. Have you read the Bible where it was written about some set of people known as Bereans? Do you know why this was included? It is a lesson for us not to swallow everything said no matter the person who made such statement simply because man is fallible (and this does not exclude me).

Back to the subject matter, do you know that the TRUTH when tested in every angle remains the TRUTH and does not change at all? But facts, falsehood or lies can be tested and will change. This is why I said he shared his view rather than stick to the Bible. You can never teach the Bible and still go wrong.

So, please all I want to know now is this:

1. Are all virgins pure as he has painted it and by their virginity facilitates their relationship with God?

2. Does being pure in heart mean virginity? OR are all virgins pure in heart?

3. If virginity facilitates their relationship with God, what happens to the non-virgins? Are they far from God because of their status of not being 'pure' (as he puts it in his message)?

Finally, dictates of the scripture carries just one meaning which is the Author's intended meaning. The Holyspirit is never the author of confusion by coming up with something else outside the scripture.

Now I know your problem, the word facilitate is what it seems you don't understand, when something facilitate it means that not all will need it. If you go to an exam and there is a facilitator available, some persons during the course of the exam will have issues and therefore need the help of said facilitator while others may not have any issues. As for where is it in the scriptures James clearly tells us that we can see a persons faith through his works, a lot of people can be doing the same works and still be not be in right with God, that does not negate the fact that there are people whose works (in this case virginity) matches their faith (a life in Christ).

As for scriptural absolutes you have once again failed to even grasp the whole picture. The Bible clearly states thou shall not kill. So if a Christian soldier or cop is in the position where they have no other choice but to kill a mass murderer, is that not also allowed.

PS:
The scriptures encourages us to study as that is what makes us approved, when a topic comes up that brings up an area with differing views from you, it is a biblical mandate that Christians should study and find out more. This idea of always depending on what you think you know is not God's desire for us.
If more Christians even bother to study, maybe most of this fake doctrines flying up and down might have been reduced.

Nauttyprof:
What due diligence do you want me to give to an error which anybody is prone to as a man?

Tell me how about virgins who watch adult movies, engage in kissing, gossip, backbiting and several other sins but just didn't do the penetration?

So, explain to me if PURE IN HEART as stated in the scripture is same as what he stated and if being a virgin means you are pure in heart.

Following your logic all virgins are not pure of heart, you can even extend it to say every single virgin who has ever lived cannot be pure of heart (which also includes Jesus).
You are simply making an assumption that nobody can follow the dictates of the scriptures with the guidance of the holy spirit. What of if there was only one person in the congregation who is a virgin and also does not dwell on immoral thoughts does the message now fly.

You should just admit that you thought only of people who kept the outward show of virginity, but are immoral in more ways than one, and did not even consider that negligible percentage of persons who have by the grace of God kept themselves inline with Gods will. Which are the people he is encouraging by telling them they are not doing it for humans but for God.
When trying to make corrections try as much as possible to consider every possibility instead of just assuming the worst about every single person

PS: He never said virginity is a requirement, he said it can 'facilitate'.

Nauttyprof:
It is you who failed to comprehend his teaching and have chosen to uphold man than God's word. Please, when you read the post again and digest EVERYTHING and not just come back with male virginity then, maybe you will understand clearly.

I still keep asking you the same question? Point out where in my post I mentioned virginity is for ladies alone. What's your issue with male virginity.

Please, don't come up with the nonsense facilitation explanation as if you are discussing with a kid. He spoke his view and it does not conform to the Bible simple.

Where in the Bible does virginity facilitates relationship with God? Also, what happens with the non-virgin? Point out this from the Bible and please, don't come back with an explanation that holds no water all in the name of defending a man who is FALLIBLE.

It seems you have a penchant for speaking without considering possibilities. You say virginity does not facilitate a relationship with God. I say it can be a tool that helps you develop a skill/ability which helps you in your Christian race ergo facilitates.
Simply follow the logic if you are patient enough to even try.

For a Christian to be a virgin especially in the time that we are in, means at the very least that said individual has a modicum of self discipline/self control. So that self discipline/self control which the individual has developed from staying away from sexual immortality can be applied in every part of the Christian race, from helping you to keep a bridled tongue, keeping your temper in check and making sure it does not lead you into sin e.t.c.
All you failed to do after reading his teaching is to even try to consider how the process of keeping their virginity can help a person develop basic foundations to build their Christian life.
As a Christian when you see a teaching you don't understand or agree with, the first thing to do, is either think it through or study a bit to see if the teaching holds any water, as Paul admonishes us in the scriptures.
condemning it as a deviation from biblical doctrine without any due diligence on your part is a sign of a Christian who still feeds on milk as Paul put it.

Afonjacoward:
Freeze a man that can't handle his own marriage but instead is doing Baby Mama stuff now has the guts to counter what someone who has been married for over 30yrs said.
Daddy freeze you are plain stupid hoohaa.

Does your assertion include people like Chris?

awoo47:
actually Martin Luther(founder of today Pentecostal churches) was excommunicated and later arrested.
The simple thing is you'll face opposition to the fullest capacity but only time can tell....Nd by time i mean centuries

Martin Luther did not found the Pentecostal churches. He started Protestant churches instead.

Nauttyprof:
Can you please stop this nonsense and go do something else?

Did you see anywhere in my post where I referred to only ladies as being virgin?

If you don't understand the reason for my comment, please find something else to do or comment separately without mentioning me. I don't understand the point you are trying to prove.

Please, point to me where in the Bible it says that virginity facilitates your relationship with God and also tell me what then happens to the non-virgin, are they now far away from God and God won't have any relationship with them?

Since you seems to know beyond the Bible and the priest words are more important than the position of the Bible?

Next time, try understand my first comment and see who I mentioned first before bringing the matter of men being virgin to this discussion.

The priest never said virginity is the one and be all, it seems you have failed to comprehend his teaching. In a nutshell he is saying the teaching of avoiding premarital sex is for both male and female children, also keeping your self whole until the marriage bed is not a gift to your spouse but a testament to your relationship with God.
When he talks facilitating, he is talking about those who are lucky to have known Christ as kids(whether male or female) and have decided to to keep all his teachings, and not hide under the rock of, virginity is only required of women not men to indulge in sexual immortality.

Ategberoson:
virginity is ladies dignity and value and if that is taken away, what's worth

if not that western world have manipulate our societal values and cultures, does it even make sense to open legs for a man that has not show commitment in the relationship?

Now it is about cultural values, the priest is talking from a Christian perspective and as far as the Bible is concerned there is no difference between the standards expected of a man or a woman.
If you are a traditionalist, then the idea that only women are required to be virgins is Paramount. but if you are a Christian that idea is wrong because both women and men are called to live above sexual immortality. So I will advice you to pick a lane either Christian or traditional and stick with it.
This idea of jumping to and fro from Christian and traditional ideology whenever we want validation of our stance on a matter, is one of the biggest issues in Nigerian Christianity

djon78:
That's why a lot of married. Men are sleeping around.
They don't take marriage vows serious.
Because nothing makes a man have no self control than being with a woman that has no control too.

The fact that you believe people repeatedly break their marriage vows because of what their spouse did is laughable.
Men and women simply chose to commit adultery because they want to, all these excuses are just what they are excuses.
People should at least own their choices and stop behaving like Adam and blaming others for what they decided to do.

Ategberoson:
human value had always been determined by the same Human

God had created you, value is a self/collective impression of ourselves


a non virgin lady to me has no marital value because her dignity (hymen) had been stolen/exploited by trick or taken away from her because of her ignorance/naivety

In simple terms all women who are non virgins are are worthless in the sight of man and God and are all going to hell?




For someone who believes in God to say that what God thinks of a person does not matter, but what other people think of that person is the benchmark to determining how a person should live their life makes me wonder if you even understand the concept of the Christian God at all.
In case you forgot as far as the people in the gospel were concerned, Jesus was worthless, that is why they chose a criminal over him.
If you believe in God then worth and value is viewed through his lenses and nothing else

Ategberoson:
virginity has nothing to do with God but it has a lot to do with pride and dignity


it's natural phenomenon that lady has hymen while men doesn't.


what's the essence of paying Bride price if we are canvassing to throw the dignity and value of lady away


virginity portrait the dignity and value of a woman and if a woman don't have it then her marriage bride price should come with discount

Virginity has nothing to do with God but both formication and adultery are sins. Please can you share where you got this teaching from ( if you got it from the bible) so that we all can learn

djon78:
A man has a higher chance of being faithful to a virgin woman than to a non virgin woman.
That's as plain out there
A man married to a non virgin woman can easily sleep around.
A virgin woman has a higher chance of having a faithful man as a husband.


The level of sexual promiscuity this days is alarming. People live now like dogs.
And any sexually immoral person has no place in God or his kingdom

So at judgement day, according to your own doctrine it is allowed for all men to state that the reason they committed adultery repeatedly, was because they married a non virgin?

Ategberoson:
you know nothing bro. women are subject in the hands of men, their dignity and value is our pride and what made a man value the female gender


when a lady doesn't have dignity and value, she's totally empty bro

Who determines a persons value, you or God?

Nauttyprof:
Can you first read the post and understand why I responded that way before forming unnecessary oversabi?

If you don't have the time to even read the post at least the subject you clicked on says a lot about its content.

So, please don't question me by derailing from the subject.

There is no where in the Bible only christian women are admonished to keep their virginity while Christian men are exempted. That is why the priest said parents should not teach 'only' their daughters about virginity but include their sons in said teaching. How this statement differs from biblical doctrine as you claimed is what I don't understand.

PS
If you don't understand how the word 'only' is used in the priest statement then reread it before jumping the gun and posting untrue statements.

It seems like Giannis just wants to do it all by himself today

Nauttyprof:
Just tired of how men of God keep teaching based on their own view instead of giving Bible based teachings.

Tell a lady to keep her virginity based on what the Bible says. Don't add any nonsense to it all in the name of passing a point.

So only women commit sin by having premarital sex?

mattfeuter:
Oga, so what’s your point ? We already know all these you typed.

You said Siakam is not “Top Tier” and not average. Which is it?? You can’t even pick a side.

Ps: your attempt at sarcasm was lame.

There is above average bro. Like B students are not exceptional but there are also not C students are they. An average player is not even an all-star. guys like Tim Hardaway, P Beverly, Steven Adams etc are then what if you call Siakam average. The simple question is, are these other guys then bums? because that is the only category after average

I really like how Sir Charles speaks in these times, he has balls and common sense.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/charles-barkley-reacts-to-nba-suspending-playoffs-to-protest-jacob-blake-shooting

SIRcumalot:
Are these guys (the players) going to lose any money whatsoever?
I doubt it,even the guys that didn't get into the bubble still got their money.

That next CBA contract negotiations go be like world war 3.

The problem for the nba in CBA negotiations unlike the nfl is that the big stars in the nba will all have alternatives. I remember during the last lock out that some of the marquee players had tentative lucrative deals with european teams, in case the season did not hold.
Last last IMHO basketball is so global now that i think most of the big players can hold owners to ransom because they can easily get alternative employers and also because the NBA is a star driven league

Dame Lillard listed as out of Game 5. Lakers for the gentleman sweep

Giannis as DPOY, he absolutely deserves this award (IMHO he should have also won it last year).

A40:
Like I always say a made 2 is better than a missed 3. Sometimes you have to take what the defense gives you and such if it's uncontested 2's then you take it.

I'm not saying you go full DeRozan or Ben Simmons but unless you're Steph Curry level as a #1 option I don't think you should be taking more than 5-7 3 pointers in the playoffs. Especially when the first 2 or 3 don't fall.

As a Rockets fan I would have gone batshit crazy that year they missed 27 straight 3's

Spot on

Roland17:
CP3 and the mid range..

He is showing that all that analytics talk is bulljive. The mid range is a lost art and CP3 just painted another master piece with it Respect.

A40:
This Khris Middleton guy is dreadful. Christttt

Asssin, he is nothing but a low end 3rd best player getting paid as a high end 2nd best player of a championship caliber team. Will not begrude him his dough but the Bucks wiffed with that contract.

chic2pimp:
He most certainly won't get outstandingly better than He currently His. If He does,then we are looking at our GOAT. He'll no doubt get better however, that's a given. How much better is up for debate. I don't think His PPG would go through the roof but His efficiency will no doubt get better and so will other aspects of His game.

He also does not need to get that bigger. The Lad is already a unit as it is. Converting His current Baby fat into Lean muscle would be the objective and then maybe adding a bit more muscle down the line.

Increasing his muscle mass will give him another whole dimension, one thing i noticed about him is his willingness to post smaller players when they switch on him in the paint add this to his ability of finishing through contact, you have another aspect for opposition coaches to worry about.

P.S: It sometimes surprises me that luka is willing to post up smaller players, while big men like Embiid, KAT, even AD sometimes run away from it and have to be reminded to get their butts in the post especially against smaller players.

steady986:
Who told you that? Might not be 21 per se, but 22-23. If you watch soccer you'd know what I'm talking about. There are a lot of players that did pretty well at their very young ages, playing in big clubs, but as they approached their mid 20s they became inexplicably bad, and then they got shipped off to smaller teams, and they remain in smaller teams till they retire.

There are also some who peak in their late 20s to early 30s

Name a soccer player that peakee in their 20's? What is more common is where people overhype a player in his teens by overlooking glaring gaps in their skill set and football IQ, all in the name of they are the next this or the next that e.g Bojan, Dos Santos, Morata, Yohan Gorcuff etc.
When evaluating young prospects in sports the key thing that you look for is their IQ and attitude not speed or athleticism or flashy product.

steady986:
Improvement is not really about age, it's more about exposure and experience. Luka is 21 but has been playing professional basketball for about 5 years. How are we sure he hasn't reached his peak?

No athlete peaks at 21 yrs old whose natural life span ends in their 30's, unless they become lazy and their work ethic drops. History shows that a large majority of athletes peak in terms of performance in the mid and 20's.
Luka still has a lot to improve and IMHO he has not even gotten to that stage where there is complete synergy amongst his athletic ability, Basketball IQ and experience.

This playoffs are introducing the world to guys who are bonafide number 1's on a championship team. D Michell, J Tatum, and Luka.
The nba is in good hands going forward as long as these guys keep improving baring injuries.

Roland17:
Baba, I don’t think so. I wrote a detailed post about this even before he moved to LA. The man has developed a bad habit that he is now unable to shake off. Some say it’s because of his injury but I was convinced he was heading the wrong path trying to cheat on offense because of his new found love for jacking up threes.

Some players just dont have that ice in their veins when it matters. PG13 just keeps shrinking game by game.
As for Luka, he is not just special he also has a knack for the big plays

benji93:
Only recently? How recently? You mean as recent as the 80s? . Where were you when the centers like Kareem, Hakeem, Shaq e.t.c were the go to offensively. I included Shaq cos he played in the 90s too. But come to think of it, you may not be wrong. We can only mention a handful of centers who were great offensively. .We can not say the same for centers generally.

I will not say a handful, there are about 15-16 players who have played the Center position (even if not solely the 5 like Duncan) who are in the top 50 of the NBA in points scored.

SIRcumalot:
he threatened to remain in Europe if any other team aside from Dallas drafted him..that was the story then.

Actually he never said that, but the American press implied that as one of the options open to him especially when it came out that his father and the Kings GM had some personal beef.
His combo with Booker would have been fun to watch on offense though... But they won't be stopping anyone on defense