haekymbahd:

Exodus 6
3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by My [a]name the Lord [Yahweh] I did not make Myself known to them [in acts and great miracles].(A)


Now it is clear that God appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty.


You compared Isaiah 10:21 to Isaiah 9:6 that is why we Muslims will rather read our Quran in Arabic as it was revealed rather than translated version.


In my Bible I saw I don't know your version
Isaiah 10
21 A remnant will return [Shear-jashub, name of Isaiah's son], a remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.

Isaiah 9:6
6For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given; and the government shall be upon His shoulder, and His name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father [of Eternity], Prince of Peace.(C)

In Isaiah 20: 21 we have the definite article The (The Mighty God)

In Isaiah 9:6 we don't have the definite article "the". (Mighty God).

So read the Bible in its original language which it was written I am sure you will understand me better.

Allah means The God

Illah- means god


Hope you see the difference.

Infact while on earth Jesus was not called Father or God.

Mathew 23
9 And do not call anyone [in the church] on earth father, for you have one Father, Who is in heaven

have you read the original translation? It's obvious you have not you would know that
in both Isaiah 9vv6 and isaiah 10vv21 there is not definite article.
Bible translations added "The" to it for grammatical correction in english.

In Israel there is only one that bear the title "mighty God"and that is yahweh.

Yahweh was called both "Almighty" and "the mighty God" it all depends on how he is revealed.

Jesus is the father of the new human race just as Adam was the father of the old human race.
Jesus didnt come to call himself God he infact his this identity from men.

Yes judges in israel are sometimes called gods because stand as God's representative but take note such is only figurative for example calling a man lion does not really mean he is a lion, but for "The messiah" what he was called was not figurative.
But in Israel there is only one who is called "the mighty God" and that is yahweh but the messiah in Isaiah is called the mighty God.

Isaiah 10:21
The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.



Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

haekymbahd:
Now on the issue of the word 'God' let's explore which God Jesus is...
John 10
32 Jesus said to them, My Father has enabled Me to do many good deeds. [I have shown many acts of mercy in your presence.] For which of these do you mean to stone Me?

33 The Jews replied, We are not going to stone You for a good act, but for blasphemy, because You, a mere Man, make Yourself [out to be] God.

34Jesus answered, Is it not written in your Law, I said, You are gods?(C)

35So men are called gods [by the Law], men to whom God's message came--and the Scripture cannot be set aside or cancelled or broken or annulled--

36[If that is true] do you say of the One Whom the Father consecrated and dedicated and set apart for Himself and sent into the world, You are blaspheming, because I said, I am the Son of God?


Now Jesus was talking about psalm 82 am I right about that.

Psalm 82
1 GOD STANDS in the assembly [of the representatives] of God; in the midst of the magistrates or judges He gives judgment [as] among the gods.
3 Do justice to the weak (poor) and fatherless; maintain the rights of the afflicted and needy.

4 Deliver the poor and needy; rescue them out of the hand of the wicked.

6 I said, You are gods [since you judge on My behalf, as My representatives]; indeed, all of you are children of the Most High.(A)

7But you shall die as men and fall as one of the princes.

8Arise, O God, judge the earth! For to You belong all the nations



Now is Jesus GOD or amongst the gods.

From the verse you quoted I saw mighty God and not Almighty God.

Is there a difference between GOD and God according to psalm 82.

Why did Jesus not call himself God but son of God.

haekymbahd:
The meaning of messiah in Hebrew in my my Google is "the annointed one" and not God as you claim

[b]Isaiah 61
1 THE SPIRIT of the Lord God is upon me, because [b]the Lord has anointed and qualified me to preach the Gospel of good tidings to the meek, the poor, and afflicted; He has sent me to bind up and heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the [physical and spiritual] captives and the opening of the prison and of the eyes to those who are bound,([/b][/b]

2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord [the year of His favor] [a]and the day of vengeance of our God, to comfort all who mourn,(B)


Who annointed Jesus?

Yes messiah means the anointed one but there is one "messiah that is special"
"This messiah" is who would bring salvation to the Jews and the rest of the world according to the jewish scriptures.

Isaiah 9:6-7 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.



Every king of Israel is called the LORD'S anointed and according to Isaiah this particular anointed of God is also God.
Who anointed the messiah? It is God the father.

Do you know the word messiah is hebrew language from hebrew scriptures?

According to the hebrew scriptures the messiah is God.

Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom to order it and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this
ישעה 9:7 Hebrew OT: Westminster Leningrad Codex
[לְמַרְבֵּה כ] (לְמַרְבֵּ֨ה ק) הַמִּשְׂרָ֜ה וּלְשָׁלֹ֣ום אֵֽין־קֵ֗ץ עַל־כִּסֵּ֤א דָוִד֙ וְעַל־מַמְלַכְתֹּ֔ו לְהָכִ֤ין אֹתָהּ֙ וּֽלְסַעֲדָ֔הּ בְּמִשְׁפָּ֖ט וּבִצְדָקָ֑ה מֵעַתָּה֙ וְעַד־עֹולָ֔ם קִנְאַ֛ת יְהוָ֥ה צְבָאֹ֖ות תַּעֲשֶׂה־זֹּֽאת׃

haekymbahd:
Islam is the only non-christianic religion that believes Jesus was the messiah and was sent by God but he himself is not Almighty God.

The onus is on you to tell us whether the Jesus that came in flesh was the Almighty God himself then we will know who the antichrist is..

Mind you Jesus never named any religion be it : Nazarenes, ebionites, christians, Jehova witness, or Islam

We are all on a clean slate table the claim for your, let others table their let's see who the antichrist is..

Many penticostals/charismatic are bereft of scriptural knowledge, they often rely on experience from dreams or experience, and also speaking of tongues doesnt make one a Christian.

The error of penticostalism/charismatic is placing experience above or at par with scriptures.

For Christians, scripture is the authority,

Pentecostalism is a fairly modern movement within Christianity that can be traced back to the Holiness movement in the Methodist Church. A major focus of Pentecostal churches is Holy Spirit baptism as evidenced by speaking in tongues. There are approximately 170 different denominations that identify themselves as Pentecostal.

Toward the end of the 19th century, there was a dramatic rise in religious fervor as various groups anticipated the end of history and the return of Christ in 1900. Much of this fervor was driven by the revival meetings held by those in the Holiness movement, and there were occasional reports of people speaking in tongues. The first widespread use of tongues was at a revival in Topeka, Kansas, in January 1900, led by Charles Parham. Agnes Ozman, a Methodist, began to speak in tongues, and others in the meeting eventually followed suit. In 1906, a series of revival meetings on Azusa Street in Los Angeles led to a widespread experience of tongues-speaking, which spread to many parts of the country. The meetings were led by William Seymour, one of Charles Parham’s students. Parham and Seymour eventually parted ways, because Parham believed many of the manifestations of Azusa Street were of the flesh, or perhaps even demonic. By 1909, Seymour had excluded all but African-Americans from holding office in the mission, and the ministry eventually faded into history.

Though the Azusa Street mission had a brief life, its impact on the Pentecostal movement has been a lasting one. Many new churches and missions were founded across America which carried the new emphasis on seeking the baptism of the Spirit as evidenced by speaking in tongues. Today, there are over 200,000,000 denominational Pentecostals and another 200,000,000 who identify themselves as Pentecostal or charismatic in mainline churches.

There are three main divisions within the Pentecostal movement. The original group which came out of the Holiness churches (Methodist and Nazarene), sees three progressive steps in the life of a believer which indicate growth and blessing. The first step is justification, which is the forgiveness of sins that comes from putting faith in Jesus Christ. The second step is sanctification, or the second blessing, which was first taught by John Wesley in his “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection” (1766). The essence of this doctrine is an inner purity of heart and an infusion of power, whereby the believer no longer practices sin. This is sometimes followed by the third step, the “baptism of the Spirit,” as evidenced by speaking in tongues or other signs. The Church of God in Christ and the Church of God, Cleveland, Tennessee, are two major denominations in this group.

The second division is comprised of those who came out of a Baptist background, but were heavily influenced by the Holiness revivals of the late 1800s. The Assemblies of God was founded in 1914 under the leadership of Eudorus N. Bell, who had been a Southern Baptist pastor. The key difference in doctrine for this group is that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is available for anyone, regardless of attaining sanctification.

The third division is the Oneness Pentecostals. At the meeting which formed the Church of God in Christ (1914), there was intense debate over Trinitarian doctrine. While the majority of Holiness believers held to the traditional belief in the Trinity, there was a growing group which held to a modalist belief and affirmed that baptism should be done in Jesus’ name only. Another tenet of this group is the necessity of speaking in tongues as evidence of salvation. This group was to form the United Pentecostal Church and the Apostolic Pentecostal Church, among others.

What are we to make of this movement? The early Holiness believers recognized that Christianity ought to result in visible changes in a person’s life. The focus of many early prayer meetings was to “throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles” (Hebrews 12:1). These earnest believers wanted to run their race faithfully and were seeking God’s help to do so. As that earnestness gave way to emotional religious fervor, doctrines were developed to explain and support the emotions and experiences. For many today, the emphasis is on the excitement, the experience, or the new word of prophecy. Some of the questionable foundations laid by John Wesley (e.g., a second blessing of perfection) paved the way for later Pentecostal doctrines of new works of the Spirit. Some Pentecostals allow experience to trump scriptural teaching and attempt to conform Scripture to what they “know by experience.” But fervent experience, even when it involves miracles, is not the test of true faith (see Matthew 7:22–23). Peter affirmed the value of Scripture over experience when he said, “We also have a more sure Word of prophecy, to which you do well to take heed, as to a light that shines in a dark place”

I have heard people say, oh the religion or ideology is not bad but it is the people that practice it, oh islam is ok, but just some extremist.

Jesus said a good tree does not bring forth corrupt fruit.

Islam is a religious system begun in the seventh century by Muhammad. Muslims follow the teachings of the Qur’an and strive to keep the Five Pillars.



The History of Islam
In the seventh century, Muhammad claimed the angel Gabriel visited him. During these angelic visitations, which continued for about 23 years until Muhammad’s death, the angel purportedly revealed to Muhammad the words of Allah (the Arabic word for “God” used by Muslims). These dictated revelations compose the Qur'an, Islam’s holy book. Islam means “submission,” deriving from a root word that means “peace.” The word Muslim means “one who submits to Allah.”

The Doctrine of Islam
Muslims summarize their doctrine in six articles of faith:
1. Belief in one Allah: Muslims believe Allah is one, eternal, creator, and sovereign.
2. Belief in the angels
3. Belief in the prophets: The prophets include the biblical prophets but end with Muhammad as Allah’s final prophet.
4. Belief in the revelations of Allah: Muslims accept certain portions of the Bible, such as the Torah and the Gospels. They believe the Qur'an is the preexistent, perfect word of Allah.
5. Belief in the last day of judgment and the hereafter: Everyone will be resurrected for judgment into either paradise or hell.
6. Belief in predestination: Muslims believe Allah has decreed everything that will happen. Muslims testify to Allah’s sovereignty with their frequent phrase, inshallah, meaning, “if God wills.”

The Five Pillars of Islam
These five tenets compose the framework of obedience for Muslims:
1. The testimony of faith (shahada): “la ilaha illa allah. Muhammad rasul Allah.” This means, “There is no deity but Allah. Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” A person can convert to Islam by stating this creed. The shahada shows that a Muslim believes in Allah alone as deity and believes that Muhammad reveals Allah.
2. Prayer (salat): Five ritual prayers must be performed every day.
3. Giving (zakat): This almsgiving is a certain percentage given once a year.
4. Fasting (sawm): Muslims fast during Ramadan in the ninth month of the Islamic calendar. They must not eat or drink from dawn until sunset.
5. Pilgrimage (hajj): If physically and financially possible, a Muslim must make the pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia at least once. The hajj is performed in the twelfth month of the Islamic calendar.

A Muslim’s entrance into paradise hinges on obedience to these Five Pillars. Still, Allah may reject them. Even Muhammad was not sure whether Allah would admit him to paradise (Surah 46:9; Hadith 5.266).

An Evaluation of Islam
Compared to Christianity, Islam has some similarities but significant differences. Like Christianity, Islam is monotheistic. However, Muslims reject the Trinity—that God has revealed Himself as one in three Persons: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Muslims claim that Jesus was one of the most important prophets—not God’s Son. Islam asserts that Jesus, though born of a virgin, was created like Adam. Muslims do not believe Jesus died on the cross. They do not understand why Allah would allow His prophet Isa (the Islamic word for "Jesus" to die a torturous death. Yet the Bible shows how the death of the perfect Son of God was essential to pay for the sins of the world (Isaiah 53:5-6; John 3:16; 14:6; 1 Peter 2:24).

Islam teaches that the Qur'an is the final authority and the last revelation of Allah. The Bible, however, was completed in the first century with the Book of Revelation. The Bible warns against anyone adding to or subtracting from God’s Word (Deuteronomy 4:2; Proverbs 30:6; Galatians 1:6-12; Revelation 22:18). The Qur’an, as a claimed addition to God’s Word, directly disobeys God’s command.

Muslims believe that paradise can be earned through keeping the Five Pillars. The Bible, in contrast, reveals that sinful man can never measure up to the holy God (Romans 3:23; 6:23). Only by God’s grace may sinners be saved through repentant faith in Jesus (Acts 20:21; Ephesians 2:8-9).

Because of these essential differences and contradictions, Islam and Christianity cannot both be true. The Bible and Qur’an cannot both be God’s Word. The truth has eternal consequences.

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world” (1 John 4:1-4; see also John 3:35-36).

Feminism was invented by the occult society is counter the Christian world view.
In the witch craft and occult the female is worshiped as the way to divinity as opposed to christianity that presents Jesus as the way to salvation.

The Roman catholic religion worshipp mary the queen of heaven as an equal with Christ, this is nothing but the sacred feminine worship.

The obelisk represent the male sexual organ called the phallus, and also the pyramid, in the occult the female is actually the head of the male which is a reversal of Christianity.

This below is the symbol of feminism
Also note the alchemy symbol below, the upside down cross means a reversal of christianity, it is a symbol of rebellion.

It is a symbol that represent mocking Christ and his teachings.

This is obviously what feminism represent and that is what the symbol is.

Wqy

Op

A Christian leader is Christian who replicate Christ type of leadership.

What are the qualities of Christ leadership?
Faithfulness
Love,
Righteousness/impartiality
Meekness
Temperance
Kindness
Servitude (having the mind to serve and not to be served)
The christ leadership is the type a Christian man has to demonstrate in the church and home.

In the family, the husband should replicate such type of leadership so that even if his wife is an unbeliever she would be won without a word so, how much more a Christian wife?

Ephesians 5:25, 28-29 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:

A husband must cherish and nourish his wife giving her hope and joy,

Nourishment in this chase is not just about money but include emotional and metal nourishment.

A Christian husband is faithful, dependent,helps, listens and carry his wife along.

1 Peter 3:7
Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

A Christian husband should understand and honors his wife, as a weaker vessel, and acknowledged her as their also of the grace life.

Peter acknowledged this fact that men and women are not equal biologically, women are weaker vessel and some men know this, use this to their advantage but a Christian husband should not do this but should honor his wife, this will make her very confident both in herself and in the husband.

Romantic?
Should a Christian man be romantic towards his wife?
Yes, yes, yes,

The book of songs of Solomon is a whole book of love expression between a man and his spouse, but as a man you will have to understand wife's love language, which of course, should be in his courtship.
Lastly, A Christian husband should enjoy his marriage.
Shallom

Dtruthspeaker:


This is what I tell my Catholic people, it is Written "Come to Me, all ye... : If thou will walk before Me"

Even Peter and Mary never said "come to me"

They most important thing is that they show that they do not want to go to God themselves.

But it is no different from those who claim to go to God but they flee from His Commandments.

yeap, God's commandments are good and righteous because he is good and righteous.

Catholics who pray to mary or any other saints do not believe that faith alone in the name of Jesus is what saves.
Jesus is the only way not mary, not micheal not anyother



John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

You that go through another way, like mary, other saints,prophets, general overseers,good works, Angels, church or organisation you are regarded as a theif.

John 10:1
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

Jesus is the door not a door

John 10:7
Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.

John 10:9
I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

There is only name given to men whereby we shall be saved.

Acts 4:12
Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Salvation is strictly by grace through faith in Jesus only.

Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Cc. Nancy, Benedictus, maxD, ,dappa,Bishopkingsely, Dtruthspeaker, kobojunkie and everybody else

Qwt

obi4eze:
Of course it is. May God deliver the youths of nowadays.

amen bro,

Op

Watch this video on the filth of bbNaija.

Bbn an immoral and satanic show


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1tb2aICKsw

Article by John Piper
Founder & Teacher, desiringGod.org

John Piper, “Satan’s Design in Reversing Male Leadership Role,” The Standard 73:11 (December 1983): 33, 35. Alvera and Berekely Micklesen responded with, “Questions from the Garden: Response from the Mickelsens,” The Standard 73:11 (December 1983).

Our existence as male and female commits us to different responsibilities of leadership in relation to each other. One way to put it is that God wills that men, by virtue of their maleness, have a greater responsibility for personal, directive, spiritual leadership in relation to women than women do in relation to men.

Genesis 1:27 gives the inaugural truth: man and woman are both created in God’s image. Neither is a lesser form of being. With all their differences (which may fit them for far different roles), let there be no talk of greater or lesser value in manhood or womanhood.

But there are at least six observations from Genesis 2–3 which show that God’s primal (pre-fall) will for man and woman was that the man should provide loving leadership and the woman should honor this leadership as man’s submissive helper.

The Firstborn
The man was created first, then the woman (Gen. 2:7). What was God trying to communicate here? If his aim was to teach a kind of partnership in which manhood and womanhood are equally fit and ordained to lead, it seems that a simultaneous creation of man and woman would have been a clearer lesson.

Feminists have attempted to make this argument sound ludicrous by saying that in Genesis 1 animals come first, but do not lead man. But this is like saying that the Hebrew custom of primogeniture would be meaningless if a father bred cattle before he had a son. No Hebrew reader would put humans and animals in the same category. But every Hebrew would see significance in the “firstborn” of the original pair.

God could very easily have avoided an order in creation that put the man in a position of headship according to the Hebrew custom of primogeniture. But instead, he chose to create in sequence and thus to communicate some kind of leadership role for the man. (See 1 Tim. 2:13.)

The Moral Leader
Not only did God make man first; He also gave the man moral instruction and taught him the design of life in the garden (Gen. 2:15-17). God did not repeat this for Eve. Evidently Adam was responsible to provide his family with this moral vision and lead them in its fulfillment.

A Loyal and Suitable Assistant
Woman was created from man in order to be a “helper fit for him” (Gen. 2:18–23). I am aware that God is called our “helper” and we do not lead Him. But the context must decide whether Eve is to “help” as a strong person who aids a weaker one or as one who assists a loving leader. The context rules out construing “helper” on the analogy of God’s help, because in verses 19-20 Adam is caused to seek his “helper” first among the animals. But the animals will not do, because they are not “fit for him.” So God makes woman “from man.”

Now there is a being who is “fit for him,” sharing his human nature. She is infinitely different from an animal, and God highlights her value to man by showing man how no animal can fill her role. Yet in passing through “helpful” animals to woman, God teaches us that woman is the “helper” in the sense of a loyal and suitable assistant in the life of the garden.

Again man’s leadership is implied. It is the fall which causes man to brutalize woman. Man before the fall is thrilled with woman and cherishes her as he does his own flesh (v. 23).

Authority and the Naming Process
Man names woman (Gen. 2:23). Few acts among persons in the Old Testament involve more significant leadership and authority than giving someone a name. See, for example, Genesis 32:28-29 where God names Jacob but will not tell Jacob God’s own name.

The force of this argument is still felt today. Many feminists resist the male leadership implied in being given their husband’s name. So far, the pre-fall picture of God’s will for how man and woman should relate seem to be one of loving, joyful complementarity between head and helper.

If God had wanted to teach us that man and woman share responsibility for leadership equally it seems that 1) he would have created them simultaneously instead of giving priority to the man; 2) he would have instructed them together instead of entrusting the moral design to the man; 3) he would have presented her as an independently formed associate instead of presenting her as one derived from man and designed as his “helper”; and 4) he would have named them both instead of giving man the responsibility to name the woman.

I conclude that it is not sin that inclines man to assume leadership in relation to women. It is the result of God’s design in creation. This is confirmed when we analyze the fall in Genesis 3.

The Serpent and Role Reversal
The fall of man and woman from innocence was accompanied by a dramatic reversal of roles under the influence of the tempter. The serpent was very subtle. He hated God’s beautiful ordering of life for the happiness of man and woman. Therefore, he cleverly repudiated God’s order and blatantly addressed the woman—not the man—thus tempting her to assume the role of spokesman and leader (Gen. 3:1).

The text suggests that Adam was present with Eve during the temptation and that he abdicated his role as leader and protector while she accepted the serpent’s challenge to become the spokesman and leader.

Verse 6 says the woman ate of the forbidden fruit, “and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate” (NASB). This seems to mean that Adam was with Eve during the conversation with the serpent. He had been a silent partner instead of a strong leader and protector. And so both fell as they reversed their God-appointed roles of Genesis 2.

Another piece of evidence for this interpretation is found in Genesis 3:17. God says to Adam, “Because you have listened to [obeyed] the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree which I commanded you, ‘you shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you.” (The only other place in Genesis where this Hebrew phrase is used is 16:2, where Sarai tells Abram to go to bed with Hagar: “And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai.”)

What did God have in mind when he said that Adam had obeyed the voice of his wife? Nowhere in Genesis 3 does Eve say anything to Adam. The most natural assumption is that Adam was simply standing there listening to the dialog between Eve and the serpent, and instead of assuming the role of spiritual leadership and attempting to defend and secure his family, he fell right into line with the serpent’s scheme and his wife’s thinking.

Therefore, when God brings down the curse in Genesis 3:17 he faults not only man’s eating the forbidden fruit but also man’s abdication of spiritual leadership in relation to his wife.

God’s Design Doubted, His Design Rejected
This role reversal between man and woman is rooted in the deeper role reversal with God. Eve’s interaction with Satan shows that she had begun to distrust the goodness of God and His design for life.

For example, in Genesis 3:3 she wrongly reports to the serpent what God said concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: “You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.” But God had not said they couldn’t touch the tree (2:17), nor was it said in 2:9 that the forbidden tree was “in the midst” of the garden. Only the tree of life was there.

These misstatements signal to the reader Eve’s budding doubt about God’s goodness. There seems to be a growing resentment that God is an unduly restrictive leader who does not have her best interest at heart. This climaxes for Eve and Adam in a dramatic role reversal with God in which they reject Him as Father and take for themselves the prerogative to decide what is good (3:6), and to be like God (3:5, 22).

The root of the fall is a proud, self-sufficient assumption of divine prerogatives—a rejection of God’s design for life.

The subtlety of the serpent’s strategy is seen in how he sowed the seed of resentment against God’s order by luring man and woman into a reversal of their own roles which God has appointed for their good. The man should have stepped in and taken some spiritual initiative, especially when he saw what was happening between the serpent and his wife; and the woman should have deferred to the authority of God and the leadership of her husband rather than letting the serpent sow the seed of resentment and rebellion in her heart.

A Mark of the Curse
Feminine rejection of godly masculine leadership is the mark of the curse. In Genesis 3:16 God sentences the woman with these words: “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” This is often taken to mean that feminine flirtation and masculine domination are part of the curse. But the language of the text points strongly in another direction.

The vocabulary and grammar of 3:16 are reproduced in a stunning way in 4:7. God speaks to Cain after rejecting his offering: “If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is couching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master (rule over) it.”

This is an inescapable parallel to Genesis 3:16: “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” But notice the meaning suggested. Sin is crouching at the door like a lion desiring to subdue its prey (cf. Gen 49:9). But Cain should gain the mastery over sin and do what is right. Therefore, the closest biblical parallel to 3:16 suggests that the curse is neither woman’s sexual desire for man nor her personal desire for companionship, but rather her desire to subdue man.

So what God seems to be saying is that part of woman’s punishment for the fall is that now her natural inclination to want man to be a strong leader will be corrupted by an unnatural inclination to usurp the God-appointed place of man as her leader. Yet she will be continually frustrated in this attempt throughout history.

Harmony Destroyed . . . Restored (p. 9)
In conclusion, the evidence of Genesis 1-3 does not support the notion that male leadership is an evil result of the fall. On the contrary, Genesis 2 teaches that there was once a very beautiful harmony and co-relation between man as leader and woman as helper, follower, subordinate. With the coming of sin into the world, both roles are corrupted by pride and self-sufficiency.

Men abdicate the responsibility of leadership in silence or abuse it in belittling or brutalizing women. Women may debase their role at man’s side by trivial obsequiousness or reject his leadership altogether. As Susan Foh puts it (Women and the Word of God, p. 69),

“Sin has corrupted both the willing submission of the wife and the loving headship of the husband. And so, the rule of love founded in paradise is replaced by struggle, tyranny, domination and manipulation.”

It will not surprise us then when Jesus brings redemption that the roles of headship and submission are not obliterated but returned to their original purity. “Wives, be subject to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church.”

Op

Hemanwel:
But "Doing good works" and "Having good morals" are not laws. Even if they were, shouldn't they be seen in the character of every believer?

they are, there are written laws and unwritten laws.
Yes these things should be seen in a believer as part of the fruits of salvation but not the cause itself.

He is right, God expect total perfection which no human can present.

Hemanwel:
How? Wanna learn.

Because God's standard is total perfection which no flesh can meet up,

Romans 3:20
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

It is a show meant to distract and blind the unbelieving world so that they would not be able to see the glorious light of christ.

He is correct

fergie001:


Bloomberg


American-backed Afghan President, Ghani said he fled the country
to avoid bloodshed.



Ashraf Ghani

this will embolden other islamic militia to sped up and fight more for islamic state creation, the success of the Taliban would encourage them.
Nigeria is in great danger.
According to the prophecy, the kings of the east which are the islamic world would play a major role in the end, they would accompany the antichrist to finally attack Israel but they would fall into God's trap there.
Jesus is coming soon!

Satanjnr, you want your own opinion to be exalted to the level of the inspired word of God, right?

2 Peter 1:20-21 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.



Every scripture in the bible is not just an
opinion of man, they were inspired of the holy Ghost, but I know you are a liar, who will not hesitate to lie against the holy Ghost but your judgment is coming, in other to fulfill the lust of your father the devil.
Jesus himself appointed peter to be the leader of the apostles.
Go and read up connonisation of scriptures, or do you think that any book or statement is recognised as scripture because a man says so?
You are of your father the devil that is why you have no respect for authority but seek to displace God.
John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Jude 1:8, 10-13 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.

Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;

Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.


Every vision revelations or teaching must have a witness there must be atleast two persons to attest to it.

The books of moses, david, Solomon esther and all old testament had the whole nation of Israel as their witness.
In the new testament the Church was the witness, Jesus himself appointed peter as the leader of the apostles, peter, and the rest of the church recognise the teachings of paul and his ministry as being ordained of God.
Peter is a witness to Paul's ministry

2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

But you satanjnr a reprobate just seek to elevate yourself like mohammed no wonder you even endorsed Mohammed and koran paving way for your master the antichrist, but I thank God, that God is exposing you.

jesusjnr2020:
I don't understand why you're making such a big deal about me saying my own belief and then saying anything that goes contrary to what I'm saying is not of God. Is it just because it's not also written in the Bible?

Because it was the same thing that the apostles as Paul were doing in their own books, yet you hold on to every word they said as the Word of God.

Or do you think that they were more qualified to teach the sheep of Christ?

Or that the Spirit of God they had was different?

What you should understand is that, it's my own way of speaking.

If I say "I believe", it means I believe what I'm saying was inspired by God's Word or His Spirit. So for me to go further to say that anything contrary to that is not of God but of men, it means I am totally convinced that my belief is of God

It's not by saying what one says was inspired by God's Word or His Spirit, but by it being the Truth.

By the way, i wish you should have shown me anywhere else in the Bible God said a man was the Head of the house and had authority over the wife, apart from Paul's teachings, but you couldn't find any because it's not there, except after the woman sinned in the beginning, to show it was a consequence of her sin.

Even the Words of Jesus you hence quoted could be more easily interpreted to mean the otherwise, since it says the man has to leave his parents or family behind and cleave to his wife, just as the disciples left everything behind to submit to Christ. Hence, that the man was meant to submit to his wife since she's his head and has authority over him, right?

Wrong! So that doesn't add up for me as well.

As for the example of bearing the man's name, do you think it was really of God and what He intended in the beginning?

Something you should know is that a lot of what you saw play out before the coming of Christ was as a result of sin.

But guess who the first person's name in the genealogies was after the birth of Christ. It was the name of a woman, not that of any man to suggest that such was also a consequence of sin, and perhaps not how it ought to be and was in the beginning.

I don't really understand though why people who really claim to be of God and followers of Christ, would have an issue with Christ being the head of a Christian marriage and not the man. Is it that they don't trust Christ that much?

If you observed, you'd see that my threads have hardly made NL front page of recent, but somehow, I saw this coming. I strongly believe that this threads were brought up by the Holy Spirit because it represents His interests.

In these last days, the Spirit of God needs more marriages that Jesus has complete control over like that of Smith Wigglesworth at some point, which I mentioned, for Him to be able to use to greater effect.

Not those which undermine His capacity as the many headed by men these days.

God bless.

Satanjnr withdraw his statement quite alright that was because of the backlash of that thread but he has shown that he does not recieve instruction from the scriptures but from visions, that is not a mark of a Christian.

Anybody who elevates themsleves above the scripture is not a Christian.

LilMissFavvy:
The OP had apologised for the error message. As Christians we grow every day and learn every day. Personally, I appologise that I was one of those who castigated him in the previous thread.

I Hereby Withdraw Everything I Said In This Forum About The Koran, Mohammed, Islam And Allah Because The Holy Ghost Said "Ba Na So Koran"

---

No be small thing. The Holy Spirit no allow me rest for the past few days immediately after I made the thread that posited the utterances He gave me of "Koran" as a confirmation that Allah of Islam was God Almighty.

From that moment, it seemed I had drawn His ire, as the utterances He has been giving me has been more or less in rejection of that notion. It's mostly been in the hausa language and started with "ba na so Koran" which means in english "I don't want the Koran".

And that has been the most prominent amongst others some of which I had jotted down in a book, as follows:

"Ba na so Koran" - (English) "I don't want the Koran."

"Koran ne christian?" - "Is Koran christian?"

"You are christian".

"Ka bere Christ/Cross" - "Have you left Christ/cross?"

"Koran ba yi christian" - "Koran don't do/is not christian."

"Ka bere Christ/cross Koran ka yi?" - "Have you left Christ/cross and (now) do Koran?"

"Ka yi Koran ba yi Christian" - "If you do Koran, you don't do Christian!"

These are rough translations according to my fair understanding of hausa language having previously stayed in the north for a while, but I hope it suffices to convey the point.

That's in a nutshell what i've been bombarded with recently, that it made it difficult for me to pray as usual, as speaking in tongues is an integral part of my prayer.

Though I was initially adamant that I would not heed what He was saying until I was given a full revelation of what transpired concerning the Koran and Mohammed, to ensure I got it right this time and not put myself in a position where I would yet have to come out to change my position again. Because I was really angry that I was allowed to come out with my initial position in the first place, despite that I had prayed just about all night to ensure I got it right, so as not to find myself misleading people.

But this has created a lot of tension between the Spirit of God and myself, as He has not given me a breather, but na so so "ba na so Koran" or the likes, so I have to come out by force to withdraw all my claims concerning what I said concerning the Koran, Mohammed, Islam and Allah of Islam. Because the Spirit in me has clearly shown Himself to have serious issues with the spirit behind the Koran, and this He has let me know in no unclear terms.

Though I'm not going to say anything categorically in this case until I get a full revelation concerning the Koran and it's source from God, it is obvious that it is not of the Spirit that dwells in me which gives me the utterances of tongues I speak.

Therefore I must apologize for misinterpreting the utterance He gave to me of "Koran" as His endorsement of Allah of Islam, for the error came from me, and my misinterpretation of His utterances, not from Him.

Moreover prior to this development, it seem He was already hinting at this error because the word "Christian" had recently become quite frequent in the utterances He gave me via tongues. So maybe it was an error He was in the process of correcting beforehand, since He lives in me, He couldn't afford for me to be associated with any contrary spirit, especially considering the extent to which He intends to use me on Earth.

Hence my coming out to withdraw everything I said in this respect, in the hope that it would pacify Him, and make Him to finally give me a breather.

God bless.

Jesusjnr lying against the holy spirit.
This guy is not a Christian he is a wolf in sheep clothings.

Satanjnr is gradually exposing himself [although he has already exposed himself along time ago for some of us]. the one that declared Allah to be his God, lied against the holy spirit, castigate the gospel of Jesus.
Jesusjnr satanjnr indeed.

I just pray op repent from this rebellious way he has choosen.

This was as far back as 1940 the fruit of feminism had already having its effect on marriages in America

livingchrist:
AGED WOMEN SHOULD TEACH YOUNGER WOMEN TO OBEY HUSBANDS

Titus, the younger pastor, was instructed by Paul how to teach sound doctrine. In Titus 2:3-5 the Holy Spirit had Paul to write down the following:

“The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Older women sometimes are responsible for breaking homes. When trouble comes up in the home of a young married couple, the mother of the wife may say, “You don't have to put up with his mistreatment!” Get your things together and come back home if he doesn't treat you right! Stand up for your rights! And the neighbor women take it on themselves to offer advice. But here we are told just the kind of counsel that the aged women should give to young women. They are to “teach the young women . . . to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, OBEDIENT TO THEIR OWN HUSBANDS, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” When a Christian women's influence leads another woman to be rebellious and disobedient at home in her attitude toward her husband, then she sins against God and causes the Word of God to be blasphemed. Any kind of Christianity that does not make a woman into a good wife brings reproach on the cause of Christ. So older women must teach young wives to obey their husbands, and thus Christianity will be in repute, and God will be honored by the happy homes that Christianity brings!

Once I was asked to marry a young couple whom I loved very dearly. The young bride-to-be asked me, “You are not going to put obey in the marriage ceremony, are you?” I answered back that of course I would not want to make up my own kind of marriage ceremony. “But,” I said, “if I leave it out, God has put it in. It is in the Bible that wives are to be 'obedient to their own husbands.' You don't want me to leave out what God put in, do you?” And since she was a good Christian girl, she agreed. Preachers, to please a modern world, may leave obey out of the marriage ceremony. But God puts it in just the same and preachers ought to too, and no Christian wife pleases Him who does not take the solemn vow to obey her husband and who does not prayerfully, with God's help, seek to fulfill that vow. ...


WHAT IF WIVES ARE WISER THAN HUSBANDS?

Wives sometimes say, “But I have a better education than my husband. I am a better manager. I have better judgment in many matters. Why shouldn't I have the deciding voice? I think the wiser of the two should have the authority in the home.”

Well, no doubt children often think they are wiser than their parents. Laborers are generally wiser, in their own sight, than their bosses. And no doubt the devil thinks himself wiser than God. That does not prove it is true.

However, children are often better informed, better trained, better equipped, in some matters, than their parents. Many a farm boy under the supervision of his county agent has learned to grow more corn to the acre than his father could, has learned to grow prize winning pigs by a feeding schedule with which his father is unfamiliar. But the farm boy still should not boss his father.

A girl in high school may learn how to make curtains, how to make lovely dresses, how to set an exquisite table, how to plan a balanced meal better than her mother ever knew. But God's plan is still for the girl to be subject to her mother.

I may be a better man than the policeman at the corner, who directs traffic, and yet if I am a good citizen, I obey his whistle. I may be a better man than the judge, but I respect the court.

God's way is still the best way, and wives are to be subject to their husbands. It is the way of peace and happiness and prosperity.

I have no doubt that many of the curses on our land come from sin in the home. Children do not obey parents, because there is disunion and no respect for authority in the home. The crime wave that plagues America is a part and parcel of the rebellion against authority in which every woman who does not obey her husband has a part. Wives who do not submit to their husbands may expect their own children to scorn their authority. And such women need not be surprised if their husbands' love grows cold and all the horrible train of evil comes that follows rebellion against authority—quarrels, discontent, lack of trust, and then broken homes and broken hearts! And when such women come to pray, they may expect to be treated by their dear Lord as rebels, not only against the authority of husband, but against the authority of God who commanded wives to be subject to their own husbands as unto the Lord.

I had a letter the other day from a brokenhearted wife. She had tried many, many years to win her husband to Christ. He would not hear her. She had heard me preach over the radio at Grand Island, Nebraska. She had found how she had failed in her rebellious way, trying to have her own way. And now she said, “I have tried my way and I have failed. Now I am going to try the Lord's way. It is my last chance to win my husband.” Why don't you try God's way, dear wife who reads this?

In Oklahoma City by a book table in revival services, a woman pointed to my little booklet, What Must I Do To be Saved? and said, “That booklet won my brother to Christ!” A man who stood nearby heard it. He pointed to the little booklet on Rebellious Wives and Slacker Husbands and said “My brother and his wife were separated, had been separated two weeks, and were applying for a divorce. I got this little booklet for them and both of them read it. They went back together, confessed their sins to each other, and now their home is wonderfully happy.”

Some years ago a woman wrote me in greatest distress. Her husband, she said, was so mean to her that it was impossible to live with him. She was having to give up her home and go back to her mother's. Yet her heart was broken about it and she wanted me to pray and wondered if there was anything she could do. I did pray and wrote to give her the Scriptures that I have given in these chapters about women being in subjection to their own husbands, and I sent her a little booklet on the subject. Soon she wrote to tell me that her home had been happily re-established. “I was as much to blame as he was,” she said. “I was rebellious and bitter and wanted my own way. Now everything has been smoothed and and I love him as never before. Our hearts are, oh, so happy!”

Dear reader, God's way is the only way to bring real happiness in your home, permanent happiness. It is not much to do for one who loves the Lord, to be subject to your husband for Christ's sake. And oh, how rich are the rewards for any godly woman who obeys God through surrendering to the authority of her husband.

SOURCE: Dr. John R. Rice - “Bobbed Hair, Bossy Wives And Women Preachers,” pages 29-32 and 35-37; Sword of The Lord Publishers ©1941.