₦airaland Forum

vooks: Adam's blood was equally human sir, where did it come from? THINK!
Think for once, blood is for creatures. What is God who is Spirit doing with blood in heaven?

Leviticus 17:11 King James Version (KJV)
11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
The blood is precious but so is the flesh. There is no difference between Christ's body and his blood except in Ernst Angley, Branham, Jack Van Impe, H A Maxwell Whyte and and their minions' minds

What does this verse have to do with anything?

Adam like Jesus got his blood from his Father- God! It was only that sort of impeccable blood that could have saved mankind. Nothing else.

How do you think human blood would do so?

vooks: Sir, there was nothing divine about Jesus blood any more than his body.
The idea that Jesus had a sinful flesh but sinless blood borders on mysticism and is clearly heretical

The blood of a baby is gotten from who? From Whom did Jesus get his blood?

What did Peter mean in 1 Peter 1:19 and can you tell us the greek translation for the word Precious as used there? Why do you think Jesus blood was the only one capable of saving the world of men?

Mysticism you said. How risible.

Vooks,

Your logic flies in the face of God's word.

What is the will of God= that we become Christians (John 6:40)
What is not doing the Father's will= rejecting Christ (remaining unsaved)

Who will say Lord Lord and still enter the kingdom of Heaven? Christians.

Who will say Lord Lord and still not enter the kingdom? Non- Christians.

Who will Jesus deny knowing? Non- Christians.

Can a non-Christian do a miracle in Jesus name? No.

Paul said in Romans 10:13 and Peter said in Acts 2:21 that WHOEVER shall call on that name [in Faith] shall be saved.

But what do we have? We have pseudo-spiritualists telling us that sinners would use the name of Jesus and remain unsaved.

Another question, if you would respond or evade it as usual: Can you show me anywhere that says a Christian went to hell or was castaway? I will wait.

Bidam: Ermm..sorry to barge in @ the last minute, i have been following the trend of arguments here and i must say well done to both contributors, i have learnt quite alot from both parties. But i want to chip in one or two thoughts if you guys will oblige me.
Paul writing by the unction of the Holy Spirit said Christ did redeem us from the curse of the Law( Gal 3:13). The greek word for redeem is not "agorazo" but "exagorazo" which is to purchase or redeem out from or away from.
The word "curse" here is "katara".
But casting our minds back to OT since all scriptures is written for our learning we would find in Deut.28:15-47 every kinds of sickness and diseases included in the curse of the law. So it amazes me when christians stick to an erroneous impression that Christ death and ressurection has no power to free christians from sicknesses and diseases but only to save souls.
And concerning the blood and body of Christ both are efficacious and powerful, that one sacrifice is absolutely pure, so perfect and so powerful that it has enduring strength throughout all eternity( Heb 10:10).
In types and shadows found in OT, we see both the blood and the body of the passover lamb being used by the chidren of Isreal. NONE was discarded. No wonder Paul said in 1 cor 5:7 that Christ our passover lamb is sacrificed for us. Since Christ is our passover lamb, we must conclude: that his blood was shed to save us from the wrath of God and HIS FLESH was broken for OUR PHYSICAL BENEFITS or as Peter puts it in 1 pet 2:24 "by the bruise of whom ye were healed". The healing wasn't spiritual as some theologians are trying to water it down but PHYSICAL from the greek word "iaomai".
So all saints should expect God to heal their sicknesses today because all sickness is the result of satan's work, when he introduce sin into this world, and Christ was manifested to destroy satan's work.

Endorsed.

Topgainer: Pastor Mba, What are you saying? Haven't you realized that what Rev Oyakhilome is teaching you has no basis in the scripture. You are seriously re-affirming our belief that Love World had long deviated from the Bible Truths to self-preserving stunts

I love all Pastors but I am not one. Please leave MOGs names out of this discourse or I will cease to reply you. All the Pastors that have taught me teach me from the word and I also do my own personal research to see that it is so.

Leave all that irreverent talk about self-preservation for a day so you can understand God's word without cultural biases and religious views. The branch I worship with started really small say 11-15 members on a Sunday o. We had some 'Holiness' brethren come to advice us that we were few because we let women come in with trousers and not cover their hair. My Pastor thanked them but continued following the word. Fews Years past and we are now the largest congregation in the region. Guess what the 'holiness' brethren began to say? That we were growing large because we let women wear trousers and not cover their hair. The same thing they said was millitating us in time past.

All such reasoning is fleshly man. It is God that enlarges his church by the word and not because of any self-preserving nonsense talk.

Is sex a sin? Not to married couples it isn't. But to unmarried couples it is a sin. So will a teacher be wrong to say "sex in itself is not sin"? That's how to handle the word of God rightly so as not to teach your own ideas. That's why you hate the jerry curls on him yet you cannot prove it is a sin from the bible.

Go for the word and leave carnality to sinners because carnality is death but a life in the spirit is joy everlasting.

2 Peter 1:21 KJV

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.

None of the prophecies or scriptures came from men. They came from the Holy Spirit who moved them to speak or write it down. Will the Holy Spirit move a Christian to act contrary to the scriptures?

Paul didn't rebuke Peter because he was "just" wrong. He rebuked him because Peter was within Paul's jurisdiction which was Galatia- a region Paul had established a church. The same Paul when he met with James and the other elders in Jerusalem didn't rebuke them even though they admonished Gentiles to imbibe some Jewish customs as part of their salvation "duties". He simply obeyed them there and kept mum but when he wrote to his churches he taught otherwise.

There is a due process in God's house for the Holy Spirit is not the author of confusion or a proponent of dissension and rank-breaking. But if any MOG fails in the law of the land then let him be punished by the law of the land and if he fails in the law of God then let God himself punish him amicably.

Going by what Image123 had already said when David had the opportunity to kill Saul he refused to and when one of his soldiers offered to do it David called Saul "the Lord's annointed". Remember that David too was the Lord's anointed (and even more anointed than Saul if I may add) but when he learned about Saul's death he exclaimed "How are the mighty fallen?" before he instructed his men not to tell the story amongst the Heathens (Garth in the context). He didn't call Saul a demon-possessed Charlatan or fraud that God had punished. Instead with tears he queried why such a mighty man had fallen so ignominiously.

I am not a proponent of anything except I declare unequivocally that I am. Just thought to add that.

vooks: I gladly throw the challenge back at you...Show me where it is written they didn't

I have given you reasons to believe they did what they said
1. Nobody rebutted their claims
2. the idea of mortals standing before the throne and having the presence of mind to go through various works and picking the most convincing lies is stranger than science fiction.

The answer is in his statement and reply. He said MANY will SAY to him and not many who DID will SAY to him. And then his reply is the clincher- I NEVER KNEW YOU. You who worked iniquity A.K.A you sinner.

How can Jesus say he never knew someone who made demands in his name that caused the Holy Spirit to act?

Do you know you insult the name of Jesus to suggest that sinners could use it to achieve anything? Do you know that a sinner who uses the name of Jesus to wrought a miracle will automatically cease to be a sinner?

Where do you people pick all these teachings from?

vooks: You are regurgitating (plagiarizing) Ernst Angley mysticism and passing them as Spirit teaching you
I know what Peter is saying, my question is whether the blood was ANY divine more than Jesus flesh
If ONLY the blood was needed, was Christ's death necessary seeing it is very possible to spill and sprinkle blood without DEATH?
Read this and focus on the word FLESH

1 Timothy 3:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
John 1:14 King James Version (KJV)
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Was Jesus really human if he had no human blood?
On who is a Christian, that is a nickname for the disciples. You can derail this thread by taking me through TULIP but am not interested. Let's focus on your mysticism of Jesus blood being non-human seeing you have no proof of the workers of iniquities lying. My maxim on doctrine is simple; don't cling to what you can't defend regardless of which mortal is propagating it

You on the other hand are just picking names and ideas from the sky and shying away from questions that ridicle your beliefs no matter how unscriptural they are.

The lamb that was slain for the atonement didn't it need to die? Stop asking me questions to mock what you don't understand because you haven't studied well. Part of the reason that the lamb of God came on the scene was to THROUGH death defeat the one who had the power over death- the devil. So it was necessary Jesus died.

Jesus was fully human even if he had "no human blood" according to your construction. The blood he had was not smeared by sin because it came from his father. Is that too hard to understand?

vooks: mbaemeka,
So in short you are saying that ;
1. Jesus' physical nature was different from you and me seeing his blood was DIFFERENT from yours?
2. he had sins 'in his flesh' but not in 'his blood'?
3. And Christ's divinity was his blood?

Let me quote scriptures again to help your understanding. 1 Peter 1:19 says Jesus blood was precious and spotless like a spotless Lamb will be.

His blood was what needed to be taken into the Holy of Holies like high priests in the OT did when they went ro make atonement for the sin of the nation within a year.

Jesus had a flesh subject to sin Romans 8:3 but Jesus didn't sin unlike Adam who sinned. When Adam sinned his Spirit was tainted and the same would have happened to Jesus if he too did but he didn't.

When scripture says we sinned in Adam it is referring to our Spirits for we were born with a sinful nature (sinful spirit). The flesh is always corrupt and will always be till the final redemption of the body where we will put on incorruption. Jesus had a corruptible flesh which enabled him to die and then he resurrected to an incorruptible one.

See how simple I have made it. Now let me see you do so too. Who is a christian?

vooks: mbaemeka,
Nobody would 'merely SAY' to God on judgement day before His throne they did ABCD if they didn't. That is the point. And if they did,the natural response would be to rebut the lie. Jesus never disputed their claims because they were true....it is because you can't imagine yourself or fellow 'greater-than-Jesus'-miracles' worker going to hell that you are determined to defy logic and common sense not to mention the natural reading of this verse; some miracle workers WILL perish.

You are trying to argue that NOBODY would perform miracles and be branded worker of iniquity. Spiritual gifts don't cease immediately a man falls into sin or even after the man persists in sin. So if you think exercising your gifting is a mark of purity, think again

On Judas, you are engaging in unnecessary theological gymnastics. You are essentially GUESSING that Judas died BEFORE Christ (like it matters) and you are lamely attempting to LIMIT the MANY that would cite their works (lies according to you) to post resurrection. The twelve and the 72 actively operated in the name of Jesus well BEFORE he died.........


And come to think of it, how would the name of a mere man like any other( God in him dormant) drive out demons?

Jesus' as a mere man was the Son of Man. That's why his name had power in Israel.

People will say all sorts to prevent themselves from being cast into the LAKE OF FIRE. The bible says exactly so. And no Christian would be found in Hell so no Christian will be on LAKE OF FIRE ROW.

As per Judas dying before Jesus: it shows how little you know about salvation and you are trying to engage me as if you have something to teach me.

let me take it slow with you. Who is a christian?

vooks: You are probably drunk with Calvinism and you are arguing in circles;
-All that perish were never Christians
-Christians will never perish
probably your own version of once-saved-always-saved

There are many prophets and miracle workers who will cling to works all the way to hell and I pray that with your greater-than-Jesus-miracles you won't be among them. That's all Jesus said, not that there would be many who would try cheat their way out of hell. You must have a very dim view of God if you think men can stand before the judgement seat and concoct clear lies

What was the point of Jesus telling his disciples about men lying in heaven? That liars have no place in heaven or lying won't save you?
He was relaying the shock factor of people like you who think performing miracles is an external manifestation of eternal security. They did more than say Lord Lord, they even performed miracles in his name

That exchange was not in heaven. Please study well. Secondly, who is a christian and who is a sinner?. Can you show me where Jesus said those who told him they did miracles IN HIS NAME actually did it?

Let me see you answer this from scripture then if God wills it I would teach you who a christian is.

Trustman

Here I am quoting scriptures while you are there giving me conjectures. Why not just quote the scriptures and let them interprete themselves as usual.

Henceforth, I will reply you in clear scriptures and a few words. Let me see you argue yourself away from God's word.

1. Jesus had to come in the same flesh with ordinary men because his body was from his mum but his blood was from his dad as ELEMENTARY biology will tell you.

Romans 8:3 says God sent his son in the verisimilitude of SINFUL FLESH.

2. John 20:23 answers you clearly on Man's ability to forgive sins committed against GOD. He told his disciples if they forgave any man's sins the man is forgiven and if they retained his sins he would not be forgiven. Simple and clear.

3. The word pre-existed Abraham of course. That same word was at the beginning in the bosom of the father 1 John 1:2. That same word became flesh and was born by a woman, Mary. That word made flesh was called Jesus.

4. ANYONE born from God is a son of God. 1John 3:1. So any human being is as much a son of God as Jesus was but the Jews didn't know that.

5. Being born again means to come from above. Genneth anothen in Greek. How did Jesus come from above? He was the word made flesh same way any man that is born again is born from the same word that lives and abides forever 1 Peter 1:23

6. Stop making daft relations between the biblical statement that Jesus had a flesh subject to sin (sinful flesh) and one that says he didn't sin in his flesh. Jesus' flesh was a mortal/sinful one like any man's but Jesus didn't sin. Also he had spotless blood. That's why he is different from any other man bar Adam.

Why do you think it was necessary he had a sinful flesh? Because if he could not sin then he could not represent us the same way Adam did because Adam could sin and he did.

6b. Anyone who is born again has received the Spirit without measure for God doesn't give his sons the spirit by measure and then send them the same way he sent the one he sent without measure. It makes no scriptural sense.

7. If you don't know the growth stages in the life of the born again man just ask politely and I will teach you. The grown man (fathers) in Christ doesn't sin and he cannot sin. I know they have not taught you that in wherever you worship but it is in scripture. What do you have to say about 1John 3:9 and then compare it with 1 John 1: 8-10 that you initially referred me to.

8. Without faith it is impossible to please God. For he who comes to God must first believe that he exists and that he is a REWARDER of those that DILLIGENTLY seek him. Hebrew 11:6. What is faith? It is the EVIDENCE of things not yet seen Hebrews 11:1 so if a man comes to Jesus without a confidence that he will receive from him then he would not receive. I quoted Paul in Galatians 3:5 and even him in Acts 14. If you have a better understanding why not humor me by telling me what that understanding is and watch you contradict yourself for the gazillionth time.

9. Stop giving me chaff about the miracles he did and answer the question for once. Which miracle was greater between raising Lazarus from the dead and Jesus raising himself from the dead?

As per HS's you have no case. HS's teach about salvation and demonstrate it. The healing is part of the salvation (soteria).

trustman: It has been said that repetition makes for better understanding. So bear with me. Maybe repetitions will make my points clearer to you .

When you said about Jesus that
“his flesh was a sinful one” you just directly claim that he was not qualified to be our sin-bearer. This is absolutely INCORRECT. The reason why he was born without the involvement of any male in the first place was to ENSURE that his flesh will have no sin. Adam’s sin, which is the basis of our sin nature or ‘flesh’ as some portions of scripture put it, had no place in the humanity of Jesus. He was born PERFECT just as Adam was created perfect and without sin. As a physical human being he would experience all that ‘flesh’ would experience and the things that will normally affect ‘flesh’. He was also subject to temptation. Quickly note here that even creatures without ‘flesh’ (angels) were also subject to temptation. If his flesh was a sinful one he could not be said to be the lamb without blemish. Recall that in the OT the animals for sacrifices had to be without any defect.

ha ha ha ha. Go and ask a medical doctor: a baby receives his body (flesh) from his mother but receives his blood from his father. That was why Jesus got conceived by his father- God. He had the sinful flesh but he had sinless blood. The phrase "lamb without blemish" refers to the BLOOD of the lamb and not the flesh for if it were about the flesh then Jesus' badly blemished flesh wouldn't have been good enough.

Hebrews 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same;
Hebrews 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Hebrews 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our weaknesses; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

He was tempted like any other man yet he did not sin. If he was unable to sin then the test would have been a fake one- it wasn't. Please study!

When a man is born again the divine ‘surgery’ takes place in his inside, not the flesh. If our new nature, like you said, is now sinless then there would be no need for the several instructions in the NT to stay away from sin, to confess sin, to put off the ‘old man’ and several others. Apostle Paul documents this in the book of Romans and elsewhere. Putting all that here will extend this presentation.

Thrash. The nature (Spirit) of the born-again man is RIGHTEOUS. What we are told to subject is our flesh and mind as they are not born-again.

1 Corinthians 9:27King James Version (KJV)
27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

Romans 12:2King James Version (KJV)
2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

On forgiveness of sin. Who did mankind offend? God. Who should man seek forgiveness from? God. Who then should forgive man? God. When therefore you have a Man claiming to forgive sin what can anyone make of that? The Pharisees clearly understood this when they made some of the statements they made about him blaspheming and the like. They knew what the man Jesus was DOING. So to them the issue was ‘how can a mere man forgive sin?’ Maybe I should ask you the same question: ‘how can a mere man forgive another of the sin he committed against God?’

He wasn't talking to ghost's here was he? He was saying this to men. The Pharisees had a religious mentality- they even objected healing on the sabbath.

John 20:23New King James Version (NKJV)
23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

The Jews were too serious about their spiritual issues to laugh at things that come against what they believed. When Jesus said ‘I Am’ they knew he was saying that he is Yahweh. That is why you see their reaction of trying to stone him. Now did Yahweh pre-exist Abraham; even greater than Abraham?

Jesus did not say before Abraham I was- that would have meant Pre-existence. He said before Abraham "I AM". He was referring to the WORD when he was in the bosom of the father. The word is GOD, Jesus on earth didn't function as him. He FUNCTIONED as a Man even though he was God.

Ask yourself one question: ‘Why did John record Jesus’ miracles – to show that other men (Christians now?) can do the same, or to establish his (Jesus’) deity?’ what do we find in John 20: 30 – 31.

John recorded somethings to show that Jesus is the Christos- the anointed one; the anointed one of God; the sent one; the messiah. He didn't say to show he was God. Besides, Jesus commissioned those who believe to do greater works and function the same way God sent him. Hear Nicodemus: "for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him"

John 20:21New King James Version (NKJV)
21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.”

John 14:12New King James Version (NKJV)
12 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

What I’m getting at with you is that when the WORD became FLESH he DID NOT cease to exist as the second person of the Godhead. He did not also exist as a separate entity from the humanity of Jesus. The two did not come together AFTER the resurrection. The two coexisted in the humanity of Jesus Christ. John 8: 23 – “He said to them, ‘You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world” The man standing in front of them was telling them 'I am from above'!

Jesus never FUNCTIONED as God even though he was legally. I am from above too; I am not of this world. Anyone who is born-again is born from above.

John17:14 I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world.
John17:16 They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world.
John17:20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will[e] believe in Me through their word;

If you claim to have the Holy Spirit without measure like Jesus did, congratulation!
Maybe you need to look at the issue of hamartiology

Barnabas, Paul, Peter, Phillip etc. were full of the Spirit. Paul told us in Ephesians about being full and filled of the Spirit.

Then you make 1 John 1: 8, 10 a LIE. “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” “If we say have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us” Or maybe it’s the other way round.
Were the Corinthians born again? Did they exhibit carnality?

ha ha ha ha! Who is John writing to? John was writing to babes- carnal/ sin-conscious Christians. Not Young men or Fathers. The fathers are those that are righteousness-conscious.
2 My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin.

Carnality means being fleshly-ruled, body-ruled; sense-ruled. There are a lot of carnal christians even on this thread. A carnal man let's his flesh dominate him while a spiritual man let's his spirit rule because the Spirit has been recreated in RIGHTEOUSNESS and TRUE HOLINESS. The spiritual man is guided by the word and the spirit but the carnal man tries to rationalize God's word to a "believable level".

Mark 6: 5 clearly tells us that Jesus marveled because of their unbelief. Now unbelief how? Again like I repeatedly said, context is important. Looking at earlier discourse in that portion it is clear that it was about his person that the issue is, not about their ‘faith’ for miracles.

Thrash! If you disbelieve the person you disbelieve the authority that he functions in. Jesus said "those who receive a Prophet would receive the reward of a Prophet". That is why those who didn't see him as a Prophet (E.g Nazareth) didn't have faith to receive mighty miracles from him.

Mark 6:5-6New International Version (NIV)
5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6 He was amazed at their lack of faith.
Galatians 3:5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

I hope you what the meaning of ‘formal’ is. If you do then you will know that all you wrote here is chaff.

1. officially sanctioned or recognized."a formal complaint" synonyms: official, legal, authorized, approved, validated, certified, endorsed, documented, sanctioned, licensed, recognized, authoritative, accepted, verified, legitimate, lawful, valid, bona fide, proper, prescribed, pro-forma

Matthew 10:8King James Version (KJV)
8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

If he gave these instructions in the Past he can still give this instructions in the present and he did!

[s]Like i said previously:
There is a difference between him and us because we continue to have the sin nature which he never did.
[/s]
I still do not see anything in scripture that talks about doing miracles progressively. Maybe the WoF advocates use this to justify their inability to do certain things at any point in their ministry. Maybe you should show me clearly.

Again because Jesus did not heal all DOES NOT mean he did not have the ABILITY to heal all. The two are different.

[s]You are ADDING to what Jesus stated in Matthew 28:18-20 when you include healing schools in it. Please show me where that is included in that passage.[/s]

[s]Jesus' miracles were not formally arranged. It did not take those healed days or weeks to be healed as a result of their needing to increase their faith to be healed. Healing schools are the OPPOSITE of this. To that extent they run in direct contrast to how Jesus FUNCTIONED. Because the soul is more important than the body the overemphasis on healing schools turns the priority upside down as it focuses more on the physical than on the soul[/s].

I asked you before- Jesus raising "himself" from the dead and raising Lazarus which is a greater miracle and which happened before which? Are they on the same level? The ability of Jesus to heal anyone is embedded in the person's ability to believe Jesus. Jesus COULD NOT heal mighty ailments in Nazareth because the people DID NOT have faith in him. Period.

Joagbaje: Mbaemeka x3

Your posts dey loong o. Try dey summaries na

I am trying to respond to his post's according to each paragraph. I should take note and make them as short as possible.

vooks: Mbaemeka,
Two quick ones
1. Do you have the Holy Spirit as Jesus did? You should since the Spirit teaches you while mere mortals like me are left to REASONING
2. Do you do the same miracles Jesus did?

1. I DO
2. I DO

Vooks,

Those who do the will of the Father

John 6:40New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
40 This is indeed the will of my Father, that all who see the Son and believe in him may have eternal life; and I will raise them up on the last day.”

Do you understand Jesus now? Anyone saying Lord Lord doesn't matter to him except they are Christians. That's what he was saying. Also anyone merely "SAYING" "I did this in your name and I did that in your name" is only just saying it. They are not Christians- they are sinners (those who work iniquity by nature)

Read Ezekiel 18 especially 26-27

Ezekiel 18:26-27 King James Version (KJV)
26 When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.
27 Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.

Does this mean that if a christian sins he has lost his salvation? hahahaha.

Regardless of what it means, there are some who acted and did something in Jesus name and were dismissed as workers of iniquity

That is a lie. Jesus said Many will SAY to him and not many who did. . .read the words well and stop with your additions.

Was Judas a sinner? Did he use that name?

John 12:6 King James Version (KJV)
6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

Judas was a sinner like every other man that pre-existed Jesus' death was. Even those who don't believe in Jesus regardless of how well behaved they are- they are ALL sinners. But before Jesus died his name was not yet salvific coupled with the fact that it had limitations in its use- it was restricted to Israel. So Judas and co worked miracles in the name (in the stead of the owner and with the authority he possessed) even though they were still sinners then. When Jesus died and resurrected the name had all the authority in heaven and in earth and became the name that saves people. The name belongs now to Christians.

So again like I said in the previous post- Judas was not unknown by Jesus, Judas was known but he died without receiving Christ's salvation that's why he went to hell and nothing more.

vooks: I do think and meditate about the Word of God and clearly the Spirit does not teach corpses nor birds but thinking men. You are thinking about what/how to respond and quit pretending otherwise. The scriptures were not transmitted by the Spirit but by thinking men diligently compared and translated. Thinking is a privilege I don't abuse

Like said earlier- I don't reason out the word of God. I let the Holy Spirit teach me through the word and I take him for exactly what he is and not a watered-down version.

Jesus never said many Christians (by your definition, post resurrection believers)would say Lord Lord...He said many so we can't preclude pre-resurrection believers. Judas is well included here. Try another escape route

Simple comprehension should be applied here.

Matthew 7:21-23 King James Version (KJV)

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

I don't know what Christianity has to do with the discourse. Anybody can say Lord Lord doesn't mean they are saved. The will of the father is that men should believe the one he sent- Jesus. That's what Jesus meant.

The FACT is a man who did miracles in Jesus name perished.

The man perished as an apostate and Jesus would not say to Judas "I never knew you". That's simple enough. Judas couldn't repent because he tasted of that power from on high and later dis-reputed it.

ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE is your thinking. You might as well quantify that. What percentage of miracle performing Christians perish? It does not matter. Some will

No Christian will perish. Let alone a miracle-performing one.

Ezekiel is very clear. Your state at death determines your eternity. Ditto the thief on the cross. Did Jesus know him seeing they met a few hours before their death? NEVER knowing means they perished in their sins. Whether they sinned all their lives or at death is irrelevant. Read Ezekiel 18 again

This means it is perfectly possible for a Christian miracle worker to perish, especially habitual sinners

You don't know who a christian is. A christian is the opposite of a sinner so let that marinate first. You have totally missed the mark with your Ezekiel reference and now is not the time or the thread to school you on that. The thief on the cross got the same promissory note that other disciples had before Jesus death and resurrection. Jesus would know him in Heaven even if he had worked iniquity all through his life because Jesus knew him when it mattered to the thief.

vooks: mbaemeka,
Let's practice thinking for once;
Answer these three questions as faithfully as you can
1. Did Judas perform miracles in the name of Jesus?

Luke 9:1-7 King James Version (KJV)
9 Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.
2 And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick.
3 And he said unto them, Take nothing for your journey, neither staves, nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece.
4 And whatsoever house ye enter into, there abide, and thence depart.
5 And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them.
6 And they departed, and went through the towns, preaching the gospel, and healing every where.

2. Did Judas perish in sin?


John 17:12 King James Version (KJV)
12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

3. Can somebody who has ever performed miracles in Jesus name perish?

I don't think about the word of God. The spirit of God teaches me. Maybe you should stop reasoning the word and just take him for who he is.

1. Did Judas cast out demons etc? Yes he did under the delegated authority that Jesus gave his disciples while he was alive (before his death). Judas was not a christian for Jesus had not died.

2. Judas perished in sin because he was never saved to begin with and he killed himself before he could be. Thereby fulfilling scriptures.

3. If a christian that performed miracles in Jesus name apostasizes and walks away from the faith he/she would perish. But it would be almost impossible for any christian who has tasted of this power in Jesus name to apostasize and deny the faith. Paul said if they ever did so they would never be able to repent again (and not that God would not forgive them). Even at that Jesus would not say to the person "I never knew you" for that would be a lie. Jesus knew the person as a christian while he worked miracles in his name. The person only lost his way and denied Jesus by saying he doesn't want to be christian again. That's apostasy and it is the only way salvation can be lost.

Can you see why it is impossible for a sinner to use the name of Jesus to achieve a miracle? Besides, Jesus said to them "I NEVER knew you" proving without a doubt that they didn't do what they claimed.

Trustman

In typical Trustman style you keep recycling the same issues and giving your own interpretations of my statements then giving your purported "correct" interpretations regardless of how ridden with contradictions they are. For instance, I have maintained all through that Jesus (the man) was unique in that he had a SINLESS SPIRIT and SINLESS BLOOD but his FLESH was a sinful one and therefore subject to the temptations of sin.

I also told you repeatedly that the miracles he wrought were not as a result of his blood or spirit but they were as a result of the HOLY SPIRIT that was within him (his sinful/ mortal flesh). For this very fact any man that is born into this world with a mortal flesh like Jesus will be able to do the same miracles he did if he has the HOLY SPIRIT within like Jesus did. It doesn't matter how much you say SINFUL NATURE in relation to mankind or in contrast with Jesus. SINFUL NATURE refers to the SPIRIT of the unregenerate man and not his FLESH. When a man becomes Born again he receives a NEW NATURE that is now SINLESS like Jesus' and he receives the HOLY SPIRIT that enables the miracles to happen so men have as much claim to the miraculous and Jesus said so belaboredly.

That Jesus forgave sin isn't anything to behold his Deity from. I told you he made claims to his deity without FUNCTIONING as deity. Jesus said he forgave sins to show that the SON OF MAN could forgive sins and not that GOD could forgive sins (which everyone knows including Pharisees). Jesus also gave us the right to forgive any man's sins just like he did. It is not a big deal. Stop cherry-picking words in a style that doesn't show scriptural maturity. When Jesus died and resurrected he became the one to REMOVE sins and not just forgive sins which any christian can do. This clearly shows the world of class between the man and the GOD.

Jesus didn't say before Abraham I was. He said before Abraham "I AM". If the Jews understood him to mean he was saying he pre-existed Abraham they would have laughed him off as a mad man seeing that they knew he was just 33. But for him to say I AM he was making a claim to his deity as the WORD of God that was in the bosom of the father when he appeared to Moses in the burning bush. Again this is Jesus making a claim to his deity and NOT FUNCTIONING as one.

Again in John 1:10 like all the verses above it was John explaining Jesus' CLAIM to deity and not his FUNCTIONS because he never once functioned as GOD while on earth. He only made claims and I have said that so many times it is baffling that you continue to pretend that it is flying over you. Besides, John was describing the WORD in the beginning of his book because he was trying to set the precedence before stating that that WORD was what was made FLESH and dwelled amongst us. Again proving me right that JESUS was flesh and functioned as one because Jesus is the WORD that became FLESH and John wrote this AFTER Jesus had died and resurrected.

Colossians 2 or any of Paul's writings would not help your case so there's no need mentioning them. The books are very clear. Jesus is the first born from the dead; who died on the cross and brought us into oneness with God. If Jesus was functioning as God while on earth he would not have died or be referred to as the first born from the dead. If Jesus was functioning as God he would not be described as the first creation for GOD cannot be created. The word which was in God was released on earth to become a man named Jesus. That man died on the cross and was raised. He became the first born from the dead as a result and was elevated to a status that the WORD had at the beginning of the creation- God. His name was exalted too as a result and he was given ALL AUTHORITY IN HEAVEN AND ON EARTH AND EVEN UNDERNEATH THE EARTH and Jesus told his disciples when this happened- after the resurrection.

Whether you called Jesus the God-man or whether that is in contention isn't the essence of this discourse. I have maintained and continue to do so from scripture that albeit Jesus was God and made claims to that effect. He never functioned as God while on earth (before his death). He functioned ONLY as a man. He wasn't holding any universe while on earth- he was a mere man that needed to pray always like he recommended mere men did. He wept, he sweated, he panicked even before his death. All these easily show manly attitudes in him and not his deity.

Jesus was as different as Adam and only just because both men had sinless spirits and blood at conception even though their flesh was subject to sin. While Adam failed by subjecting himself to sin, Jesus won by not doing so. Jesus had to be as much man as Adam was given that he was going to represent the same men that Adam initially represented. After Jesus resurrected he gave the new men (formed after him) the right to act in his authority and receive the same Spirit he received without measure just like him. In fact, it would be outright stupidity to reject the instructions he gave us "to go in his authority" saying that he was unique and only him could function that way. When he himself has already told you he is sending you the same way his father sent him.

A born again man doesn't have A SIN NATURE. For what makes a man's nature is the SPIRIT that he has and the born again man has been created in RIGHTEOUSNESS. But Just like Jesus we have a mortal flesh that can sin and Paul told us to bring it under subjection.

As per progressively doing miracles you don't need to see it given that you may have not studied the scriptures well. I have put the verses showing Jesus saying exactly that- that the Holy spirit will show him GREATER miracles than the one's the Jews had already seen at the point, so that they would marvel. If you have a better interpretation of the verse please show us here.

Again Mark 6:5 says Jesus COULD NOT do mighty (GREATER works/miracles) in Nazareth because of his people's LACK OF FAITH so he went about teaching them (again showing teaching is not the works). The bible never said Jesus DID NOT or that he CHOSE NOT to. The bible said HE COULD NOT and in English language the word COULD signifies an ability to do something and not a willingness. Jesus cannot save or heal anyone that doesn't believe in him to do so.

I am not ADDING to anything in showing you the commission he gave to us. For whatever he said in Matthew 28 was the same thing Mark 16 was referring to. The gospel of Jesus is that he has saved mankind from SIN and the consequences of it. Sickness is one of the consequences of sin and healing schools help people receive the healing that Jesus salvation wrought for them. That's why Jesus told his disciples to wait in Jerusalem first before going about to preach the gospel. He knew the gospel required more than words- it also required the demonstration of the power. In Acts 1:8 Jesus said when they received the Holy Spirit they will now receive the POWER to be effective witnesses for him around the world. Paul who came into the scene much later taught the same things: that he didn't only preach with words he also demonstrated the power in the gospel. And even today (just like the early church) we are to preach the gospel with the same power and even more. That is what Healing Schools are meant for.

Jesus healed formally on occasions. People gathered at his door and then he healed all of them. He also instructed his disciples to go out and heal people. Not all the people Jesus healed got healed instantly. Some by gratitude received a wholeness while others just had the symptoms stop. Besides, healing schools don't have gradual healings. They teach faith messages first because that's what causes the miracles to work. While teaching faith some people act on the word and get healed while others may require a touch from the healing minister. Many times when the healing minister touches those still left they receive instant healings and continue to live so even till 30years later.

Healing schools are not church services or crusades where salvation is majorly preached even though salvation messages are preached in healing schools. Healing schools are even held in periods at the leading of the spirit of God and are less frequent than normal church services. As for messages of the gospel they are taught regularly in church services to those who have already received it and are on course to grow. So those who didn't get sent by God should mind their businesses and leave those who actually were sent to do what God asked them to do.

Vooks,

You are saying many words and yet passing no message. Let me ask again.

1. Not everyone who says "lord, lord" will enter the kingdom of Heaven. This means some that say "lord, lord" will enter the kingdom. Who are those?

2. Jesus didn't say "those who prophesied in my name, cast out demons in my name etc." I never you. He said they will SAY to him "lord we cast out demons in your name. . .etc" and he would respond that he NEVER knew them.

Who can be regarded by Christ as "I NEVER KNEW YOU?" If someone was born again and worked miracles in Jesus name and later apostasized will Jesus say "I never knew you"? Or will he say "You were once in my fold but you left"?

3. Do you know what it means to act or do something in Jesus name? What does working iniquity mean?

4. Do you think that name can be used by sinners to achieve anything (save obtain salvation) ?

5. Then for your references to the disciples account, you have spoken like a true nepios (one not accustomed to walking in the knowledge or power of God). How could his disciples who thought the preserve of working miracles in Jesus' name accept that someone somewhere could do that without following Jesus? What was Jesus' response? Why did he not talk about sinners using his name but on the last day I would decide who is who? Why did he say "don't forbid them"?

You need not respond as Jesus already did. He said NO ONE who works a miracle in my name will afterwards speak evil of me. So stop bending Jesus' words to suit your unbelief. The name of Jesus can never be used to work miracles by sinners. In fact, it is an insult to Jesus for anyone to suggest so let alone a hypocrite arrogating the right to call one righteous or unrighteous.

vooks: Warped logic probably recited from a 'Christian' book by you know whom;
You are in danger of hellfire and you think you can LIE (to GOD) your way out of this by claiming you did stuff in Jesus name you never did? Not logical.
In any case, if these people will be at the judgement seat lying, what would Jesus' rational response be? Tell them they are lying. Instead He says he never knew them meaning regardless of what they did, He never knew them. Their sin/disqualification is WORKING INIQUITY and NOT PURPORTING TO HAVE DONE THINGS IN JESUS NAME THEY NEVER DID

Don't quote me if you have nothing meaningful to say. You didn't need to create a new handle to engage me. I quoted the scriptures and showed you exactly what Jesus said and I interpreted it for all to see because I know what it is to act in the name of Jesus. The name belongs to ONLY christians. Let me quote Jesus again this time maybe you would be kind enough to read it a little slower while meditating on it.

21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

From the verses above we can infer 2 things:

1. There are some that say "lord,lord" that will enter the kingdom of heaven.
2. There are some that will say that they prophesied, cast out demons, did many wonders and he will say to them "thou good and faithful servant, welcome"

Agree? Good. So who are those ones? Let us start from there and we would watch your interpretation crumble like biscuits. BTW, he said "I never knew you" not that "I knew you but you backslid" or "I knew you but you worked iniquity". He said "I never knew you" meaning you were never a christian, period.

Mark 9:39New King James Version (NKJV)
39 But Jesus said, “Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me.

This verse, Jesus was specifically addressing disciples' concern with people who did miracles and they were not following Him as the disciples. He sought to allay their fears that the men were blaspheming. It does not prove that one can't perform miracles in Jesus name and still perish

You spoke about warped logic earlier on right? The emboldened is a perfect example of such. Jesus said NO ONE meaning not a single soul who works a miracle IN MY NAME can soon after speak evil of me. For if you taste of that power, you would know there is nothing or no one greater than the one vested in Jesus' name.

But like I have been saying: anyone can quote scriptures in any format and use it to make a case (even atheists) because there is no experience to back the interpretation given. That all changes when you are boxed to prove that what you believe works and then we start hearing all sorts of dumb excuses.

Trustman

The key thing God wanted us to understand from there is that Jesus is the Christ and that is how unique the man, Jesus was. There's no need to argue the scriptures because it turns what you believed on it's head. That verse that said he descended from heaven didn't say Jesus descended from heaven for he didn't. Jesus was born by Mary. The word was what descended from heaven and made a form in Mary's womb and was born a human being (100%). So you should understand the context too.

Also, when you talk about the phrase "born again" or "born from above" I need you to understand why I said it in relation to Jesus. Jesus is the son of God because he was born of the word of God same way anyone who is born again is born of the same word of God. Secondly, that verse in Colossians 2 wasn't referring to Jesus while he was on earth. Paul called the person he was describing the "first born from the dead" same way John called Jesus that in Revelations 1:5. How can God be born from the dead?

Jesus also never gave anyone eternal life while he was on earth. He made a promissory note to them and they received it when he resurrected- the scriptures are clear and replete with such notions. You are not helping your argument by quoting portions of scripture with Jesus saying he is one with the Father or what not. I never said he wasn't. I said he FUNCTIONED as a man even if in legal terms he was indeed God. Same way a medical doctor while receiving treatment from another medical doctor remains a doctor in legal terms even if he has become a patient and has to FUNCTION as one by doing what "medical doctor" says to him regardless of his own experience. That's how Jesus functioned.

Don't make me laugh with the reference to John 10. Even up to John 17 Jesus said he had overcome the world. That was him talking faith- he only overcame the world when he died and resurrected. That's what we talk about legal and vital terms. Jesus took a blood oath (communion) with his disciples and told them that was his blood shed for the sins of the world. Tell me had his blood been shed by then? Nobody had eternal life till Jesus died and resurrected.

So please do away with the notion that Jesus was functioning in between being God and man. That's an absolute lie with no corroborating scriptures to effect it. Jesus was God because he hailed from God BUT he FUNCTIONED as a man. He did everything he did on earth as a man and he died as a man. He had to be as much man as the people he was dying for. That's why he had to deplete himself of his privileges as God.

The reason you can't mention Hebrew 1 or any other scriptures that you feel I will tell you it represents the present is because you can see it lucidly from the various books. In Revelations 1: 18 Jesus told John that I was dead but NOW I am alive forevermore and I have collected the Keys of hell and of death from the one who had it- the devil. When did Jesus collect the keys from the devil?

Again lol at 1 John 3:2. I showed you where Jesus said the glory God gave him he is giving to us. I can also show you where scripture says as Jesus IS so are we in this world. Again I can show you where Jesus said as the father sent him so he too is sending us. So why will we have less of him when he is sending us the same way the father sent him (with the Holy Spirit)?

This very scripture buttresses my point all along. If you claim Jesus was functioning as God-man while on earth and he referred to himself as the son of God, then what aspect of our sonship are we not seeing yet? What part does not appear yet? Hahaha.

Jesus was mortal while on earth even though he was God. The immortality that made him God had not appeared while he was on earth before his death. Jesus immortality became evident after he resurrected. That's the same way with us who are already sons of God. We can function like Jesus did while he was on earth even though we do not yet have the Immortal body like he does now but when he appears at the rapture the dead in Christ will first take a new body and ascend from the grave while those of us that are still alive then will change in the twinkle of an eye and we would look like him- immortal. That's what 1 John 3:2 means.

Again Jesus perfect humanity was not his flesh. His flesh was like any other man's. His perfect humanity was his blood and Spirit for they were not tainted by sin. So there was no difference between him when he received the Spirit and We that have received the Spirit now because it is in the same flesh. I told you that Jesus flesh was a mortal one while he was on earth. Only his blood was sinless. So even if his flesh did not sin it could sin if he let it. That was part of the subjection he had to let himself face. So forget all those excuses you were taught and made to believe. If Jesus (having a mortal flesh) could do all he did by the Holy Spirit then we too that have a mortal flesh can do same if we have the same Holy Spirit which we do.

Jesus was as obedient to the Holy Spirit as much as God wants us to for he was the standard. Jesus didn't tell us he could do any greater miracles at any time. He said the Holy Spirit will show HIM greater miracles progressively so that the naysayers and believers alike will marvel. So he had to let the Holy Spirit do what he wanted to do as the opportunity arose- that is the definition of Faith.

In John 14:12 I explained the word works in my previous post even if you pretended not to see it only to ask me again. The works Jesus did are clear in the scriptures- healings, miracles, signs, wonders. The word is ERGON meaning acts or deeds and they would be performed by the HOLY SPIRIT. He wasn't referring to preaching or teaching.

Salvation from sin includes salvation from sickness, ignorance, death etc. Because they all came with sin. If you tell any man that God has taken away his sins then you must tell him that his diseases and sicknesses were taken away the same way. If he believes you, the sicknesses will dematerialize before his very eyes and he will have a greater conviction about the sins being taken away that he cannot visualize.

Jesus COULD NOT heal all the same way he CANNOT save all. He can only save or heal those who believe and put their faith in him. Also, Jesus' mandate to preach the GOSPEL (GOOD NEWS) includes telling people that he has taken away their sicknesses and proving it to them. That is exactly what HEALING SCHOOLS are meant for.

There is no institution that demonstrates Christ's salvation message as the healing school. The healing school is for demonstrating salvation. Salvation messages are preached there copiously for those who come there who may not have been saved. That's why they don't just gather people to lay hands or just pray- No. They teach about Jesus and what his death wrought for his church then they minister to sick people and get them healed to prove that the same Jesus that lived on this earth and did all those wonderful things including dying on the cross is very much alive today still doing the same things- that's the salvation theme: Jesus is ALIVE! And that's the level God wants all his children to get to.

trustman: Like I pointed before now I want to keep our discussion in focus, otherwise we would have to be treating so many issues. 

It may be difficult to persuade you that Jesus did not shut off his deity while here on earth short of quoting him directly say so. Nevertheless look at these: 
"No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man." John 3:13
"He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all." John 3: 31.

I beseech you to study any verse(s) thoroughly before showing them to me as I may understand them better than you do. It is not a statement of pride. I am merely stating another fact. For example, In the Book of John 3 that you referenced in your post I want you to observe the verse 13 well.

13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

You missed out on the emboldened. At the time that John retold the story Jesus, the son of Man was in heaven for he had ascended. He descended as the word of God from Heaven that was made flesh. That's one aspect. Secondly the phrase "come from above" or "born from above" as used in verse 31 was the same word Jesus used in verse 3 to mean born again. The word is gennethe anothen. Jesus was saying one who is born again is above all and talks as one who is from above while those who are of the earth (sinners) talk in a worldly way. In other words, one who is born again talks faith while sinners talk "facts" We can cross-reference this aspect with what Paul said when he said he went to Heaven and heard words that are not lawful to be said on earth. And we know bad words are never and can never be said in Heaven so we can tell what Paul meant. I can give you an example: On earth when someone (Christian) dies they say "he is dead" but People of God say "he is asleep". The people on earth will say how can you say someone that is dead is sleeping? (Like the disciples said to Jesus concerning Lazarus before they had received the Holy Spirit) but much later we can see Paul use that term alot when referring to Christians. I have many other examples.

John 17:10 All mine are yours, and yours are mine, and I am glorified in them.
In all these we see that the man Jesus is above all mere mortals.

Jesus as God is above all mortals yes. Jesus the man was a mortal (someone subject to death, which he was!). Besides, the verse didn't end there listen to what he said subsequently.

14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

We (who are born again) are not of the world the way Jesus was not of the world.

16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

Again he repeats it.

18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

as God sent him so also he is sending us- the same way and with the same power- by the Holy Spirit!

Incase you wanted to claim it was for only the then disciples:

20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

We have received the same glory that Jesus had. It is that simple.

In his humanity Jesus' deity was still fulfilling Col. 1: 17 and Col. 2: 9
Undiminished deity and true humanity were inseparably united in one person.

False. These verses refer to him now- after the resurrection. Look at the verses before and after verse 17 of Colossians 1.

18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

He is the firstborn from the dead same thing Paul (by the Holy Spirit) had already said in verse 15. Also look at Colossians 2 verse 10

10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

When did he become the head of all principality and power? After his death and resurrection. Even the whole of chapter 2 teaches exactly so. Paul was describing how we got saved and righteous and all happened during his death and resurrection. Period.

When in John 3: 34 we read "For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure." it is clear that the impartation of the Holy Spirit to Jesus was complete. His power to perform miracles was at the FULLEST from day ONE. He did not need to 'exercise' his faith to cause it to grow and enable him perform miracles from one small degree to a greater degree as his faith grew. By the time he started his ministry he had all that was necessary to perform ANY kind of miracle.

LOL, All the men of God and prophets before Jesus had the Holy Spirit come upon them when need was necessary and then leave after. Jesus was the only one to have received the Spirit without him departing and returning. After Jesus died and resurrected (and ascended) he gave us the Holy Spirit too without measure. That's why it is possible for us to be born again. So the fact that Jesus had the Spirit permanently says nothing about the miracles. The miracles are performed by the Holy Spirit as you yield to Him and trust him to do what he said he would do concerning more complex situations than before- that is faith!. Jesus said so.

John 5:20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

The Holy Spirit will show Jesus greater works than healing a man who was impotent in his legs so that you people will marvel- you people that criticize and persecute me. In Chapter 11 for example, we saw a greater miracle- the raising of Lazarus! So even if one has the Holy Spirit like we do today it takes faith to trust him to do what he said when we ask in his name- Jesus.

Collectively as his church we can do greater than he did, like for example reaching more people with the gospel than he did. As individuals ? That's another story.

He said greater miracles than what he did- not greater evangelism or preaching and he referred to individuals. He said he is doing the work he sees his father do and God does not preach! The word is ergon and was used many times in scriptures to refer to the acts/deeds that Jesus did e.g healing the sick, casting out devils, raising the dead etc. Anyone can preach over the radio or have a large following without having the Holy Spirit. The works Jesus was referring to needed the aid of the Holy Spirit- the same one that helped him during his ministry to perform all the acts. That is why we are better of trying to do what Jesus did before bothering about achieving greater ones.

Recognize that to start with he had no old sin nature so the ministry of the Holy Spirit in his life and ministry was like in no other life.
This fact alone, in this preceding sentence, means that no man today can function like Jesus did. That is why he is the only one in all the universe who qualified to be 'the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world'.

We didn't have the same birth with Jesus- he was born without a sin nature I agree. We now have the righteous nature- the same one that Jesus has plus the Holy Spirit. This is what being born- again means. Now we can function like he did and that is why he said as the father sent him so he too is sending us.

His major focus was to fulfill the plan for mankind's salvation. Healings were therefore a secondary part of his ministry. They were added to show or prove that he was who he said he was. So then, Healings should not be given the prominence over the salvation message as HEALING SCHOOLS have become.

The salvation message of God includes the truth that God has healed us and want's us well- and that is what healing schools are for besides, all those that have a healing school got their instructions from God himself.

Paul preached a gospel that made sick people have faith to be healed like the man in Lystra. He preached a gospel that made miracles happen in Galatia, Ephesus etc. Healings are not secondary per se. They are embedded in the message of salvation. A muslim is cripple and a christian approaches him sharing the message of Salvation to him. He tells him about Jesus: how he lived, died and resurrected and the significance of it all including saving him from his sins and sicknesses etc. he believes the message and you ask for a healing in Jesus' name for the man. Instantly, the otherwise cripple man begins to walk. Why would he not easily believe that his sins have been removed the same way his lameness left?

The message of salvation is from faith to faith all through and the Christian is to live by faith for anything that is not of faith is sin. Period.

Topgainer: What are you trying to say by "what God didn't call a sin"? Your god may not see anything ungodly in it, as it sees everything godly in ta.tt.oos, divorce, bleaching skin and the rest.
You are looking for a straight place in the Bible that condemns mas.tur.ba.tion.
That something is practiced in healthcare setting doesn't make it right and godly even among different religious divides. There are two other methods for taking samples for seminal analysis and most married men will opt for any of them rather than your favorite mas.turb.atn
STOP DECEIVING PEOPLE ALL IN YOUR BID TO PROTECT YOUR CAMP

I like your brand of Christianity. Anything that doesn't feel good to you is sin and anything that feels good to you is the work of God. I only admire you from a distance but I don't envy you neither do I want to be like you for I am guided only by the word.

It is your people that once called women wearing trousers sinners or not covering the hair was an abomination to God. It is your people that call weavons and hair attachments as evil weapons of the devil and many other fleshly teachings that you have accepted as the word of God. Just ride on and leave those of us who see the word of God as the only true guide.

I asked you a question and you evaded it and called me a deceiver. You are funny. If you and I claim we are both christians yet you feel I am in the wrong what should be the point of reference to iron things out save the word? Can you see why you are indeed the dangerous person?

Let me ask you again for the second time. Can you please give me the scriptures that enable you to say that I am wrong? I am waiting for them.

Just to even correct some of the lies that are being passed around the mastur-bation issue was raised during a Q and A by an email and Pastor Chris' response was "according to the bible, mastur-bation in itself is not a sin".

Now let me give you another instance, a man is suspected to have Ebola and part of the tests required is to check out his Se-men for the virus and He has to provide a sample for the lab scientists. Does he sin while providing it for them? What does the bible say?

An important factor to be considered in discordance also is length of cohabitation as married couples. In most of the hospital case studies, the longest time of living together is so far 2 years. It is unclear whether the longer the cohabitation period, the lesser rates of discordance will be.

It is unclear whether the longer the cohabitation period, the lesser rates of discordance the article says. Which means they may have had inconsistent results checking this out. Also, take note of the longest time of living together based on that research.

Now imagine 8 years of courting and now 3/4years of living together. The odds are emaciating. That is, if they were together since 2002 which I highly doubt.

I dey go sleep ja re. Good night.

SirJohn: Let me further expose your ignorance lawyer Mba.
Have you heard of Discordance or HIV discordant couples?
Please go read further and get back to me shoo... shoo

lol, I know about HIV discordant couples. Even Kenya28 mentioned it in one of her posts during the heat. Discordance is affected by frequency and some form of resistance that a few people possess (1/10000 or so).

We can subject it to the test and watch the "discordance' fall like a pack of cards (just like all the mutations to her stories) including the 8-year courtship lie.

SirJohn: Hmmm! I can see someone has gone to dust his HIV 101 lecture notes
Well, you are gradually getting there; while you are at it, also Google up or rather read up the possibility of not getting infected even when you have a positive partner.

I was watching the EPL games- that's what I did almost all day. I don't know if I was responding to you on the other thread where I said I had some distant cousin that suffered the HIV which turned to full-blown AIDS of which he eventually died. His CD4 dropped to 50 at some point so I did my research on them then (My sources gave me this information). If Kenya28s CD4 dropped to 375 it is not because the ARVs were giving her side-effects (which they would). It is because the Virus had depleted her immunity to an infection-prone state. This invariably means that the ARVs haven't been working well, period.

So the medicine ain't working well, and they never really will- there would be up and down moments maybe more down than ups and you know this. There is a greater surety in the word of God. Stop destroying her faith.

As per the possibility of not getting the HIV from a positive partner only one reason stands out- LUCK! which could wane if you have done it consistently with that partner unprotected. If we put 2 and 2 . . . we would still arrive at a miracle especially since you said it was for 8 years.

SirJohn: The problem with you is that you think you know too much, but thats your undoing
She met her husband in 2002, they had intimate contact before she went to the healing school and he is still negative till date. He (the husband) never knew she had HIV even though he had his suspicions and her trip to the HS was covert, he was told she was going for a christian conference
You seem to have very little knowledge about HIV as the comments in bold reveal so, I think you should go do some little research first.
She sometimes drops her ARV's because of side effect of the drugs not because they aren't working dude, shes not the only HIV positive person in the world; there are millions of them living a very normal life with medications. Yes its possible for her to still have either negative or positive results depending on several factors.

I don't know why you are talking like this Oga. There are 2 reasons one could get a false negative result and they're easily understood. The first is during the widow period and the second is if the test shows undetectable levels of the virus and this is usually for someone that was confirmed positive before now. The fact that the virus is undetectable doesn't mean the result was negative in fact if samples of the gut or even fluid are tested they will always test positive. But that is different from her case because from 2002-2009 she tested 13 times and all were positive. She said so herself and she said that she had gone through phases of having zero symptoms to which she never once tested negative. That's why she cried her eyes out at the VCT for 3 hrs. The evidences are here for all to see and read.

So I don't understand this theory of her testing falsely negative. The odds should mean it would have happened prior at one of the many symptom-free phases she had and that was never the case including the 2 year symptoms-free one. I won't also buy the nonsense talk of expired strips- indeed the very nurses didn't even want the HS to be right.

Speaking about her husband, you can't give me that story because it has too many holes. For I fail to see the reason how a man will court a lady for 8 solid years between which she suffered relapses and used ARVs and Herbs and never once did he notice. Haba. Even when she said she was using an omega-magic bracelet with infrared or what not. She even said she took no medications for 4 good years or so and only managed her diet before going to the HS. I don't know why you and 'her' are now claiming she took herbs before going or that she took it 4 months before and then stayed 2 years symptoms-free. That is a lie. The time she said she took the herbs was between 2005 & 2006 for 4 months and after which she stopped and had a 2-year phase where all went well yet she still tested POSITIVE.

So for her to come back now to alter all the stories just shows the character she has and for you to endorse it even makes you worse considering how much of a liar you once thought she was. Someone who even lied to her husband to be for 8 good years not thinking about his safety or the risks she was putting him through.

SirJohn: As usual, you turn a blind eye to the truth; she lived for 8 years with the virus and was able to conceal this from her fiance, how do you explain that? off course you didn't bother to think how that was possible did you? Well read her story again, perhaps it will make sense to you now.
She obviously was on other medications that helped lower her viral loads and give her symptom free periods; that explains why the husband is still negative despite contacts with her even before the healing school. She even said she was symptom free for two years or more at some point before going to the healing school.

Her CD4 levels dropped because she stayed away from her medications, shes gone back to them and is better now. Shes been strong for about twelve years and will be stronger.

I have read her story(s) so many times- all 3 of them and she never did say that she dated her husband for 8 years. From what I can understand, she tested positive in 2002 and again in 2005 after living in denial. Then she battled the symptoms with ARVs and herbs till 2010 when she sought other options including the HS. So it is possible she met her then fiancé in 2009 or 2010 for if it were any earlier he would have known and pulled out.

Then she began making enquiries on the HS in January of 2010 and eventually went in April. Even at that, a HIV positive status cannot read negative no matter how symptoms-free the person has been so if her and fiancé were doing things unprotected before the HS he would have tested positive. Besides, even she said she was free of symptoms for 2 years before going to the HS she still would have tested positive. Now factor it with the fact that she said she refused to get one in Kenya before travelling to SA because she didn't want him to see a positive status abi? So what ailment did she tell him she was going to the HS for or did she lie to him that she was going on vacation? If she didn't lie to him and he didn't know that she went there then we can only conclude that he didn't exist before she went to the HS and as such for him to test negative after "creating" a child with her must be a miracle- regardless of what you or she says.

Nope her CD4 dropped 3 weeks ago- that part was clear. She said the ARVs weren't working so she decided to go back to her herbs and she has seen results to which we bless God for. If we want to prove that she will still test positive now (even after improving by taking herbs and living symptom-free) we can ask her to do so. So all that talk about placebos or faulty strips doesn't add up and you know it.

SirJohn: So tell me Barr. mbaemeka, what are you trying to insinuate by the statement in bold?

Your guess is as good as mine

WinsomeX: You should not have quoted me. You know you and I respect ourselves a lot on this forum and if we start, its usually difficult to end.

So just behave as if you didn't see that word "horror" and let us not be forced to reveal more sordid details. Your church has enough troubles to contend with, you need not add to it.

So, oga, park well...

I don't quote you to engage you, you have nothing to say to me and nothing to teach me. I am presenting a case to observers of the thread. If you have more sordid details please reveal them and make a foool of yourself as usual.

I will be scared to have my chief witness as one who has said 3 different accounts of one story to which only the first one was expressed unsolicited and under no whim of anger or bitterness. Any wise lawyer will tell you that.

So, don't reply me.

Cheers.

WinsomeX: 1. It's apparent you have not been following the thread. Go back a bit and read her reactions when she discovered she was still positive. She didn't spare Joagbaje and the rest at all. And that's the reason for their attitude to her. Forger that suggestion: apart from the fact that she won't associate with them, Joagbaje has proven to anyone on this forum that he can heal anything, except for his minions.
.

She didn't associate with CE again right after receiving her healing and the posts are here for anyone to see. She repeatedly told everyone here that she tested negative by the same strips that had tested positive before 13 times in the past. She testified here that she got healed before she ever met Pastor Chris and that she went to an "independent" clinic to get tested of which the nurses expressed their dislike for the HS and Pastor Chris. Despite all these they didn't deny that she tested negative but they asked her to get retested 2 months after.

She lived free of those symptoms that plagued her for a full year after she had cancelled her payments to her doctor. She got married, had a child yet her husband tested negative till date. Even when she said all these SirJohn and co repeatedly called her names including "CE worker, liar, fraud etc." Today that same liar is all of a sudden saying the truth that need not be questioned including how improved her writings have become within a very short span.

They can tell their stories to the marines.