₦airaland Forum

trustman:
It is not a verse i gave you. I gave you a whole chapter to look at but as usual you just glanced through and yet hope to get something without giving attention to details.



You both should see these for starters;
These are from the ESV

Leviticus 23: 14
And you shall eat neither bread nor grain parched or fresh until this same day, until you have brought the offering of your God: it is a statute forever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.

Leviticus 23:21
And you shall make a proclamation on the same day. You shall hold a holy convocation. You shall not do any ordinary work. It is a statute forever in all your dwelling places throughout your generations.

Leviticus 23:31
You shall not do any work. It is a statute forever throughout your generations in all your dwelling places.


Even when you go back to Leviticus 16 the same things are found all over.

PS -
So maybe you can now answer my question:
How many of them do you or your church still follow today?

I have answered something similar to vooks. The law said throughout your generations like the Aaronic priesthood etc. They came with the law and went with the law. Abraham's covenant came pre-law, thus the law that came afterwards could not annull it.

Now answer Gombs' question: was circumcision for ISRAEL AND ONLY ISRAEL?

vooks:
You ignored my question(s)

1. Is a Christian Jew under ANY obligation to be circumcised?

You have NEVER asked this question before and my answer is still NO. Now please answer my question: what was the usefulness of circumcision in the past?

2. You read too much between the lines. Paul was not saving Timothy from ostracization,Timothy a half-Jew was under no obligation to be circumcised. This came right after the Council so it is least likely the Circumcision party could have targeted a Christian for the very thing that had been ruled. Paul was avoiding his detractors unsaved Jews, the same guys who later accused him of taking a Gentile, Tophimus to the temple

Awww, Men. This is nonsense. Pure Jews didn't even want anyone bar Jews to be circumcised. How would they then be expecting Paul to circumcise a Gentile? They could careless about Christianity as a whole let alone who is or not circumcised. On the other hand they accused Paul of taking Trophimus into the SYNAGOGUE because according to the law, NON-JEWS weren't allowed to go in to the place of worship. This is totally unconnected to Christianity.

3. It is your team that claims that circumcision has some value though it don't add righteousness nor save nobody. Gombs claim it is a means of identifying with the promise. That's garbage hopefully his and not CE because, such residual purposes were not sufficient to persuade Paul to circumcise Gentiles. Please let's stop word plays; when I say worthless, you know well exactly what I mean; ZERO religious value

Bogus point again. Nobody ever claimed circumcision had any religious or spiritual value but it had a fleshly one. You even claimed it was useful before but have since evaded my questions asking you what it's usefulness was before. As per the emboldened, not only did Gombs say it, I did too.

Romans 2:25King James Version (KJV)
25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law:

Circumcision was not the covenant God had with Abraham. God had a covenant with Abraham and gave promises in Genesis 12 & 15, and then circumcision became the seal of that promise, similar to a wedding ring which is not the marriage but a sign of the marriage. It shows that the woman or man wearing the ring identifies with whomever they are married to.

Romans 3 King James Version (KJV)

3 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, [size=24pt]because that unto them were committed the oracles of God[/size].

This is what we have been saying ^^^.

So why did Paul not coerce anyone into being circumcised? Simple, because the seal of the NT is the Holy Spirit and he is all that matters SPIRITUALLY. But he never said circumcision was TOTALLY DISMISSED or what not- word play or not, it is spurios and specious and should be retracted.

4. Israel clings to an extremely small fraction of what Abraham was promised and you can bet in the next 3,000 years if Christ tarried,that won't change

Just like the Jews, you too are confused about the promise. Let me belabor it again. The promise about owning the WHOLE WORLD was given to Abraham and his seed and not SEEDS. That seed is Christ and we (the body of christ) are that body and seed/heir of the promise. I hope I don't need to show the scriptures clearly averring this.

Exodus 40. Let's drop word play with (per)versions. Let's go Hebrews and ask us if the word EVERLASTING is used with regard to Aaronic priesthood. Can the word be qualified?
The Jews MISUNDERSTOOD? Prove from scriptures that Abrahamic covenant is eternal, and while at it tell me whether a Jew is still under the circumcision obligation

All Jews still circumcise themselves till date. I believe your question is directed at Jewish Christians and NO they are not obligated/mandated to get circumcised anymore- doesn't mean they don't do it.

The Abrahamic covenant gave birth to the NT. We who are of faith are regarded as the REAL children of Abraham.

Galatians 3:14King James Version (KJV)
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

The promises God made to Abraham is accessed by us via faith- faith in Jesus Christ. Meaning the agreement with Abraham is still intact. That is why we could usurp all the blessings from it by being in christ.

15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.

Albeit God made the covenant with a man, nobody can disannull it-not even you mate.

17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Even the LAW (which came years after) could not disannull the Abrahamic covenant.

29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

This verse shows that the church is the SEED that God referred to in Genesis 17. So that rubbish talk about the covenant being for ISRAEL AND ISRAEL ALONE should be thrown away.

Acts 3:25King James Version (KJV)
25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

If you don't get it after seeing this ^^ particular verse, you may not get it at all. Peter said the church (because we are the REAL SEED as shown from Galatians above) represents the children of the covenant- the one God made with ABRAHAM that his seed will be blessed. So how can anyone not see that this covenant is everlasting?

Again NOBODY is obligated to get circumcised anymore than they are obligated to wear a wedding ring. But you cannot claim the ring like the circumcision is COMPLETELY USELESS because it is not. It is only useless as a condition for salvation. Period.

Hebrews 7:21-24King James Version (KJV)
21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec
22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:
24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.

For Paul to tell his fellow Jews in this book that this man- Jesus, had an unchangeable priesthood which he got after the father swore that he will NEVER CHANGE HIS MIND concerning that. It means they (like you) "thought" the Aaronic and Levitical priesthoods were everlasting- but they weren't.

About kneeling and clapping. I find it decidedly convenient that you insist on NT yet when it comes to tithing, you excavate dead things in Genesis to prove a point.

I didn't insist on nothing. It is only in the NT that we were pointed out to the spiritual part of worship hence why I referred you to it since we are discussing spiritual values of things done in the NT. In actual fact I never said anything about the NT. The assignment is open to ANY BOOK of the bible. Show me the spiritual value of kneeling and clapping.

Clapping is a command from God, it is as spiritual as lifting hands. That hands can be lifted without spiritual value don't mean lifting them is no spiritual. You can do better than argue absurdities.

The emboldened is absolute nonsense. You can do the needful and quote the relevant scriptures saying so. And that you related it to lifting of hands is even nauseatingly disingenuous. The blue font flew over me. Maybe you should rephrase it. I have mentioned the 3 things that God related to praise and worship in scriptures in the NT, you are just making the absurdities and accusing others of it. Can you remember why I mentioned kneeling and clapping to you? To show you that just like circumcision and co, there are many things we do in Christianity that have no spiritual value but they are not wrong all the same.

Circumcision is not only of ZERO spiritual value, it is of NO religious value, none whatsoever to a believer. Any value you ascribe to it is a measure of your creative imagination that escaped Paul and the Holy Spirit

Please just one quote from anyone on this thread that said circumcision has any spiritual value and if you cannot provide one then you are advised to stop employing it as diversionary tool. It is DOA.

vooks:
1. Usefulness is restricted to the covenant Abraham had with God

2. Neither was Timothy compelled. Paul just did it. Some things can be dismissed WITHOUT being banned. Paul offered sacrifices per Nazirite vow. It is no sin to do such but they are on NO VALUE to nobody. So dismissal vs complete dismissal is a nonsensical dichotomy

3. Point was and remains, Paul was perfectly at ease with Titus the uncircumcised Gentile

4. Everlasting means up to and including eternity? Everlasting can by qualified. Will circumcision be carried out in regeneration? Does a Christian Jew need circumcision?

Gen 17:8 (KJV) And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

Will the Jews inhabit Israel forever?

Exodus 40:15 (KJV)
And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations

Numbers 25:13 (KJV)
And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel

Is Levitical priesthood everlasting in any way?

Everlasting as used in Genesis appears to me to mean PERMANENT not eternal. The priesthood ended with Jesus Christ yet it was everlasting. Am strongly persuaded that circumcision NOW (after Christ) is completely useless for EVERY believer Jew or Gentile. It adds nothing to what the believer receives in Christ nor does it act as a sign of ANYTHING

5. Being commanded to do so and the Fact that Paul did it suffices. Or you wanted an epistle on kneeling in prayers?

1. That covenant still exists. Again I ask: what was the usefulness of the covenant in the past?

2. Moot sir. It is clear as day. Paul did it because he didn't want Timothy to be ostracised by the Jews. The same Jews would have done it to Titus but they didn't because Paul took him in the presence of James and co in Jerusalem (who didn't mind that he wasn't circumcised). And you are wrong again about the Nazirite vow. It had fleshly value and that is why Paul honored it. It is similar to a christian that borrows money from his fellow christian friend and then refuses to Pay saying 'it means nothing to my salvation'.

So it is pleonastic to keep telling us that circumcision added nothing to salvation. We never said it did. But one can benefit from it physically and that is in itself valueable.

3. Bland. We never said Paul was uncomfortable with any uncircumcised man. In 1 Corinthians 7 he said if you were uncircumcised before you received Christ, you don't need to be circumcised after and if otherwise, the same remains.

4. a)That was Canaan and not Israel and yes, it is forever owned by Abraham and his seed till date.

b) Exodus 40:15 didn't say the Aaronic priesthood will last forever. It said Aarons sons will be the only priests of God's people. How do I know? 2 reasons; 1) other translations like CEV and 2) in Hebrews 7, Paul said when God swore that Jesus will be a priest forever he didn't say it like he had done so about Aaron and the levites meaning you, like the Jews, misunderstood what God was saying in Exodus and Numbers and Hebrews 7 aptly proves it.

5. You were not commanded to do anything and Paul doing it suffices nothing my friend. Didn't you just claim that Paul observed a Nazirite vow even though it meant nothing? Didn't Paul not stay unmarried? Does it mean they had spiritual implications? NO.

The 3 ways God told us to praise and worship him in the NT are very clear. We are to lift up holy hands without fear and wrath; We are to sing Psalms, Hymns and spiritual songs while making melody in our hearts unto God; We are to worship God with the fruit of our lips praising his name. Full stop.

Clapping doesn't mean praise or worship spiritually. Kneeling doesn't mean it spiritually as well. If they did, then people who clap in football games are praising God and those who kneel are worshiping him as well. Clapping and kneeling are fleshly like shutting our eyes. It makes us concentrate; it shows physical obeisance and reverence BUT they are of ZERO SPIRITUAL VALUE. So understand that NOT EVERYTHING we do is spiritual and it doesn't make it wrong nonetheless.

trustman:
Leviticus 23 stated many things God said were to be done forever or 'throughout your generations' or words to that effect.
How many of them do you or your church still follow today?

I didn't see anything of the sort. But let us assume it existed as you said it, isn't it contained in the law? I said the law and it's ordinances were put away. Everyone knows that. That's why we are talking about specific things that were done pre-law and in which nothing replaces them in the NT. The Abrahamic covenant was not cancelled.

vooks:
My brother,
I gave you a clear verse where none other than Peter says God bore them witness and you reject it? Note it was Peter recounting this episode again. I regard it and Paul's conversion special for the several times they are repeated in Acts.
What do you do when you preach to a sinner and lead them to repentance? Do you wait until they recieve the Holy Spirit to 'confirm' anything? We have believers who never received Holy Spirit yet they are regarded as believers. Walk in faith man

You are intentionally misunderstanding him. Peter got the confirmation of their salvation by the Acts 10&11 accounts. This was before he narrated Acts 15. Why does it matter? Because up to that point, the Jews believed the gift of the Holy Spirit was for them only. So in seeing the Gentiles receive that same gift, they were certain they were saved.

Gombs:
That's what I was trying to drive home, but vooks don't seem to want to understand. Thanks buddy!

For the colored, vooks, I'd want to learn too...in all honesty I know about kneeling, but clapping is a no no. David once said Psalms 95:6 - Come, let us worship and bow down, Let us kneel before the LORD our Maker.

Yes bro. I know people bow down, kneel, and clap during praise and worship but there is not a single verse in the scriptures that says they have a spiritual meaning like say 'raising of hands' does. Yet those things are not wrong like when we close our eyes or close our palms in prayer. Bowing down or kneeling, and clapping are fleshly ways of showing reverence and appreciation to someone. When Alexis Sanchez scores a good goal we clap our hands in admiration and appreciation FOR what he has done. Same way the Yorubas do ba le alot to show respect to elderly ones but all these things are physical and fleshly NOT that they are wrong.

Jesus said the TRUE WORSHIPERS will worship the father IN SPIRIT and ACCORDING TO THE WORD. And that word worship there actually meant 'to bow, kneel'. So Jesus was saying true kneeling or bowing to GOD will be in spirit because that's what God truly desires. Does it then mean that those of us who kneel and clap are wrong? No sir and that is what I was trying to show him concerning circumcision.

He kept asking us for the SPIRITUAL VALUE of it and I kept telling him that not everything we do has spiritual value. It doesn't mean they are wrong or DISMISSED COMPLETELY. If I stand in prayer God will still hear me. If I sit he still will. What he wants me to do spiritually is have faith (because faith is the response of our spirit to his word). If I kneel in prayer God will still hear me and if I lay on the floor he still will as long as I have faith. If I shut my eyes The name of Jesus will still work and if I open my eyes it still will. So because these things don't affect my spirit man doesn't mean they are now USELESS or COMPLETELY DISMISSED. That's what I was showing him.

vooks:
1. It is dismissed because it has outlived its usefulness. The elaborate animal sacrifices were fulfilled. They were not useless. God did not give Israel useless laws. Animal sacrifices are not sinful neither. I saw this analogy. Once you fill a bucket with water, adding anything else will spill the water. The bucket is filled and can't be used for any other purpose. But it is still useful. That's the Law.... circumcision & tithes for you
2. 'People' is misleading because it presents Paul as an advocate of circumcision among Gentiles. He was not. He stood by Titus in Jerusalem in the face of Judaizers and never bowed to no pressure. Circumcising Timothy was a concession (the only one) not borne out of some 'identifying with the promise' theory
3. Moot point. study that verse closely. How is it relevant to what Paul is saying? Bottom line, Paul hanged around uncircumcised Gentiles who couldn't give a hoot about 'carnally identifying with the promise' because that imaginary nonsense don't exist
4. I said circumcision HAS NO BENEFITS not HAD NO. Tenses my brother. It was instituted by God, is as relevant as burnt offerings. Zero benefit NOW not THEN. It is slightly less useful than washing hands with Dettol jel. heard it lowers chances of HIV infection...surface area stuff
5. Eph 3:14, Psalms 47:1----Spirit inspired acts of worship

1. What was it's usefulness before? That's how to help you see the flaw in your argument.

2. Rubbish. Nobody COMPELLED Titus to be circumcised. That's what Paul said. But when they compelled Timothy, Paul cowered and he would have not done so if he knew it was COMPLETELY DISMISSED.

3. Your point is not only moot but diversionary. Paul was saying that those Judaizers didn't put pressure on Titus in JERUSALEM and now they have come to Galatia (Gentile land) to put pressure on you. Showing that they're not interested in your spirituality- they only want to gratify the flesh because if that were not the case they would have preached their circumcision everywhere including Jerusalem. This akin to those who make women 'cover their hair' or not 'wear make up' yet they don't care if such women are even born again to begin with.

4. Nonsense again. God said it would be everlasting. Everlasting means even now. Paul said it is beneficial to you ONLY if you are obedient to all the laws or saved. You on the other say it was useful but not anymore. Please why was it useful before? If you can answer this,you will see the ccontradictions in your argument.

5. Thank you for those verses that Paul said 'he bows to God in prayer' and the Psalmist said 'clap your hands to God'. I am sure you thought I asked you for a verse that says such were ever done in the bible. Let me show you my question again:

please provide verses showing clapping and kneeling as SPIRITUAL

In other words showing their value SPIRITUALLY.

Thank you.

vooks:
1.Circumcision is not sin. Paul would resist all pressure to sin just to please men. Bad example.

2. Paul did not circumcise 'people', he circumcised Timothy and Timothy ALONE

3. Paul undertook an IRRELEVANT practice for peace sake, and he resisted the same elsewhere- Gal 2:3. 'to the Jews he became Jews'. When I visit naija, I will put on the traditional garb just to blend not that I care. They look horrible

So there is no spiritual nor religious value real or imagined in circumcision. Keep your 'consciousness'. Paul would scoff at that. Titus with his joystick intact was as 'conscious' as any man can be of his place in Christ and his relationship to Father Abraham

Clapping hands, kneeling are all spiritual exercises

1. So if circumcision is not a sin why will it be TOTALLY DISMISSED FROM THE NT? see the flaw?

2. Hair-splitting. Whether he circumcised Timothy and Timothy ALONE means nothing. He circumcised him after Acts 15. That's the point.

3. Wrong. Paul didn't say he resisted Titus from being circumcised. He said NOBODY FORCED/COMPELLED Titus to be circumcised even though he was a Gentile.

4. Please tell Genesis 17 and Galatians 3 or Romans 3 that circumcision has zero benefits. It is cyclical to keep mentioning spiritual benefits to it. I already said physical circumcision is physical. Period.

5. Please provide verses showing clapping and kneeling as spiritual.

Goshen360:
Why have you decided to rush in to type like Bidam. That's why he also came, rush and clicked like for you and quoted you, talking rubbish too,


Both of you can't even understand simple logic. The circumcision you both referring to is IN THE FLESH. That phrase often go along natural circumcision and I made it clear that most of us, Gentiles was circumcised IN THE FLESH of our foreskin in about 8 days or so depending on culture while some even in adult are still not circumcised BEFORE we come to Christ.

When Paul said the Law is spiritual, he knows what he was saying by the Spirit in the sense that, those it was given to are so spiritually blind that they can't see beyond the spiritual truth contained therein which is all wrapped "in Christ". They held unto the dos, donts, regulations, commandments and rituals without understand what the Spirit was saying. Today, by the Apostolic revelations, we understand what's behind circumcision:

New International Version
In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ,

New Living Translation
When you came to Christ, you were "circumcised," but not by a physical procedure. Christ performed a spiritual circumcision--the cutting away of your sinful nature.

The above verse completely dismiss circumcision IN THE FLESH, MADE BY HANDS....which was what I referred to here:
...Why does it mean something different to us in the NT? Our fleshly circumcision was already done to us when we're new born babies and that's not a subject of condition for salvation in the first place, because it is irrelevant to when we came to Christ.

...AND interpreted by Apostolic revelation to mean, what is not done by a physical procedure by hands BUT the cutting away of your sinful nature done by Christ.



Does Bidam & other Law keepers agree with you in this one also? As for me, I completely agree with you on this one.



...without feeling it makes you rich, blessed and without making you feel the windows of heaven will be opened to pour out blessings that there will be no room to contain it and finally, without making you feeling devourer is rebuked because you tithe.

***edited***



This is the crux of the tithe matter: It is always attached to one blessings or the other. This is where you people failed completely in tithe argument. The pre-law tithing after the order of Abraham wasn't done FOR ABRAHAM TO BE BLESSED AND HE WASN'T EVEN EXPECTING ANY BLESSINGS AS YOU CAN READ, HE RETURNED THE OTHER STUFFS TO THE KING and he was blessed before the tithe to Melchi. Where do you people get your example of "pre-law blessing of tithing" from?

2. The blessings of tithing in the law? Don't even go there. I have asked Bidam in the past and will ask you too. Do you think God is a liar that he's not obligated to keep His word if truly He promised He will pour you out blessings that there will be no room to contain it? Ever since you people have been tithing and expecting the "blessings of tithing in the law", have you experience such a blessings that there will be no room to contain it? You people should be distributing blessings by now if truly there's no room to contain that kind of blessings promised by God. I challenge you to produce the evidence of blessings of tithing in the law that in your house, there's truly no room to contain such blessings.

In a simple statement: There's no (special) blessings in tithing than it is in giving. I and many around the world don't tithe but a giver and I'm blessed greatly. You don't want me boast do you?

There are alot of things wrong with this post but I am currently using my phone to reply you.

1. I still fail to see the logic about anything being dismissed. You quoted a verse saying we were ALSO spiritually circumcised and you concluded it dismissed the first one? How so?.

2. The fleshly circumcision doesn't mean anything different to us. It means what it means while the spiritual circumcision means what it means as well. God told Abraham " you are righteous and I have a covenant with you. As a mark of that covenant, circumcise yourself and your seed from now till eternity". Didn't the righteousness come before the circumcision? So why is the circumcision being dismissed in the NT? It never made anyone righteous to begin with BUT SOME PEOPLE THOUGHT AND TAUGHT SO, so Paul was correcting them. Period.

3. Windows of heaven, rebuked devourer etc were the blessings God said would come from tithes and offerings. Are you also saying the blessings of the law do not exist again? NB: I believe the curses to be abolished that's why a non-tither who is christian is still saved and righteous.

4. Yes Melchi blessed Abraham before he gave the tithes. The question is did Abraham ever let any King before and after Melchi pray for him, bless him or give him anything? No. So why did he subject himself to Melchi? And please don't question anyone's ability to reason again. We went to the law to see the blessing of what Abraham did pre-law. It is called rightfully dividing the word of truth. Malachi 3 shows me the importance of tithing like Hebrews 7 does too and these things weren't clearly shown in Genesis 14.

5. For your question about evidence of my uncontained blessings. I SMH.

vooks:
My broda,
But circumcision was NEVER retained for ANY reason. Acts 15 Council did more than clarify that circumcision was not necessary for salvation; it was dismissed altogether as a burden. Proof of this is, Paul ONLY circumcised to avoid the bugging unbelieveing Jews. If there was ANY benefit ( which you can't name but Gombs calls 'identifying with the covenant' but can't substantiate) Paul would have circumcised more readily than only when pressured by non-believers.

So circumcision among Gentiles was not a noble practice abused like spiritual gifts in Corinth,for which proper use needed emphasis, it was an unnecessary BURDEN

Galatians 2:3 (ESV)
3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek.

Acts 16:3 (ESV) 3 Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek

Why would Paul stay with an uncircumcised Gentile Timothy UNTIL he visits Jerusalem? Why couldn't he circumcise him earlier? Because circumcision was totally useless and irrelevant for a Christian. In Jerusalem, his haterz,nitpickers would not have hesitated to remind everyone that he hang around uncircumcised Gentiles. So he just went along, made a concession for peace sake

Note Titus remained uncircumcised

If the Jews had put pressure on him to commit sexual immorality would he have done it?

Your points are moot because Paul still went on to physically circumcise people "after he knew it was completely dismissed". Does this make any sense?

In the Jerusalem council they resolved to remove the burden of circumcision from the 'saved' Gentiles. Why was it a burden? Because the Christian Jews believed that one was not saved if they weren't circumcised (Acts 15:1), so Paul and Barnabas shared their testimonies of Gentiles getting and 'acting' saved who weren't circumcised and as such the Leader- James, conceded that circumcision was not necessary for salvation and told the Jews not to put pressure on Gentiles who believed in Jesus but were uncircumcised.

So why did Paul still cower to pressure atimes and circumcise some people even as he didn't do so at other times? It is the same reason he later taught his church in Corinth that eating meat sacrificed to Idols meant nothing as long as it was sanctified with Prayer and thanksgiving (somewhat contradiction to the resolution of the Jerusalem council).

There are some things you know (according to the word of God) are not wrong, but you still refuse to do them to appease fellow christians who have weak consciences. Paul said (concerning meat sacrificed to Idols) that as far as he was concerned, they meant nothing because he was only conscious of one God in heaven. But if he was in the gathering of babes (who still believe in idols/demons) he would turn down the meat so as not to make them think that since a 'whole Apostle Paul' could eat meat that was once sacrificed to Idols then we too can even visit their temples- which would be a sin and God would have held Paul responsible for that. So look at it from that angle.

Paul knew that if he didn't circumcise those Gentiles, the Jews around would have ostracised them like they did in Antioch. So to pander to their feeble-mindedness he did what he had to but in his heart he knew those Gentiles were saved as long as they believed in Jesus.

So what is the import of circumcision? As we have said before a) to carnally identify with the Abrahamic covenant b) to keep it (Genesis 17:10). Notice that God said to Abraham "between you and thy seed" in Genesis, and Paul making reference to that verse said the seed in question was Christ and not even the Physical Jews. So even if circumcision doesn't make me saved or seal my salvation as it were, it makes me 'conscious' that I am a child of Abraham and an heir of the promise. Also notice how I used the words 'carnal', conscious etc. It is because the significance of circumcision is now fleshly.

But it makes zero sense for you to ask me what spiritual value it holds. What spiritual value does clapping hold? What spiritual value does not kneeling to pray hold? Will God unhear my prayers if I stand? So because these things hold no spiritual value does it mean they have been TOTALLY DISMISSED from the NT?

That's the same way with Tithes and offerings.

Goshen360:
The circumcision that was done IN THE FLESH was completely dismissed in the NT. It means something different to us in the NT. We can't over emphasize this point.

^^Total rubbish- provide one verse that says so. Circumcision was not completely dismissed by anybody. It was dismissed as a condition for being saved. The same way someone is not saved because they observed the 10 Commandments the way they would have been in the OT. That's the same way I am allowed to tithe without feeling it makes me righteous. However, the blessing of tithing is still intact as is the blessing of everything pre-law and in-law.

Goshen360:
Obviously, dumb double standard hero worshippers will never see what's hidden in that teaching. I'm not confused, I only see through some bullshit that some people serve to us.

Like Circumcision is for ISRAEL AND ONLY ISRAEL.

Hahahahaha. Miss me with the BS.

BabaGnoni:
You wouldn't recognise "Gibberish", if you read it. At this rate, you're wearing the poor "Gibberish" word thin
You wouldn't know what "Gibberish" is if it walked up to you and bite you on the bum
What you going to do, what's going to happen when you wear it thin-vanishing in to the air
- you must have just learnt the word, that's why you take to it like a shine, it's new on you LOL

Young man, if you must know, your words are empty and all that's coming out of your mouth is hot air
You're nothing worse than a disingenious windbag
Why does WoF deserve a windbag like this representing it?

As a matter of gfact, you really need to shut up for a bit because with all that diarrhea of the mouth, you still aren't coherent as you think you are or be intelligent as you like to make out.
You will not shut up, which typically is a cover for your own shortcomings, inferiority complex and inadequacy(ies)
- Running dystentry, as he's talking shite

Aren't you sick of regurgitation, repeating the same thing on and on, behaving like a whinning or nagging old hag?

You sure would like to know about "Eve-serpent-sex" Don't you? LOL
You sure would like to know about the "Kenneth Hagin-Apostle" angle. Don't you? LOL
- "...Omniscience is not required for that. Simple deductive reasoning would do" © nlMediator
You sure would like to know about the "Tower of Babel" slant. Don't you? LOL

Well what of thinking about Pearls and Pigs?
- over your head and another candidate for your favourite word; "Gibberish" LOL

If you may know, young man, I have the temerity to call you, mbaemeka, incorrigible and wallowing in ignorance. Hahahahahahaha!
Yes, I do because you repeatedly dont take to advice to back up your allegations with proof (i.e. verbatim or the actual quotes)

You know why you are unable back your posts with quotes?
It is because if/when you do, you will fall flat on your face and fail in an embarrassingly epic way

Simple questions asked, especially Q2, and he is going on la-la land (i.e Lastly, you made a fallacy of Generalizing Hastily by making it seem like 'ALL' Healing school ministers avoided patients with the conditions above when you have NEVER attended any of the healing schools to corroborate such a statement)
The questions asked were the below:
Q1) Why are "healing" schools FULL of genuinely and undisputedly crippled wheelchair-ridden people who NEVER GET HEALED?
Q2) Why is cerebral palsy sufferer(s) turned away from approaching "healing" pastor(s) on stage at "healing" school(s)?

I stand by and have ALWAYS stood by whatever I post which is why I ALWAYS BOLDLY ask for verbatim or quotations to back up any raised trumped up charges and allegations
- I will go eyeball-to-eyeball, face-to-face, head-on, mano a mano, one-on-one, toe-to-toe with ten of you put together on anything I post

I am not frightened to speak on issues I understand nor apologetic of any of my posts. I always quote-reference posts I comment or remark on

No matter how much you elbow, spit, poke, scratch, bite, stab, head butt and prod, for the likes of youse, silence is often the best thing to say.

So many words, nothing said.

Meanwhile, I am here laughing at the Palongo dancers.

vooks:
My broda,
When I receive my space gray iPhone 6+ 64Gb, I will mail you an antique KJV as a gift. Minimum 100 years young.

Now,I believe I was the first person to introduce that figure of 22% on this thread. There were two annual tithes per annum and a third one every third year. Dividing the third tithe by 3 you get 3.33. Add this to the first tithe 10% and the second 9% (10% of 90%) you get 22.3333% per annum in tithes. It never stopped at this, they still had other offerings as well. A modern pastor receiving 100% in Jan and 10% of gross pay every month of MANDATORY offerings receives 17.5% in total per annum. Like the Levites, it does not stop here. There be normal offerings, seeds and so forth. May be that was the point, I can only talk of the 17.5% as the minimum.

Now, about averages.
What is the average of this set of data; 10,10,10,10?
What about this, 10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10?

In both cases it is 10. This means somebody tithing faithfully for any number of months ends up giving a tithe of the total income over that period. For instance, if Gombs tithes Nov and Dec from his 100,000, his tithes for the two months total 20,000, 10,000 for each month. Total income over Nov and Dec is 200,000. So his average tithing is 20,000/200,000 or 10%. In other words, the average per month equals the average for the year as long as it is consistent. So when I say 17.5% per month or per annum, it means the same.

The modern tither still pays LESS than the Jew.

Tithing has some apparent benefits; consistency and discipline on the givers. May be God knew if Levites had no inheritance and there was no command to support them, they would starve and get distracted from service. The tithing Laws ensured they didn't.

But on the other hand, when I look at the death penalties such as on adultery and the fact that in Islamic nations, they actually appear to deter the vice, I wonder why this is not the NT way of life. So am not surprised that under one covenant God can COMMAND support for LEVITES and throw in promises and curses to enforce the same while in the other,there are no penalties whatsoever for not supporting ministers

I agree with everything you said above. Why I said the emboldened in the previous post cracked me up is that it contradicted what some other poster said and that poster was endorsing your post yet he didn't spot the contradiction which is: yes 17.5% whether per month or annum is right but it will be less than 22% whether per month or annum.

Wuru wuru meant that you shunted the process to arrive at your answer but now seeing that you wrote 110% and not 110 then you were also right.

Unfortunately, I support Arsenal FC so I am distracted by the champions league game I am currently watching.

cheers.

Candour:
Actually bro, no mog, no matter how crooked can defend 22% as tithe for christians. it's not honesty keeping them from it; it's common sense and the knowledge that they'll be biting off more than they can chew if they dare.

imagine bringing Deut 14:22-29 and Deut 26:12 into the fray to demand 22%?

I agree. The point is that a Tithe means one-tenth. So if I say I want to give a tithe it must be at least 10% or else I cannot say it was a tithe. What God expects from us in the NT is to give now out of love, so I can decide to be giving 35% of my income as a tithe which is even higher than it was during the OT. That's what I have been trying to show him.

vooks:
Normal tithes between Feb and Dec -10% * 11= 110%
January First Fruits- 100%
Total- 110%+100%= 210%

So you give 210% of your Gross or Net in 12 months or 17.5% per month on average

Bro, I barely even had time to read this thread well or respond to my mentions but I saw the emboldened and it cracked me up. There was another ignoramus that said the "Pastors" collect more than the law-stipulated 22% and you guys had the nerves to question Gombs data interpretation skills?

First and foremost, your answer is correct no matter how you did wuru wuru to arrive at the answer (find out what wuru wuru signifies).

Secondly, the 22% by the law was it per annum or per month? If it was per annum then 17.5% is still less than it (word to the ignoramuses). And if the 22% is per month then it is still more than the 17.5%. Hope you see the flaw.

This was the wuru wuru --> and yea BTW Gombs was right. You cannot say 10% * 11 is 110.

Galatians 2:20 KJV

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Pauk said the life I live IN THE FLESH. Which means the I lives in the flesh and the I is not the flesh. What is it the I? James 2:26 answers it.

Man is a spirit. He has a soul but he lives in a body.

vooks:
poor fallible Paul. Who told him there is purposing in your heart? it is God's property id!ot
There is ZERO distinction between freewill and mandatory offering in the NT. Those are 500 years late imports from the OT.
Tithing was hard business. This is the ONLY reason the Pharisee who managed to keep the Laws felt like somebody, had to remind God that he did it. I can picture him with a constipated grin, 'I am not like other men'. Made him feel special. A guy doing 22% in tithes feels special. Another doing a paltry 10% is actually a goD. Little wonder they fete the 'best givers'

To make this your 'hard business' quips to make sense then the MOG that teach on tithes are not as greedy as you claim. Why, because they could have insisted on the 22% as stipulated by the law, yet they settled for a meagre 10%.

I can see how we have jumped from explaining Tithes pre-Mosaic to now asking for a distinction between freewill giving and tithes in the NT. Let me just chip in that there are actually 3 covenants in the bible:

Abrahamic covenant
Mosaic/ Old covenant
Christ/New covenant.

The one that was ABOLISHED is the OLD or Mosaic one. The Abrahamic one gave birth to the NEW one. So we can draw parallels between those covenants while we do away with the aspects that the NT expressly stated were now unnecessary.

Tithing was NEVER termed unnecessary again. I mean the one that Abraham did and he offered 10%. If anyone wants to tithe he MUST give atleast 10%. That's why it is called a tithe.

If you believe the contrary then provide one NT verse that lumps freewill offerings and tithes into one. Meanwhile Hebrews 7:7-8. Care to expound?

vooks:
My broda,
That was sarcasm but it is well.

It is dangerous to appeal to numbers to stall doctrinal examination. It is two-edged, it really motivates the good guys just as it does the deluded guys. use them for anything else like vanity cat fights but not to gauge the truth.

Don't just hope am well, buy me a 128GB iPhone 6+ and it shall be well with my soul for the day

PS: make it space gray

I command that iPhone6+ to come into your hands in the name of Jesus!

Yes, the numbers were thrown up when NON-Bible truths or doctrines were discusssed. That's my point.

Gombs:
Amazing the nerves that bloke has, huh?

His fellow board member who sold his honesty and integrity for a morsel of pounded yam has the moral thought to tread same line he is, calling another ignorant and in denial, one wonders whether they discuss these in the board room!

Ha ha ha bro. I tire for the matter. I have encountered him before. He can switch positions like a contortionist and yet maintain that that had been his position all along. For example, can you see how circumcision was for ISRAEL AND ONLY ISRAEL yet Ismael was circumcised? Or how Abraham- a Gentile, was circumcised too? Maybe Abraham didn't get the memo.

True gospelers!

vooks:
Gombs my broda,
There is one one NT rule for giving; as you purpose in your heart & without compulsion.

An externally set fraction of giving goes against the 'as you purpose' aspect of giving

I would encourage the 10% giver equally to the 5%,15%,30% giver or the no-percentage-nonsense giver equally.

Pious fraudsters fear that the NT standards may not rake in enough. They set fractions robbing you of the freedom of choice. They also compel you by dangling utopia called financial breakthroughs,disease-free bliss,debt cancellation and they go as far as threatening you with hellfire. Calling you robber and invoking curse they won't hesitate.

These threads have just done that; taking deluded sheeple through Bible study so they can regain their freedom to give and get immunized from compulsion. Gloooooooooory

This is a stand you have to take to make your stance on tithing worth its salt. There is TITHING and there is FREEWILL GIVING. There is no fixed % on the latter but the former means 10% or one-tenth. It basically defines itself.

If anyone wants to tithe he MUST not give less than 10% otherwise it is not a tithe. Whereas if anyone wants to give anything freewillingly then he is free to do so underzero compulsion.

vooks:
what you are calling conjecture is EXACTLY what happens here. Gombs is notorious. He started with claiming his Rhapsodies thread has more impact than the WOF one. I pushed him to define 'impact'. He mumbled something to do with views,emails,prayers.....i called out this vanity. Does the views on a thread reflect the truth on a thread? It quickly turned into Rhapsodies distributed,branches. Somebody was being challenged to match that. Am not too old on NL but I have noticed that habit of throwing around CE numbers at inconvenient occasions.

When you are accused of peddling false doctrine, please justify your position Biblically not from subjective parameters such as 'millions' of Rhapsodies distributed or bought by branches.

There comes a time when I know that you know the point am making whether you admit it or not and you agree with me. This is it.

Shalom

Bro, you're off your game today. Hope all is well. I explained to you why mentioning the numbers was necessary SOMETIMES and you admitted to it, so the only case you should be making is that the numbers were thrown about inappositely and you are yet to do so. What I mean is: Someone claimed to be making impact with his own thread and Gombs proved that he was not. When the issue was posed back at Gombs, he proved why he was making the said impact by providing his own numbers. That's in order.

If someone says your church isn't making any impact, what bible passage should he use to debate it? None man. All he has to do is to throw his numbers to buttress his claims while to rebutting the zero-impact claim tossed at him. Period.

I am sure you understand.

BabaGnoni:
"Imma need a gibberish interpreting software" indeed
- You retreat into a world of fantasy and self-delusion a lot when the truth stares you in face, don't worry, this time, blame it on been sleepyhead

Don't be silly, What is esoteric about sharing a for-you-information (i.e. FYI) or you prefer the need-to-know-information be hidden or hoarded?
- it isn't the first time and by God's grace, it certainly wouldn't be my last sharing it.

I don't know you from Adam, nor know you from a previous life, so I still don't understand your hardened and stubborn fixation with changing monickers

You're incorrigible, wont learn from correction. How many times have you got to be advised to back up your allegation and/or trumped-up charges.
Show the original quotes for the following:
#1) "medical-science-replacing-greater-works-than-these-shall-ye-do prophecy"
#2) "everyone is fake to you because your grouse is not with Chris Oyakhilome, Kumuyi, Hagin, Oyedepo etc."

Look, that's my gauntlet, throw down on the floor
Prove "issue is with unbelief and I can prove it"

Young man you will do yourself a world of good, if you can just provide unedited versions of quotations to backed up ALL your allegations

I wonder how people like you get the liver to do this, make incriminating statements about other posters without providing evidence(s) or backing it up with the original quotes

Who are all the so-called faith healers that you are affiliated to, fake or not fake?

Yahweh is our Healer, so mbaemeka do me the honours, as I would very much love to see the original quotation relating to or the entire post pertaining to "Let us also assume that you believe God still heals people"

Criticism and hatred for the faith healers ke?
mbaemeka, there is a thin line between faith healers and "faith healers"

PS: a lamb and a pig fall into the same dirty, oozing muddy ditch,
The pig rolls about, wallowing in and enjoying the mud, but the lamb cries and gets out
The pig loves to get dirty and loves mud
so the pig is happy to stay perpetually in the mud ditch

This is even more Gibberisher than the previous post.

Let me pace myself a bit with you since you are not as quick-witted as I had overestimated you to be.

If I was to tell you instances of Tetraplegics and Palsy sufferers who got healed instantly by the anointing of God, you would have disbelieved them even if I provided videos for you. Secondly, your incredulity is not limited to the Pastor I would have referred you to: it encompasses even many others abroad and ahome (on earth and in heaven for e.g Kenneth Hagin). So it made absolutely no sense for me to honor your questions with the sort of reply you were craving for. Lastly, you made a fallacy of Generalizing Hastily by making it seem like 'ALL' Healing school ministers avoided patients with the conditions above when you have NEVER attended any of the healing schools to corroborate such a statement. The same way you asserted that Christopher Columbus helped prove Galileos discoveries right even when Columbus had died before Galileo was born. I am sure you realise you are a tad too whimsical in your responses and they have always come back to bite you where the sun doesn't shine.

Now, let it be that none of the WOF or WOF related ministers I know have healed anyone suffering from the 2 conditions you mentioned. Let it be that the testimonies they have were all stage-managed. You who believes in Yahweh that heals, can you provide any evidences to back that claim or is it just hot-air (again) ? I.e are you just throwing the I-believe-Yahweh-can-heal-those-things line, even when you don't really believe?

PS: I ignored all your nonsense about verbatim quotes and the likes. You were dishonest enough to refuse to admit your Eve-serpent-sex, Kenneth Hagin-Apostle, Tower of Babel was mythical goof (s) so I don't expect you to take the humble route and keep mum now. And you have the temerity to call someone incorrigible and wallowing in ignorance? Hahahahahahaha!

BabaGnoni:
mbaemeka, you're an unscrupulous appalling ego driven self-conceited WoFtard
- no offense, and am sorry this is hurting me more saying this than hurting you

mbaemeka, are you a learner, if not why are you coming across as one
1) You are so naive about healing and miracles
- The first question was about Tetraplegia (i.e. also known as quadriplegia) and you are bringing out fibroids
- You know, dont you, that inspite of the body been a self healing machine, there is a limit to...
2) You are so ignorant of Greek Aorist Tenses used in the New Testament.
- Google is your friend, if you're seriously curious or want to know more about Greek Aorist Tenses
3) You are so fond of using deceptive casualness, you put out "remarks" allegedly made by other poster(s) without backing them up with the actual quote or at very least do a verbatim
- Why do you shamelessly like quoting posters out of context, why do you enjoy twisting comments made by fellow poster(s)?

The questions asked were the below:
Q1) Why are "healing" schools FULL of genuinely and undisputedly crippled wheelchair-ridden people who NEVER GET HEALED?
Q2) Why is cerebral palsy sufferer(s) turned away from approaching "healing" pastor(s) on stage at "healing" school(s)?

How and where you got the "everyone is fake to you" idea, no doubt is a nomination for another/one of life's great mysteries

If you have no explanations for the scenario in Q1 and the incident in Q2, why not keep schtum or quiet about them.
Do you have to graffiti threads with uppity slurs
Your response make a mockery of two serious cases (i.e. the scenario in Q1 and the incident in Q2) which required/demanded careful consideration and not seasonal vituperative outburst(s)

^^^ Imma need a gibberish interpreting software to read this.

All in a bid to sound esoteric or is it because I reminded you of your medical-science-replacing-greater-works-than-these-shall-ye-do prophecy?

Please read between the lines concerning Vooks post and hide your egghead in shame. Or better still create a new moniker to escape this one. I would go easy on you this time around because I am in a good mood. For the record though, you spoke OP (I would add 'as usual' here)

Now concerning your questions I said everyone is fake to you because your grouse is not with Chris Oyakhilome, Kumuyi, Hagin, Oyedepo etc. Your issue is with unbelief and I can prove it.

Let us assume that all the so-called faith healers that you feel I am affiliated to are fake. Let us also assume that you believe God still heals people. Now can you show me evidences that tetraplegics and Palsy sufferers have received this healing from God- I mean the God of the bible, and if/WHEN you can't, can we also conclude that you do not believe in healings but only aver so to substantiate your criticism and hatred for the faith healers?

PS: Someone tossed a stick into a pack of dogs. The one that got hit barked the loudest. But I'm sleep though...

Gombs:
I don't. Why not get back to the Facebook page and ask them? You believe anything you read online so far it puts CE in bad light, you now shamelessly mention me for an opinion? Ask Whatshisface , he seems to have opinions you'd love to hear.

Just imagine if that link said "Millions healed" by CE Pastor. You would have seen Sherlock Holmes, Matlock and Nancy Drew in full gear proving how bogus such a claim was. Now that it sounded scandalous it became the absolute truth with no need to investigate it.

Hahahaha.

vooks:
Escapist is throwing numbers in a doctrinal debate.
False religions can and they do flourish. So appealing to growth adds NOTHING to the debate, it is sideshow.

Whether believers can/should perform miracles and exceed Jesus ( something NOBODY has ever seen) or not is equally irrelevant.

Vooks: why is Oyaks telling members who don't give Firstfruits that they will catch HIV?
mbaemeka: last year we were 166,392,111 members, this year we are 167,258,966.77 gloooooory
Vooks: say what?
mbaemeka: last week, fibroids disappeared off a woman at Canada Healing School

The emboldened is on a wheelchair man- lame. That's just conjecture that we don't take serious or bother responding to as it is nothing like us. A proper exchange would have been:

Vooks: WOF teaches a false gospel and the Pastors are all fake.
Mbaemeka: but Millions have listened to the gospel from the so-called WOF men and they seem to be doing well off. Sicknesses are healed, poor are becoming rich, ignorance seems a thing of the past.
Vooks: numbers is sideshow. False signs and false prophets shall arise.
Mbaemeka:

vooks:
Escapist is throwing numbers in a doctrinal debate.
False religions can and they do flourish. So appealing to growth adds NOTHING to the debate, it is sideshow.

Numbers don't lie bro, people do. Besides, what debate am I engaged in when someone says "you are false or you teach a false gospel?" All I am left to do in such an instance is to flash out my credentials and juxtapose it with what obtains in the scriptures.

I don't believe numbers were flashed in rebuttal of any doctrinal debate like tithing. You can do well to refresh your memory.

vooks:
False religions can equally boast of 'small beginings'. So if CE was once twenty and now they are 200 million,it tells you NOTHING about the content of their doctrine. So when am picking their doctrine apart, don't point me to numbers. False doctrines garner numbers too

This is escapist. I am not talking about whatever false religions that thrive or exist. That's why I said in the BIBLE and why I related it between people who call themselves christians.

If you insist on tossing in the feeble excuse of 'false religions have power or false religions garner numbers' then Paul was wrong for listing his credentials in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Jesus was wrong in pointing John the Baptist's disciples to his miracles.

vooks:
I will not repeat my points because all you have said I had responded to.
Take any fringe,false religion such as Jehovah's Witnesses. At some point, there was Rutherford I guess in the US. Now they have Kingdom Halls all over the world. Numbers are important SOMETIMES I agree
They show that you are effective in whatever you are doing not whether you are right or wrong. For this, injecting them when testing doctrine is not wisdom.

Doctrine, is it in the bible? Does it work? Do people apply it to their lives? Do people believe it? This has nothing to do with Mormons, JWs or Muslims.

BabaGnoni:
Why are "healing" schools FULL of genuinely and undisputedly crippled wheelchair-ridden people who NEVER GET HEALED?
Why is cerebral palsy sufferer(s) turned away from approaching "healing" pastor(s) on stage at "healing" school(s)?

My challenge in answering these questions is that everyone is fake to you. But for the sake of posterity this claim even though rhetorical, is as flimsy as the one about Medical science being the fulfilment of "Greater than these shall ye do". Shebi you remember who made that claim?

vooks:
Numbers and Miracles mean NOTHING for these reasons;
1. False religions can also boast of numbers and signs

2. MAJORITY of those turning to Christ are not drawn by the miraculous. I was not drawn by the miraculous

3. If numbers and signs vindicate a minister of the true gospel, then the converse is true; small numbers and NO signs are marks of a false gospel.

4. Signs and wonders do not necessarily turn people to Christ. Read Matthew 11:20-24

5. Paul was wearied by chronic sign seekers at the expense of the Word 1 Cor 1:22

6. The growth recorded in Acts was the ENTIRE church. Now it is sectarian, Oyaks vs Oyedepo vs Adefarsin.

Once again, why are numbers thrown at us? It was a noble thing for Bereans to examine if what Paul said was so. Now it is envying unmatched record.

I am sure you missed the why numbers are important SOMETIMES part of my post. The word of God never said if you preached the right gospel you would have few people around. So when people consistently preach what they delude themselves to believe is the right gospel and also claim that to be the reason they are few in number you can as well point them out to your own numbers and show them why they might infact be false. It is similar to those who call themselves Pastors or Apostles yet they are bereft of the credentials of that office and when they see someone else who oozes out the said credentials they begin misquoting scriptures to explain away their faithlessness.

In 2 Corinthians 12:12 Paul said there were signs to follow an Apostle. If I see anyone who claims to be an Apostle yet lacks those signs I can know the office is only Titular I.e such a person was not sent- they just went. Now if on the other hand I am labelled false and I go forth to defend my ministry or calling by listing out the signs that were wrought by my hands you would be amiss to start mentioning Chris Angel or Derren Brown to me, and insisting that non-Christians wrought 'miracles' as well. I am sure false Apostles in Paul's day still wrought some form of miracles but he didn't take it into consideration in penning the afore cited verse. So let's get the full gist.

Also, I don't remember saying that miracles were or not the major reason people are drawn to the gospel. I myself was in need of no miracle when I stumbled into a CE church or when I found a book by Kenneth E Hagin. In fact, I was already born again before I encountered any of the above but was in search of a deeper connection with God and I found it- praise the Lord.

In 1 Samuel 22:2 the men who came to join David were in Distress, Debt and Discontented- all 400 of them. If you dig deeper into 2 Samuel and I believe Chronicles the bible later described them as David's Mighty Men and they gave a lot to the building of the Temple. They were no longer what they were before they met him and if you consider that David wasn't yet the actual king you would learn to appreciate their testimony a lot better. The point is that if people come to listen to your own right gospel it ought to change and benefit them not only in the world to come but in the present. And when it does, more and more people will be added to them. It is only logical. The cripple who met Paul at Lystra listened intently to Paul's gospel and from it he developed a faith to be healed. Yet you have self-styled true gospelers who claim the 'health gospel' is false and brand those who preach it anathema. You tell me if they have God's backing.

So the numbers will eventually show your progress and you or no one else can refute this incontrovertible fact. There is no problem with starting small. Jesus did. But 2 became 4 became 12. And it kept rising from 70 to 120 to 500, 3000 etc. The Samaritan woman that met Jesus went to tell her whole neighbourhood to come and listen to him. Same things happened with all his disciples and I guess we all agree that they were all 'true gospelers'.

Now be kind enough to tell those who claim to be true gospelers without all the necessary signs. Nobody is added to their ilk, nobody is blessed by their messages, no one is healed, enlightened, empowered. No one is unburdened. No one has true faith. What we see is a group of people who claim that faith is mentally assenting to an idea like I mentally assent to the idea that dieting is good yet my eating habits and stomach show that I do not have faith in dieting. For according to the bible, if I did have faith in dieting I would have been talking and ACTING like it is true by putting it to practice.

So yes, the numbers we are talking about is in relation to the body of Christ and not just individual numbers. You have to remember that all the names you mentioned have been termed vipers and what not. Kenneth Hagin, Chris Oyakhilome, Adeboye, Oyedepo etc etc are all fake and false for acting like the bible is true by putting the name of Jesus to use and preaching about the totality of the gospel I.e righteousness, health, wealth etc with the results and numbers to show. Just tell these true gospelers to show us the way and how it should be done. Let them stop complaining about the darkness. They should simply show us the light!

vooks:
nlMediator's point is, pulling more crowds even if only a few come to Christ is more Jesus-esque than pulling smaller crowds out of which even fewer come to Christ. The question is, WHY do these numbers arguments come up when examining doctrine? Why is he and Gombs wont in reminding us of CE size? Somebody reminded another that he would NEVER match Oyaks works in three lifetimes.
Numbers it appears is a major motivating factor. This argument vindicating Oyaks from his numbers must be part of the pep talks they regularly get. It is a sales pitch no different from MLM talks. Oyaks MUST be of God seeing all the languages into which he translates and distributes millions of Rhapsodies. He has over 1,000 branches in India...glooooooooory
The other is to paint critics as envious. You little pricks are just envious of 'levels' you will never attain

Mr A said God called him into ministry. Mr B said it wasn't true, that he was called by God almighty into ministry and not Mr A. Mr A then said if God truly called you he would back you up with the necessary credentials that he usually backs those he sent and since you do not have any of the signs we can conclude that you were not sent- you simply went. Mr B began quoting "false signs and false prophets shall appear..."

Question, what is Mr B's talk if not a cheap excuse?

Let me tell you why the numbers are important sometimes; it is because if the message being preached by CEC or WOF as a whole attracted only a few people the critics would not care. They would say "he is preaching a false gospel that's why nobody is listening to him". But now that the message is being heard by the world over it becomes frustrating to the traducers. I can give you a real time example. In my own branch of CEC in Nigeria we had just about 29 members on a Sunday service. This was like 10-12 years ago. There were a couple of good churches around us at the time and the least of them had close to 400 members on a typical Sunday.

Every now and then some of the leaders of those churches will visit the Pastor of my church and advice her to stop wearing trousers. Some told her it was an instruction from the lord while others were honest enough to say they were simply passing a piece of advice. The pieces of advice seemed to range from one of this four things: a) you let women wear makeup and this pisses people off who want to come to church b) you focus too much on feel good messages and you neglect the aspects of sin and the end time c) they are always advertising miracles and hero-worshiping the Pastor d) they are always talking about money money and giving giving etc.

My Pastor always thanked them politely for their counsel but she continued to minister complete doses of the whole counsel of the word as Paul (by the Holy spirit) admonished us to.

Few Years passed (and as I type this), we are the largest word church in my vicinity. It was now I began to understand that God doesn't need many members to do any work that he wants. What he asked us to do in the NT, is to obtain grace for the task ahead and that is what we have been doing. There was a time the Pastor announced that we had imminent plans of increasing capacity to accommodate new members and renovate the building. Just a rough estimate of what was required and people began speaking in tongues. One who is Carnally minded would begin to say "if everybody gives so so amount we might get half of the total required" but that is man's way of thinking and not God's. One brother stepped up and dropped a cheque and it was the total amount. Those of us who have spiritual sensors and know that the things of God aren't about 'contributions' didn't let him get blessed alone- We still gave as though it depended on us- each one as he had purposed in his heart. If I begin to mention all the financial testimonies we reaped I would be accused of boasting.

Anyways, our beloved brothers in christ that stayed around us began to change their talk. We started hearing that we were 'sinners playing church'. Some others called us a fellowship of sinners whose success was as a result of the same things they claimed was millitating us in timepast. The big cars that parked around the church became loot from tithes and firstfruits. The large crowd to them was elicited by miracle adverts and feel good messages and the renovations were from contributions from the gullible sheeple.

You are damned if you do, and damned if you don't. Now the standard of being a true gospeler is in being scandal-free. Jesus' words that there would be no woe to false prophets have been conveniently swept under the rug. Now that people are being added to the church it has become "narrow is the way". When your gospel attracts no one at the start, you are false. When it attracts people later you are false. When they see no one healed they say 'no one gets healed it is fake'. When they see people get healed they say 'too many people get healed it is fake'. If they ask you about yourself and you say don't focus on me, focus on Jesus that I am presenting to you they will say he is too secretive he has something to hide. If you tell them about yourself they will say you are taking the glory for yourself and giving none to God.

Jesus said they complained about his own friends, dressing and feeding habits and in turn complained about a polar opposite- John the Baptist's as well. They want you to dance when they dance and cry when they cry. They know everything that is wrong with the church but will not offer what is right. They will not lift a pin but will give men heavy loads to carry. Everyone is right or wrong based on their own little standard. There is nothing new my dear. Absolutely nothing new.