₦airaland Forum

twosquare:
This is what Kim Clement (September 30, 1956- November 23, 2016) of blessed memory said about Donald Trump's impeachment as far back as 2014 with such accuracy. Watch from the beginning or jump (2:11-3:14):

h t tps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7T3Y5PBmpUQ&feature=share

Cc Lalasticlala, seun....front page please.

" Can you believe that I will be impeached today by the Radical Left, Do Nothing Democrats, AND I DID NOTHING WRONG! A terrible Thing. Read the Transcripts. This should never happen to another President again. Say a PRAYER! —"
- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 18, 2019

Well, Trump did ask Twitter followers to pray for him ahead of impeachment vote

TheSourcerer:
Nobody can tell the future , just well calculated predictions or A Guess
That Aside God doesn't exist enjoy life to the fullest , not @ you Serial killer
Hard Working men still giving tithes to pastor's and Imaams

Well, how come Bill Gates has yet to open up the gate of a financial realm for the church, like Clement foretold, huh twosquare?

petra1:
How much and what's the mileage

You wan buy am, come bless me with it petra1?
You sabi like mpv cars sha. Kilode, lol.

Image123:
I guess you fully agree, pastor Chris cannot err. Can he?

petra1:
Anyone can err. But he didnt err here. Firstly the bible never condemn trouser. There was no trouser in bible days. In fact there was no difference between Male and female all wore the same national gown. And there was no difference in the style or fashion . Men wire same gone as women except other accessories like head covering.

[img]https://s2/images/MuttleyHilarious.gif[/img]
Better a late response than never

Image123:
And by the way, i thought that the common argument was that Deuteronomy does not apply to christians or New Testament? Then it went to trousers is not only for men and was not mentioned? Now, the narrative has changed or what? From his explanation, we can all wear skirts, high heels, geles etc. Just make sure as a man that a woman has not worn it before, and vice versa.

Among other things, he mentioned that Jesus Christ was not allowed in the synagogue that is why he went to the desert, and that Pharisees were not around Him etc. Well, that's not even what i want to talk about in the thread. But it just goes to show that people need to read and study the Bible for themselves. Many of these preachers simply just say things that are not there in the Bible.

Image123 ooo. Pardon me for shouting out your name as if I put money down for plate during your naming ceremony. I am sorry, as the thing dey kami lara, nahin make me hala.

OK Image123 here's the deal, I've been thinking deeply about this thread, topic heading, content and especially Deuteronomy 22:5, I think that is your what you use as proof for your theological belief that women shouldnt wear men's trousers lol, and I know that I had advanced to you that Deuteronomy 22:5 was instituted because of the idolatory pagan custom/practice that included cross dressing as part of the ritual performed in the whole pagan rite, but then I couldnt find any and/or the textual proof supporting this. To make matters worse, I tried to look at Deuteronomy 22:5 contextually, but it seems like it was just plonked into the Deuteronomy 22:5 spot out of thin air, there is no top, no bottom, no head, no tail, just the order "A woman must not wear men’s clothing, and a man must not wear women’s clothing, for whoever does these things is detestable to the LORD your God", straight up and out of the blue. Like jcross19 would say, something wasnt adding up, so re-adjusted my sitting posture, sat up and sat up back straight, to get looking into Deuteronomy 22:5 deeply, carefully, properly and correctly. I began to wonder, asking myself questions, like, what is going on here, what is God up to here. Like, why did God plonk this Deuteronomy 22:5 verse right in there and put it in there without any seemingly explanation. The verse is in isolation, as in meaning, just there by itself

Image123, I was shocked at what I unearthed, pulled out and found. It turned out that Deuteronomy 22:5 is a command about something completely and totally different. Deuteronomy 22:5 had nothing whatsoever to do with any idolatory pagan custom/practice that included cross dressing as part of the ritual performed in the whole pagan rite. Deuteronomy 22:5 had nothing at all, to do with your thread title heading of whether must women ordinarily wear trousers/pants at all. Apparently Deuteronomy 22:5, really, truly and actually is about a command that was forbidding women from dressing up armed for/to war.

As it turns out, the correct literal Hebrew translation of Deuteronomy 22:5 is: “Never cause or force a warriors weapon to be used by a woman or wife, neither dress warriors armor on a woman or wife for to Yahweh, God of Host, disgusting is such that do so" and it is not "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God" and so it is God commanded in Deuteronomy 22:5 and God, in it, considered it disgusting, those that force the woman or wife, armed and to go fight in a war. Dont take my word as gospel Image123 lol, why not pull out a very good interlinear, then use it to check and find out the individual Hebrew words/phrases in Deuteronomy 22:5. "Gbe ẹsẹ now, ki iwọ na tẹsumọle, Ma fọ bi awo, oje ni wọn lo", lol.

Now Image123, the question(s) that begs an answer(s), is how did the falsism of the Hebrew translation of Deuteronomy 22:5 to English come about and/or why is the mainstream English bible translation(s) of Deuteronomy 22:5 an invalid interpretation of the verse? Moreover, since there is no biblical law, that says what a woman should wear or should not wear, why are we allowing Deuteronomy 22:5 to be used to say the outward dressing appearance of a woman is the measure of her inward relationship with Jesus Christ and so made to live under the constraints of legalism, the act of putting law above gospel by establishing requirements for salvation beyond repentance and faith in Jesus Christ, hmm? One is comforted to know that Eviana, admits to not believing that clothes (in particular, "pants" wearing) are not a "salvational" issue, lol. Even you too, had a lot earlier on had said: "First and last, for me, wearing of trousers is not an issue of salvation", lol.

Fyi in my research, I found John Selden, who happened to be an English jurist, a scholar of England's ancient laws and constitution and scholar of Jewish law, also was known as a polymath, when deconstructing Deuteronomy 22:5 in a letter, quotes Flavious Josephus', (i.e. you know Josephus, right Image123?) "Watch out particularly in battles lest a woman use masculine clothing, and lest a man use feminine dress" Funnily enough also found out men used to worship Venus in women's clothing and women worshipped Mars by wearing armour, lol. Anyway, point being made is that the mainstream interpretation of Deuteronomy 22:5 is not what we've come to know it really to be.

Fyi reference: https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/deuteronomy-22.html#5
cc Finallydead

"³⁰Jesus replied with a story:
“A Jewish man was traveling from Jerusalem down to Jericho, and he was attacked by bandits.
They stripped him of his clothes (i.e. left him naked?), beat him up, and left him half dead beside the road.
³¹“By chance a priest (i.e. a pastor) came along. But when he saw the man lying there, he crossed to the other side of the road and passed him by.
³²A Temple assistant (i.e. a choir master/usher/deacon etcetera) walked over and looked at him lying there, but he also passed by on the other side.
³³“Then a despised Samaritan came along, and when he saw the man, he felt compassion for him.
³⁴Going over to him, the Samaritan soothed his wounds with olive oil and wine and bandaged them. Then he put the man on his own donkey and took him to an inn, where he took care of him.
³⁵The next day he handed the innkeeper two silver coins,e telling him, ‘Take care of this man. If his bill runs higher than this, I’ll pay you the next time I’m here.’"
- Luke 10:30-35

"I want you to share your food with the hungry and to provide shelter for homeless, oppressed people.
When you see someone naked, clothe him! Don't turn your back on your own flesh and blood!"
- Isaiah 58:7

"³⁵For I was hungry and you gave Me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave Me something to drink, I was a stranger and you took Me in,
³⁶I was naked and you clothed Me, I was sick and you looked after Me, I was in prison and you visited Me.'"
- Matthew 25:35-36

WinningEleven:
1. Yes I have them all
2. No
3. An intense desire stirring in me
4. I won't call them ill or evil but from my small knowledge its not supported by the Bible. But yes, some of them are evil but I shot them out quickly. This is part of my worry
5. 4-3 days ago

Thank you thank you, thank you

WinningEleven:
6. I honestly don't understand this question

You said at #5 above, the whole urges problem started 4-3 days ago, which considering you're at least between 15-18 years old at least implies the issue is a recently developed one, so the question here at #6, is asking that, what to your mind, do you think caused you to begin all of a sudden, develop this seemingly unhealthy strong and compelling attraction to women/girls. Something must have triggered this. You dont seem to have same urges towards your mother, sisters, aunts, nieces etc. You dont seem to have this uncontrollable urge/desire feelings, that is going unchecked, towards not good looking, shapeless and/or not well physically blessed women/girls

WinningEleven:
7. Honestly it matters.

Good

WinningEleven:
The reason why I am worried is because this has never happened like this before. Before you yarn puberty, I am in my late teens so I have mostly gone past puberty.

Lol, I am not Finallydead. I dont do presupposition and if I do, I often will tell that I am doing it, lol. Dont get worried my brother, this is a shut and close case. You dont really have a problem, what you are in need of is a paradigm shift, once you have it, as I earlier said you'll see all women and/or girls in a different light, lol and all those lust will evaporate, disappear, lol

PS: I really need to already be out, else I'll be late for my appointment. Excuse me. Ah, I've seen Image123 waving the stick at you and beating you with it, lol. It is well, lol

WinningEleven:
lemme kuku answer the questions

Thank you my brother. You wont regret you did. Just make sure you give your answers in the same format, order and style the questions were asked, meaning they need to be numbered, lol.
PS: I am now briefly popping out, say for an hour, lol

Finallydead:
Your right on this one. But observe my initial post, I offered this only if his problem was as I suggested. Its up to him then, to say if it is or not. And to follow through based on that. I love to save time, so I do such at times. Lol. It probably is, if he took it.

"... I've learnt to give answers rather than raise questions,"
- Religion / Re: Bible Scholars Should Help Me Out With This Teachings. PLEASE. by Finallydead: 3:03pm On Dec 17

Tbh, you're not helping him and matters when you do things that way. Whats the rush, why the quick fix? I think, I know why, it's because you dont according to the above quote, like asking questions, is why, lol, but meanwhile, the art and science of asking questions is the source of all knowledge, that's Thomas Berger for you, by the way, lol.

WinningEleven, is not sincerely, honestly and truthfully ready yet for any help sought, take that from me, lol.

Finallydead:
By the way, did you see my reply to you on the image of God by stupidity

Yes I did see your reply on the other thread Finallydead. It was because of you actually that I veered to join the thread, in fact, it was because of your initial "sensus plenior" comment before your last reply you're referring to, that made me decide to join the thread. Why I hear or sense you ask, lol. Well so you know that you're not alone, so you know there are are others who seem to think like you think, lol, and because not many usually stick their neck(s) on the block here, lol.

I am about popping out shortly for a bit, when I come back in, I will try to drop some comment to your reply on the other thread, lol

WinningEleven:
I'll try this sir. Definitely

You will definitely try what, hmm? Medication before and/or without diagnosis, erhn? Finallydead, should know better that prescription before proper and correct diagnosis is malpractice, lol.

Do not fear those simple questions, dont be afraid of any of those questions WinningEleven, but fear sidestepping them. Be afraid of not answering the questions.

We would have made some advances in to this situation of yours if you had made it to answering those questions and even possibly discoveries made likely further questioning your answers, lol. WinningEleven, please find the courage to answer those questions you're afraid to hear the answers you're going to give.

WinningEleven:
Sir, I need help not a exam now

This is how you'll effectively get the help you so much need my dear new friend.

I don't know why you seem to find those seven simple, harmless, easy, direct and straightforward questions hard for you to answer. Trust me, when/if you answer those questions, I will be able to educate and/or re-orientate you on what you need to know about women/girls. The information will re-align and set up you to look at women/girls in a different, respective, appreciative and admirable light so that you won't necessarily anymore be having at all, any of those body quakes you say are giving you concerns.

WinningEleven:
please help me before I do something stupid.

What examples of something stupid, do you think you'll and/or might do?

WinningEleven:
its a very simple yet complicated thing
lately, I dunno what is wrong with me. when I see girls, my body quakes.
by quakes, I mean that there is this movement inside of me that makes my heart, chest and stomach hurt for a second. like something inside me is moving uneasily. I don't understand this and it began lately.

1/ Do you have a mother, sisters, aunts, nieces etc at all?
2/ Do you have this same experience when with any and/or each of them?
3/ Describe what "my body quakes" is and what this specifically means?
4/ Describe the urges you have, when you see girls, do you have any ill or evil intentions in your mind whenever you experience this feeling towards girls/women?
5/ When precisely did you start developing this urges towards girls/women?
6/ What to your mind, do you think triggered you having this to behave this way to girls?
7/ Does it matter if the girls are good looking or not, if well physically blessed or not, or it doesn't matter because you feel this way regardless of if good looking or not, if well physically blessed or not, hmm?

WinningEleven:
what is wrong with me?

Why does it need to be that something is wrong with you?

WinningEleven:
I have prayed and prayed about it to no avail
FYI I'm a teen

Describe in the detail, what the prayers were about and give example of how you made or give the prayer

deuzgreat:
And you had to attribute it to religion! It's basically hormones. Even angels saw beautiful girls and fell to earth to fvck dem. Who then are you for hormones not to mess with u? Read more biology books and stop being stupid

WinningEleven:
FYI, the "angels" you said impregnated ladies were not the kind of spirit beings you think
The bible call them "Sons of God" not angels.
And also, the nature of the children they bore from women showed that their nature wasn't godly but EVIL

Please dont make the mistake of believing that lie, because the Bible never called any angels anywhere the "sons of God"

PS: Well done WinningEleven for correcting deuzgreat. I'll soon get to you. You're a smart guy and you wouldnt have any problem overcoming this seemingly problem after I have shared some info and realities with you

solite3:
the father never commanded the son to become a servant nowhere is it in the bible.
By the way the fact that he had to become a servant proves he was never a servant.
" All things were created by the father" because the father himself participated in the act of creation but the act was through the Son.
Jesus is the source of God's creation Revelation 3vv14

"¹⁴If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet.
¹⁵For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you."
- John 13:14-15

The Father does need nor have to command the Son to become a servant and it is in the bible that the Son became a servant. What was Jesus, in John 13:14-15 above, demonstrating, teaching and advising His disciples to be and do to others?

Janosky:
(1).
Psalm 110:1, who gave the command "Sit at my right hand"?
Hebrew 10:12,13, Who obeyed the command?
What's the place or location where the command was given?
Acts 3:13, who is the servant?

The servant is God Himself projected as Jesus on Earth

Janosky:
(2).TRUE.

We thank God you see the sense in this, lol

Janosky:
(3).
NOT true.
Your (2) CONTRADICTS (3).
Proof of Source>"All things were created by the father". Source>The Father.
John5:26, The Source is the Father.

The Father created by proxy, so its true

Janosky:
* For instance, Janosky (J) bought a car through Solite3, (S),between (J) & (S) who is the source of the bought car?

For instance, Janosky FirstName(JF), bought a car and used his middle name to pay for it, Janosky MiddleName(JM), who on paper bought the car?

Janosky:
Nothing is wrong with you. calm down.
You are passing through a normal phase of development ,puberty phase.
Your parents should have educated you and made you aware of the changes in your body as well as fluctuations of feelings and emotions you would pass through as you transition from teenage years to mature, adulthood.
Beware of the counsel of Ahithophel,that is your peers and others who may mislead you with half truths about sexuality education.
Please Google this very informative book, "Questions Young People Ask- Answers That Work", published by Jehovah's witnesses.
The Official JW website has lots of practical counsel for young people/youths.
God bless.

WinningEleven, just be alert and on guard, so when/if you do eat the "The Official JW website lots of practical counsel for young people/youths" that you have the sense wisdom, good and right strength of mind to spit out the bones

Godhatesodomy:
Emilo is Emilo and I am Sango Kainde.

I am educated on that, and better or more informed. Thanks.

solite3:
ok

[img]https://s3/images/ObamaMuttley.gif[/img]
So OK what? So you mean you arent bothered to help nlPoster with an answer to her question, hmm? The question where she said:
"Tracing Adam's genealogy in Genesis, I once wondered if he was there around the time of Noah. I think this might have been mentioned before by other folks."

Ijawwomaninoyo:
GET OFF MY MENTION! DAFT FOOL!

You're loosing it and fyi, you're a bigger daft fool than I ever would and/or could be, lol

Ijawwomaninoyo:
LET THEM CALL THEIR MOTHERS THE SAME NAMES THEY CALLED THE EKITI WOMEN WHEN THEY WERE POSTED ON NAIRALAND TOPLESS.

So you're getting unnecessarily all wound up because Ekiti women posted topless on Nairaland were called unsavoury names by a bunch of teenaged ignorant posters behaving childishly, erhn? Smh.

Ijawwomaninoyo:
SIMPLE ENGLISH HE CAN'T COMPREHEND!

Why not come and translate into Ekiti language for me to comprehend nau

Ijawwomaninoyo:
STOP QUOTING ME AND GET OFF MY MENTION!!!!!!

It hasnt dawned on you that I might stop quoting you if and/or when you stop quoting me, lol. It's not rocket science, lol.

kkins25:
everything was going smoothly until you typed @bolded. it was then my lie detector began to beep..
beep beep beep beep
lie detected, beep beep
lie detected
beep beep!!!!!!!!!!
ohh metatron, what agenda those though have? are thou so filled with light that thou wishes to 'take the seat of God' .Have you learnt nothing from the 'fall of thine brother- lucifer'..

once a mainstream christian, always a mainstream christian. Always filling in the gaps for God. where is thy evidence sir? what accelerated learning are you even talking of? are you saying that adams brains were working so fast he solved problems much faster than albert einstein discovered relativity? what criteria did you use to measure his rate of brain processing? the context of the thread agrees that adam and eve were indeed the first man. Are you now saying that my evolution textbooks are fairy tales or the fossil and remains of ancient man, H. habilis, H. erectus, neanderthals,etc are nothing but a conspiracy just like emilo2stay claims? what are you getting at o lord metatron??

[img]https://s2/images/MuttleyDriveLaff.gif[/img]
You can get off kkins25, if the ride is too bumpy for you
or it's too much hard meat for your stomach and/or liver to handle, lol

Bigflamie:
Nothing one won't see on Nairaland.

Everyone seeking irrelevant attention

Preciousgirl:
I pity you

I am sorry dahling, but I just have to agree with Bigfamie's comment and do without malice because I too make this meaningless and unintelligible noise when yawning and stretching. It sure is just like yours, meaning not bursting and/or speaking in tongues dearie, lol. I love you, love you with the love of Christ, so please don't take this wrong way.

Why don't you consider Hahn's suggestion, and let others be the judge of what's happening, erhn?

Funnily enough, I have just now in my car stretched out with hands flung out and yawned letting out unrecognisable, not understanding words and unintelligible noises. I loved it, seems to have a good feel factor on me, my body.

Ijawwomaninoyo:
I said the East insulted the Ekiti women when they did it even in the darkness, they never thought of justifying the women's action then but justifying the Eastern women's action even in broad day light.
What did you get?

I am not remotely interested in or with your squabbles about Ekiti women gone nude and being called witches or whanot and the East not doing same but justifying their womenfolk ' action, I mentioned you just to get your attention to this brilliant thread put up by nlposter, to see whether you had matured contribution to make to it. My grandma RIP, an Ijebu, walked around with her wrapper round her waist with her breast hanging out in public display, nobody so much winced, complained, found it strange or odd, we all just went about business, just as usual, no big deal. You are unecessarily getting worked up because of a few special snowflakes on that thread not worth getting wound up over, lol. So what a few limpy hanging out breasts in broad day light, na only "okobo" (i.e. pervert) that one will shack nau, mtcheew.

Ijawwomaninoyo:
Do you understand English Language?

and what is the meaning of this comment, what's it supposed to mean? No I dont understand English. Are you planning to translate in vernacular to me ni?

Ijawwomaninoyo:
I said when Ekiti women did it even though in the dark, they were castigated by the Igbos right here and called names, nobody justified their reason for doing it.
It is done in the East now, they are justifying the women's action but not calling them the names they called the Ekiti women.

Did you read MuttleyLaff calling the Ekiti women names huh? I only mentioned your moniker with that of Wazobiamax22 because you two were the only ones on that thread you have a complaint with, who seemed to be sensible, not being childish and not making ignorant comments.

Ijawwomaninoyo:
But nobody knew that when Ekiti women did this, they were called a lot of bad names.
They were called 'Stupid Afonjas' , 'Old witches' etc Their breasts were made jest of even though they did theirs in the night not broad day light.
When these ones' breasts were made jest of, now they see something wrong with that.
I hope you are getting my point.

MuttleyLaff:
I recall my long time ago RIP paternal grandma, who use to go about the home, balcony and all, showcasing her opened for all to see, hanging down limply breasts/boobs. She just puts on her wrapper at waist level and be going about her business. She wasnt crazy, senile or anything like like that. No one bats an eyelid, no one cared and no one thought anything untoward about it.

I doubt that its still being done nowadays. Its just as you said nlPoster, it was an unashamed African culture thing going on, with no negative connotation attached to it.

You are not making any point for me to get because as you can see from the above, my paternal grandma RIP, did this too and she was not stupid, was no witch, and wasnt laughed at, but actually was a God fearing woman, who even was made the matron of her aladura church sef when alive

jcross19:
Am strong believer and I have encountered the true power of God which concreted my faith in Him. But the truth is this, the creation story in the Eden something is not adding up I may not want to go deeper because people who have a little faith. Does that mean God did not know the capacity of what He created by given them such test? Now am asking you when you have a very young baby that has just started to crawl and you tell the baby do not drink this snipper and keep the snipper beside the baby what will happen? That's what happened in that Eden according bible which is not making sense.

MuttleyLaff:
Excellent truth

Are you a learner ni?. The tree goes through judgement upon examination of its fruits

Trees are used as a metaphor for humans in that budaatum comment

Dont worry, he'll soon copy.
I spoke too soon

eaddyboy, are you aware we have an advocate before the Father. You do know what an advocate is and what role they play in a court of law, dont you, hmm?

Judgement be passed one after the other, bearing in mind how much populated we are and time consuming it will be

Also to answer your question eaddyboy, do you know Adam and Eve were not created like babies or 3 year olds.

Adam was a grown man. He and Eve were not made children nor childish. Adam and Eve did not gradually change physically or progress to maturity as we have children would do. Adam and Eve were created fully grown, made and developed to be responsible for their actions. Their minds were endowed with accelerated knowledge and so capable to be completely responsible for what they did or not do. So eaddyboy, if evidently, Adam was subjected to an accelerated learning process or program, what is stopping God in conducting an accelerated seating or fast track judgement hearing, hmm?

MuttleyLaff:
Adam and Eve were made fully grown and/or developed to be responsible for their actions
They are completely responsible for what they did or not do

Their minds were endowed with accelerated knowledge

Unlike johnydon22 who doesnt, I am glad you accept and agree they were not children

Adam was a grown man. He and Eve were not made children nor childish

Adam and Eve did not gradually change physically or progress to maturity as a child would do

Man's knowledge can go beyond his experience. The acquistion of knowledge doesnt all have to be experiential (i.e. first-hand) People are known to learn from other people's experience. Besides God taught Adam well and well enough. Adam had the best Teacher, at his disposal to throw questions at in a quest to gain more knowledge.

Evidently, Adam was subjected to an accelerated learning process or program, which purposeful was to allow him to think and make reflective judgment(s) concerning what to believe or what not to believe.

So Adam was imparted with enough information by God to make informed decisions like whether or not, to choose to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good or evil

Inspite of their thinking abilities and/or reasoning capabilities, Eve was deceived but as for Adam, he wasnt deceived, he, Adam, deliberately decided to mis-behave

Everything in the creation story in the garden of Eden adds up, but to a not fully informed it might seem not.

Of course, the Omniscient, Omni know all, Omni know everything God knows the capacity of what He created and this is so much so, more the reason why the not covered up and/or not hidden, strategically placed centrally, in the garden, test was before them, lol, then the stand back. To stand back, is a God special modus operandi, lol. If you doubt that, God stands back, then be prepared and ready to answer the question about how did the first sin come about, lol? I am not talking of Adam and Eve's sin, but I am asking the question specifically about and/or talking of Satan's sin, lol.
cc stupidity

Finallydead:
Adam never had the nature of God (image of God), which is the Word of God Himself (Heb 1:3) but was only made in God's likeness (resemblance in looks, design, structure and form) as the account was careful to specify(Gen 5:1). Had he had God's nature neither he nor eve would have been victims of Satan's deception, just like the Word Himself (Mt 4:3-11) proved. To give one God's nature (image/character/attribute) is to take away one's unique identity from him, which defeats the purpose of creation. You may ask about Gen 1:26, then. Take this (Gen 1:1-2:3) to be a different frame of existence only structuring than what actually happened on earth as we know it today (which began in Gen 2:4). The created objects mentioned in (Gen 1) are Divine figures of speech and the man in v26 is actually Christ not Adam, the male being Christ and the female being the bride of Christ. In the Hebrew, the word for Man(v26) and Adam are two very related words with the same spelling except the addition of an tittle on one of the letters and hence a slightly different pronunciation. In other words though Adam was symbolic of the man in v26, he isn't that man.

MuttleyLaff:
"²⁶And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:
[s]and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.[/s]
²⁷So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."
- Genesis 1:26-27

This is a very good inquiry question. I like it and lurve how you asked it.

What do you think is the image of God and what's His likeness is Magnoliaa? Well in an oversimplified way "image of God" and "His likeness" are "Hebraism". They are Hebrew idioms and/or expressions. The "image of God" is God expressing Himself Magnoliaa. It is God projecting Himself and/or projecting the Godhead.

OK, let's do it this way, I am quite sure you're familiar with how artists express themselves with their particular form of art, even you too, do express yourself with specific hair styles or hair-dos etcetera, but if taking this image and expressing oneself thing seriously, then as regards, the "what is the image of God" question, the image of God, is about God uninhibitedly expressing Himself through giving some insight into what the Godhead is all about, with and through using the creation of man as the art form. Man is meant to be the "image of God" , as in, be a creative self-expression of the Godhead, this is God showing who He is, but this image got marred after the fall from grace, as in, the quality or appearance of the image got spoiled. The image got spoiled after Adam & Eve rejected and opposed God. The wholeness and godliness of the image got lost and broken after the fall, though fragmented pieces of it still remained

"Christ is the visible likeness of the invisible God (i.e. image that exactly reflects its source)..."
- Colossians 1:15a

"Christ is the exact likeness of the unseen God (i.e. the visible likeness of the invisible God)
He existed before God made anything at all, and, in fact, Christ himself is the Creator who made."
- Colossians 1:15

"He is the reflection of God's glory (i.e. mirror-like representation) and the exact likeness of His being"
- Hebrews 1:3a

"His Son is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of God's being (i.e. the exact representation of His nature)
He holds everything together through his powerful words.
After He had cleansed people from their sins, He received the highest position, the one next to the Father in heaven."
- Hebrews 1:3

"Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe.
They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News.
They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God."
- 2 Corinthians 4:4

Now about "what is His likeness" question, well Jesus is the exact likeness of God. The likeness of God is the visible spiritual attribute of the moral qualities of God, which are wisdom, power, compassion, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.

I previously said that, I am sure you made the observation that, God in Genesis 1:26 had said "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" but in Genesis 1:27, man was only made in His image, nothing about the other half, likeness is mentioned. That, it wasnt until Genesis 5:1, that the subject "likeness of God" ever surfaced, and even that likeness is shortlived, because by Genesis 5:3, when Adam had his son, the son is in Adam's likeness, after Adam's image and not anymore God's. The likeness of God because of the fall from grace, is no more there already Magnoliaa.

Colossians 1:15a, Hebrews 1:3a and 2 Corinthians 4:4 profoundly, have a sudden realization and great revelation because the trio, are talking of the living embodiment of God, about the road that leads to perfection, the road that leads to all and what is good, what God is and what God is about, Magnoliaa. Each day with Christ in our lives, we are becoming that exact likeness of God

Please continue, if necessary, to freely ask questions, maybe ask, even if just to more light shed on something or do just a plain rfi (i.e. request for information). I am online 24/7. Have a good plus blessed day and week Magnoliaa.

In sensus plenior, we get to know that, when at Genesis 1:26, God said: "Let Us make man in Our image, after/according to Our likeness..." God, did at Genesis 1:27, make the man, in His image (i.e. So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him) but the likeness, God did not institute it or get it off the ground until when God got to Genesis 5:1 (i.e. "this is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God")

Whoa, whoa, I know, so OK then, why not let's ease off and slow down a bit, eh. Aside the above mention excerpt of mine brought over from a discussion on another thread all, here is an addendum to it. Surely we must have heard it said that: "In the Old Testament the New Testament is concealed, and, in the New Testament, the Old Testament is revealed” Someone's asking: Where is the New Testament hidden in the Old Testament here and where or how is the New Testament revealing the Old Testament, hmm? This is profound and humbles me to share this.

Well, New Testament Colossians 1:15 tells us that "Christ is the visible image of the invisible God. He existed before anything was created and is supreme over all creation" or Hebrews 1:3, another New Testament verse further tells, that Jesus Christ "reflects the brightness of God's glory and is the exact likeness of God's own being" and then comes another New Testament in person of 1 John 3:2, broadcasting by saying "Beloved, now we are the children of God, and it has not been revealed until now what we are going to be, but we know that when he has been revealed, we shall be in his likeness, and we shall see him just as what he is.".

There are New Testament stuff squeezed and hidden in Old Testament Genesis chapters 2-5. The narrative in Genesis chapters 2-5 was hiding the fact that the killing of Abel at Genesis 4:8, signified death of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Eve, at Genesis 4:25, giving birth to Seth and saying, "God has granted me another seed in place of Abel, since Cain killed him" was signifing the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and Genesis 4:26b, that said: "... then men began to call on the name of the LORD" signified, depending on which side of the divide, when man began, to call upon God and/or to profane God (i.e. some men began to worship God some didnt) Then Genesis 5:1, where God has made an evolved man now in His likeness, like Himself, signified the end of time of man made in the likeness of God.
cc stupidity

www.nairaland.com/attachments/10740605_fbimg1576515440364_jpeg612386d3a1ed65ea56638833098d295e

Ebonyi Women Protest Topless In Front Of Government House Over Sons' Arrest
https://www.nairaland.com/5584879/ebonyi-women-protest-topless-front

nlPoster:
Thoughts on nudity

nlPoster:
Alright, let me give mine.
We Africans used to be nude prior to colonization. Now, we're not thanks to the influence of modernization and religion.
Although, our traditional religions are ok with nudity.

Wazobiamax22:
God bless our mothers
Not nude for fashion sake but for a good cause.
Chaos everywhere, Mr governor please look into it ASAP.
Every child is precious

Ijawwomaninoyo:
The day Ekiti women did this same thing, they were called all sort or imprinted names including 'Old witches'.
These are what now?

As we see made use of here, nudity is sometimes used as an organized public demonstration tactic during a civil protest/disturbance to attract media and public attention to a grievance(s)

fao and fyi openmine I earlier until now got banned for quoting your post and responding to it, so if you have to respond to mine, don't quote it, don't touch it, so copy out into a fresh and new post whatever in my post you want and/or need to address.

This advance warning is also for the benefit of other interested interlocutors on this thread.

openmine:
Like you said, Tithe is a law....

It's not like I said, because it was loswhite who first said "tithe is a law". I merely echoed what he said because I accept and know this as a fact, that it is a law and had a purpose, which primarily was for e welfare and/well being of the Levites, who had no landed inheritance in the Promised Land, Canaan in Israel.

openmine:
aside tithe, there were other laws which He was under!

Birds born in cages, think that flying is a disease. Of course, there were other laws He was under, but Jesus as for this the tithing law, as a carpenter, Jesus was never under it.

Wait, let's do it this way. Lets both carefully examine together the intricacy of how the talk and/or why the subject of tithing at Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42 crept into the discussion Jesus initiated with the crowds and His disciples at Matthew 23:1

Left to Jesus, He wouldnt have raise the subject of tithing, if not because the hypocrites Pharisees, who a first one in his mind at Luke 11:37-38 was wondering in His mind why Jesus did not first wash before the meal and then after another set of Pharisees and teachers of religious law at Mark 7:5, began to challenge and questioning Jesus over why His disciples arent washing their hands, cleaning themselves up first before eating (i.e. eat without first performing the hand-washing ceremony)

The funniest thing about this all, is that, the hand-washing ceremony isnt even a law, that the Pharisees were getting sore about. It isnt a God given law, but is just a Pharisaic standard of ceremonial purity, that had nothing to do with a God given religion law and not even with any of the Levitical Laws, but is only a Pharisaic tradition and Oral Law, a mere man-made, tradition of the elders, lol. So anyway, it was when after the Pharisee, at Luke 11:37-38 had raised this objection in his mind and the Pharisees and teachers of religious law, at Mark 7:5 openly raised their concerns to Jesus that He used tithe to publicly criticize them all using ridicule, irony and sarcasm to do that

He, Jesus, at Matthew 23:1, called the crowds and His disciples together and began to warn them about the Pharisees and teachers of religious law, whom He said disregard the commandment of God to keep the tradition of men and then from Matthew 23:13, He started raining curses upon the Pharisees and teachers of religious law, right up to Matthew 23:23 He did, and which is the point at where He ridiculed the Pharisees and teachers of religious with the mention of tithing and then continued thereon further cursing them more, until Matthew 23:29, lol.

openmine:
So we could conclude he spoke as one under the law hence his response to tithing!

He did not speak as one under a tithing law. Like I've previously said, the mention of tithing was an accident. It wasnt expectedly planned. It really was no response to tithing, as nobody and/or no one asked Him questions about tithing, lol. He used tithing to poke and make fun of them for their misplaced priorities. He was not teaching tithing, He was teaching get your priorities right, lol. Praise God Alleluia.

cheechee1:
How many of you grew up watching this hilarious young man on television back then? Although I cannot remember his real name as well as the name of the TV programme he appeared in. But I know he was called STEVE on the show and he was a fun to watch as he made me stay completely glued to the TV screen at the time. Check out this 'before and after' picture of him. And if you know his real name, please I'd appreciate that Nairalanders
Cc - Lalasticlala, OAM4J, Mynd44, Seun, Dominique, Fynestboi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHiqDQQZOjc
The first and last pics are Steve Urkel, the "Family Matters" fictional character played by Jaleel White. Jaleel, a typical black American first name, right?, lol

OLAADEGBU:
Fake News.

careytommy37:
Fake story
All the made up bullsh*t usually posted on Sunday mornings to paint Christianity in bad light.
If the story is true, post the name of the church and the pastor. No need to post your name

[img]https://s5/images/Islam-and-72-Virgins-Cartoon.jpg[/img]
Tbh, at the back of my mind, I kinda thought it might be. I should next time trust my spirit, instinct and/or sixth sense, lol. careytommy37 seems to know these guys and what they get up to, but I never put our esteemed and much respected mod lalas' to be in the frame joining and/or doing any of this messing about too nau. Maybe, if true, lalas' will post church location and pastor, so that you can sort out and straighten up things. Maybe get Deeper Life's the powers that be, put together some refresher training for the pastor, hmm?

As for being told there will be virgins, its no fake news, just a slight misunderstanding and/or breakdown in communication lol, as seen from above pinshure

Nothing wey miguard, no dey see for gatehouse. Nothing wey vigilante, no dey see for midnight hour. "Oya afira, kiya mọ sa", OLAADEGBU, your attention is needed here ooo

MasterKernel:
Buhari equally called for revolution during Jonathan, why wasn't he roughed?

voltron14:
Please if you want to trade rumours don't quote me.
I don't do exchanges concerning beer parlour conversations.

MasterKernel:
Oooh! You don't trade rumors?
https://www.thecable.ng/flashback-in-2011-general-buhari-called-for-a-revolution

voltron14:
Opening sentence:
In 2011, General Muhammadu Buhari, the candidate of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), called for a revolution in Nigeria — albeit through the ballot.

MasterKernel:
Through which ballot? Didn't he match on the street calling for revolution during Jonathan.
Please show any quote from him saying "Revolution through Ballot" you win, and if you're unable to show his words explicitly stating that out, he's not different from Sowore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92kU-q-gXww

Sowore has never been to Dubai ever, but Sowore remains jailed for calling for peaceful protests and mobilising others with his movement "Revolution Now" on trumped up and ludicrous charges

MasterKernel:
Surprisingly, I'm not a fan of Sowore or Yoruba. But Buhari isn't better than him.

Surprisingly, its the same Buhari, who armed with guns removed a democratically elected government in a coup in 1983, unlike Sowore who never called for any violent change of government, lol. Surprisingly, its again, same Buhari in 2011, who called for protest akin to those that were then taking place in Egypt, so of course, the man is 1000% far worse and rotten than Sowore ever would dream to be, lol

loswhite:
Jesus was under the law, so speaking against tithing would have been blasphemy...This is no way means Jesus was in support of tithing. Tithing was a law and the law was meant for a purpose. It today's generation that law is not required

Tithing was a law and the law was meant for the purpose of those who had no inheritance out of the Promised Land period, lol.

The Pharisees, rightly so, as according to the law, are expected to tithe, so Jesus endorses tithing in their case, lol, however Jesus wouldnt support all these jagbajantis sense of entitlement to obligatory or imposed ecclesiastical monitised tithing going around the place here, lol

openmine:
True

Jesus would speak against tithing and it wouldnt have been blasphemy, if it is not applicable to a person, just as like He, as a carpenter or His disciples as fishermen weren't tithing and werent expected to tithe, lol.