₦airaland Forum

Tranquillity360:
DSS written scripts.




Someone should remind me how many AK 47 found in Igboho's home.

It's unfortunate that we don't know who to believe.

DSS can't be trusted.

IPOB/ESN can't claim not to have performed rituals to fortify themselves. And the cost of some fortification rituals could require human lives.

Tranquillity360:
We want you to enjoy the Biafra you fought for.





God bless and protect Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

As much as I dont support his approach, I believe the fight for Biafra is justified. Because Buhari has proven that Norherners only think of themselves. So Easterners, Westerners and Southerners should likewise do the same.

Skyfornia:
The way MNK story will turn in the coming weeks will shock everybody... I'm observing...

Meanwhile, All of you celebrating Nnamdị Kanụ's arrest inside IDP camp, your salvation is here, go home; the reason you ran away from your various homes has been arrested. The reason you can't travel freely via Kaduna road has been arrested. It calls for celebration. Drink more kunu!

I used to be against MNK but thanks to Buhari's tribal and religious bigotry, I started supporting anyone who fought against Buhari including MNK and Sunday Igboho.

MNK lost me when he decided to start killing any Igbo who doesnt support him.
Even the last sit-at-home order was violent because he instructed his foot soldiers to kill who ever violated the sit-at-home order in the east. Videos were shared of the violence that was meted on those who flouted the sit-at-home order on May 29-31st. Even old men were beaten.

At that point he stopped being a freedom fighter and slipped unfortunately becoming a terrorist.

While I do not celebrate his arrest, because we have a more terrorist government, he has made it difficult for the international community to be able to support him. Because the first thing this useless govt would play to then are his insurgent messages instructing his followers and footsoldiers in IPOB/ESN to kill peaceful civilians and politicians who do not support his course.

It's obvious from the attacks on Sunday Igboho that this govt seeks to silence every agitator even peaceful agitators. On that note, I believe they have already failed.

Because every non-political Nigeria already sees this govt as a failed govt and their antics to trample on their democratic rights to express their grievances will only provoke more freedom fighters.

Even if govt arrests Kanu and Igboho, more like them will simply sprout because Nigeria has never been more politically, economically, religiously etc divided, ever. Buhari is apparently and oxymoronically now the worst and the best thing to happen to Nigeria.

Worst because Nigeria has never experienced this level of Low.
Best because he has United all non-Fulani Nigerians to see the bigotry of the Fulanis in their evil and sinister efforts to rule other Nigerian tribes.

Now all Nigerians United against the entity called One Nigeria. Every geopolitical zone is now clamouring to secede. From the East to the West, South and even some parts of the North who have experienced the evil of the Fulani.

iamyemiakins:
If he had done this in Nigeria, his soakaway down to his WC wouldn't remain the same by now.

Kodak Black, Lil Uzi Vert and their contemporaries acts almost the same way.

Isn't there a US law that forbids abusing the dollar?
He's definitely going to be hearing from the popo soon.

Fahdiga1:
Exactly. Things have gotten out of hand. You don't even know what to expect when going to the market. Nigerians have never had it this bad

This government has to be the worst ever.

Megatrix:
There was never any evidence against him. This jury people just decide cases based on emotions, I don't know where the US got this there useless trial by jury method. Many innocent people are languishing in jail just because members of jury that know nothing about the law decided to find them guilty based on emotional sentiments.

This is great news.
It's weird to see the man that brought laughter to so many faces being drained of his joy and freedom by false allegations by the powers that be, fuelled by the outcry of ignorant feminists riding on the #Metoo movement who are more anti-men then humanists.

I sincerely hope he gets his freedom.

advanceDNA:
You think the man suffered to build that church from scratch then the wife will allow one outsider take over in the name of God said.....??

This only proves that it's a family business.
Guess he had a succession plan in place and chose to keep it in the family.

Reminiscent of Benson Idahosa whose wife also took over his ministry after similar death circumstances.

Automated.

BlowYourMind:
What power does a vice president possess in Nigeria, Osibanjo cannot make a difference in Buhari's government, despite he was against crypto currency and Twitter ban, he can't say it because removing him as vice principal takes the president nothing because his puppets are in the Senate, immediately the president order his removal he will be removed without consequences and you igbos pretending to be south south will be the one mocking him for wanting a difference.t

Then he should resign to save his integrity or whatever is left of it.

I used to defend Osinbajo too cos like you rightly said, the office if the Vice President is more or less a figure head unless the president is indisposed and his responsibilities given to the Vice.

Fahdiga1:
He should retrace his step cos even if he is lucky not to be caught he won't escape the repercussions from this terrible act

What's the repercussion?
Do side-chics suffer any repercussions?
Why do you think side-dicks will suffer any repercussion?

The only repercussion is if he gets caught by the husband he's definitely a goner.

budaatum:
I so love when people put words into God's mouth and people believe it instead of looking around with their own eyes and accepting what they see, because if you did look around you'd see lots of people God is meant to hate, as you put it, being blessed by the ever loving God. A crude example would be God blessing nations that condone homosexuality, while Lord Lord Nigeria is wailing.

God is not a human being, nor would God ask humans to do what God can't bother doing. and as I've stated, love your enemies is a removal of conditions to not love. If you can love your children unconditionally as you likely do and regardless of their sins, and if your parents can love you unconditionally too as they likely do regardless of your sins, then how much more can God love unconditionally?

Do note that love does not preclude punishment. If one sins one will be justly rewarded but one will still be loved like the one sheep out of a hundred that went astray.

This is where I get tired of discussing the bible with your kind.
Malachi clearly explained that God hated Esau in the literal meaning of Hate. Why do you then choose to define your own meaning?
Clearly it is you who is putting words and meanings into God's mouth.

Even in Romans where Paul explained Malachi he clearly defines the Hate as Hate. God actually hated Esau even while he was yet unborn and loved Jacob while unborn.
In attemplting to define your own meaning to suit your argument or desires, you have simply turned the bible against itself.
But maybe you understand Malachi better than Apostle Paul though, you being a priest of the order of Melchizedek (that's called sarcasm before you add your own meaning.)

This is the rest of Malachi 1:1-6
... Yet I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.”
If Edom says, “We are shattered but we will rebuild the ruins,” the Lord of hosts says, “They may build, but I will tear down, and they will be called ‘the wicked country,’ and ‘the people with whom the Lord is angry forever.’
Your own eyes shall see this, and you shall say, “Great is the Lord beyond the border of Israel!”


Here is Paul's explanation; Roman's 9:10-20

And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of thim who calls— she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 
For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?
Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?

budaatum:
God will decide whom to have mercy on or whom not have mercy on.

"It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy".

You should see how it connects to the [url=https://classic.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+18%3A9-14&version=NLT]Parable of Hubris[/url], which Romans 9:15 is to teach us not to commit.

Malachi 1:2-3 declares, “‘I have loved you,’” says the LORD. But you ask, ‘How have you loved us?’ ‘Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?’ the LORD says. ‘Yet I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals.’”

Malachi 1:3 is quoted in Romans 9:10-13, “Not only that, but Rebekah’s children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, ‘The older will serve the younger.’ Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.’”

Why did God love Jacob and hate Esau? If God is love (1 John 4:, how could He hate anyone?

Kobojunkie:
So, we agree that unconditional love is a human delusion then. Good!

Exactly why I was wondering where you got the notion that I said God's love was unconditional.

All over the bible God's love is conditional.

Kobojunkie:
Ofcourse!

Jesus Christ is God's Law in the Kingdom of God. God's Word and Truth come down to man. if you don't trust/submit and obey His teachings, you are against Him and against God's Law.

So, where does your idea of unconditional love come from in the Bible?

When did I mention God's love is unconditional.
From the bible it's obvious that God;s love is conditional.
However the condition varies.
God chose to Love Jacob and Hate Esau even whilst they were yet unborn.
God told Moses he would have mercy and compassion on whoever he pleases. Meaning he doesn't love everyone but according to his choice.
In the old testament, God loved only the Israelites and damned the rest of the world.
Even among the Israelites, God loves those who obey him and hates those who disobey his commands. Deut 30
In the new testament God loves those who follow him and calls those who do not follow him Dead.

From the above, God's love is conditional.
You can prove me wrong if you can simply state the scripture where the God says his love is unconditional.

Kobojunkie:
1. Can we at least start with pointing out exactly where the Bible teaches you that Love is unconditional.

2. In Jeremiah 17 vs 5, God declared cursed any man who puts his trust in another man(including self) , and by that your definition of genuine unconditional for man implies those who genuinely love you are those cursed by God.

3. The love God has called us to is not according to your definition though. It is instead a kind born of trust in the Almighty.

You must have been taught that God's love is unconditional by your Sunday school teacher cos it's definitely not in the bible.

Dangerousboy:
you have to understand the difference between the old covenant and the new covenant. The old covenant was based on work's and law's. Do good and get good, do bad and get bad, eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. You had to win God over by doing his status why? Because there was no grace then. So you cannot be saved then without keeping and following the law of moses.

Now concerning Esau, you have to understand that that was also in the old testament. Now Esau was such a bad boy then. He sold his birthright for as little as a plate of porridge. Knowing fully well what that entails. He further upset his parents by marrying a strange woman. Men that guy was foolish. Before God would say he hate someone, then know that person is so foolish. He didn't hate him as a person, he was disgusted by his character

Now in the new covenant, cos God is a God of love, salvation is available to all. John 3:16. The old was to give birth to the new.

God the father loves the world, and he has proved it by giving his son. He has nothing to prove again.

Now love is not selfish, we should love people no matter what. But we should know when our love and simplicity is been taken for granted. When people are trying to manipulate and use us. Look at Jesus, there were times he was so soft, and there were times he was tough and firm

There wasn't Grace in the old testament?
Really?
Explain the story of Abraham, Jacob, David, Ruth, just to name few.

budaatum:
And yet, Oh, when the rain fall, fall, fall now,
It don't fall on one man's housetop.
Remember that:
When the rain fall,
It don't fall on one man's housetop.

Experience has shown that God loves unconditionally just as we are also taught to unconditionally love our enemies.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZp-LLfDSc4

What do you understand by Romans 9:15

For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

Kobojunkie:
1. Can we at least start with pointing out exactly where the Bible teaches you that Love is unconditional.

2. In Jeremiah 17 vs 5, God declared cursed any man who puts his trust in another man(including self) , and by that your definition of genuine unconditional for man implies those who genuinely love you are those cursed by God.

3. The love God has called us to is not according to your definition though. It is instead a kind born of trust in the Almighty.

Do you put your trust in Jesus Christ?
Simple answer, yes or no?
Jesus Christ was man and declared himself as son of man.

Dangerousboy:
THE BELIEVERS IDENTITY

John.13.35 - By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

How would the world know that we are Children of God? Is it through signs and wonders? Although that's a way also, but don't forget the devil also does signs and wonders. Matt24:11.

The major way the world would know that we are God's Children is our Love walk. The devil and his Children can't love. They can pretend to, but they just can't. And even when they do, its for their selfish interests. because love is God.1John4:8.

It's selfishness to love only those that love us. We are to love everyone with wisdom of cos. If it is conditional, or has a price tag, it is not love. The proof of love is the sacrifice you make 1 John3:18.

As a Christian, the bible teaches that Love is conditional.
God loves man conditionally.
Either you obey his commands or he simply chooses to love you as predestined by Him.
God hates too. As the bible says, God loved Jacob but hated Esau.
Though there are no sure conditions we can really standardize. When Moses asked God to distinguish between the Israelites and the rest of the world, God simply replied that he would have compassion on whom he pleases.

But truly as you have pointed out, genuine and unconditional love makes you trust someone and breaks the person's distrust.

The question is how do you distinguish between those who genuinely love you and pretenders?

At the end of the day, you can only play your part by loving others genuinely but also safe-guarding yourself from pretenders.

petra1:
when you find yourself in comflict eith the bible you meed to check your theology.

secondly there are different kinds of prayers. There is a differnt between personal devotion and corporate prayer.

You can't know jesus more than the apostles of christ who prayed openly.

1 Timothy 2:8
8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

How can you say amen when someone prays in a prayer of agreement withouy hearinng his voice ?

1 Corinthians 14:16 (AMPC)
16 Otherwise, if you bless and render thanks with [your] spirit [thoroughly aroused by the Holy Spirit], how can anyone in the position of an outsider or he who is not gifted with [interpreting of unknown] tongues, say the Amen to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying?

Before another argument starts, can we just agree that both of you are right?

The problem always starts when the bible says different things in different situations.

As Kobojunkie rightly quoted,praying out loud even though it's not a sin, Jesus taught that it was unacceptable. Jesus himself always said his prayers in a secluded place. He only gave thanks and blessed God publicly.

And as you rightly pointed,there were occasions where as a congregation the early disciples prayed with a loud voice too.

What then?
In personal prayers,it shouldn't be made public as God seems to see it as a show-off and an act of self-righteousness.
For corporate prayers apparently that cannot be silent.

What we get from this is that Jesus was addressing the intent of the person praying. It should not be an act of for Self-righteousness.

Interestingly during the time of Jesus, we do not have any record of a loud corporate prayer. Even at Gethsenane, Jesus never told he disciples to pray out loud, he simply urged them to pray. It was when the fell asleep during prayer that was an issue.

Now to OP.
You're very right,Jesus, neither Jesus nor the apostles mentioned that the person "with the loudest Amen" would get an answered prayer.
Pastors who sought to engage their congregation either with the intention of getting a feedback or self-aggrandization made that up.

So you're very right about that. No where in the bible did Jesus or the apostles seek the person with the loudest Anen. All they sought was the person with Faith. Cos it was not about them,but about your Faith in God and his vessel.

Freewill continues to be a major discussion in religious circuits and especially in the Christianity fold where the All-Loving Almighty God has given man the freewill to either follow Jesus and inherit eternal life in heaven or perish to eternal damnation in hell fire.

What is Freewill?
In robotic terms, it is simply what robots do not have and man has.

Freewill is what separates a human being from a mindless creature which simply obeys the command or purpose for which it was designed.
A human being with freewill has a mind of theirs and can choose between choices and make their own decisions.

This poses a couple of question for religion- especially Christoanity.

As Deuteronomy 30:15-20 says, God placed the choice between life and death on man.


Lets us break this down comprehensicely;

1. God created Life and Death.
2. He has given man the "freewill" to choose between life and death.
3. The bible says God has predestined those who will have life and those who will have death.
4. God says he hated Esau but loved Jacob without any fault or choice of Esau.
5. But the condition for eternal life is to believe in Jesus, repent and confess your sins and ask for forgiveness.

Questions:
Can it be called freewill if the option of who gets life or death is already predestined?

Can it really be called freewill when everyone who doesnt do God's will according to the bible is doomed for hell.
If it is truly freewill then it is not a matter of heaven or hell but choosing to obey God without consequences of not obeying him.
If it is truly freewill, there should not be conditions attached. Otherwise, the obvious reality is bound to play out.
People are forced to exercise their freewill to make the safer decision of not going to hell out of fear of burning in hell for eternity.
People are compelled to pretend until the get what they desire.
Any determined person can choose to be pious for a while if it guarantees heaven. Which is why often times after all the piety and righteousness some stop having faith due to lact of results.

Eventually, the reality becomes that there is actually no freewill if choosing my will takes me to hell unless I choose God's will.

Prettygirl27:
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2018/november/missionary-killed-north-sentinel-isolated-island-tribe-chau.html

And your point is?

1. Spirituality:
Spirituality involves the recognition of a feeling or sense or belief that there is something greater than myself, something more to being human than sensory experience, and that the greater whole of which we are part is cosmic or divine in nature. (Ref Dr. Maya Spencer)

2. Religion:
Belief in a spiritual or metaphysical reality (often including at least one deity), accompanied by practices or rituals pertaining to the belief.

3. Enlightenment:
A concept in spirituality, philosophy and psychology related to achieving clarity of perception, reason and knowledge.

Which one or two define(s) you best?

hupernikao:
You arent clear in what you wrote above.

But i will state this for you that non of God's Law was abolished. None.

I will want you to read Stephen defence in Acts 7. How he explained the Law, and why Moses gave a second Law and what was God's true intention of the temple (this is where Levi/Priest comes in).

You will see from his defence what brought about the temple/tabernacle. Was it God's intention or man's desire to have a physical altar for their own God too as the heathen serve their gods.

Pay attention well to verse 36 - 52, it was well explained with much details.


Now, Read side by side with God's commandment from Sinai

Exo 34:29
And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.


His instruction on the position of His Law in the ark

Exo 25:16
And thou shalt put into the ark the testimony H5715 which I shall give thee.

21. And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony H5715 that I shall give thee.


It was repeated severally
Exo 40:20
And he took and put the testimony H5715 into the ark, and set the staves on the ark, and put the mercy seat above upon the ark:


Now read it side by side with [b]Deut 31:24-27

24 And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished,
25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying,
26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.
27 For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the Lord; and how much more after my death?

What Moses gave later due to their rebellion and stiff neck.

So two Laws, one given by God on Sinai, always in the ark at the mercy seat. The other written by Moses for stiffneck people. Put by the side of the ark not in the ark. It was outside the ark of COVENANT.

Stephen referred to this Acts 7:51
51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

That will let you define properly what is God's commandment and Law.

I simply corrected your error because I never mentioned that the laws were abolished which you accused me of.

But since you brought it up, I was wondering what you meant since most Christian's agree that the ceremonial laws were abolished.

I'm surprised you're justifying your argument with allegories.

The issue is not about the significance of the role of Levites and Priests. But has the necessity for Levites and Priests been abolished or not?
Cos I'm not sure I get your stand on this.

Cos I was sure the bible stated clearly that Jesus tore the veil when he died.
And Hebrews teaches us that there is no longer the need for priests and high Priests who could only approach the Holy of Holies once in a year with chain tied around their feet in case God struck them down.

Cos now every Christian is supposed to have direct access to God. Hebrews 4:16

FatherCHRISTMAS:
It's not in a man's nature to hold on to a single woman... No matter how much he loves the wife, the urge to hunt younger women will always be there.

Some men fight the urge... The good news is, non has ever won



Shout out Born2winnx
Man is born to win

Women hate to hear this but men are biologically programmed to be polygamous in nature.

Compare the amount of sperm a man can produce in a month to the amount of eggs a woman can produce.

Compare the fact that most women are naturally attracted to successful men. While most successful women can hardly get a man.

Compare the fact that even in the bible most of the men of faith were polygamous,marrying several wives eg Abraham, Jacob, David, Soĺomon, etc.
In the Quran,polygamy is even encouraged. While polyandry is cursed.

So asking why the slain guy cheated on his beautiful and successful wife is not the right question. The right question is how did a 21 year old female manage to kill a trained boxer and gallant man. Which I believe he must have been drugged by the said girl.
The said girl,how did she get so cold?
I even saw her press videos and she was nice cold, no remorse. She was even justifying killing him as if it was in self defense. Yet she managed to withdraw 380,000 from his account via atm.

Like i read somewhere, if you must cheat, let the side-chic know that she is known by your friend or friends. So she would have a rethink before committing any foolish harm.

RIP to the dead.

hupernikao:
Bro, you seems to be reading this teaching in silos. It is a teaching hence you must read from the beginning of the points and read the end. A teaching has a focus, when you pick just a line from it and give it your own meaning without considering surrounding texts, you will get it wrong.

Reading the beginning of Mathew 5 teaching you pointed to (thats vs 17) and reading the ending part (verse 43-48) should set the pace of your explanation. Love.

---

The teaching of the section of Matt 5 you quoted started from verse 1 but for the sake of space, i will pick it from verse 17 (please read 1-16).

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

The word abolish is from the word kataloo, it means to overthrow, to leave behind.
The word fulfil is from the word plero, it means to make full, to cause to abound, it is used for completing a phase or a process. It is not used for ending a cause but to come to a full circle, abound.


Let me give you a simple quote here that explain this.

Mat 4:14
That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,

You will see such statement consistently in the scriptures. It doesnt mean it ends the prophecy. it simply means, bringing the prophecy to past, ie a full circle, it means the prophecy now abound, that is, not fail. That fulfilment, implies it doesnt fail but abound in fullness.

---

Now, observe Jesus already told you he didnt come to abolish the law. This set the pace of every thing you will read afterwards in Matthew 5 teaching. Dont read in silos.


If you now observe, he started referencing the Law even some were based on assumptions, then he corrected them (the hearer).

I will summarize here.

Matt 5: 21-25 speaks about not murdering and forgiveness
Matt 5: 27-32 speaks about avoiding adultery and strong defence to prevent divorce on flimsy ground
Matt 5: 33-37 speaks about not lying to people, to always speak the truth

Matt 5: 38-42 speaks about tolerance and perseverance


Notice the concluding part.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?
47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Jesus summarized all he is teaching into one thing: LOVE. Why?

This is consistent with his teaching on the great (the summation) commandment. Jesus taught that the summary of all Moses wrote is Love.

Matt 22:36-40
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt l[b]ove thy neighbour[/b] as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

1. Love God
2. Love your neighbor.

The word Great here means, the summation.

The moment you see Moses writing beyond this, that means you arent seeing what Jesus saw. Hence, every other thing you read must align to this.


This means, Jesus conclusion on Moses Law was Love. That is the motive. This is still what holds in God's kingdom today. From the days of Abel (a keeper of sheep), till today, God's love is his message.


Infact Moses never wrote that we should hate or kill our enemy. No where did that occur in his writing. It was a rumor (Jesus said, ...You have heard...), not Moses wrote.

Hence all Jesus was doing in Matthew 5 is to correct all misconception about Moses teaching and law.

I would have continue but these days many are afraid to read long post. But like i said, reread that teaching again by firstly understanding his conclusion. It was a systematic teaching with flow of taught not versely sermon.

I don't recall saying here that the Laws and Prophets were abolished.
I said there's a difference.
You said there's no difference.

I pointed you to just 2 clear examples of some of the differences.

Other examples include the laws and roles of Levites and High Priests. Were those not abolished?
After the tearing of the veil?

mugnmuffin:
Dear Nairalanders,
I have an issue that has been on my mind for weeks now. My fiancé and I have been dating for over three years. I love him and he loves me too. We are physically attracted to each other. We’re both catholic but since I graduated, during my service year I gave my life to Christ, got saved and left the Catholic Church. So I’ve been a Pentecostal Christian since then. He on the other hand is still catholic. I subtly try to nudge him to consider getting saved, i.e acknowledging Christ as lord and savior and becoming born again but he is content with his laidback Christian life.

Earlier this year, he asked to meet my parents and I let him. My parents like him especially because my younger sis is married and they have been waiting for me too. They’re glad I’ve someone. However, after the introduction,I regret it. I’m now certain that he’s not the one. I think about my spiritual life and how lukewarm he is about the things of God, I think about kids and how we’ll raise the, with such differing views about God and I’m discouraged. I feel like I’m settling because he checks all the boxes on the checklist of physical attributes. Another mistake I made is, I didn’t pray about this decision and that worries me because anything that involves him,I just act with pausing to ask God, but I always ask God about other aspects of my life. So it’s like my associating with him is a minus for my spiritual life and that’s a huge cause for concern.

At this point, I want to tell my parents I am not convinced it’s him but I’m afraid of the disappointment this will cause. *sigh* I’ll appreciate your thoughts, comments, criticisms...

This is a major concern in Christianity.
You have a fellow Christian looking down on another Christian simply because of their different denomination.

Before you attack OP for discriminating against a Catholic you might reconsider when you realise that Catholics discriminate the most.

Most Catholics cannot even contemplate marrying a Non-Catholic as they believe they have the religious lineage from Apostle Peter and every other denomination is simply a product of rebellion that split the church. Catholics believe only they are the true Christians.

While non-Catholics perceive Catholics to be idolatry and religious, even deviated from Christianity.

Now my dear OP.
I can assure you that I just might understand your plight.
Marriage is a major decision and step.
And I presume you have been taught the following especially if your church conducts marriage counselling;

Amos 3:3
Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?

2 Corinthians 6:14
Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness.

1 Corinthians 7:3-5
The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.
For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, wso that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.


Yet does the bible also not teach this?
1 Corinthians 7:14
For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.


In conclusion, his "lukewarm spiritual life" which you say is a red flag does not make you less holy.
If however you're into church titles, it may be an issue.

Do not enter a marriage with intent to change your fiance. Be sure his weakness is something you can live with in comparison to his strengths knowing no one out there is perfect, and neither are you.

You mentioned you didn't pray about him.
I presume you must have done that now.
My question is do you always get an answer when you pray concerning matters?
What answer have you gotten from your prayers concerning him?

Though some have claimed God does not interfere in the prayers of marriage since Adam blamed his fall on the wife God chose for him. That's just an opinion though.

hupernikao:
Firstly, The God you explained above seems a confused God, and that's what an atheist/unbeliever with no knowledge of God should see but not a believer.


Secondly, That bold above, is the primer step to the journey of unbelieving world.

I will leave you with a simple quote (sadly the quote originated even from an unbeliever).



Even man, honor and stay by his word. Subjecting God's word to our imagination its a contention on the divine inspiration of his word.


Lastly, to help you in your reference to God going out of what the Law and Prophets taught. There is no single scriptures for that. No single verse support that assertion. The Law and the prophets are all Jesus and the Apostles taught and taught from.

Glad hearing from you once again.

Same here bro.
It's usually a matter of interest to me when anyone says there's no difference between the old and the new covenant teachings.

To be clear, by your explanation, because Jesus and the apostles quoted from the Laws and Prophets, it means nothing changed?

If I may ask, what then is the significance of the Jesus? Why did God send his son just to continue to maintain the status quo?

Before you answer I would point you to Matthew 5:38-44. Where Jesus himself referred to the Laws and Prophets and further gives the corresponding new laws.

An eye for an eye... Exodus 21:24-25. The Laws

Do not resist an evil doer rather turn the other cheek
Matthew 5:38-39- Jesus.

Kingsnairaland:
You contribute nothing to your salvation except the sin that made it necessary.

Does God give saving faith? And does that mean He gives it to some and not to others?

Answer is yes

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

Some say that both the grace and the faith mentioned in this verse are gifts. Others say the verse refers to grace alone as the gift of salvation


I believe both are gift because if there was anything man can contribute to salvation then he has something to boast about therefore the death of Christ has no pure value

But we know the death has complete value and only through what Jesus did can one attain everlasting life

Since man has nothing to contribute to his salvation "except the sin that made it necessary."
Does that therefore exonerates every sinner from being blamed for not being saved?

Since it is God who decides who is to be saved.
And it is by His Grace that anyone is able to remain saved.
If it is all simply by faith which is a gift from God.

hupernikao:
Bro, I trust you have remained strong, spirit, soul and body.

Two opposing view can never be right at the same time when viewing the scriptures and any literature per say.

When you have opposing view in bible study, one or two of both of these things are happening.

1. One of the is wrong
2. Both of them are wrong

Secondly, the 3 scriptures you quoted above does not in any facts support the existence of Jesus as angel, which is what the other is seeing in his imaginative scriptures.

Truthfully also, when study wholesomely, all scriptures pointed to Christ as the GOD of OT writings, the MAN in the prophecies of the prophets of old, revealed in HUMANITY in this last days.

Great.
I think you need to understand the concept of perspectives more before you draw such conclusions.
Two opposing views could actually be right depending on the perspective.

I actually was addressing the issue of Trinity and not Angels which explains the verses I quoted.

I also think you need to learn to unbox God even from a biblical perspective. This was the error of the Pharisees and Jews. They also concluded that God could never go out of what the Law and Prophets taught them. Hence they ended up not accepting Jesus as even the Son of God but even went as far as crucifying their Lord.

God is God because he's Omni-everything.

So it's very possible you're seeing God from one perspective while another is seeing him from another. Both of you being right.

Janosky:
1 Timothy 3:16 there is nothing there about Trinity.

1 Timothy 3:16 , Romans 8:3 & John 17:4-5,24, God sent His Son to the earth for redemption of man.
After his earthly ministry , Jesus returned to his God and Father.
His Father gave the glory back to Jesus which He had given Jesus before creation of the universe.
Shikena

Why is it called a mystery then if it's that simple?

The preceding verse was referring to God. Hence the "He" was likewise referring to God.

God became flesh, was vindicated by the Spirit, seen by Angels, preached among nations and taken up in glory.

That is why it is called the great mystery. Because it astounds the human thought and everything other religions ever taught.