₦airaland Forum

Firstly, the issue of you not receiving your healing if that is anything to go bye, it is not anything deserving of an exclusive consideration because getting healed is an act of God by the faith of a man that is why its called a MIRACLE. Even Jesus Himself didn't have a record of everybody getting healed
Mark 6:5
"And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed[ them]"
The amplified version make it even more clearer
Mark 6:5
"And He was not able to do a even one work of power there, except that He laid His hands on a few sickly people[ and] cured them"

^^^^ o yeah

To love people is dept owed them that must be paid thus they don't have to deserve it
Romans 13:8
"Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law"

1 John 4:19
19 We love him, because he first loved us.

Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ,( by grace ye are saved"

Ephesians 2:4-5
"But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

John 15:12
"This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you"
Jesus Christ is our perfect example and definition of what true love really is

There is only one true gospel and it is called
"The Gospel of God"
Romans 1:1
Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,


"The Gospel of Christ"
Romans 1:16
"For I am not ashamed ofthe gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."


And this Gospel is encompassing, total, complete and absolute.

The Bible is not the word of God to say it is, is a symantic error rather it is more correct to say that the bible contains the INSPIRED word of God amongst the several other details that are not in themselves "sayings" of anyone one. Be that as it may though, we are always informed of the source of every information that has been chronicled and documented for us in it. Consequently, we have included in the document called the bible we have the words of God, the words of men, the words of devils even the words of an Ass or a donkey

2 Timothy 3:16
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"

Romans 15:4
"For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope."

2 Peter 1:20-21
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.  For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. {in old time: or, at any time}"

Hebrews 3:1
1 ¶ Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; (KJV)
Isn't it amazing that even the whole journey begins (Romans 10;9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved)

If it took confession to bring us into the Kingdom of God's love l find it almost unimaginable and absurd why there are certain persons who try to discredit and down-play on the significance and relevance of Christians making bold and profound "Faith Declearations".  To be a Christian means that we have embraced the righteousness which is of God through Jesus by Faith and trust in hie name

Romans 3:22
Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

There is a RIGHTEOUSNESS which is of/from God and it is obtained by faith. Then we are brought to the knowing that this Faith SPEAKS
Romans 10:6
"But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh"

2Co 4:13  
We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak;
(KJV)

The problem that many have sadly have with this concept of faith is that they do not understand the principle by which it runs and functions and even more importantly they fail to understand FAITH IS A SPIRIT [/b]and that spirit of faith comes to us as we receive the WORD OF FAITH (message of faith) Ro 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
(KJV)

Faith is a spirit little wonder why it is just almost impossible for the carnal mind or natural mind to accommodate the details that the concept contains

Ro 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
(KJV)

FAITH IS THE PLATFORM ON WHICH THE CHRISTIAN FUNCTIONS IN THIS REALITY AND SEGMENT OF GOD'S UNIVERSE
[b]Romans 1:17
17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

l pray that the body of Christ come to the place of full understanding of the principle of faith

We had some on one hand saying "NO" to it and some on the other hand "haulahing" a very loud "YES" to it.
But permit me to hight some of the efforts of certain men of enviable courage who stood firm in opposition on the train track of slavery

William Wilberforce, only son of Robert Wilberforce (1728–1768) and Elizabeth Bird (1730–1798), was born in Kingston upon Hull on 24th August 1759. William's father, who was a wealthy merchant, died when he was seven years old and for a time was brought up by an uncle and aunt.

William came under the influence of his aunt, who was a strong supporter of John Wesley and the Methodist movement. According to his biographer, John Wolffe: "Meanwhile his aunt Hannah, an admirer of George Whitefield and friendly with the Methodists, influenced him towards evangelicalism. His grandfather and mother, however, took fright, and brought him back to live in Hull, where every effort was made to distract him from such enthusiastic religion."

At seventeen Wilberforce was sent to St. John's College. Following the deaths of his grandfather in 1776 and his childless uncle William in 1777, Wilberforce was an extremely wealthy man. Wilberforce was shocked by the behaviour of his fellow students at the University of Cambridge and later wrote: "I was introduced on the very first night of my arrival to as licentious a set of men as can well be conceived. They drank hard, and their conversation was even worse than their lives." One of Wilberforce's friends at university was William Pitt, who was later to become Britain's youngest ever Prime Minister.

Following the deaths of his grandfather in 1776 and his childless uncle William in 1777, Wilberforce was an extremely wealthy man. After leaving university he showed no interest in the family business, and while still at Cambridge he decided to pursue a political career and at the age of twenty, he decided to become a candidate in the forthcoming parliamentary election in Kingston upon Hill in September 1780. His opponent was Charles Watson-Wentworth, a rich and powerful member of the nobility, and Wilberforce had to spend nearly £9,000 to become elected. In the House of Commons Wilberforce supported the the Tory government led by William Pitt.

The historian, Ellen Gibson Wilson, has pointed out: "Wilberforce was little over five feet tall, a frail and elfin figure who in his later years weighed well under 100 pounds. His charm was legendary, his conversation delightful, his oratory impressive. He dressed in the colourful finery of the day and adorned any salon with his amiable manner. Yet his object in life - no less than the transformation of a corrupt society through serious religion - was solemn, Wilberforce, although he rejected a party label, was deeply conservative and a loyal supporter of the government led by his friend William Pitt."

In 1784 Wilberforce became converted to Evangelical Christianity. He joined the Clapham Set, a group of evangelical members of the Anglican Church, centered around Henry Venn, rector of Clapham Church in London. As a result of this conversion, Wilberforce became interested in the subject of social reform. Other members included Hannah More, Granville Sharp, Henry Thornton, Zachary Macaulay, James Stephen, Edward James Eliot, Thomas Gisbourne, John Shore and Charles Grant.

In June 1786 Thomas Clarkson published Essay on the Slavery and Commerce of the Human Species, Particularly the African. As Ellen Gibson Wilson has pointed out: "A substantial book (256 pages), it traced the history of slavery to its decline in Europe and arrival in Africa, made a powerful indictment of the slave system as it operated in the West Indian colonies and attacked the slave trade supporting it. In reading it, one is struck by its raw emotion as much as by its strong reasoning." William Smith argued that the book was a turning-point for the slave trade abolition movement and made the case "unanswerably, and I should have thought, irresistibly".

In 1787 Thomas Clarkson, William Dillwyn and Granville Sharp formed the Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade. Although Sharp and Clarkson were both Anglicans, nine out of the twelve members on the committee, were Quakers. This included John Barton (1755-1789); George Harrison (1747-1827); Samuel Hoare Jr. (1751-1825); Joseph Hooper (1732-1789); John Lloyd (1750-1811); Joseph Woods (1738-1812); James Phillips (1745-1799) and Richard Phillips (1756-1836). Influential figures such as Charles Fox, John Wesley, Josiah Wedgwood, James Ramsay, and William Smith gave their support to the campaign. Clarkson was appointed secretary, Sharp as chairman and Hoare as treasurer.

Clarkson approached another sympathiser, Charles Middleton, the MP for Rochester, to represent the group in the House of Commons. He rejected the idea and instead suggested the name of William Wilberforce, who "not only displayed very superior talents of great eloquence, but was a decided and powerful advocate of the cause of truth and virtue." Lady Middleton wrote to Wilberforce who replied: "I feel the great importance of the subject and I think myself unequal to the task allotted to me, but yet I will not positively decline it." Wilberforce's nephew, George Stephen, was surprised by this choice as he considered him a lazy man: "He worked out nothing for himself; he was destitute of system, and desultory in his habits; he depended on others for information, and he required an intellectual walking stick."

Charles Fox was unsure of Wilberforce's commitment to the anti-slavery campaign. He wrote to Thomas Walker: "There are many reasons why I am glad (Wilberforce) has undertaken it rather than I, and I think as you do, that I can be very useful in preventing him from betraying the cause, if he should be so inclined, which I own I suspect. Nothing, I think but such a disposition, or a want of judgment scarcely credible, could induce him to throw cold water upon petitions. It is from them and other demonstrations of the opinion without doors that I look for success."

In May 1788, Charles Fox precipitated the first parliamentary debate on the issue. He denounced the "disgraceful traffic" which ought not to be regulated but destroyed. He was supported by Edmund Burke who warned MPs not to let committees of the privy council do their work for them. William Dolben described shipboard horrors of slaves chained hand and foot, stowed like "herrings in a barrel" and stricken with "putrid and fatal disorders" which infected crews as well. With the support of Wilberforce Samuel Whitbread, Charles Middleton and William Smith, Dolben put forward a bill to regulate conditions on board slave ships. The legislation was initially rejected by the House of Lords but after William Pitt threatened to resign as prime minister, the bill passed 56 to 5 and received royal assent on 11th July.

Wilberforce also became involved in other areas of social reform. In August 1789 Wilberforce stayed with Hannah More at her cottage in Blagdon, and on visiting the nearby village of Cheddar and according to William Roberts, the author of Memoirs of the Life and Correspondence of Mrs. Hannah More (1834): they were appalled to find "incredible multitudes of poor, plunged in an excess of vice, poverty, and ignorance beyond what one would suppose possible in a civilized and Christian country". As a result of this experience, More rented a house at Cheddar and engaged teachers to instruct the children in reading the Bible and the catechism. The school soon had 300 pupils and over the next ten years the More sisters opened another twelve schools in the area where the main objective was "to train up the lower classes to habits of industry and virtue".

Michael Jordan, the author of The Great Abolition Sham (2005) has pointed out that More shared Wilberforce's reactionary political views: "More set up local schools in order to equip impoverished pupils with an elementary grasp of reading. This, however, was where her concern for their education effectively ended, because she did not offer her charges the additional skill of writing. To be able to read was to open a door to good ideas and sound morality (most of which was provided by Hannah More through a series of religious pamphlets); writing, on the other hand, was to be discouraged, since it would open the way to rising above one's natural station."

Wilberforce's biographer, John Wolffe, has argued: "Following the publication of the privy council report on 25 April 1789, Wilberforce marked his own delayed formal entry into the parliamentary campaign on 12 May with a closely reasoned speech of three and a half hours, using its evidence to describe the effects of the trade on Africa and the appalling conditions of the middle passage. He argued that abolition would lead to an improvement in the conditions of slaves already in the West Indies, and sought to answer the economic arguments of his opponents. For him, however, the fundamental issue was one of morality and justice. The Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade was very pleased with the speech and sent its thanks for his "unparalleled assiduity and perseverance".

The House of Commons agreed to establish a committee to look into the slave trade. Wilberforce said he did not intend to introduce new testimony as the case against the trade was already in the public record. Ellen Gibson Wilson, a leading historian on the slave trade has argued: "Everyone thought the hearing would be brief, perhaps one sitting. Instead, the slaving interests prolonged it so skilfully that when the House adjourned on 23 June, their witnesses were still testifying."

James Ramsay, the veteran campaigner against the slave trade, was now extremely ill. He wrote to Thomas Clarkson on 10th July 1789: "Whether the bill goes through the House or not, the discussion attending it will have a most beneficial effect. The whole of this business I think now to be in such a train as to enable me to bid farewell to the present scene with the satisfaction of not having lived in vain." Ten days later Ramsay died from a gastric haemorrhage. The vote on the slave trade was postponed to 1790.

Wilberforce initially welcomed the French Revolution as he believed that the new government would abolish the country's slave trade. He wrote to Abbé de la Jeard on 17th July 1789 commenting that "I sympathize warmly in what is going forward in your country." Wilberforce intended to visit France but he was persuaded by friends that it would be dangerous for an English politician to be in the country during a revolution. Wilberforce therefore asked Clarkson to visit Paris on behalf of himself and the Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade.

Clarkson was welcomed by the French abolitionists and later that month the government published A Declaration of the Rights of Man asserting that all men were born and remained free and equal. However, the visit was a failure as Clarkson could not persuade the French National Assembly to discuss the abolition of the slave trade. Marquis de Lafayette said "he hoped the day was near at hand, when two great nations, which had been hitherto distinguished only for their hostility would unite in so sublime a measure (abolition) and that they would follow up their union by another, still more lovely, for the preservation of eternal and universal peace."

On his return to England Thomas Clarkson continued to gather information for the campaign against the slave-trade. Over the next four months he covered over 7,000 miles. During this period he could only find twenty men willing to testify before the House of Commons. He later recalled: "I was disgusted, to find how little men were disposed to make sacrifices for so great a cause." There were some seamen who were willing to make the trip to London. One captain told Clarkson: "I had rather live on bread and water, and tell what I know of the slave trade, than live in the greatest affluence and withhold it."

Wilberforce believed that the support for the French Revolution by the leading members of the Society for the Abolition of Slave Trade was creating difficulties for his attempts to bring an end to the slave trade in the House of Commons. He told Thomas Clarkson: "I wanted much to see you to tell you to keep clear from the subject of the French Revolution and I hope you will." Isaac Milner, after a long talk with Clarkson, commented to Wilberforce: "I wish him better health, and better notions in politics; no government can stand on such principles as he maintains. I am very sorry for it, because I see plainly advantage is taken of such cases as his, in order to represent the friends of Abolition as levellers."

On 18th April 1791 Wilberforce introduced a bill to abolish the slave trade. Wilberforce was supported by William Pitt, William Smith, Charles Fox, Richard Brinsley Sheridan, William Grenville and Henry Brougham. The opposition was led by Lord John Russell and Colonel Banastre Tarleton, the MP for Liverpool. One observer commented that it was "a war of the pigmies against the giants of the House". However, on 19th April, the motion was defeated by 163 to 88.

In March 1796, Wilberforce's proposal to abolish the slave trade was defeated in the House of Commons by only four votes. At least a dozen abolitionist MPs were out of town or at the new comic opera in London. Wilberforce wrote in his diary: "Enough at the Opera to have carried it. I am permanently hurt about the Slave Trade." Thomas Clarkson commented: "To have all our endeavours blasted by the vote of a single night is both vexatious and discouraging." It was a terrible blow to Clarkson and he decided to take a rest from campaigning.

In 1804, Clarkson returned to his campaign against the slave trade and toured the country on horseback obtaining new evidence and maintaining support for the campaigners in Parliament. A new generation of activists such as Henry Brougham, Zachary Macaulay and James Stephen, helped to galvanize older members of the Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade.

William Wilberforce introduced an abolition bill on 30th May 1804. It passed all stages in the House of Commons and on 28th June it moved to the House of Lords. The Whig leader in the Lords, Lord Grenville, said as so many "friends of abolition had already gone home" the bill would be defeated and advised Wilberforce to leave the vote to the following year. Wilberforce agreed and later commented "that in the House of Lords a bill from the House of Commons is in a destitute and orphan state, unless it has some peer to adopt and take the conduct of it".

In 1805 the bill was once again presented to the House of Commons. This time the pro-slave trade MPs were better organised and it was defeated by seven votes. Wilberforce blamed "Great canvassing of our enemies and several of our friends absent through forgetfulness, or accident, or engagements preferred from lukewarmness." Clarkson now toured the country reactivating local committees against the slave trade in an attempt to drum up the support needed to get the legislation through parliament.

In February, 1806 Lord Grenville was invited by the king to form a new Whig administration. Grenville, was a strong opponent of the slave trade. Grenville was determined to bring an end to British involvement in the trade. Thomas Clarkson sent a circular to all supporters of the Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade claiming that "we have rather more friends in the Cabinet than formerly" and suggested "spontaneous" lobbying of MPs.

Grenville's Foreign Secretary, Charles Fox, led the campaign in the House of Commons to ban the slave trade in captured colonies. Clarkson commented that Fox was "determined upon the abolition of it (the slave trade) as the highest glory of his administration, and as the greatest earthly blessing which it was the power of the Government to bestow." This time there was little opposition and it was passed by an overwhelming 114 to 15.

In the House of Lords Lord Greenville made a passionate speech where he argued that the trade was "contrary to the principles of justice, humanity and sound policy" and criticised fellow members for "not having abolished the trade long ago". When the vote was taken the bill was passed in the House of Lords by 41 votes to 20.

In January 1807 Lord Grenville introduced a bill that would stop the trade to British colonies on grounds of "justice, humanity and sound policy". Ellen Gibson Wilson has pointed out: "Lord Grenville masterminded the victory which had eluded the abolitionist for so long, He opposed a delaying inquiry but several last-ditch petitions came from West Indian, London and Liverpool shipping and planting spokesmen, He was determined to succeed and his canvassing of support had been meticulous." Grenville addressed the Lords for three hours on 4th February and when the vote was taken it was passed by 100 to 34.

Wilberforce commented: "How popular Abolition is, just now! God can turn the hearts of men". During the debate in the House of Commons the solicitor-general, Samuel Romilly, paid a fulsome tribute to Wilberforce's unremitting advocacy in Parliament. The trade was abolished by a resounding 283 to 16. According to Clarkson, it was the largest majority recorded on any issue where the House divided. Romilly felt it to be "the most glorious event, and the happiest for mankind, that has ever taken place since human affairs have been recorded."

Under the terms of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act (1807) British captains who were caught continuing the trade were fined £100 for every slave found on board. However, this law did not stop the British slave trade. If slave-ships were in danger of being captured by the British navy, captains often reduced the fines they had to pay by ordering the slaves to be thrown into the sea.

In 1807 Thomas Clarkson published his book History of the Abolition of the African Slave Trade. He dedicated it to the nine of the twelve members of Lord Grenville's Cabinet who supported the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act and to the memories of William Pitt and Charles Fox. Clarkson played a generous tribute to the work of Wilberforce: "For what, for example, could I myself have done if I had not derived so much assistance from the committee? What could Mr Wilberforce have done in parliament, if I , had not collected that great body of evidence, to which there was such a constant appeal? And what could the committee have done without the parliamentary aid of Mr Wilberforce?"

Some people involved in the anti-slave trade campaign such as Thomas Fowell Buxton, argued that the only way to end the suffering of the slaves was to make slavery illegal. Wilberforce disagreed, he believed that at this time slaves were not ready to be granted their freedom. He pointed out in a pamphlet that he wrote in 1807 that: "It would be wrong to emancipate (the slaves). To grant freedom to them immediately, would be to insure not only their masters' ruin, but their own. They must (first) be trained and educated for freedom."

In July, 1807, members of the Society for the Abolition of Slave Trade established the African Institution, an organization that was committed to watch over the execution of the law, seek a ban on the slave trade by foreign powers and to promote the "civilization and happiness" of Africa. The Duke of Gloucester became the first president and members of the committee included Wilberforce, Thomas Clarkson, Henry Brougham, James Stephen, Granville Sharp and Zachary Macaulay.

Wayne Ackerson, the author of The African Institution and the Antislavery Movement in Great Britain (2005) has argued: "The African Institution was a pivotal abolitionist and antislavery group in Britain during the early nineteenth century, and its members included royalty, prominent lawyers, Members of Parliament, and noted reformers such as William Wilberforce, Thomas Clarkson, and Zachary Macaulay. Focusing on the spread of Western civilization to Africa, the abolition of the foreign slave trade, and improving the lives of slaves in British colonies, the group's influence extended far into Britain's diplomatic relations in addition to the government's domestic affairs. The African Institution carried the torch for antislavery reform for twenty years and paved the way for later humanitarian efforts in Great Britain."

Wilberforce made it clear that he considered the African Institution should do what it could to convert Africans to Christianity. In 1811 he wrote: "In truth there is a peculiar call on our sensibility in the present instance, for in proportion as the lot of slaves is hard in the world, we ought to rejoice in every opportunity of bringing them under their present sufferings, and secure for them a rich compensation of reversionary happiness."

In 1808 the Clapham Set decided to transfer the Sierra Leone Company to the crown, the British government accepted Wilberforce's suggestion that Thomas Perronet Thompson would be a suitable governor. He introduced an extensive range of reforms and made serious allegations against the colony's former administrators. Stephen Tomkins, the author of William Wilberforce (2007) has argued: "He (Perronet Thompson) single-handedly abolished apprenticeship and freed the slaves. He filed scandalised reports to the colonial office. Wilberforce told him he was being rash and hasty, and he and his colleagues voted unanimously for his dismissal. Wilberforce advised him to go quietly for the sake of his career."

In the General Election following the passing of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act Wilberforce was challenged by a political opponent. He won but the hard contest had left him "thin and old beyond his years". In 1811 he decided to give up the county seat for reasons of health. Lord Calthorpe offered him a pocket borough at Bramber and he was returned from there in 1812 without having to leave his holiday home.

Francis Burdett was a supporter of Wilberforce's campaign against the slave trade. In 1816 he attacked Wilberforce when he refused to complain about the suspension of Habeas Corpus, during the campaign for parliamentary reform. Burdett commented: "How happened it that the honourable and religious member was not shocked at Englishmen being taken up under this act and treated like African slaves?" Wilberforce replied that Burdett was opposing the government in a deliberate scheme to destroy the liberty and happiness of the people."

In 1823 Thomas Clarkson, Thomas Fowell Buxton, William Allen, James Cropper and Zachary Macaulay formed the Society for the Mitigation and Gradual Abolition of Slavery. Buxton eventually persuaded Wilberforce to join his campaign but as he had retired from the House of Commons in 1825, he did not play an important part in persuading Parliament to bring an end to slavery.

At the conference in May 1830, the Society for the Mitigation and Gradual Abolition of Slavery agreed to drop the words "gradual abolition" from its title. It also agreed to support the plan put forward by Sarah Wedgwood for a new campaign to bring about immediate abolition. Wilberforce, who had always been reluctant to campaign against slavery, agreed to promote the organisation. Thomas Clarkson praised Wilberforce for taking this brave move. He replied: "I cannot but look back to those happy days when we began our labours together; or rather when we worked together - for he began before me - and we made the first step towards that great object, the completion of which is the purpose of our assembling this day."

William Wilberforce died on 29th July, 1833. One month later, Parliament passed the Slavery Abolition Act that gave all slaves in the British Empire their freedom. When Thomas Clarkson heard the news he locked the door of his study and his wife heard him "in an agony of grief weeping and uttering loud lamentations."

In 1834 Robert Wilberforce and Samuel Wilberforce, began work on their father's biography. The book was published in 1838. As Ellen Gibson Wilson, the author of Thomas Clarkson (1989), pointed out: "The five volumes which the Wilberforces published in 1838 vindicated Clarkson's worst fears that he would be forced to reply. How far the memoir was Christian, I must leave to others to decide. That it was unfair to Clarkson is not disputed. Where possible, the authors ignored Clarkson; where they could not they disparaged him. In the whole rambling work, using the thousands of documents available to them, they found no space for anything illustrating the mutual affection and regard between the two great men, or between Wilberforce and Clarkson's brother."

Wilson goes on to argue that the book has completely distorted the history of the campaign against the slave-trade: "The Life has been treated as an authoritative source for 150 years of histories and biographies. It is readily available and cannot be ignored because of the wealth of original material it contains. It has not always been read with the caution it deserves. That its treatment of Clarkson, in particular, a deservedly towering figure in the abolition struggle, is invalidated by untruths, omissions and misrepresentations of his motives and his achievements is not understood by later generations, unfamiliar with the jealousy that motivated the holy authors. When all the contemporary shouting had died away, the Life survived to take from Clarkson both his fame and his good name. It left us with the simplistic myth of Wilberforce and his evangelical warriors in a holy crusade.

Eventually, Robert Wilberforce and Samuel Wilberforce apologized for what they had done to Clarkson: "As it is now several years since the conclusion of all differences between us, and we can take a more dispassionate view than formerly of the circumstances of the case, we think ourselves bound to acknowledge that we were in the wrong in the manner in which we treated you in the memoir of our father, we are conscious that too jealous a regard for what we thought our father's fame, led us to entertain an ungrounded prejudice against you and this led us into a tone of writing which we now acknowledge was practically unjust."

Well as almost always is the case, the church was on both sides of the divide
Christian abolitionismMain article: Abolitionism
Although many abolitionists opposed slavery on purely philosophical reasons, anti-slavery movements attracted strong religious elements. Throughout Europe and the United States, Christians, usually from 'un-institutional' Christian faith movements, not directly connected with traditional state churches, or "non-conformist" believers within established churches, were to be found at the forefront of the abolitionist movements.[81][82]

In particular, the effects of the Second Great Awakening resulted in many evangelicals working to see the theoretical Christian view, that all people are essentially equal, made more of a practical reality. Freedom of expression within the Western world also helped in enabling opportunity to express their position. Prominent among these abolitionists was Parliamentarian William Wilberforce in England, who wrote in his diary when he was 28 that, “God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the Slave Trade and Reformation of Morals.”[83] With others he labored, against much determined opposition, to finally abolish the British slave trade. The famous English preacher Charles Spurgeon had some of his sermons burned in America due to his censure of slavery, calling it "the foulest blot" and which "may have to be washed out in blood."[84] Methodist founder John Wesley denounced human bondage as "the sum of all villainies," and detailed its abuses.[85] In Georgia, primitive Methodists united with brethren elsewhere in condemning slavery. Many evangelical leaders in the United States such as Presbyterian Charles Finney and Theodore Weld, and women such as Harriet Beecher Stowe (daughter of abolitionist Lyman Beecher) and Sojourner Truth motivated hearers to support abolition. Finney preached that slavery was a moral sin, and so supported its elimination. "I had made up my mind on the question of slavery, and was exceedingly anxious to arouse public attention to the subject. In my prayers and preaching, I so often alluded to slavery, and denounced it.[86] Repentance from slavery was required of souls, once enlightened of the subject, while continued support of the system incurred "the greatest guilt" upon them.[87]

Quakers in particular were early leaders in abolitionism. In 1688 Dutch Quakers in Germantown, Pennsylvania, sent an antislavery petition to the Monthly Meeting of Quakers. By 1727 British Quakers had expressed their official disapproval of the slave trade.[88] Three Quaker abolitionists, Benjamin Lay, John Woolman, and Anthony Benezet, devoted their lives to the abolitionist effort from the 1730s to the 1760s, with Lay founding the Negro School in 1770, which would serve more than 250 pupils.[89] In June of 1783 a petition from the London Yearly Meeting and signed by over 300 Quakers was presented to Parliament protesting the slave trade.[90]

In 1787 the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade was formed, with 9 of the 12 founder members being Quakers. During the same year, William Wilberforce was persuaded to take up their cause; as an MP, Wilberforce was able to introduce a bill to abolish the slave trade. Wilberforce first attempted to abolish the trade in 1791, but could only muster half the necessary votes; however, after transferring his support to the Whigs, it became an election issue. Abolitionist pressure had changed popular opinion, and in the 1806 election enough abolitionists entered parliament for Wilberforce to be able to see the passing of the Slave Trade Act 1807. The Royal Navy subsequently declared that the slave trade was equal to piracy, the West Africa Squadron choosing to seize ships involved in the transfer of slaves and liberate the slaves on board, effectively crippling the transatlantic trade. Through abolitionist efforts, popular opinion continued to mount against slavery, and in 1833 slavery itself was outlawed throughout the British Empire - at that time containing roughly 1/6 of the world's population (rising to 1/4 towards the end of the century).

Though facing much opposition - from violence to the U.S. Postmaster General refusing to allow the mails to carry abolition pamphlets to the South [91][92] - many Methodist, Baptist, and Presbyterian members freed their slaves and sponsored black congregations, in which many black ministers encouraged slaves to believe that freedom could be gained during their lifetime. After a great revival occurred in 1801 at Cane Ridge, Kentucky, American Methodists made anti-slavery sentiments a condition of church membership.[93] Abolitionist writings, such as "A Condensed Anti-Slavery Bible Argument" (1845) by George Bourne,[94] and "God Against Slavery" (1857) by George B. Cheever,[95] used the Bible, logic and reason extensively in contending against the institution of slavery, and in particular the chattel form of it as seen in the South.

Roman Catholic statements also became increasingly vehement against slavery, during this era. In 1741 Pope Benedict XIV condemned slavery generally. In 1815 Pope Pius VII demanded of the Congress of Vienna the suppression of the slave trade. In the Bull of Canonization of Peter Claver, one of the most illustrious adversaries of slavery, Pope Pius IX branded the "supreme villainy" (summum nefas) of the slave traders;[96]

In 1839 Pope Gregory XVI condemned the slave trade in In Supremo Apostolatus;[97] and in 1888 Pope Leo XIII condemned slavery in In Plurimis [98]].

Other Protestant missionaries of the Great Awakening initially opposed slavery in the South, but by the early decades of the 19th century, many Baptist and Methodist preachers in the South had come to an accommodation with it in order to evangelize the farmers and workers. Disagreements between the newer way of thinking and the old often created schisms within denominations at the time. Differences in views toward slavery resulted in the Baptist and Methodist churches dividing into regional associations by the beginning of the Civil War.[99]

Roman Catholic efforts extended to the Americas. The Roman Catholic leader of the Irish in Ireland, Daniel O'Connell, supported the abolition of slavery in the British Empire and in America. With the black abolitionist Charles Lenox Remond, and the temperance priest Theobold Mayhew, he organized a petition with 60,000 signatures urging the Irish of the United States to support abolition. O'Connell also spoke in the United States for abolition.

In 1917, the Roman Catholic Church's Canon Law was officially expanded to specify that "selling a human being into slavery or for any other evil purpose" is a crime.[100]

[edit] Opposition to abolitionismPassages in the Bible on the use and regulation of slavery have been used throughout history as justification for the keeping of slaves, and for guidance in how it should be done. Therefore, when abolition was proposed, many Christians spoke vociferously against it, citing the Bible's acceptance of slavery as 'proof' that it was part of the normal condition. George Whitefield, famed for his sparking of the so-called Great Awakening of American evangelicalism, campaigned, in the Province of Georgia, for the legalisation of slavery;[101][102] slavery had been outlawed in Georgia, but it was legalised in 1751 due in large part to Whitefield's efforts.

In both Europe and the United States many Christians went further, arguing that slavery was actually justified by the words and doctrines of the Bible.

[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God, it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation, it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts - Jefferson Davis, President, Confederate States of America [103]
Every hope of the existence of church and state, and of civilization itself, hangs upon our arduous effort to defeat the doctrine of Negro suffrage - Robert Dabney, a prominent 19th century Southern Presbyterian pastor
, the right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example - Richard Furman, President, South Carolina Baptist Convention[104][105]
In 1837, southerners in the Presbyterian denomination joined forces with conservative northerners to drive the antislavery New School Presbyterians out of the denomination. In 1844, the Methodist Episcopal Church split into northern and southern wings over the issue of slavery. In 1845, the Baptists in the South formed the Southern Baptist Convention due to disputes with Northern Baptists over slavery and missions.[106]

Some members of fringe Christian groups like the Christian Identity movement, and the Ku Klux Klan (an organization dedicated to the "empowerment of the white race", and Christian Reconstructionists still argue that slavery is justified by Christian doctrine today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_slavery

@nlModerator
You made a whole lot of sense but l'll like to highlight the point of the Holy Spirit being the ultimate teacher whome the Jesus calls "THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH"
John 16:13
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guild you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come"

All this aguaments won't do any good

nuclearboy:
If the god you guys are discussing with is an example of what it means for a human to become a "god", nuclearboy prefers to become a donkey.

Balaam's donkey would have kicked this "god" to death for the crime of inexcusable "daftnesss" .

kcjazz:
The Gospel is free. I believe that when we get to heaven, God is not going to tell folks "we missed our target due to budget constraints". Money is a tool and not the Gospel. What we need are a willing Church to lead the gospel. Having this in mind will help us see things differently.

Thank you very much at last what a consolation to fine somebody with whom sense can be brokered. l agree with you
"What we need are a willing Church to lead the gospel" but the reality remains; how else do we successfully "lead the gospel" when we are continually faced more than ever with the responsibility and challenge to not only keep pace with the ever increasing out-cry, thirst, hunger and demand for the gospel of the Lord of God revealed in Christ Jesus all over the world but to most often that not stay ahead of the challenge thus necessitating the need for taking advantage of all available media platforms which in themselves are not cheap you must agree but is anything to good for Jesus? if is good, efficient and effective for terrorists, pornography merchants, drug cartels, governments, cooperate organizations etc why shouldn't it be good, efficient and effective for the gospel

kcjazz:
The principles of giving is simple. Give and you receive. It applies to everyone whether you are a Christian or not, it is a universal principle. Some in the church have misused it and most folks here, against Church giving won't mind giving to the Red Cross or Salvation Army, why do they do that?

Great sense

@Zikkyy
Young man stop begging the questions because you are yet to make any sense
Answer this question is this too much to ask of you
"do telivision stations collect the "blood of Jesus Christ" as payment for services rendered? or may state of the act equipments are purchased with a "holighorized God blessssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhh you"

obowunmi:
Gospel in Nigeria is NOT FREE. If you don't pay the pastor, God will not bless you. You must pay someone somewhere.

WOW YOU MUST BE THE TREASURER TO BE CONVINCED ABOUT THIS. WHAT AN INSENSITIVE BLANKET STATEMENT

davidylan:
this modern brand of the gospel is pretty expensive. Many cannot afford it

It is really sad that many just can't get this.
What is their to afford in the gospel when Jesus Christ has done it all but the point many are blind to see is the fact that as society change with revolutionary exploits in several information techniques in communications it is becoming increasingly "expensive" to maintain the temp and momentum of effortlessly reaching the unreached and tell the untold of the love of God in Christ Jesus through the preaching of the gospel. For God sake who was the internet made for? perhaps for drug gangs, Terrorist groups, pornography merchants or maybe for politics?
is it an offence for the gospel to be on TV, on Satellite and other expressive media platforms abeg what are saying please don't just send a post for the fun of it at least try and make sense

femeluaka:
[i][/i][color=#990000][/color]
GOSPEL IS NOT FOR SALE,PEOPLE WAKE UP!!!

NOBODY SAID ANY WAY!!!

Zikkyy:
I still am of the opinion pastors stay away from prosperity talks in church.

perhaps it would satisfactorily please you if they stock with poverty talks
Nonsense!!!
If money talks can take place at the bank, the market, the civil service etc then why not the church maybe every church should be a "batcher" or "shark" then certainly money talks will stay miles away from the church then your opinion will make more sense but till then money talks will more than ever remain an integral constituent of church talks like in every place else where important and visionary projects are carried out

Zikkyy:
All you succeeded in telling us here is that the purpose/objective of the prosperity gospel is to fund church activities. You've stated the truth here, it was never about the prosperity of members. if anything, the average wealth of members appears to decrease as the church (as an entity) and/or pastor's wealth increases

You see that is the problem your connotative and contextual interpretation of meaning nobody said that the purpose of properity is primarily to fund church l wonder where you are getting your insinuations from

Eph 4:28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. {to give: or, to distribute}
(KJV)

The bible says that Let him labour working with his hands the thing which is good, (why?) that HE MAY HAVE TO GIVE (OR DISTRIBUTE) TO HIM THAT NEEDETH. So if it turns out there is a need at church, why not LET HIM HAVE , THAT HE MAY HAVE TO DISTRIBUTE IN CHURCH, IF ITS TO FRIEND IN NEED WHY NOT DO THE SAME

nuclearboy:
@newmi & joagbaje,

Christianity is about individual lives and not stories.

so young man who is telling stories?

crossman9:
right you wrong it made God very mad because he was spilling his seed on the ground that is why God killed him so get your facts right pastor said it is not a sin against God right i self services and spill my seed on the bed or on the sock like in American pie what does that make nothing is the answer there is no woman present you are so blind to defend pastor Chris to the death
It is like max in the thunder Dom 2 men go in and one comes out come on wake up and see him for what he is a liar and evil doer
There is more I could give you Jesus said if you look on a woman to lust after you have committed adultery already in your heart
So when self services thinking of a brick wall or a woman but in your case who knows


Psalm 7
New International Version (NIV)
14 Whoever is pregnant with evil
  conceives trouble and gives birth to disillusionment.
15 Whoever digs a hole and scoops it out
  falls into the pit they have made.
16 The trouble they cause recoils on them;
  their violence comes down on their own heads.

17 I will give thanks to the LORD because of his righteousness;
  I will sing the praises of the name of the LORD Most High.




Exodus 20:17 "You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leviticus 18:20 "'Do not have intimate relations with your neighbor's wife and defile yourself with her.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deuteronomy 22:22 If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Samuel 11:2 One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Job 31:1 "I made a covenant with my eyes not to look lustfully at a girl.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proverbs 6:25 Do not lust in your heart after her beauty or let her captivate you with her eyes,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ezekiel 23:16 As soon as she saw them, she lusted after them and sent messengers to them in Chaldea.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, intimate immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James 1:14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James 1:15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.


   
New International Version (©1984)
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
New Living Translation (©2007)
But I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

English Standard Version (©2001)
But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

International Standard Version (©2008)
But I say to you, anyone who stares at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
But I can guarantee that whoever looks with lust at a woman has already committed adultery in his heart.

King James Bible
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

American King James Version
But I say to you, That whoever looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.

American Standard Version
but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Bible in Basic English
But I say to you that everyone whose eyes are turned on a woman with desire has had connection with her in his heart.

Douay-Rheims Bible
But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Darby Bible Translation
But I say unto you, that every one who looks upon a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

English Revised Version
but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Webster's Bible Translation
But I say to you, That whoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Weymouth New Testament
But I tell you that whoever looks at a woman and cherishes lustful thoughts has already in his heart become guilty with regard to her.

World English Bible
but I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Young's Literal Translation
but I -- I say to you, that every one who is looking on a woman to desire her, did already commit adultery with her in his heart.


Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her - Επιθυμησαι αυτην, earnestly to covet her. The verb, επιθυμεω, is undoubtedly used here by our Lord, in the sense of coveting through the influence of impure desire. The word is used in precisely the same sense, on the same subject, by Herodotus, book the first, near the end. I will give the passage, but I dare not translate it. To the learned reader it will justify my translation, and the unlearned must take my word. Της ΕΠΙΘΥΜΗΣΕΙ γυναικος Μασσαγετης ανηρ, μισγεται αδεως, Raphelius, on this verse, says, επιθυμειν hoc loco, est turpi cupiditate mulieris potiundae flagrare. In all these eases, our blessed Lord points out the spirituality of the law; which was a matter to which the Jews paid very little attention. Indeed it is the property of a Pharisee to abstain only from the outward crime. Men are very often less inquisitive to know how far the will of God extends, that they may please him in performing it, than they are to know how far they may satisfy their lusts without destroying their bodies and souls, utterly, by an open violation of his law.

Hath committed adultery with her already in his heart - It is the earnest wish or desire of the soul, which, in a variety of cases, constitutes the good or evil of an act. If a man earnestly wish to commit an evil, but cannot, because God puts time, place, and opportunity out of his power, he is fully chargeable with the iniquity of the act, by that God who searches and judges the heart. So, if a man earnestly wish to do some kindness, which it is out of his power to perform, the act is considered as his; because God, in this case, as in that above, takes the will for the deed. If voluntary and deliberate looks and desires make adulterers and adulteresses, how many persons are there whose whole life is one continued crime! whose eyes being full of adultery, they cannot cease from sin, 2 Peter 2:14. Many would abhor to commit one external act before the eyes of men, in a temple of stone; and yet they are not afraid to commit a multitude of such acts in the temple of their hearts, and in the sight of God!

l spit on this

Joagbaje:
I've answered. These outreaches require financial contributions. So giving for such outreaches help to further the gospel.

Jo it is pointless making any further effort trying to make him get it. . .haba for how long na do telivision stations collect the "blood of Jesus Christ" as payment for services rendered? or may state of the act equipments are purchased with a "holighorized God blessssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhh you" abeg let us be reasonable

Zikkyy:
Is there an unexplored territory that you are reaching out to? I wonder why a church in nigeria would spend so much money preaching to christians in America, if not to sell it's brand

What brand, can't you get it? there is no brand to be sold, it is moving with global trend and you are even narrow in your thinking to think that any specific country like you mentioned America is the target; NO! NO! you are wrong, the whole world is the mission field and what better way to do it than to take advantage of current global technological trend. . . it that a wrong thing to do

Zikkyy:
You are not even successful in your backyard, you are spending big money to convert Christians in western nations.

For once imagine if the several missionaries many of whom came from Europe who paid the ultimate sacrifice in denying self and families had reasoned that until they were successful in their backyard Africa does not deserve to hear the gospel. . .hmmmmmmm this "dark continent" well till tomorrow their backyard remains anything but successfully kept

Zikkyy:
Kindly advise oyaks to hold the next crusade or night of bliss in Maiduguri, we need to win over the boko haram people abeg i will gladly provide my share of financial support

who needs your change   you might as well pay your fair their anyway just for the records we do have a church at Maiduguri

Zikkyy:
I also don't understand why so many pastors/ministries will queue up on cable television to preach to the same audience/crowd, aside selling their brand

that probably explains why it also would be difficult for you to understand how the prophecy below would be possible
"Mt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come"

Enigma:
Actually, I would like to revise part of my last sentence above ---- in view of the new title for his boss that Joagbaje supplied in his last post here.

Joagbaje, the fraudulent slave of a bastard and spiritual vagabond.

Lol look at who is calling people bastards and spiritual vagabond
please spare us

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=698695.msg8608308#msg8608308 date=1309273966]One moment you are making a great point, the next time you are making a disgusting one. . .what exactly is your problem?. . .I go flog you o![/quote]Abeg flog am, this my bonboi he is always fulfilling scripture but my concern is negatively
Proverbs 22:15
Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.
(KJV)
You know sometime the boy seem to want to make a sense then almost immediately that inherent folly just simply make a nonesense of his intial effort to make a sense.
Anyway l got good news for you boy
Job 14:7
For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
(KJV)

There is hope for you kid

nuclearboy:
I know frosbel will come and defend himself presenting his case.

But I will clarify my stand and if called out, will defend from scripture - "IF"Frosbel says prospering or prosperous people cannot go to Heaven, then he is wrong.

What I am against (and believe Frosbel is saying) is that the Gospel is not about prosperity of the body but of the spirit. Prosperity of the body is an "extra" which is not compulsory. I defend this simply - "the poor will ALWAYS be amongst you" - that is not gist but God's own truth

Let me help Jo on this one because l find it irresistably inviting. Those of us who are proponents of prosperity in the church neither are saying otherwise what we are saying which is according to scripture is that God wants us as christians to proper in the complete sense of the word and the so called "prosperity gospel" that many on nairalnad have made a mockery of which for me is a display of ignorance in itself because there is actually nothing in the bible that is difined by and with that discription, anyway the massage of prosperity we are advocating is not all about money, giving, sowing etc no its an all rounder also accomodating such concerns as wise investment ( Pr 4:7 "Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding".
, enterpreneureship (Eph 4:28 "Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth" , honesty ( 2 Corithians 8:21 "Providing for honest things, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men" etc so it encompasses everything because that is what the word of God teaches.

nuclearboy:
"the poor will ALWAYS be amongst you" - that is not gist but God's own truth

Definately no doubt becuase Jesus said so but that doesn't imply that they should remain poor the bible teaches that the gospel of man's salvation is a complete package which does includes a provision to make even a poor man come out of his poverty state "Lu 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised"
Question: What is a good news to a poor man?
You know is like when Jesus said suffer not the little children to come to me with the under tone of imply that "these little children we would always have in our midst" but does that mean that they will never grow to adults no but bear in mind that several factor also comes to play in their growth in like manner, when a man comes poor to God recognizing the potency of the help that God offers in Christ Jesus subscribing to the simple laid down principles that the bible teaches for properity some of which we have discussed a number of times and l briefly highlighted some previously

@Enigma and Nuclearboy
Is has become increasingly obvious that you guys won't have peace untill you have mentioned "joagbaje" because l wonder in what way this discussion concerns joagabje but am not surprised especially when we always have people whose hearts are given to quarrels and unhealthy and unprofitable arguments.

Zikkyy:
. . . and i thought the gospel was free making it a ticketed event indicates a profit motive That will make pastor chris an entertainer

There is no place that suggest such, it is Salvation that is free. The gospel simple means "good news" how can you say "good news" is free; does it make any sense?
So tell me the copy of the holy bible you have l guess its free or perhaps you purchased it with the "blood of Jesus" (thats if u have a copy) because sometimes l wonder if some of you guys own a copy because of the absurd, foolish and unlearned statements and comments that you make.

Luke 8:1-3
"And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and villages, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with Him. . .And Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others which minstered unto him of their substance"

I know that people have argued in the past that the portion "which ministered unto him of their substance" that "substance" here could have mearnt "financial" aid. Well from all indications according to the theories of meaning on the basis of context, l am convinced that this were as much "financial" aid or support to the ministry of Jesus as much as it would being anything else because the context says ". . . he (Jesus) went throughout every city and village, preaching. . .", he wouldn't have done that fasting or with these women cooking all the way or perhaps walking his way even water well paraventure he did walked his way on water in areas that were not accessible on land what about his discilples ". . . the twelve were with him. . .". This is interesting because God deemed it important to include for our reference the fact that his disciples of twelve were with him, doesn't that communicate any sense?

frosbel:
^^


Hmm, not sure I ever said I was against financial prosperity which comes as a result of God's blessings on hard work not on sowing seed in a gambling Las Vegas fashion.

I personally live a prosperous life due to God's mercies and a reward of hard work.

Anyway you and your false teachers seem to have more of an interest in claiming and naming by FAITH rather than living HOLY lives in victory over unruly temperaments, sin, the world and Satan.

Why are you eliciting a double standard? For God sake you leave us with no other subjective option as to what side you are on with respect to the issue of prosperity and poverty in the church. Nobody said you are against prosperity but you are offended at prosperity with image of a church in the picture frame. You are all hypocrites and liars disceivers, insincere men with twisted consciences
1 Chronicles 29:10-12

"Wherefore David blessed the Lord before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be thou, Lord God of Israel out father, for ever and ever. Thine, O Lord, is the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O Lord, and thou art exalted as head before all. BOTH RICHES AND HONOUR COME OF THEE, AND THOU REIGNEST OVER ALL. . ."
[b][/b]
it is hypocracy for anyone to think that properity or the topic of money is convinient to be discuss every where else but in the church it is LUDACRIS.
does the church exist illusively in space? or are churches built and sustained with the "blood of Jesus" as the transacting legal tender or perhaps a big, cheerful and "holigirized" "God blesh you" paid the bill for sound equipment, television air time or may be internet expenses.

l REPEAT YOU GUYS ARE ALL HYPOCRITES!

Roman 8:16-17
"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together"

And the partnership formular is not on a "co-heir" basis rather its on a "joint-heir" basis

Acts 2:1-13
"And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And they were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. . . and they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine"

It is not exaltly clear whether or not the 120 disciples together with the apostles were actually celebrating Pentecost their own way by fellowship aside the fact that they had already being given an instuction by Jesus in the previous chapter (Acts1:4) to remain in Jerusalem. Also it is possible that they were hidding from the persecution posted by the Jews and the religious set of their day after the deat, burial, ressurectiona ascension.
But there is some so so important that sadly for counless year many even those in the church have either missed it or judged it wrongly; The bible doesn't have any record that suggest to us that the pentecostals (those who had come from every where both Jews and Gentiles to celebrate the pentecost ) received the Holy Ghost. The bible specifically noted that the Holy Ghost that came only filled those who were gatherd at the upper room and they alone be began to speak in tongues.

The pentecostals didn't speak in tongue so speaking in tongues doesn't decribe a man to being an Pentecostal