₦airaland Forum

Joagbaje:
So did tb say you should go after other Gods?

So was there a mistake? . He said be watched the match and they were looking for a goal. And the first group to score a goal takes the day. And be said be saw the end that the match didnt favour nigeria.

I'm sorry I must be missing something from your above comment; otherwise it does not make one bit of sense. Do you know how many scenarios that can fit as well or better into the parameters you outlined? E.g., The match ends 1-0 against Nigeria; the match ends 1-1 against Nigeria with Guinea scoring first. If the room is that wide, of what value is the prediction? Shouldn't the emphasis be on precision? Do we have Biblical examples of such lack of precision?

Joagbaje:
You don't Deserve my response dear, you are only a mocker.

I think he was only trying to engage in a real conversation by raising some valid points. If we don't our views challenged, we should not raise them in a public forum. Your position on this thread is one I generally agree with, but there are also legitimate questions that need to be addressed to present a full, wholesome picture.

^^^

What you said qualifies as judging by your own definition. Trying to wiggle out by saying there may be insinuation of judging does not change it.

There is significant indication that Jesus was not born on Dec. 25. But does it make a big difference?

nlMediator:
Can you be a bit more specific? Seven years of economic prosperity in Nigeria or globally? And what indices are you using to measure the economic prosperity: GDP growth, PPP, poverty levels, stock market growth, employment numbers, etc. Of course, in the case of Nigeria, the answer is very clear: I doubt if Nigeria has known any real economic propsperity since 1980 or so. And if you're not specific enough, anything can fit into the prophecy.

Continuing, I'd say the prophecy may be accurate but it is not being relayed properly here. It is difficult to see any facts to support a conclusion either of 7 years of economic prosperity or even 7 years of economic growth from 2001-2008. The United States, which constitute[d] more than a quarter of the world's economy ($14 trillion GDP out of a total of $52 trillion world GDP) was basically in a recession from 2001-2003. Another dominant player, the EU was in a recession up till 2002. Japan, another major player, was not anywhere near growth. So, globally there were not 7 years of economic growth ending in 2008. A number of countries like Canada and the UK did well, but their numbers are not sufficient to constitute global growth.

The link below provides a useful summary of facts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession

^^^

Depends on the slant you want to put on the word "basest". If you see it in a negative light ("base", "lowlife"), it is intriguing why such people would rule. But I believe the Scripture is using the word in a positive light -, i.e., lowly, humble, weak. In that sense, God chooses to promote the weak things of this life to confound the strong and thereby show His strength. If a child is falling from a skyscraper and a 90-year old emaciated woman catches her, that's certainly a bigger marvel than if she was caught by the reigning heavyweight champion. In summary, that Daniel scripture may not provide justification for some of the things this thread is complaining about.

Joagbaje:
It's Kunleoshob that said so. I hope I can still get the thread. In that thread I explained that pastor chris predicted the economic crisis as far back as 2001. He said we are in a 7 year periodic prosperity and after the 7th year there will be a worldwide crisis. But he didn't give the details. But in 2008 when the crisis was on,he explained that it will last another 7 year. When I said that, kunleoshob told me the prophecy is not true because the crisis is almost over. And I told him this is just the beginning, don't listen to wall street .

Can you be a bit more specific? Seven years of economic prosperity in Nigeria or globally? And what indices are you using to measure the economic prosperity: GDP growth, PPP, poverty levels, stock market growth, employment numbers, etc. Of course, in the case of Nigeria, the answer is very clear: I doubt if Nigeria has known any real economic propsperity since 1980 or so. And if you're not specific enough, anything can fit into the prophecy.

Claus:
[quote author=Claus link=topic=751661.msg9223019#msg9223019 date=1317047320]The essence of the message, which in my opinion is about being more loyal to Christ than to a ministry, would be a much better topic of discussion.

[/quote]Yes, that is what I believe to be the essence of the message. I also believe that every objective observer got that. The distraction completely surprised me. And I was happy to give the gentleman the opportunity to slow down but he kept on with his kerfuffle.

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=751661.msg9221382#msg9221382 date=1317031969]This is a very dumb question . . . why wont my church have correct doctrinal pattern? Besides this question has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

If you must know so as to retrace your views again, my beef is "why would Zach Pooen advice his members to attend churches that he believes have incorrect doctrinal pattern" is he doing it to look good before them?. . .because why would someone who makes you think he cares advice you to go attend a church that he "believes" does not have "correct pattern". Isnt that trying to be hypocritical?

Now answer the question [/quote]You’re dancing palango, after being cornered! Look at your post #41 again. You made 2 accusations: (a) that he was boasting by claiming to have a correct doctrinal pattern and that (b) he was hypocritical by asking his members to go to other churches, thereby making himself look good. Your accusation (a) was earlier made in your post #20 where you wrote: “Now naturally I hate being judgemental in my views, but since the respected teacher- Zac feels "his church can claim monopoly of 'doctrinal-pattern correctness' [i.e he feels like his church CFC is the only correct church] then I guess we should look critically at points and his teachings - Can one Church really have the power to claim "doctrinal-pattern correctness"? I certainly dont think so.”

In post #21 you wrote: “It is a grave error for any church wheresoever to claim "absolute doctrinal correctness". Analogically its like the hand goes out saying we are the only correct part of the entire human body.So what right has he got to feel the other parts are not so important too?. . .what makes him feel his church is the only "doctrinally correct church'?Maybe we sure need him to make redressals before making such claims”

In post #27, you wrote: “Zach Poonen said : "maybe the church dont have the correct pattern like we have". . . frosbel pls what do you think is that "correct pattern" he feels they have that others dont? Secondly, whom do you believe has the power to say "one church has a correct pattern and the others dont" A Man or Jesus Christ?”

In post#29 you wrote: “frosbel pls what do you think is that "correct pattern" he feels they have that others dont?”

To answer your question: there’s nothing hypocritical about his position. Just as you’re not being a hypocrite yourself by claiming your church has a correct doctrinal pattern and yet accept other Christians.

^^

Ha ha! You're welcome.

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=751661.msg9182976#msg9182976 date=1316516224]^^^ just look at yourself! how else should i describe you know: hypocritic or confused?[/quote]Glad that you're back. Do you mind answering my earlier question as to whether you believe your church has an incorrect doctrinal pattern?

Image123:
The baptism of the Holy Ghost is NOT the same thing as been born again. I'd have thought that as a typographic error but knowing your ilk, i know it's deliberate of you to gain popularity and attention by controversy and ludicrous statements.

This is actually a well-debated topic in Christianity. Generally, it's much ado about nothing because the people who believe salvation is the Baptism OF the Holy Spirit also believe in the second experience that others call Baptism WITH or IN the Holy Spirit. But they call it in-filling or receiving the Holy Spirit. Of course, some people that believe that salvation is the baptism of the Holy Spirit - mainly baptists - do not believe in the second or subsequent experience. The link below may be helpful in capturing the controversy.

http://www.bpnews.net/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=25404

^^

I still don't get it. So your additional help would be appreciated. Looking at the Bible, I don't see such pattern of wealth acquisition that is that dependent on giving. What did Adam give to get wealthy? What did Abram give? What of Job, David? Or Solomon that God told that He'd give him wealth when he asked for wisdom (not because he gave). I've given several examples of people whose wealth is not traceable to giving. Can you provide some Biblical counter-examples? Of course, your theory fails completely when applied to modern times. How much did Bill Gates give to get wealthy? Or even some rich christians, espcially in more decent societies, where wealth is not acquired primarily through corrupt means?

Joagbaje:
We were talking about being blessed on account of obedience as a condition. Weve been blessed already .That's the problem of jumping on a matter one side of the coin without asking proper questions. Read that thread again. Few days after that thread I still posted a teaching on obedience by pastor chris.

The principle of giving and receiving ran from genesis to revelation. It's a principle. God embedded it in the culture and structure if the old testsment . It's a principle for the church as well.

Not one person I know questions that giving is a principle of the Bible starting from Revelation. But this discussion is about whether it is *the primary* principle for building wealth or escaping poverty. You’ve not shown that it is a primary principle. I take it that you have no scriptural support for your position – just as I thought. On obedience, I asked you 2 questions and your response is that I jumped into a matter without asking proper questions. What is improper about my questions?

Joagbaje:
The prinary principle by which we can recieve is through our givings. Some other factoes can work against it also. Laziness , wastefulness, foolishness. Lack of wisdom ,lack of faith. Several things work together as regard the prosperity of Christians. Giving creates An atmosphere for you to receive . You cant speak for another man. Because you dont know his heart. But other things work along side. Faith, knowledge, confessions etc . Then there are things that can block miracles also. Sin, umbelief etc. So all work together. We have to fulfil all obedience .

Obedience? Thought you insisted the other time that christians have no business with obedience?

That aside, I'd like to know where the Scriptures say that the primary road to wealth is giving and that the other things you mentioned are important but secondary. I "wager" there's no such scripture. My point is that giving is secondary, not primary. For instance, Isaac got wealthy without any mention of his giving. Ditto many other rich examples in the Bible, whose wealth did not precede their giving. Also, you're right that we can't speak for another man. So, does it mean that you'll discount any testimonies in church where somebody, including pastors, attribute their wealth to giving? Because, after all, we can't speak for them and can't be so sure that the wealth came through giving. In fact, from what I've seen in several places, the wealth had little to do with giving.

Joagbaje:
What are you saying . Is every pastor rich? Does every pastor recieve? . Every christian ought to practice the law of Giving and RECIEVING . These are biblical principles. If a pastor is not a giver he will be in lack .

What I'm saying is that contrary to your claim, giving is not the way out of poverty. The bible teaches no such thing. And there is no evidence from the life of wealthy people in the Bible and on earth today that giving was their way out of poverty or into wealth. Any pastor that believes that message should be prepared to demonstrate that it is true by looking at the lives of the givers in his church. If people have sat under a pastor's teaching for years and are constant givers to that church - as the church records would show - and are still not wealthy, then that message is not true. Or how else can we prove the truth of the message? By hearing the pastors testimonies about his own life - when his wealth can easily be explained outside of giving?

Joagbaje:
That's the point. A pastor has to put the word of God to work by being a giver. A pastor who does not give will lack. so naturaly he must first be a giver because he is a christian .

Oh no, giving-as-a-way- of- escaping- from- poverty is not tested empirically simply by the pastor’s giving. If I come up with a brand of pain-killer today and test it on myself and family, claiming it cured our headache, will NAFDAC approve the drug on that basis? If you truly believe that giving is THE way out of poverty, test it empirically by looking at the rate of giving by each member and see if it corresponds to their current (improved) financial position. Then control for – or discount – such factors as whether the person got richer because his brother became a governor or poorer because he has a gambling problem, etc. What you see will PROVE if the message is working or not.

JeSoul:
couldn't resist . . . so to ask God for an answer as to why He's not answering your prayer? j/k. I do get you though. Thanks.


@ALL, and especially for those opining if a prayer doesn't get answered it is probably not God's will . . . what do you do with

Lk 18:1-8
1 Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up [“lose heart,” NASB]. 2 He said: “In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared about [“did not respect,” NASB] men. 3 And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, ‘Grant me justice against my adversary.’ 4 “For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, ‘Even though I don’t fear God or care about men, 5 yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t eventually wear me out with her coming!’ “ 6 And the Lord said, “Listen to what the unjust judge says. 7 And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? 8 I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”

Jesus is teaching not to grow weary in prayer, even until His return! This is another angle to the story. Perhaps there is plenty to take here about the kind of prayer we should be praying and how persistent we should be in the prayers.

---

Hmm . . . how do you reconcile this to the parable of the persistent widow who incessantly put her request forward and Jesus told us to be like her when praying to God?

---

Lol. This boy. You're not serious. lol. I do believe that God uses tragic circumstances to bring about good. And remember, the death of a saint can sometimes be a blessing to that particular person (remember Hezekiah?) and within the will of God - be it through an accident or otherwise.

I don't see any contradiction or something to reconcile. The widow's request was consistent with God's will. Jesus never asked anybody to request repeatedly for anything outside of God's will.

The idea that God has 3 or 4 different answers to prayer – yes, no, wait, silence – is not entirely accurate. God has only one answer to prayer and that is Yes. I Jn. 5.14 says that if we ask anything according to His will, he hears us and if he hears us, we have everything we asked of Him. Problem is that what people call prayer sometimes is no prayer because it is against His Will – general or specific. In such cases, God does not even hear what you’re saying – it’s like you’re speaking French to a non-French speaker. The issue of No or Wait does not arise since he doesn’t even hear what you’re saying. The key is to key in into God’s Will, not only by studying the Bible (since the specific matter may not be written there) but by developing a closer relationship with the Holy Spirit and also using the wisdom God has given to every human being.

Second point is that some of the prayers are a waste of God’s time. Sometime, we are asking for a thing or guidance when God has given us the tools to make the decision. Prayer in such cases is often our way of trying to avoid taking responsibility.

Finally, Christians have grown to have a sense of entitlement. Partly because of well-meaning teaching on the loving nature of God, some Christians believe that if they have faith, live right, give of their time and treasure, etc., they should get answers to their prayers. Especially when they believe that the answer they’re looking for will make them happy. I’ve seen a number of situations where people would have been happier without that thing they got. E.g., a particular job, house, living in another country, etc. We really need to develop a spiritual state that accepts that our happiness is not tied to earthly things. A man’s life does not consist in the abundance of what he has. Our treasure is in Heaven.

wordtalk:
That is a conjecture and has no bearing on what Paul was stating. He was commending their GENEROSITY, not some 'economic crisis' survival. Generosity is often commended when poor people give out of their deep poverty (Luke 21:1-4 and 2 Corinthians 8:2), or when people give BEYOND their ability (2 Corinthians 8:3). The "great trial of affliction" in 2 Cor. 8:2 is reminiscent of the trials of persecutions that believers experience in their commitment to Christ - compare 1 Thes. 1:6; 2:14 and 3:3-4.

No, Paul did not "make them" practise any such law of sowing and reaping as a means of escaping economic crisis. This cliche of 'the law of sowing and reaping' has been seized upon by money-grabbers in the Church to deceive simple-minded folks that it is the sure-fire means or "way out of poverty". Paul preached on giving, and when he did so he was careful to let his receipients know that he was NOT COMMANDING or DEMANDING them to give or sow by some law - compare 2 Corinthians 8:8 ('I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of others, and to prove the sincerity of your love').

The NT teaches a principle of sowing and reaping as an aspect of giving; but nowhere is it taught as a "way out of poverty". When people begin to make sowing and reaping the foundation of their "way out of poverty", you can bet your life savings that you're listening to an anti-gospel and not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

We don't read that about the woman who gave her everything in Luke 21:1-4.

It is terrifying and utterly disappointing the way christians build theology on conjecture. I have no problem with suggesting that something might have happened because of what is not written in the Bible. But to build a doctrine on such omissions, incomplete facts or perhaps even falsehood is sad.

And like I said earlier, if pastors really believe in their "give yourself out of poverty" message, they should test it empirically and see how well it has worked. It's like Obama claiming his job plan will create a million jobs, but refuses an evaluation of it. Or rejects facts to the contrary.

So far, what I see is a message of giving that guarantees the pastor and his family a life of limitless luxury while 95% of the givers wallow in poverty or barely-making it. And of the 5% that made it, many of them did so because they're from rich or connected families, etc. I wonder why these Nigerian churches with their message of giving out of poverty have not been able to rescue their members abroad suffering like the rest of the people. I heard the other time that a Nigerian church's worship center was foreclosed upon in Northern Virginia. Members obviously did not have enough money to pay the mortgage. Of course, such would not happen in Nigeria. All they need is mention the financial difficulty and one corrupt politician or some other thief would donate to take care of that. And the pastor will jump up with his message about giving as the be-all and end-all of acquiring wealth.

I believe giving is important for the believer. But pastors are simply abusing the message of giving. And that's really sad.

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=751661.msg9136422#msg9136422 date=1315906666]Making a mountain out of mole hill is one step to decoding fallasies from false teachers. . .ignoring on the other side is one reason deception abounds in Christianity today. Quote me!

Guess what? maybe I should quote the entire phrase here and let you guys judge better:

". . .If you find another church there maybe another Pentecostal church or charismatic church where you find the pastor maybe they don’t have the correct pattern like we have the pastor is a god fearing man challenges you to be a good disciple. . . "

My question exactly:

[list]
[li]Telling his audience that his church CFC has the correct pattern, doesnt it sound like boasting?[/li]
[li]Since he feels his church CFC has the correct pattern that other churches maynot have, why then is he telling his members to go elsewhere?, doesnt that amount to trying to look good before them?, like what good teacher would tell his students to go a poor feeding home?. . .like puuuullllllleeeeaaaaasssseeeee spare me! [/li]
[/list]

Proverbs 16:2 Every man wants to seem innocent , but motives are weighed by the LORD

I dont have a beef over what Zach taught, besides i aint surprised that no one seem to be seeing anything wrong in the guys exhortations. What we fail to see or understand is that "one strategy fake teachers uses is the art of making their words sound appealing to their audience" they'll want to make you see them as good, but guess what they are adultresses trained in the art of seduction.

Prov. 5:3 - "For the lips of an adulteress drip honey, and her speech is smoother than oil"

You see his words as unintentional or harmless. . .i see it as intentional and worthy of creating harm. For Christ sake, tell me you dont see such gimmicks playing in our churches everyday?[/quote]So, are you saying your church has an incorrect doctrinal pattern?

erniok:
i really thing enlightenment is he problem of a lot of you. the bible says that a lot of times, Jesus couldn't perform miracles because of the peoples unbelief. one time, he even said to the people that even if they didn't believe him, they should believe the very works(miracles) he did. all of you are just pastor Chris' haters. I'll have you know that categorically god cannot even help you if you don't have faith, for the scriptures say that he that comes to god must believe that he is(exists), and that he is a re warder of them that diligently seek him. go and read you scriptures and stop attacking verbally, pastor Chris and Christ embassy members. [color=#550000][/color]

Virtually everything you said is erroneous. Can you point to the specific scriptures that back your points? And do go easy on the enlightenment issue. I’m convinced that you’re far less enlightened than many here. This tactic of demeaning people intellectually may work in your small circles but you’ll only end up embarrassing yourself if you opt for that course in this place.

^^

I think you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. Every church believes it has the correct doctrinal pattern. Otherwise, what sense does it make to continue in a doctrinal pattern you don't believe is the correct one? The pastor's job is to find the right one and follow it. Where the problem is on whether a pastor is humble enough and willing to change what he thought was correct upon the instruction of the Holy Spirit, Scriptures or Godly and scripture-based counsel from other ministers.

More important, the pastor here is not making a big deal of his church's doctrinal pattern. If anything, he's de-emphasizing it by telling people not to insist on worshipping in a church affiliated to them if they find that spiritually unhealthy. I think you'd have a beter leg to stand on if he insisted that people remain in the church because, after all, they're the only ones with the right pattern. But he did no such thing. Unlike some pastors that issue veiled or open threats to members that blessing can only be obtained under their ministry and those leaving are toying with failure.

^^
It's about infliuence. Samuel had influence over Saul. Some pastors have influence over the corrupt politicians that come to their church or with whom they interact on occasion. Their words would be more effective than that of a solitary citizen in the middle of nowhere.

Joagbaje:
. . . But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him (Hebrews 11:6)

There’re those who out of their ignorance of the Scriptures wonder how come God’s ministers are unable to just heal every sick person in the world. “If Jesus were here, He would heal everybody”; they’d say. Such statements are from those who are spiritually unlearned. When Jesus walked the earth, He “didn’t heal everybody.” As a matter of fact, He “couldn’t” heal everybody.[/b]This may sound strange to you, but study the Bible for yourself; you’ll find something amazing when you read the latter part of Mark 5, into the first five verses of Mark 6. Jesus had raised a young woman from the dead. (Mark 5:39-43). Right after that, He came into his home country and the Bible says He could there do no mighty work, except that He laid His hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them. Mark 6:5-6 tells us that as a result, He marveled at their unbelief, and then went around about the villages, teaching.

[b]He tried to heal the people and He couldn’t. This wasn’t a function of His inability, for He is Himself God and can do all things, but their unbelief short-circuited His power. Hence He resorted to teaching the Word of God to impart faith to them and rid their hearts of unbelief. So the fault wasn’t with Jesus, but with the people who didn’t plug into God’s power with their faith. It’s the same today; the power of God is with us and available to us twenty-four hours a day, but you must plug into it with your faith for it to work for you.

Receiving from God is based on the simple principle of faith. With faith, you plug into God’s abundant supply, and take a hold of whatever you desire. The woman with the issue of blood didn’t wait for Jesus to pray for her. She connected to God’s power by faith and pulled out her healing. When Jesus later spoke to her, He said:

“Thy faith hath made thee whole” (Matthew 9:22).

Your faith is the plug by which you connect to the power of God. That power is always available; tap into it.

Confession
My faith is alive and working. With it, I’ve connected into God’s unending supply, taking full advantage of His inexhaustible grace, wealth and wisdom, thus making the miraculous my daily experience. Glory to God!

Matthew 21:21
Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.

On the first bolded, Jesus healed everybody that came to him for healing. Repeat: everybody that came to Jesus seeking healing got it.

On the second, the scripture does not say that. It does not at all say that He could not heal. It says He could do no mighty work there, but He healed. If anybody that needed mighty work came to Him and wanted healing, He would have been healed. Jesus' healing never stopped because somebody did not have faith. At the very least, He would have used His power to work miracles, which is not dependent on anybody's faith. We need to be careful not to diminish Jesus to explain away our own weaknesses as human beings.

By the way, if somebody hears that Jesus (or a pastor is in town) and comes there to obtain healing, isn't that faith? What other faith does he need? We're not talking of people coming there to mock or thinking that God's power is not real. But people that truly love God and some cases who have been fasting for weeks before the crusade.

Image123:
Joagbaje is the obvious ignorant one here. i'm not endorsing (if that's even my place) or fully supporting zac, but i'm certain zac poonen has more knowledge than the sum total of knowledge in CE.

I went ahead and watched the video and was asking myself what the guy's "crime" was. Maybe, if we can hear what he said wrong, the criticism would be clearer. I must say that we charismatics have a tendency to feel that we know it all and that others are babes, carnal, etc. We really need to be careful to avoid missing the truth in what others are saying.

Claus:
I heard criticisms, from the pulpit, of the ministry of others many times while I was in CE. They were normally prefixed by the phrase "I'm not being critical, BUT. . . "

Another tactic ministries that criticize other ministers but insist they're not criticizing is to say that they're judging doctrine. Yet, the listeners know full well who's being attacked or criticized.

I think you're taking the topic in a different direction. We're using pastors in a generic sense. I'm not sure it matters to the OP whether the minister is a prophet or apostle: the question simply is whether a minister in Nigeria can tell truth to power. I'm sure there are apostles and prophets in Nigeria. How come none of them seem to have this anointing you're discussing - the anointing to speak to rulers about their evil deeds in Nigeria? I'm sure if this is the kind of anointing that would profit them, we'd be using Biblical examples to justify it. Now, that it may be unprofitable or even dangerous, we don't think anybody is anointed to do what Samuel did in all of Nigeria?

Billy Graham was an evangelist, but he advised presidents. He didn't fall down and die because somehow he lacked the anointing to admonish. I don't know what it is about Nigerians that makes us want to excuse everything away. Ministers and christians simply need to stand up and fight for justice for all. Looking for a spiritual escpae valve is unhelpful.

mabell:
psalm 138:8 The LORD will perfect that which concerneth me: thy mercy, O LORD, endureth for ever: forsake not the works of thine own hands

Having the above in mind, christians don't need to worry or fret
We should be confidient about the love of God

1Jo 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren
He loves us so much, he sent Jesus to go through the process on the cross

He love us so much He does not want us to be unhappy
Ro 8:39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Now when a christian has this at the back of his mind, nothing can make him possess and habit negative thoughts because as far as he is concerned, he has the greatest back up in life

Beautiful angle to the "Thought" message. I was blessed.

It's a good message. But the unity is not only intra-denominational. But the unity of all christians. We should be able to love all christians equally. But many a time, christians show all the love in the world to their church members but treat those outside their particular church with disdain. Including those that left that church. When I was a student in Nigeria, christians from different fellowships could come together once in a while to do things together and see themselves as part of one family. Today, one can be in a church with zero interaction with other christians, let alone treating them as family members.

Joagbaje:
What the "THE WORD OF PROPHECY " admonishes us to do is to pray for rulers . Not to judge or condemn them. But some ministers have anointing to be a voice to or against government. Like Elijah ,John, Jeremiah etc.
Its not every minister that has such ministry . If you doubt it why don't you do it yourself ? .

If the Bible is against our "condemning" or "judging" rulers, how do you expect the Holy Ghost to tell a pastor to do that? Will the Holy Ghost condemn the written word of God? Or, you're suggesting that "condemning" or "judging" is reserved for rulers called specially to do that? You cannot point to one place where the Bible asks us not to critically evaluate leaders and make suggestions for societal advancement. Saying that we should pray is not an automatic elimination of the other. Of course, if I have the kind of access the pastors have, I'll tell the leaders to their face. In fact, I've started at the level of access I have and will continue as more opportunities arise. I need nothing from these politicians and so have no qualms about telling them the truth. Unfortunately, many pastors cannot say the same. They're more interested in bragging about their connection to the misrulers and collecting money from them, while their members and other citizens suffer the consequences.

Joagbaje:
Any pastor who God sends with such message can tell the president

I'm not sure they need a specific word from God. The Word of Prophecy - Bible - is sufficiently clear on that. They should not shirk their responsibility and hide under "God did not tell me". I'm sure they do not apply such standard to many other things they speak out on or require action from others.