₦airaland Forum

aniffy4eva:
@ garyarnold, wordtalk, enigma, nuclearboy, zikkyy, Pastor Kun, debosky, nlmediator etc (please dont be offended if i didnt mention your name, its a pretty long list)

I just want to say a BIG thank you to you all for your insightful comments, I have closely followed your arguments, analysis, conclusions etc and to be honest, i have been fed spiritually (you have no idea), as they have forced me to STUDY the word in-depth on this issue of tithing, offerings, giving etc and arrive at my personal conclusion (i'll keep that to myself)

God bless you all,

You're welcome. We all have to be open to learning. At the end of the day, a sincere heart counts higher in the eyes of God than the right actions.

debosky:
That remains my view as well - I take people at their words and if that word doesn't match up with actions at a later point, then that will be the time to call them out. I don't understand fully the reason for a non-committal stance, but I'll take that over any strict definitions that all must comply with.

Personally I have ceased to consider myself a 'tither' or anything of the sort - I give as I have decided in my heart and nothing more. I haven't arrived at this point quickly though - I struggled for a long time with ministries that insisted tithing was compulsory, and struggled with getting myself out of that mindset. I can say I'm free of that now, but I continue to challenge myself to give as much as I can and downplay any reference to percentage.

Your position makes sense and I believe that's where many christians are heading unless pastors can credibly show that tithing is required of christians today, from every income. And the bolded effectively and correctly dismisses, in my view, the claim that any christian giving is a giving of a percentage. It is a stretch that makes the word ‘percentage’ useless. Perhaps it is a serious and sincere attempt to find New Testament support, which is non-existent, for tithing. I think it is unnecessary and unwise to defend tithing - voluntary or not – on that basis. Tithers are on better ground defending their belief on the basis of Genesis and ‘universal ‘ practice than trying to torture a NT verse.

^

Are you kidding? Botswana is about the only country in Africa that has maintained a consistent record of good governance. If Nigerians have even a tenth of that, hardly anybody will be complaining. You're in an environment where it's easier to make it legitimately and you're acting like it's tougher to make it there? Doesn't make sense to me unless you have not been to Nigeria.

^
Agree completely.

debosky:
Excellent post NlMediator.

I'd like to respond to a few things

I agree completely. In the same vein, we should also be open to accepting that some believe they are led to do so regularly.

This may be a matter of semantics, but I'll leave linguistic experts like WT to handle this better. From my perspective, the 'principle' is giving a tithe, the 'application' (that should be determined by each giver in his heart) may be paying it out of every income.

Some folk fast regularly as well - some do on the first day of every month (i.e. it is regular), some do at a set period each year. I don't think giving tithes monthly from every income deviates at all from practices like prayer and fasting.

What I think you are saying (please correct me if I'm wrong) is that tithing on a regular basis out of every income should NOT be elevated/treated as the principle, while leaving everything else free to interpretation when it comes to frequency. Elevating monthly tithing as such may lead to genuine concerns about the motives behind such an elevation, and rightly so.

Yes, you captured my sentiments accurately. Thanks!

Bintus2much:
I think you should read carefully what Joagbaje was trying to explain. and besides you need to undertand that using an oil to anoint is different from using the anointing oil as it was previously used in the old testament. The Anointing oil was made up of different spices which we cannot find now, Notice James was not referring to an Anointing oil but just an ordinary oil to anoint the sick, so get the difference.

I don't see th distinction. No christian I know claims to be following the OT anointing oil. They anchor their practice on James and the disciples. If ordinary oil is acceptable to James, why is olive oil not acceptable?

I don't think you're wrong and I'm not trying to correct you. I'm just drawing a different conclusion from the points you raised. That is, if anything can be anointed, if Jesus did not condemn the use of anointing oil to heal the sick, if James recommended it, then I see no reason to fuss about it. If we applied such rigid standards to other practices in the Church, many of them will not stand.

I'm really amazed at the extent of your opposition to this anointing oil stuff. Jesus did not condemn it even when it was brought to His attention. James mentioned and recommended it. You dismiss all that. But you're willing to endorse other things that do not have nearly as much support in the Scriptures. I think your concern is that the anointing oil is abused. But that's not sufficient ground to be cool towards it. After all, the same can be said of a number of other practices in the Church that we approve or practice.

Joagbaje:
Nice Article, but there's no biblical evidence for it that's why I don't quote such. But certain truths are universal . Men gave offerings, dance,and do worship to other Gods. In certain towns here nobody can eat yam until till priest of the village has eaten the first or biggest yam. That is first fruits. The spirit of man can pick certain spiritual truths.
The father Inlaw of Moses was a priest, but was not a Jew .

Job was not a Jew but he was offering sacrifices to God . So the spirit of men even in it's dead state can still pick some spiritual truths even though they may go about it wrongly. But the idea that Abraham was influenced by Babylonia culture is not acceptable , he would have copied some of their evil culture also. It was clear God called him out of idolatry . If tithing was pagan practice ,he definateky would have dumped it. Tithing , prayers, offerings, worship are all based on spiritual principles .

Yes, even if we shorten the argument and concede that tithing was instituted by God, even among heathen nations, and that God in the same way also instituted prayers, worship and firstfruits, it still doesn’t meet the burden on why tithing is mandatory. My point is that prayer and fasting are good for us, but nobody tells us that we need to pray or fast everyday to reap the benefits of prayer or avoid the dangers of prayerlessness. The emphasis is on regular praying. Ditto when we use the example of first yams brought to the village priest in pagan cultures. It doesn’t mean that the first cocoyams, oranges or chicken are also brought. But when it comes to tithing, there is little preaching that you can fulfill the need for tithing by doing it regularly and with some of the income but not all the time and on all the income.

So, even if God prompted Abram to tithe, it doesn’t mean that he prompted him to tithe on everything he gets, all the time. Just as God can prompt somebody to give thanksgiving offering, because it is a good thing, but we don’t establish a practice of thanksgiving every time something good happens. Or if God prompted Jesus to fast for 40 days and 40 nights, we now teach that every christian needs to do that once a year. Or if God told somebody to pray at night, and the person sees the benefits, we now establish a principle that God wants us to pray every night. My point is that God can prompt us to do something without it being interpreted to mean that He wants us to do it all the time. That being the case, voluntary tithing, in the sense of tithing when you are led or on certain occasions is the only thing we can establish with the universal practice of tithing. So, can somebody then show me the basis for saying that the principle is paying tithes out of every income, instead of occasionally, since that deviates from what we do with such other things as prayer, fasting that we admit are good for us?

Well, not much will change unless churches start attacking poverty instead of fighting it with words - hear the message and you'll be rich. It doesn't take a seer to see that that's not working very well for such reasons as the fact that not everything catches revelation at the same speed. Building massive structures to compete with the world has not helped much either.

Joagbaje:
Who are the other tithers who didn't know God?

The Babylonians, for example, who tithed well before Abram was born. See : http://www.keithhunt.com/Tithe2.html. Certainly, they did not know the true God and their tithes were to their gods.

Joagbaje:
That's a good point.


You should know that tithing didn't originate with the Jews. It's based on principles of faith . Just like offerings or prayers . Is offerings done away. Why 10% only God knows. Besides it's so minute when compared to other givings we do. Tithing seem to be the least of our givings.

At least the ten . I do give above ten. Let God owe me. And I know many others who do the same. Some give 20 or 30 %

It's true that even before the Jews, others tithed. But is that really relevant to us, i.e., can we really say it was instituted by God? Since these people did not know God - God revealed Himself to Abraham and the Jewsih people - aren't their practices simple guides at best that should not be taken with the level of seriousness we see with the tithe?

I have no problem with pastors living a comfortable life. I simply think they should also consider the circumstances and environment in which they operate. I know Nigerian pastors like to cite or emulate the Copelands, Hinns of this world. But do they consider the environment in which those pastors live? These pastors drive nice vehicles but the vast majority of their congregation also have their own cars, homes and are able to afford three square meals. The general society is even much wealthier. Does anyone realize that if you complie a list of the richest 100 Texans, Copeland's name is unlikely to show up? If you compile a list of the richest 1000 or even 10,000 Americans, his name is likely to be missing? Can we say the same of the Nigerian pastors using them as examples?

My other point is that pastors should be mindful of the role corruption is playing in undermining Nigeria's development. In my view, it's not good enough to quote the Book of Hebrews all the time, and go into the intricacies of the Greek, as though the society Nigerians live in is similar to the ones obtainable when the Bible was written. The Word should be made relevant to the needs of the people. And the greatest need today is to eradicate or drastically reduce corruption. Again, Martin Luther King Jr. could have preached all the Greek he wanted but he's honored today because he tapped into the need at that time - racism or the effects of slavery. The pastor that makes the gospel relevant in Nigeria - instead of trying to be wanna-bes - is the one that deserves my greatest respect.

wordtalk:
Even so, the new covenant is based on the foundation of the Old Testament. As Christians we cannot begin to disenfranchise ourselves from the Old Testament as Scripture for the very reason that Christianity is based on the OT!

Correcto! The NT is founded on the OT. However, every christian realizes that the OT is a shadow of things to come and act accordingly. Take for example. The OT talks about honoring your parents, but people went about it in certain ways. In the NT, we follow the same principle of honoring our parents, but not with a literal application of the OT pattern. In every NT practice, that's what we do. It's only when it comes to tithes and tithing that people insist on following it the same OT way - same percentage, given to support your local church (not other churches or ministries) etc. Can somebody explain to me why tithing is so different? Why was it so difficult for Paul, writing to non-Jews, to ask them to give 10% instead of making a general reference to OT? Was he that general and unclear in other areas?

BTW, I don't mind paying or giving tithes - like many I think 10% is too small. But I want to have a firm foundation for my beliefs. And if possible, I don't want to be under any kind of bondage, which makes it wrong for me to give 5% today and 40% tomorrow.

What a complete waste of time, effort and space. Among christians, simple questions should be answered simply and directly. Long responses to simple requests only serve to obfuscate and derail.

^

Sorry, you're one of a handful of people here trying to broaden it. The discussion is substantially about the narrow point I raised. If you have any contradictory information from this site, I'll like to see it.

wordtalk:
And what point have you actually made? You seem to be at a huge loss on your own struggles, you know. You don't know about something - that doesn't make someone else's discussions to be out of context. Is the whole point yet lost on you? If you are expressing surprise, that would be something else - but to draw your hasy conclusions to say my discussions are out of context just doesn't help your further arguments.

I am not against anybody contraditing any point - if done with good reasons. What you have done is try to contradict whatever point you wanted to without showing a case for your reasoned contradictions.

- Just as telling me my discussions are out of context doesn't help either.

How do you seek for information in the way you have already concluded that my discussions are out of context? I find that a very hilariously exilating manner of seeking information!

Touche.

I was not necessarily seeking the information from you - I already know your position. Glad to see you've abandoned your position that I was concluding and generalizing about what people teach, when in reality I was limiting it to my personal experience. What is left now is that I concluded that your discussion is outside the context. Again, that conclusion is only in the sense of what I know about tithe preaching. That knowledge is sufficient basis to assert that what you're saying is different from what those people I've read on this site and elsewhere from Nigeria are saying. I don't see what's harmful in that.

Joagbaje:
I'm not against anybody judging my post by the word. I welcome it whole heatedly. But when christian posts enters mockery and some get insultive . Ute no longer in the spirit of the bible.

Jesus  didn't need to teach tithing because it was never an issue for debate. It was on for thousands of years. Jesus endorsed tithing in matt. He also taught on rendering what is to God to God. So tithes and offerings were no issues.

There different offices in Gods kindgdom. Some are called by God some are  appointed by men and others came in through a desire to serve. Timothy certainly didn't recieve a call like paul. Paul made a minister out of him. If polygamy will be a hindrance to the future ministry of a potential minister being a criterial for disqualification why should one adopt it.

You don't need to back me. Stand for truth. but make sure it is truth. Besides if you had asked for clarification, what you term incosistent may not really be.

I welcome contributive criticism. It is mockery ,abuses and unchristian attitude I condemn.

We can certainly agree that sometimes people use the wrong words or adopt the wrong attitude. While it's no less sinful, I attribute it mainly to passion. Being passionate about things is a good thing. We need to make greater effort to avoid insults, hurtful words. I know I've not always lived up to that standard, contrary to my intention before I registered. But it makes me know I have a lot of room for improvement.

Your explanations on anoiting oil, ministers, polygamy are sensible. But not satisfactory. That's what discussions are about. We can always disagree. Problem is that just as you disagree on anointing oil, etc., those that disagree on mandatory tithing are called names and their motives questioned at every turn. That, to me, is not right.

wordtalk:
I'm not going to argue your conclusions here and there about your previous statement; but to make such remarks and then argue that my discussion was out of context is simply erratic an inaccurate. I based my response on your statement that "Not one of them I know or have heard makes any exceptions" - but is that anybody's fault if you don't know even ONE in Nigeria on the things you have read in my discussions? You may not know any - that doesn't make someone else's discussions to be out of context.

Excuse me, but that is just simply shallow. If you read another Bible different from the one every Christian reads and uses, I would see sense in your arguments; other than that, I find your remarks really funny.

Please visit the article - there are links that will take you to the NAE surveys, as well as the bodies involved in the survey.

You're really struggling to make a non-point. "Not one of them" is a generalization. "Not one of them I know of" is not. I'm speaking from personal experience and there's absolutely nothing generalizing about that. Words are there for a purpose. You can't pick some portions of my statement and leave the part that immediately qualifies it and nullifies your argument.

I quoted something from the NAE's president that you referred to that has an approach to tithing that's different from the one I know from this site (apart from you) and Nigerian preachers. Why can't somebody contradict the point? Telling me that it's my fault that I don't know people that hold such views is unhelpful. How else would I know other than by seeking such information from anywhere I can find it, including a widely-read forum like this?

Finally, it's not about reading another Bible. Words can be used in different ways and contexts. I'm sure you're familiar with the Alice in Wonderland example. Somebody can refer to 5% of income as tithe and another person believes that 10% of income is the tithe. That they're both using the same word does not mean they're saying the same thing. Nor has that anything to do with versions of the Bible.

wordtalk:
Please sir, I'm not one of those to argue long and hard on exactitudes, because it is obvious that a closer look at the sources dealing on tithes do not make that kind of fastidious assertion. You will observe that even among anti-tithing theologians, the tithes they argue varying between 1% to 10% to 23.3% to even 40% - and they all calling that "tithe".

Besides that, the source from the Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (several volumes) shows an approximation rather than exactitudes. A few example:

- the palace has taken eight garments as your tithe (on 85 garments)

- eleven garments as tithe (on 112 garments)

- four minas of silver, the tithe of [the gods] Bel, Nabu, and Nergal (no mention of 40 here)

Would you say that 8 is exactly 10% of 85? Would you also argue that 11 is exactly 10% of 112? This is why I don't argue legalistically - and if the person I'm discussing with can't see the simple issue of approximates, then tough luck.

I think I did not make myself clear enough. I'm not focused on percentages the way you are. Setting aside money is what people do with their offerings. I doubt that anybody giving an offering thinks he's setting aside a percentage. But tithers know they're doing that. That's the big difference.

Joagbaje:
anointing oil was never Recomended by Jesus for the church,  neither did he use it. So why should we embrace it. The oil used by Jews was medicinal. The spiritual anointing oil was for putting men into office .

every one of our members are potential ministers. So whats good for the bishop is good for them too.

I didn't select tithes . I'm taking a stand on the word. Tithing is an everlasting ordinance. Offering is everlasting ordinance . They go together . You can say you don't believe in tithing but you give God offering . It is hypocrisy because they are based on same spiritual principle.

I like how you claim your position is based on the word but another person's is based on hypocrisy. And you expect me to adopt the same approach, otherwise I've joined a bandwagon you don't like?

There is nothing wrong in your offering an explanation for the perceived inconsistencies. But one is free to disagree with you, without being your enemy, if your explanation does not seem satisfactory. For instance, Jesus may not have recommended the anointing oil for the church, but neither did he recommend tithing for the church. So, you're still in the same knot of stating a principle (what Jesus recommended or not) but selectively applying it.

Sure, everybody in your church is a minister but Paul was careful to recommend against multiple wives to office holders. Again, you start with a position you cannot sustain. When somebody says that every christian is a man of God, you quote Paul's words to Timothy that he was referring to office holders. At that point, you don't think that every member of your church is a minister and therefore a Man of God.

You see, it's such inconsistencies that make it difficult for me to back you sometimes. It'll be a waste of my mental abilities not to question such glaring contradictions. It may be that at the end of the day I'm wrong, but I need to know why. Not just because some baba said so. To borrow your phrase the other time, that would be slavery mentality on my part.

wordtalk:
And?

No, I don't think you should make such hasty generalizations and conclude erroneously. For one, there are some who may not be Nigerians nor live in Nigeria, and yet they discuss tithing on this forum. Second, tithing affects us all - and when discussants are on to the subject, they have the whole Church in view and not just the Nigerian scenario. Third, even from within Nigeria I don't think that there's not even a single pastor that does not preach tithes on voluntray basis - so the highlighted part in your comment is inaccurate.

I noted that there are other independent sources and references - if the reader could make a little search rather than stay on the anti-tithing stereotypes. I gave just one of several sources yo capture the reality in brief rather than post encyclopedias of what is actually happening.

Hasty generalizations and conclusions? Inaccurate? Where is the conclusion or generalization? I said that IF such a preacher exists, I'll like to read from him. How's that a conclusion? A conclusion would be saying there's no such preacher. But I was very careful not to say that, since I do not know. On the site being used by non-Nigerians, of course that is common knowledge. It does not change the fact that a lot of the discussion is coming from a Nigerian Christian context. You need not use a 'belief' somewhere to explain a different belief in Nigeria that goes by the same name.

Regarding your claim that evangelical leaders overwhelmingly tithe, you cannot get away from the conclusion by saying that you have other sources, unless those sources have data showing that. I'd like to see such.

wordtalk:
They actually are. Why? Because anything you set aside from a whole is actually a portion expressed in percentage. The only thing you may observe is that it is not a legalistically fixed or predetermined exactitude. From the sources highlighting the subject of tithes, we find it is only an approximation rather than an exactitude of a figure.

Wow! This response takes the cake. They're only the same in the sense that everything we have or do can be reduced to percentages. Otherwise, they're night and day. I can set aside 10% of time  to browse the internet. I can also set aside 24 minutes to browse the internet sometimes and 30 minutes some other time. Of course, 24 minutes is 1% of my time, but percentage was not in the equation when I set aside the 24 minutes. Nor am I violating any rule of mine when I switch to 30 minutes. With tithe, it's a fixed percentage of 10%. Not any amount that can now be categorized as a percentage. In summary, if the government says your tax bracket is 28% of your income and afterwards come up with a different policy that says everybody should pay what they like, you'd still say the guy that pays random amounts of his income is paying taxes based on a percentage and is in the same boat that pays a FIXED percentage?

Joagbaje:
my point.

My church doesn't believe in the use of anointing oil. Only you understand what you're posting. You started well but I can see you've joined the bandwagon of mockers.

Joagbaje:
I was making reference to tithing. There is no place in the bible where God spoke against it or give contrary intruction. Jesus spoke against the observation of sababath and some other things which he fulfilled . That's my point.

My church doesn't believe in the use of anointing oil. Only you understand what you're posting. You started well but I can see you've joined the bandwagon of mockers.

I know we're all writing from a distance, so it makes it difficult for us to understand each person and their total belief system. I'm still the same person  - i.e., my allegiance is to the truth and I'm not aligned to anybody. If you say something I agree with, I'd be on your side. If you say something that's not clear to me to me or that I disagree with, I'll ask for clarifications or voice my objection. It's really sad that we want everybody to toe the same line at all times; otherwise he's a 'bad' person - in this case, a mocker. All well and good.

Your response on anointing oil makes the point I was raising. If the validity of a practice is based on (1) thousands of years of practice AND (2) lack of condemnation in the Bible, then your church should be embracing the anointing oil. And polygamy for members (not pastors and deacons). But you don't. So, when you select tithes among all the things that fit that criteria, it raises questions about your position. And if you think seeking answers to such inconsistency makes one a mocker, feel free to continue with the characterization.

wordtalk:
There is no verse in the New Testament that negates tithing for Christians. Yet, even though the word 'tithe' is not specifically used for Christian giving, the underlying principles of setting aside a percentage from one's income is clearly found in 1 Corinthians 16:1-2.

Setting aside something and setting aside a percentage are not coterminous. The New Testament talks of the former but not of the latter. Nor does it talk of setting aside the same thing or level every time, which is exactly what tithing of income says.

wordtalk:
But is that what he meant?

I thought one basic reason for asking questions, instead of jumping to conclusions, is to find out what somebody means? I'm ready to get some clarity on that because it is fundamental to this discussion.

wordtalk:
There are many legitimate issues you have raised in your reply - and I share some of them. However, these issues do not apply to every pastor or Christian leader who encourages and teaches tithes in their churches.

To assure you, there are many pastors I know who teach tithes as voluntary, while others argue that it is mandatory ('mandatory' in the sense of "required" or "obligatory". This is serious enough to have led to a recent survey by the National Evangelical Association (NAE) on whether church leaders feel that tithing is "required" from Christians. The result is that 58% do not teach that tithing is "required" while 42% actually do. The interesting thing is that the President of the NAE, Leith Anderson noted on the whole that "about 95% of those who responded to our survey said that they at least tithed – they give 10% or more. So, they do tithe even though they think that it is not a requirement.” You may want to see the following -

Other independent sources and references are available. The whole point is that there is an overwhelming majority of Christian leaders in Western churches that tithe and teach it on voluntary basis.

There is no verse in the New Testament that negates tithing for Christians. Yet, even though the word 'tithe' is not specifically used for Christian giving, the underlying principles of setting aside a percentage from one's income is clearly found in 1 Corinthians 16:1-2.

However, so many people who oppose tithing for Christians have argued that Biblical tithes could not have included money or sourced from one's income. That argument is incorrect and very weak indeed, because Biblical tithes included money as well as were sourced from the tither's income. This may come as a surprise to many, but a little more helpful study reveals that is the case in some other instances of tithes that anti-tithers don't like to talk about.

The one thing I would agree with you here is that tithing (or any other type of giving) should not be made 'compulsory' for Christians - and the one reason I have for that is simple: the New Testament does not teach giving as "compulsory" for Christians (except where it talks about 'taxes' - which is a different thing from giving).

According to the site you posted, Leigh Anderson gave this closing comment:

“Let’s encourage tithing, and especially encourage generosity. But don’t steal from grandpa’s prescription fund in order to give 10 percent to the church. Sometimes there are emergencies and situations that take a priority like providing for your family. But stick with that guideline. Try to be generous, and 10 percent is a good guideline, but it is not a legal requirement in the New Testament.”

If there’s any tithing preacher on this site or in Nigeria who believes in the above statement, I want to hear or read him say that. Not one of them I know or have heard makes any exceptions. The truth is that your discussion is out of context. When Nigerians are talking of tithes, they’re talking of something very different from what you’re saying. Using the word tithe, which you use in a different context from theirs, is not helpful.

I also have serious doubts about your conclusion that an overwhelming majority of evangelical leaders tithe. What I read is that an overwhelming majority of those who responded tithe. Unless, you’re sure that the survey got a huge response, your conclusion is without basis.

Joagbaje:
Ask God ask him also why do we need water baptism.

You should also ask yourself why God would want 10% not 20 not 30. For thousands of years this has been on . There has never been any place in the bible where God gave contrary instruction against iT. As he did to other things.

Tithes and offering remains As vital part our worship of God.

Are these the new criteria for determining acceptable christian doctrine and practice? If so, I'd like to see some messages here from your church on the use of anointing oil since it seems to satisfy the criteria. How about Yoga?

I believe witchcraft is everywhere, since Satan's operations are not limited to one corner of the Earth. When you hear some Westerners discuss Satanic stuff, you'd think you're listening to some village priest's assistant in Nigeria. Major difference though is that such things exist on the margins abroad whereas in Nigeria they dominate personal thinking and actions as well as public reactions. I remember when flying in Nigeria was becoming very dangerous, with frequent air mishaps. People were quick to blame it on enemies, witches and wizards instead of using their brains. The moment it got unacceptable, with many "big men" dying, private and public responses changed and the incidence of air disasters died down. I think it was the year of the Sosoliso Crash that I was lightly stranded in Abuja because everybody realized that they should be flying the only 2 airlines that had serviceable aircraft then - Aero & Virgin - instead of flying the delapidated ones and praying away witches and wizards. Since then, things have stabilized. We need more of such responses (which is what they do in the West) rather than being mentally lazy and explaining everything away in spiritualese. Of course, such beliefs help the government thieves who know that instead of the people holding them accountable for poor healthcare delivery and bad roads that lead to untimely deaths, they'd rather focus on the oldest woman in the village. Government responsibility and accountability will reduce the 'wealth' of churches who benefit directly and indirectly from the thievery of government officials, but it will make for a better citizenry, better christians and better Nigeria.

Excellent observations!

I'm beginning to doubt that many of these pastors believe most of what they preach. If they do, they'd give church members enough space to practice what they're being taught. Instead, they keep piling on messages and programs with little room for members to demonstrate them. They appear to enjoy hearing themselves talk and watching people watch them perform on stage. If they want to be taken more seriously than is currently the case, they should minimize these endless programs and institute a process of measuring the effect of their teaching on members' lives. For instance, if you teach on prosperity, how many members prospered this year by measurable standards? And of those that claimed to have prospered, how much of that wealth is directly attributable to God, as opposed to stealing, drug-pushing, 419, public corruption, private connections, quality education, etc. Same with health and healing, godliness, etc.

Yeah, it's no longer passion for souls. It's passion for growing a private empire!

Joagbaje:
It's carnal for you to use such language as "SILLY" in your reference to the church. Ive explained my post . If you have something new to teach ,you can open a new thread on the "silly" in the churched. You don't have to twist my post to mean what I didn't say.

Do you have a church ? Do you have a pastor? Are there instructions given there? Or you fo as you like.?

Not surprised at the turn. First, it was accusation of rebellion. When you saw it had no basis, you shift to carnality. Such is the level of spiritual control or manipulation that goes unchecked in Nigerian churches. Nobody can ask questions. You have to accept everything a pastor says because he's all-knowing. If I wanted to belong to a cult, don't I know what to do? Funny enough, when these pastors realize their errors about certain things, it's the same people promoting this form of control that will turn round to talk about how the pastor hears from the Holy Spirit; has moved on to higher truth; then ridicule those still clinging to lesser truth. In essence, everything is right until pastor sees and says it is wrong. And if calling a **practice** silly is carnal, I wonder what it is when you quote scriptures about "foolish and unlearned questions" to dismiss people's posts here or call them clowns. I guess those people are not part of the church, since they don't belong to yours.

Joagbaje:
the first training God will give you is submission to leadership. You can't handle spiritual leadership without being under spiritual authority. There is training in God.

Some churches stands up to pray ,some others kneel down to pray. If you are in a church and such instructions are given you ought to obey if not you are rebellious . What's your business bring there if you're not willing to submit to the spiritual authority in that place

Hebrews 13:17
Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

That I obey the instructions when given does not make it any less silly. When I've been to Nigerian churches - which are about the only places I've seen such silliness - and instructions were given, I've complied. And I'm not talking of the examples you gave, but referring to a situation the pastor is preaching and asking people to stand from time to time. Like somebody said, it looks like a way of showing how much power they have over the congregation. In your world, nothing from the pastor can ever be questioned or analyzed. And the other examples of Jesus (or Elisha) giving instructions that look silly do not cut it - their instructions were targeted to the speciic individuals that needed them, not instruct thousands to reach one or two people. Is it not the same Holy Spirit directing today's pastors and prophets? Wonder why Nigeria is so backward? People hardly use their mind.