₦airaland Forum

MEILYN: Now i can see why you are confused.

"Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually." (Hebrews 7:3)

MEILYN: so whose point are you proving? You are just trying to discard reincarnation with this your two sided post, there are many priest but death prevented them to continue, but Christ and Melchizedec are priests forever. A type of Christ? Someone. Bible says Jesus the Christ and not Jesus a Christ. There is only one Christ which is Jesus. So i dont know what you talking about. Your post up there proves my point.

MEILYN: You are very wrong. Very wrong. Am not a student of the word. It didnt take Prophets of old, Paul e.t.c 5years to study and understand scriptures.

OlaoChi: Why don't Christians understand themselves

FG, States, LGs share N6tr
in 9 months
on december 23, 2013 at
1:59 am in business
FG overspends by
N740bn
BY Babajide Komolafe
The three tiers of
government shared N6
trillion from January to
September from the
federation account, while
the federal government
overspent its budget by
N740 billion within the
same period.
These were revealed in the
Economic report for the first
three quarters of the year
released by the Central
Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
The report revealed that
total federally collected
revenue for the three
quarters was N7.51 trillion
while total allocation to the
three tiers of government
including VAT revenue
stood at N6.051 trillion.
Further analysis revealed
that N2.811 trillion was
allocated to the federal
government; the 36 state
governments got N2.19
trillion, while the 774 local
governments got N1.2
trillion.
CBN governor, Sanusi
During the period, the
Federal Government spent
N3.55 trillion, implying
deficit of N740.95 billion.
Analysis of federal
government expenditure
reveals that N2.35 trillion
representing 66.28 per cent
was spent on recurrent
expenditure, while N933.12
billion representing 26.3
per cent was spent on
capital expenditure.
Recall budget estimate for
2013 comprise federally
collectible revenue of
N11.34 trillion, with
revenue for the Federal
Government estimated at
N4.1 trillion. Capital
expenditure was also
projected at N1.62 trillion.
The CBN economic report
for the three quarters gave a
summary of the
implementation of the
budget.
First Quarter
Total federally-collected
revenue during the first
quarter of 2013 stood at
N2,425.30 billion,
representing a decline of
2.4 and 17.9 per cent below
the receipts in the
preceding quarter and the
corresponding period of
2012, respectively.
However, relative to the
proportionate budget
estimate, federally-collected
revenue rose by 3.1 per
cent.
At N908.14 billion, the
Federal Government retained
revenue for the first quarter
of 2013 was lower than
both the proportionate
budget estimate and
receipts in the preceding
quarter by 11.0 and 1.6 per
cent, respectively. Relative
to the receipts in the
corresponding period of
2012, Federal Government
retained revenue also
declined by 10.6 per cent.
Of this amount, the Federal
Government share from the
Federation Account, VAT
Pool Account and FGN
Independent Revenue were
N643.87 billion, N26.34
billion and N35.42 billion,
respectively, while “Others”
accounted for the balance
of N202.51 billion.
Total estimated expenditure
for the first quarter stood at
N1,192.92 billion and was
lower than the
proportionate budget
estimate by 8.0 per cent,
but higher than the levels in
the preceding quarter and
corresponding period of
2012 by 5.5 and 8.3 per
cent,respectively. The
development (relative to the
quarterly budget estimate)
was attributed to the delay
in capital releases during
the review period.
A breakdown of the total
expenditure showed that the
recurrent component
accounted for 65.5 per
cent, capital component
27.0 per cent, while
statutory transfers
accounted for the balance
of 7.5 per cent. Further
breakdown of the recurrent
expenditure showed that the
non-debt component
accounted for 77.4 per
cent, while debt service
payments accounted for the
balance of 22.6 per cent.
Thus, the fiscal operations
of the Federal Government
resulted in an estimated
deficit of N284.78 billion or
2.9 per cent of the
estimated nominal GDP for
the quarter, compared with
the 2013 benchmark and
the preceding quarter
deficits of N276.11 billion
and N207.32 billion,
respectively. The deficit was
financed mainly from
domestic sources.
SECOND QUARTER
Total federally-collected
revenue during the second
quarter of 2013 stood at
N2,370.71 billion,
representing a decline of
2.3, 5.2 and 16.4 per cent
below the levels in the
preceding quarter, the
corresponding quarter of
2012 and the proportionate
budget estimate,
respectively.
At N938.29 billion, the
Federal Government retained
revenue for the second
quarter of 2013 was lower
than the proportionate
budget estimate by 23.5 per
cent, but higher than the
receipts in the first quarter
of 2013 and the
corresponding quarter of
2012 by 3.3 and 6.0 per
cent, respectively. Of this
amount, the Federal
Government share from the
Federation Account, VAT
Pool Account, FGN
Independent Revenue,
Revenue Augmentation and
Sure-P were N715.00
billion, N27.88 billion,
N18.17 billion, N128.36
billion and N48.88 billion,
respectively.
Jonathan and Okonjo-
Iweala
Total estimated expenditure
for second quarter 2013
stood at N1,280.41 billion,
indicating a decline of 11.6
per cent relative to the
quarterly budget estimate. It
was, however, higher than
the level in the preceding
quarter by 7.3 per cent. The
development relative to the
quarterly budget estimate
was attributed largely to the
non-release of capital
outlay during the period. A
breakdown of the total
expenditure showed that the
recurrent component
accounted for 64.3 per
cent, capital component
27.5 per cent, while
statutory transfers
accounted for the balance
of 8.2 per cent.
Further breakdown of the
recurrent expenditure
showed that the non- debt
component accounted for
75.5 per cent, while debt
service payments accounted
for the balance of 24.5 per
cent. Thus, the fiscal
operations of the Federal
Government resulted in an
estimated deficit of
N342.12 billion or 4.8 per
cent of GDP, compared with
a proportionate budget
deficit of N221.77 billion or
3.1 per cent of GDP for the
second quarter 2013.
THIRD QUARTER
Total federally-collected
revenue during the third
quarter of 2013 stood at
N2,716.43 billion,
representing a decline of
4.2 and 1.58 per cent below
the quarterly budget
estimate and the level in
the corresponding quarter
of 2012, respectively.
However, relative to the
level in the preceding
quarter, total federally-
colllected revenue rose by
14.4 per cent
At N964.86 billion, the
Federal Government retained
revenue for the third quarter
of 2013 was lower than the
proportionate budget
estimate by 21.3 per cent,
but exceeded the receipts in
the preceding quarter and
the corresponding quarter
of 2012 by 9.0 and 9.2 per
cent, respectively. Of this
amount, the Federal
Government share from the
Federation Account, VAT
Pool Account, FGN
Independent Revenue and
Sure-P were N769.83
billion, N27.99 billion,
N118.16 billion and N48.88
billion, respectively.
Total estimated expenditure
for the third quarter 2013
stood at N1,078.91 billion,
indicating a decline of 25.5
and 6.1 per cent below the
quarterly budget estimate
and the level in the
preceding quarter,
respectively. The
development relative to the
quarterly budget estimate
was attributed to the
decline in both recurrent
and capital components
during the period.
A breakdown of the total
expenditure showed that the
recurrent component
accounted for 69.5 per
cent, while capital and
statutory transfers
components accounted for
24.0 and 6.5 per cent,
respectively. Further
breakdown of the recurrent
expenditure showed that the
non-debt component
accounted for 79.0 per
cent, while debt service
payments accounted for the
balance of 21.0 per cent.
Thus, the fiscal operations
of the Federal Government
resulted in an estimated
deficit of N114.05 billion or
0.95 per cent of GDP,
compared with a
proportionate budget deficit
of N221.77 billion or 1.9
per cent of GDP for the third
quarter 2013.

Sarassin: Thank you for your reply and no offence taken.

In my view Mark is the earliest writer, biblical scholars agree that Mark was the source for Matthew as well as Luke, plus of course the "Q" source. Luke wrote his narrative on his own understanding, he admitted as much. Yes Jesus refers to John as "least in the kingdom" but it does not detract from my point that nevertheless Jesus considered John a "great" man, and personally i see nothing wrong with that.

The objective of using 1 Thessalonians is to illustrate Paul's beliefs at a particular point in time which corresponded to what Jesus believed and taught in his lifetime.

I respect your beliefs but I don't agree with your definition of the Kingdom of God, we can agree to disagree.

Sarassin: Now you are just waffling.

The endless revised versions of the Christian bible is the bane of the religion, The words of Matthew are clear in the KJV. Luke has enhanced Matthew’s words. In any event the point I was making was that Jesus paid John the Baptist high compliment indeed, one apocalypticist to another, so far, at least Christians have not invented prophets who weren’t born of women.

Jesus uses the term “Son of Man” to great effect, on occasion he uses the term to describe himself i.e when he says (according to the gospel writers) “Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head”. It is also obvious he uses the term to describe a universal judge who would be heralded by angels descending from the clouds to right the wrongs of the earth, this is an allusion to a vision of the apocalypse shared by all Jewish apocalyptic prophets, based mainly on the nightmarish vision contained in Daniel 7:17-27, also 1 Enoch 69

Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians less than twenty years after Jesus died, even before the gospel of Mark, his views then reflected early Christian beliefs and expectations, the fact that he later modified his Christology in later years does not negate the prevailing views of his earlier writing.

No-one solicited your advice, instead of indulging in petty name calling, if you have anything worthwhile to say why don’t you deal with the premise of my post ?, i.e (Mark 1:15) “The time is filled up and the kingdom of God is almost here……”

Where is the kingdom? And please let us have no talk of a day being a thousand years, as you can see from Mark 1:15, Jesus said “time’s up “

harbiola1: No vex bro, but can we start a new thread?
so that ur expo would be more effective.

Sarassin: @noblefada

Read Matthew 11:9-11 " truly I say to you, among those born of women there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptist....."

Jesus believed the kingdom of God was imminent, i.e the end of the world as he and his contemporaries knew it.
In the gospel of Mark, Jesus makes a third person reference to the advent of the "Son of Man" who would be seen arriving on the clouds. NOT he.

Apostle Paul is our first christian author, writing even before the author of the gospel of Mark, he clearly believes the kingdom of God was imminent based on the passage I quoted you from his early writings to the Thessalonians.

Sarassin: Jesus was an apocalyptic Jewish prophet, he came from a long line of Jewish apocalyptic prophets, like John the Baptist before him (Jesus believes John the Baptist was the greatest man ever to live) and Jesus Ben Ananias after him (who was hauled before the Roman procurator) Jesus believed the end of the world was imminent however, like all apocalyptic prophets he got it spectacularly wrong. Here are the words of Jesus from our earliest source Mark :

"truly I tell you some of you standing here will not taste of death before they have seen the kingdom of God having come in power’’ Mark 9:1,

“Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass before all these things take place” Mark 13:30

Jesus’ core teaching was the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God, all his other teachings were a derivative or corollary of this message. He believed God was going to perform a mighty act of salvation of his people heralded by the coming of the agent of change “ He did not believe in a change, He was the change the son of Man” and that quite a lot of people would be around to witness it. His disciples believed they would “rule” at the right hand side of Jesus in the coming kingdom, each disciple at the head of a tribe of Israel (hence they joined his ministry)

Apparently this is what the Apostle Paul believed too ….initially, here are his words; in his earliest recorded letter to the Thessalonians written around 49CE less than twenty years after Jesus’ death (Thess 4:15-17)

“ For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord by no means will precede those who have died………then we who are alive, who are left will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air”

It is clear that the early church that existed after the death of Jesus was apocalyptic in nature. Apostle Paul fully expected the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God in his lifetime, and quite clearly expected to be amongst those to be “caught up in the clouds” Indeed he asks his congregations not to better themselves, not to bother to get married if they weren’t already…the implications being, there was no point !

Luke writing with the benefit of hind-sight several years later makes the necessary adjustments to Mark’s account to rectify the anomaly of Christians being open to ridicule since the Kingdom of God had not arrived as expected hence: (Luke 9:27)” truly I tell you there are those who will not taste of death until they see the kingdom of God”…..subtly modified from Mark's statement (Luke 11:20) …”the Kingdom has already come to you” and (Luke 17:21) “ among you “.

When Jesus is brought before the Sanhedrin he tells the priests in Mark (14:62)
“you will see the son of man seated at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven”

Luke writing many years after the death of the priests knowing full well the priests saw no such thing modifies Mark’s words,
“from now on the son of man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God” (Luke 22:69)

Spot the difference.

Sarassin: In the first instance, none of the synoptic writers identified themselves, the books were simply assigned those names for convenience. The book of John identifies its writer as a John but does not elaborate. The author of Luke also wrote the Acts of the Apostles, incidentally contextually Luke is the most unreliable of all the gospel writers. The relative appearance dates of the narratives, the high quality language they are written and theological variations show that the writers were diasporan christian Jews. Irrespective of what is written in John or elsewhere, there is not the chance of a snowball in hell that any of the gospel writets walked with Jesus.

Sarassin: What is your justification for saying "the four gospels served the purposes of providing human witnesses.......these men saw and walked with Christ". ?

These are the sorts of glib statements paraded by half-baked christians. Not one of the gospel writers was a contemporary of Jesus, in fact the writers are all anonymous. As the OP pointed out Mark is our earliest writer, and his narrative appeared around twenty years after the death of Jesus, his account is still 3rd and 4th hand writings of oral traditions. Yes, Papias does give a hint that Mark's account may have been dictated by Peter but if you have done the research you would be aware of the problems of that conjecture.

I don't agree with the issue of satanic influences on the book of Mark, it was written before the Apocalypse of John and his nightmarish revelations of the beast e.t.c, Mark remains our earliest and best account of the life and death of Jesus before the likes of Matthew and Luke did a hatchet job on it.

FOLYKAZE: You are the one obfuscating yourself around with bi.gotry

NIV and other translation has 666 verses in their book of mark. Other translations added those 12 verses as agreed by scholars. How is this a lie?

The oldest gospel manuscript is the book of Mark and the other bible writters copied from it. In as much gospel of mark is fraud, what others wrote is fraud. Why cant you debunk this?

You were crying foul that the bible is inspired...pls which of the bible? Coptic bible or ethiopian orthodox bible or jerusalem bible or catholic bible or protestant bible. Get this fact straight to your head, these bibles got extra or additional books, chapters and verses. Some verses were even distorted among each others. This make the bible fraud work of men. Why cant you rebut this?

macof: And is it u dat isn't daft?

Yahweh who should be ur God(we all know christianity is confused about it's God) was worshipped on the sabbath day in ur Bible. U disobey and hell is waiting for u.

In Rome, so many Gods were honored. Gods from Egypt, Greece and Mithra from Persia. Horus and Mithra's festivals were held 25th December. And Sunday of every week was the day of Sun-Day Worship. The God of Sun being Mithra and Tabs weren't held against Honoring Zeus and Horus too.
Kemetian Gods are associated with the Sun and Horus was worshiped according to the Kemetian rights. Zeus being the head God in Roman territory was also honored during all festivals

FOLYKAZE: Jesus is a hail to almighty Zeus. There is no man that bears that name. Jesus in Latin-greek is Iesous which mean Hail Zeus.

Thanks for praising almighty Zeus

harbiola1: Bro, Are you talking about the same God that cast delusion into the mind of John and said He is not ELIJAH contrary to Jesus that said John is ELIJAH?

Emusan: The same old shi.t
you still blind not to see my post above about this.

harbiola1: The Jewish levites posed these questions to John:

John 1:20-21
1. Art thou ELIAS?

2. Art thou CHRIST?

3. Art thou That PROPHET?

According to the Bible, Who is ELIAS, CHRIST & THAT PROPHET?

FOLYKAZE: What is the meaning of Holy spirit interpretation?