₦airaland Forum

I'm building a whole new level of respect for Olaadegbu over his patience dealing with these people.

Joagbaje has said Jesus, his "supposed" Lord, his supposed "God" though sinless, was not perfect - please what is perfection? The Bible says "All have sinned and come short of the Glory of God". But that same Bible separates Jesus and tells us that He was sinless thus perfect and that it was this perfection of His that made Him a suitable sacrifice for the salvation of many.

But this "pastor" says "no, the Bible is wrong". How can someone discuss with such a person. Obviously this is not about what God's Word says but about what will profit him and his cabal of mischievous people.

@Olaadegbu: re the above you said:

He read them and understands. But it does not favor his scheme so he will keep pretending and trying to irritate/annoy you till you get angry then the rest of his pack of dogs will now come in and say "hey, see Olaadegbu fighting - he is not a christian". Ignore him. He "KNOWS" the truth. But it is a money matter for his true lord - the jeri curled millionaire business man.

@newmi:

Why do you always appear when Jo is cornered and bleating like a captured ewe? I get the impression you are simply one of Jo's more stupi-d aliases - a fighting alias owned by a quadriplegic.

Anjway, kindly shut up and get out of the way. Your NL master has realized his folly and is gradually changing the topic to something else to hide his (earthly) masters ignorance and thievery. I am pulling him back to the issue at hand and if anyone would refute me, it would be someone with possession of mental capabilities. You, dear newmi, do not fall into that category

So many words - so many lies - all meant to obfuscate issues and cover error

Very simply - The Bible and indeed existence itself is about the "Chosen" led by Christ Himself. These will reign according to God's initial design. For the remission of the sins of "many" (those Chosen or Elect), the Lamb of God was slain at the beginning of existence. That was in the Spirit and it only remained that the manifestation be shown in the physical. At Calvary, that physical manifestation was achieved. If we truly believe that God knows tomorrow then we needs must agree that He knew who would be saved and thus could say He had "chosen" them. That is of course, talking of those who believe the Bible and not a commentary.

On the issue of Jesus receiving the Holy Spirit, you should really read your Bible. Jesus WAS/IS the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit. His baptism was symbolic and the Dove coming upon Him was for a witness to men. All you need to consider is that no natural man WITHOUT the Holy Spirit can conquer sin yet Jesus did - this in itself shows the Spirit was upon Him from birth. It was the presence of the Spirit that made men marvel at Him even in childhood or would you say it was human intelligence?

If you listened to Olaadegbu instead of dancing around, you'd be better served. In fact, your own case would be served better listening to anyone aside yourself

In light of your statement of 2000 years above, what do you make of the Biblical verse Rev 13:8? Is the Bible wrong or is it you that is confused?

Okay - tell us then, "Pastor Jo" - so you understand "knowledge" - when did the sacrifice of the Christ take place?

Please consult your Bible before responding

You always surprise me. Here you ask for an explanation. Okay -

1. Jesus told His disciples not to rejoice because they had power over devils BUT BECAUSE THEIR NAMES WERE WRITTEN IN HEAVEN. He was NOT yet crucified when He said this!

2. He was STILL alive but said they had power OVER THE ENEMY.

After He had been crucified, Paul now said "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." as you have said!

Let me ask you - what else could Paul say? Do you expect Paul to have said Jesus was not raised from the dead or that people should go back to the days before Jesus died to get saved? The fact is Paul was speaking according to his time and place and so the only thing he could say was that Jesus was alive because He had risen. In your shallow understanding, you simply assumed that because Paul said so, that meant nobody could be saved except Jesus had died forgetting that the very same Jesus had confirmed the position of His Apostles BEFORE He died and said THEY (the Elected) WERE SAVED. This is about election, not the nonsense noise you people make thinking well grounded Christians are fooled by your acrobatics.

But then, you likely do not know because of the reprobate mind you carry.

^^^ The "letter" killeth.

Stop this insistence on the letter here especially when it is you that will say so every other time. You and yours are the only one that massacres Scripture to get your way. Jesus had clarified and His Word stands before Paul's word

@Enigma:

Thanks. As I said, "after" head criminal speaks, they now try to fit the Bible to his words. Imagine Jo talking about "Through the Name" and "In the Name" in a shitty attempt at damage control! I wonder who the baby is here who prays "through" the Name of Jesus. Rather than keep quiet and accept fault, these ones who will call Jesus a coward cannot accept that Oyaks can even make a mistake.

If anyone wishes to be honest, then ask yourselves - why is Jesus alive today? Then where is He today? Finally, what is He doing there today? The Bible tells us that He is seated at the Hand of the Father INTERCEDING for us. But you say we do not need an intermediary with the Father and that it is wrong to make Jesus an intermediary. So what is Jesus doing in heaven on our behalf?

All Joagbaje had to say here was that the choice of words of his earthly surrogate father suggested the wrong thing THEN he could find something to say the man meant. But the spirit of pride doesn't allow simplicity, does it?

Jesus intercedes for us. He is an intermediary for us in Heaven. That is Biblical. Any human saying otherwise is daft or unknowledgeable or is a plain out and out criminal. The fact that we can approach mercy with boldness does not mean we do not need Christ.

nothing to say, ehn? Sorry

^^ Insincere, vacuous, daft

Stop trying to explain BS. You only look insincere. And don't try to change your words above - we've seen them

You, Kandikane, said

like you said Jesus was the bridge

And newmi said

Very well said again without Jesus we are nothing

Which is to say that you both agree that Jesus is the way, the bridge, the only connection to God. But because you have conditioned yourself to agree to whatever Joagbaje and the Jeri curled dude say, you also say that you agree with

To pray through Jesus is to make Him a medium or intermediary to the Father, and that’s wrong

which is what our in-house 'pastor' said.

So it is wrong to "make" Jesus an intermediary to God but that same Jesus is the bridge to God?  You are saying six is NOT equal to half a dozen

Are you reading and understanding what we are saying or you just say yes to whatever Joagbaje says EVEN when your argument is against him? I know you will both now come to try massacre English and intellect to prove the opposite of what you have said is what you meant but don't bother - truth has shown here. I won't bother going deeper into the rubbish up there

@free123:

True!  

Logic runs backward in their minds. The dude speaks then they start looking for what to use to justify his words when his words should come only after careful consideration of what the Word of God says.

@newmi:

You seem more mature here and if you'd come at me thus, there'll be progress. Anyway, if we are "Ambassadors FOR Christ" as you say, you have proved my point. Without Jesus, you are nothing so you cannot be His Voice. ONLY because of Him, we have a status but that does NOT mean we are His Voice! Add the following to that and now read the daft article again

John 14:13 - "Because I go to the Father: and whatsoever you shall ask the Father in my name, that will I do: that the Father may be glorified in the Son"

^^^ Why should anyone bother?

@KandiKane:

I read the article WELL. It is daft! VERY very Very DAFT!

Jesus remains the bridge between Man and God because you approach the Father ONLY because He created a way. The gentiles (US) were separated UNTIL His sacrifice created a pathway and tore the veil separating mankind from the Holy of Holies.

How that becomes you have become Jesus voice beats me.

Can you jump from Lagos Mainland to Island without 3rd Mainland? So please remove that bridge and tell me how you (mighty MOGs and little "gods", I suppose) can cross! All this noise remains just noise - NO body can reach God without Jesus.

To clarify your point to yourself, all you need to answer is this

1. Remove Jesus from History
2. NOW tell me how you could then get to God!

Stupid thread. Questions ---

1. "Who" is Jesus?
2. What role does He play between the Father and mankind
3. How did the Apostles see Him so we may know how to consider Him

Answering these shows the dolt who wrote the starting post is not only mo-ronic but also deluded, idiotic and particularly wicked in his attempt to disparage Christ.

Christ IS THE BRIDGE BETWEEN GOD AND MAN (God in the Image of man) AND ANYONE BRINGING HIM DOWN TO THE LEVEL OF MAN IS A CRIMINAL

Joagbaje:
Thats my point. SECURITY IS COMMON SENSE.

My own point! -- JERI 'CURLS too is common sense and so is a FAKE ACCENT to impress dull people. And so is GREED in a poverty stricken society.

In fact, everything is common sense as long as it is Joagbaje interpreting it to be so

In summary and according to Joagbaje (I composed the below from what I glean from his posts)

Jesus usually hid (in fear) before He ran away (terrified). Because it had happened like 3 times, He then decided to get bodyguards. but He didn't have enough money (even though He used to collect Tithes, first fruits and offerings [Jesus had used all the money to jericurl His hair and buy designer clothes]) so He told the disciples to go get money and buy swords.

But when the Romans came, His guards took off when they saw He was afraid (which led to Him telling them to surrender) and He Himself surrendered.

Which is why His servant Oyaks now likes Jericurls, boasts but fakes miracles (like Jesus boasted about security before losing His nerve) and collects offers 7, 24  and doesn't pay his staff salary in the first month of the year

Read through the above, dude and remove whichever does not suit your sermons on NL  

No, he's conjuring it live from his mind. Which only shows how much semblance there is between that mind and a backside.

And yes, we have got to "exerchomai" and would like to see how the original language when put in context as Enigma has done can become Jesus running like a thief as pastor Jo, the Jesus follower insists Jesus did to prop up chairman Mao yaks

If you would NOW use the Hebrew and Greek bibles which you normally massacre to get money out of innocent people on the same verse, you would find a total different meaning.

The word used is translated to mean "concealment", to make secret (disappear), not to hide like a common criminal.

κρύπτω
kruptō
kroop'-to
A primary verb; to conceal (properly by covering): - keep secret, secret [-ly].

Jesus "concealed" Himself. Hiding is what oyaks does when he refuses to face anybody that can ask questions that will embarrass him and show hjim for the fraudster he is. Jesus did not behave like that

why are you changing translations? why would you read ONE translation for one quote then another for a second quote? Do you think we are babies or your cec members who only listen without checking?

^^

But Joagbaje:

This is simply reprehensible - what level of cunning and manipulation are you people not willing to go to?

How many Bible versions do you frigging have and how dare you start searching them all till you find words that can be twisted into whatever you feel like saying?

@Enigma:

BTW, how is Enigmalet? I hope you haven't forgotten he is promised to mine? Is Enigmatrax (hope you remember where its at) still kicking? You may wish to look at her.

^ ok, not checked that box for awhile but will do so now. but you are not fair here - me & GreyBeard spoke of the cultural link so why is it Enigma you ask to provide a link?

Petty?  

How does the question or requesting party sound petty, for Christ's sake?

You made a statement that he quoted directly.

Are you saying your statement was wrong or that no-one can ask your help in finding what we can't find in the Bible?

Seriously though - what manner of society are we in? It has become so commonplace for a "pastor" to be crooked that sensibilities are not really offended when such is accused of the manner of things we take as normal with Joagbaje.

Crazy world.

Joagbaje = Azibabe?

But Jo, what you told me is that Azibabe is Goodluck Jonathan's cousin!

Na wa for Pastor Jo O

Anyway, I thank God truth is showing more & more daily

As usual, an uninspiring and particularly daft attempt at a rebuttal - what is it with you people anyway? Did they replace your brains with coolaid?

Tell me - when Scotsmen wear skirts as culture, is it also because they are women since you say the only reason to carry swords culturally is to fight?

You people need to study and know about the world around you

:d

@Enigma:

Fabulous rebuttal up there

@Jo:

Are you sure you ever sincerely read the Bible? I know you have read it but have you ever considered reading it without seeing it through the eyes and understanding of your pastors?

What Enigma has pointed out to you is so elementary that its a wonder anyone can think you a christian talk-less a pastor. He "walked right through them" and Him disappearing from their midst is what you have turned to God "hiding" like a thief and you even laugh at it - all so you can prop up your criminal pastors. you make fun of God but take idiiot oyaks with utmost seriousness? BTW, that was deliberate - if you can laugh at God, I too should have right to say the truth about the criminals you take as servants of the God you ridicule.

At least, others are reading/seeing/learning

^^ I agree with you on the above BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT I EXPECT OF A NORMAL PERSON and Jesus was definitely full of common-sense. But you still miss the point here - you have turned the "MOG" into a special person with special powers

1. you are a "god"
2. you are "God's restraining force against evil
3. you can claim anything because you are "WHAT" sef?
4. etc

SO, if you are truly all the above, then

Why can't you just claim security against bullets?
Why can't you claim that there should be NO traffic
Why can't you [b]speak it into reality that assassins or angry people should be stuck at home [/b]and not see you?

This is the issue. Jesus humbled Himself (though God).Peter also humbled himself by accepting he lacked. Paul did same his own way.They showed common sense in their humility. But you boast, you say you are great and mighty and worthy etc which reminds most of the clanging of an empty metal barrel. So people are basically asking you to show your power and confidence. Because when it comes to these issues, you know there is common-sense but if we speak of miracles, you say NO, this is the realm of the supernatural. Like when someone who died due to loss of blood comes back to life and stays alive without blood till they top her up.

And when it comes to money, do you use the same common sense and state that we should help the needy rather than donate more to Millionaires? I think therefore that this thread deals with hypocrisy

I really think you are making a mountain out of nothing. But will leave you to the crushingly capable hands of Pastor AIO. As to deliberate insertions etal, surely you understand the concept of all understanding and usage of any and all situations to achieve the predetermined?

Give me a little while. Still not composed enough to argue issues

@Jo: I think you miss their point.

We know Christ was hated by the Religious leaders and that there were many attempts on His life yet he would hide or go someplace else until His SET time arrived when He gave Himself up. Your allegory to His Disciples carrying swords is therefore wrong because culture in those days and place informed that many people carried arms just as in the north today, many carry daggers and in the USA, many carry guns. So the 2 swords were a product of culture rather than protection or aggression.

So except if you wish to argue that your "MOGs" have bodyguards as a product of culture or DUE TO norms i.e. it is fashionable to have bodyguards if you're a "big man", your train of thought is wrong. And it is acceptable (though childish) that they do it as norms; after-all, humans are vain