₦airaland Forum

Martinez19:
if TB Joshua, being specific as you asked, later said " when you child is 80, just like Moses at the time of his calling back to Egypt, God will use him to christianise Nigeria once and for all and turn the people's heart to God." would you believe him?

Ferisidowu:
Seeing that the Christian community is a group of believers in God, also since all CHRISTIANS know that the topic before us had, has, and will continue to spark controversies between even well meaning believers.
We affirm basically that no one should discriminate the other, every Christian is allowed to explain his view concerning this HIGH-TOPIC
EVEN we ourselves don't affirm that we know it, we only trust God to help in our endeavors

So back to the topic above


1 John 5:16
If you see any brother or sister commit a sin that does not lead to death, you should pray and God will give them life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that you should pray about that.

Pls I hereby call all Christian faithfuls to come tell us their views...

No one discriminates the other ..
Views might argued but then ALL KNOWS THAT IT'S ONLY GOD WHO CHANGES PEOPLE..
AT LEAST WE ALL HAVE 1 THING IN COMMON, THAT CHRIST DIED TO SAVE US FROM SIN...

GOD BLESS

mrpresident1 flamingREED julivas enilove salvation101 jiggaz 5solas sciecewatch otr1 mimopel tomhagen didov1
Emmanystone petra1 joagbaje solite3 julivas Goshen360 ken4christ

Martinez19:
Suppose you have a wife, she got pregnant and you know that you are not responsible for the pregnancy but TB Joshua told you "God is at work through the Holy spirit as in the case of Jesus's birth . God wants to achieve something through your child." would you believe TB Joshua?

Infomaz:
Which Jerusalem and where in the Bible?

akintom:
Your admittance of foolishness, has never been a cause of contention, that you know.

To the rational and intelligent minds, your claims to imaginary and illusionary ideas as real, is pure foolishness.

That verse of Bible, actually called you Christians, fools. If you understand comprehension in English.

Dreamwaker:
Jesus Christ did not prophecy here but he cursed Judas. He cursed Judas because imagine Jesus wasn't betrayed,

He never prophecized the death of anyone. Even when Jesus prophesized the betrayal by Judas, he didn't say he will die, he just said "one of you will betray me".

akintom:
In the spirit of reciprocity and felicitation, i sent a new year greetings to a friend, below is the response i got���

* Welcome to *2018 the year of the supernatural*

*#1. Supernatural supply*
*#2. Supernatural strength*
*#3. Supernatural abilities*
*#4. Supernatural insight*
*#5. Supernatural wisdom*
*#6. Supernatural knowledge*
*#7. Supernatural health*
Hallelujah Glory to God.
�������

But a quick check of the meaning of supernatural, showed ���

Supernatural

1. of, relating to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.

2. direct influence or action of a God/deity on earthly affairs.

Going by the illusion, sold to these folks by Chris Oyakhilome, and if they really want to prove if Yahweh does anything close to "supernatural", the following should be their realities:

#1. They will get services and goods without paying for them
#2. They will work 100hrs and not be tired
#3. They will fly without aircraft, snap fingers and get money etc
#4. They will know cure for cancer without research
#5. They will have experience without observation/knowledge
#6. They will know things without learning
#7. They will never be ill or dead

Pathetically, they believe these illusions with ridiculous assurance, that will daze an in-patient at mental homes.

#epihanic

Dreamwaker:
Oga I'm talking about Jesus Christ here

Dreamwaker:
All these pastors prophecies are demonic. In the bible, the only prophecies I can remember by Jesus Christ is the betrayal by Judas Iscariot and when he told one of the apostles about making them fishers of men if they following him. He never prophecized the death of anyone. Even when Jesus prophesized the betrayal by Judas, he didn't say he will die, he just said "one of you will betray me".
.

Ubenedictus:
my dear this thing you are doing is called shifting the goal post and it doesn't lead to a profitable discussion.

first you said God is not daft and must differentiate relatives and brothers, I replied that it is OK in Semitic culture to call kinsmen brothers,
then you shifted and said they are only called brothers in a general not a specific sense, I clearly showed you that they are called brothers even in a specific sense and now you are shifting to discuss context.

OK let us see context.
King James Bible
Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother
called Mary? and his BRETHREN James, and Joses, and
Simon, and Judas?

here is gen 14:14-16
And when Abram heard that his brother was
taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born
in his own house, three hundred and eighteen,
and pursued them unto Dan.
And he divided himself against them, he and
his servants, by night, and smote them, and
pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left
hand of Damascus.
And he brought back all the goods, and also
brought again his brother Lot,

in Matthew they said,is this not the Carpenter's son, is his mother not Mary, are his brothers not.... and in genesis it says Abraham s brother was taken captive, both are specific cases, the context doesn't state if they were blood brothers, or relatives and no Christian of repute ever imagined for the first 1700 years of Christianity that those two passages were about blood brothers.

if you feel confident in holding an opinion that crept into Christendom 350 years ago then I wish you the best just remember that the Bible also warns about teaching that creep in during the end times

BluntBoy:
You are being slippery. Just answer a simple question:

Do you tithe the Abraham way or the way of the Law of Moses?

BluntBoy:
Now, lastly, since you agree that Abraham tithed beyond agro produce, why are you making a case for God? You claim tithe was food because majority of the Jews were farmers.

Since Abraham had animals, why was it never recorded that he tithed out of these properties?

When the kingdom was established under Saul, how come it was never recorded later in Nehemiah that the Jews tithed money or gold? Nehemiah explicitly mentioned the storehouse which showed that long after Saul and David and the wealthy Solomon, tithes were still food.

BluntBoy:
God's original plan was to make the Jews priests. They messed up and the Levites were gifted

God sent Jesus to actualize his original plan by dying so that we may be reconciled and to share in His priesthood. Jews were not all priests at the time of the Law but the death of Christ made them priests who believed in Him, whether they be Jews or Gentiles

. . Do you think they had no properties before God chose them?

If beds and plates are your own excuse for believing that priests received money, then, I can only shake my head because you have rendered me absolutely speechless. I don't suppose you think that the priests bought the snuffles and bowls by themselves.

I want you to shoot yourself in the foot by answering if what Abraham tithed was agro produce. So, don't be angry that I will be answering your question with a question: "Did Abraham tithe agro produce

MrPristine:
Now you contradict yourself, Malachi 3:10 that you are referring to here was talking about tithes under the law which you claim is not the type you are practising. As we all know Christians are not under the law and it's wrong for any preacher to try to subject Christians to the law as tithe preachers do.

traeces:
Job, Abraham, Isaac, Moses, David, Elijah, Elisha, down till Jesus were not Christians so if heaven is for only Christians, where will these lot spend eternity?
Please thoughts should be Bible-based

MuttleyLaff:
I concur with you that the statement is wrong

Wrong. The church is not a people
Wrong, the church is not a gathering

Wrong, the church is not a and/or the place where God is worshiped

MrPristine:
Stop this glaring lie. Tithing is preached according to the law in most Nigerian churches and that is why it is preached as mandatory. The Abrahamic tithe and Jacobs conditional promise to tithe that you are appealing to were both voluntary. It is only the law tithe that was made mandatory and that is what you and other dishonest preachers preach.

BluntBoy:
First of all, Jews were not all priests. God had the plan but they messed up by worshipping the golden calf and the Levites got the honor for staying on the side of God.

Second, money was used with a condition attached to it because God wanted tithes to be land-based. And moreover, the tithes which could be redeemed with money was not the ones to be given to the Levites. Moreover, the money was soon to be used to buy what the owner desired in his heart - which was again food

Third, the priests had their clothing specially woven. It is hard to believe that you would think to use that as an excuse to justify paying money as tithes. There were even instructions on how they were to be made

And please, stop lying about your sort of tithing existing before the law. We all know that Abraham's tithes were conditional and voluntary. )

hulk616:
Just 1 not many

BluntBoy:
Sorry, no parallel. Everyone who has been reconciled with Christ shares in His eternal priesthood. So, a true believer in Christ is a priest and Christ is His High Priest

Pastors are shepherds. Paul believed that they should make a living (not wealth) from the work of God that they did

What is "make a living". It means to have basic necessities:[b]But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. (1 Timothy 6:

It was one reason why tithes were food. Tithes was a food program instituted to cater for the Levites, and by extension the priest, and then the poor. Another reason was because man could not boast of being in direct production of food. He depended on God for rain and sun and a good harvest. If tithe was money, man would not appreciate God as much as he would if tithes were factors that he has limited mastery over.

Lastly, supposing pastors are priests, then they shouldn't be collecting tithes directly. The gateman (an equivalent of a Levite) should gather the tithes and take tenth of the tithes (one percent) to the storehouse for the use of the priests

nicemuyoo:
A place is not a congregation either. A congregation means a collection of living people believers.
The word church should correctly read congregation or assemble of believers .
Church is from the word kirk a pagan building of idol worship. The word church is a pagan idol place of worship. Pls read my posting on congregation vs church.

Ubenedictus:
not really,

the term brother is also used specifically to refer to a relative who isn't a blood brother.

here is: gen 14:14-16
And when Abram heard that his brother was
taken captive. . .

BluntBoy:
So, your pastors are equivalent of the priests of old?

BluntBoy:
Tithe is not given to God. The Bible said God gave it to the Levites:

“To the Levites I have given every tithe in Israel for an inheritance, in return for their service that they do, their service in the tent of meeting" (Numbers 18:21)

One of the services for which the Levites receive tithes is taking care of the temple. I believe you know that these involve tasks of cleaning. I have not heard of pastors sweeping the inside of the church building, yet they earnestly earn tithes.

nicemuyoo:
It is not a building. Definately not! There were no congregation buildings , they just meet at people's house like fellowship centres. It could be anywhere.
Any means to classify congregation a collection of believers to be a physical building a man made structure is a big fat lie!!

CHARLOE:
Admin illustration u say? Lol, so d tithe they collect in d name of priest n high priest is an illustrative or literal collection? Stop chasing shadows my friend, free urself from fear n bondage n begin to use ur God-given brain to think!

Ubenedictus:
God is certainly not daft, nobody said he was...

but God used Semitic people - Jews in writing the Bible and for Jews, cousin, brothers, relatives and kinsmen can all be called "brothers" without distinction and that can be seen though out the Bible... the same thing will happen if God used Nigerians in writing the Bible... we too sometimes call relatives brothers.

in case you don't know the Bible didn't fall from heaven, God used men in writing it under the inspiration of the holy spirit and those men wrote according to their cultures and understanding. and it is normal that Jews call their kinsmen brothers, this appears severally in scriptures

MuttleyLaff:
I concur with you that the statement is wrong

Wrong. The church is not a people
Wrong, the church is not a gathering

Wrong, the church is not a and/or the place where God is worshiped





But if I tarry long,
that thou may know how it is expedient to behave thyself in the house of God,
which is the congregation {Gr. ekklesia – called out ones} of the living God,
the pillar and base of the truth.
- 1 Timothy 3:15 Jubilee Bible 2000

For all it's worth, it's necessary and important to be familiar with this word "church"
because as we start to read about or know things done in the past,
we can begin to learn from them, learn a thing or two, would have become wiser and wise enough to make re-adjustments, where if applicable, to our theology

To start with and as a matter of fact, "ekklesia" is the proper and correct noun word for believers called out and/or gathering together, which the word "church", as it is, presently or currently represents.

"Ekklesia" actually, is a Greek word,
which in Athens and in most Greek poleis (i.e. Greek cities or states) means an assembly of demo
(i.e. yes, demo, is Greek for people, as like the demo in democracy)

"Ekklesia" is an assembly of summoned free people or gathering of those summoned.
The word is derived from “ekkletos” meaning summoned and “ekkaleom” meaning to summon or call out.

"Ekklesia" in Strong's Greek Concordance, is defined as "an assembly, congregation, the whole body of Christian believers"
and says it’s formed from a compound of "ek" which means "out of or out from and to" and a derivative of "kaleo" which means "to call or a calling"

"Ekkletoi" refers to the called-out inhabitants or citizens of Athens or any of the Greek poleis, assembled together, as a result of a call out request done by a herald, announcer or town crier.

"Ekklesia" appears 114 times in the NT.
It first appeared in Matthew 16:180,
and that's where it was first mentioned and first used by none other than Jesus
Now here's a sense of biblical déjà vu repeating itself , Eve out of Adam, Israelites out of Egypt etc
and this is, God, again, in the person of Jesus Christ doing a "call out from... and to assembly"

"Ekklesia" as far back in the Old Testament wilderness, has always been an assembly or congregation of called-out people
(i.e. Acts 7:38 is referring to the congregation in Deuteronomy 9:10)
and it's no different in the original Greek New Testament whether in non-secular and secular capacities
(i.e. Matthew 16:18, Acts 7:38 non-secular and Acts 19:32, 39 and 41 for secular)
Notice in Acts 19:32, 39 and 41, that "ekklesia" is used three times, for people not connected with religious or christian matters, assembling or gathering together.

This so far, is showing that, "ekklesia" represents something totally different to what we've commonly perceived what "church" is.

Also, the true meaning, import or connotation of "ekklesia" is lost or eroded when it is used or translated to/as "church"

"Ekklesia" isn't about physical structures, and the Greeks; originators of the word, never referred it, to be a building or place of worship, so at least Freeze got something right

At this juncture, some might say, all this etymology stuff is bunkum and time wasting, it's nitpicking over minute details, and that it's pedantic fault-finding or say church or ekklesia, whatever the noun used, it doesn't matter.
Others like damosky12, delighting in their ignorance(s), could say, church or ekklesia, it makes no difference,
it's much ado about nothing and so what's the big deal.

Well, FYI, in 1526 AD, William Tyndale's New Testament, was the first New Testament printed in the English Language
and the fact about this translation, is that, not a single occurrence of the word "church" is found used for congregation in it.

William Tyndale did however, use the word "church" twice in Acts 14:13 and Acts 19:37 for something else.
It was in reference to pagan Temples; "ekklesia" wasn't used in either of those verses mentioned.

Then Iupiters Preste which dwelt before their cite brought oxe and garlondes vnto the churche porche and wolde have done sacrifise with the people
- Acts 14:13 William Tyndale.

Zeus' temple was at the entrance to the city. The priest of the god Zeus brought bulls with flowery wreaths around their necks to the temple gates. The priest and the crowd wanted to offer a sacrifice [to Paul and Barnabas].
- Acts 14:13 GOD'S WORD® Translation.

For you have brought here these men, who are neither robbers of temples, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess.
- Acts 19:37 King James 2000 Bible

For ye have brought hyther these me whiche are nether robbers of churches nor yet despisers of youre goddes.
- Acts 19:37 William Tyndale.

Tyndale recognised, "ecclesia or ekklesia" to be congregacion or congregation of "called out people" who are believers
and that churches were buildings for religious practices or purposes, and this includes Jewish or pagan temples.

So, in this first English New Testament translation print, congregation originally was in the place where "church" is presently or currently found in most English translations.

In the beginning, building(s) was what "church" was original identified as,
but now, it's obvious and no denying that, "church" is prevalently also called or known as the body of Christ.
Examples of other churches, we have, as of today are:
The Church of Scientology, Church of Wicca, The National Church of Bey (i.e. Beyonce), Church of Satan,
The Sunday Assembly (i.e. an atheist church), The Church of Humanity etcetera.

1557 AD was the first time "ekklesia" was translated as "church" by William Whittingham in the Geneva New Testament produced, subsequent bible translations, KJV included, began having "church" used to describe people and their place of congregation or place of meetings too
From then to the present, the norm now is, "church" erroneously is the physical structure and people assembling together
(i.e. Matthew 16:18, Acts 14:23, James 5:14)

In the New Testament, we are used to knowing synagogue also to be an equivalent name of the building used for assembling in or congregating in, but the Greek word "sunagogé" means "coming together" and could imply a meeting (i.e. gathering together) rather than a building (i.e. Acts 13:43, James 2:2);
so synagogues were simply gatherings that took place outdoors or in people’s houses or courtyards
(i.e. refer to 2 Thessalonians 2:1 or Hebrews 10:25 Greek Text Analysis for more details)
TB Joshua’s set-up, calls itself synagogue,
but then for good measure, appends the word "church", making it: The Synagogue, Church Of All Nations (i.e. SCOAN)

The English word "church" on it's self, actually has pagan origins.
It's a derivation from the Old English word cir(i)ce, cyr(i)ce, related to the Anglo Saxon circay, kirk in Scottish, the Latin circus/circulous, Dutch kerk, or German Kirche.
These words all have associations with "gathering in circles"
and researches showed that most pagan religions meetings have worshippers/attendees gathered together round in prayer circles.

This information gives some insight into Tyndales' understanding
and the reason why he selected the word "Church" to refer to buildings; pagan temple(s) included
and used congregacion (i.e. congregation) to mean "ekklesia"

Why was a totally unrelated word to ekklesia, substituted for ekklesia? (i.e. like in Job 14:4)

As so far noticed, the word "Church" has varied origins and different meanings to what we're accustomed to,
but the word in Latin for ekklesia is also ekklesia,
so, if Latin in the absence of a proper word, managed to retain the word ekklesia,
why couldn't the "called out ones" who translated, retain it too?

In light of all these information, why the word "church", is falsely used in place of Christ's ekklesia leaves one literally open-mouthed
No doubt, there are strong indications of foul-play somewhere down the history lanes of church, as "church" DOESN'T COME from the original Koine Greek word ekklesia.

As regards the chequered and real truth about ""Church"; where did it come from and where is it headed?”, lack of space and time doesn't permit elaborating, hence these following bullet points:

• Adam & Eve in Eden fast forward to Matthew 16:18 and Acts 2:41
• Roman Emperors Constantine and Licinius' Edict of Milan in AD 313 which established a policy of religious freedom for all.
(i.e. a proclamation that permanently legalised Christianity in the Roman Empire)
• Christianity becoming the official religion of the Roman Empire.
• the sell-out and/or shady deal(s)(e.g. "Church" and State collaboration under Constantine)
• The regularisation and formation of the Roman Catholic Church (i.e. RCC)
• Roman Empire's adoption of RCC as "official" church during Constantine's reign
• The supremacy of the Roman bishop (i.e. the papacy) created/aided with the support of the Roman emperors (i.e. Constantine and his successors)
• Constantine calling the First Council of Nicaea in AD 325, in an attempt to unify Christianity when doctrinal disputes arose
(e.g. Arianism, doctrines named after Arius, a teacher in the early 4th century A.D) and presiding over this first ecumenical church council
• the exploits of the apostles, all charged up in their faith, preaching the Gospel and like Jesus willing to die horrible deaths because of it.
• The apostolic period (i.e. including The "patristic writings'') - about contemporaries of the apostles like Linus, mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:21, and who became the bishop of Rome after Peter was martyred
• the ante-Nicene (i.e. before Nicaea) period - about the likes of Ignatius and his "ekklesia katholicos" phrase, he was a disciple of the apostle John
• the post-Nicene "church" period - about the likes of Augustine, bishop of Hippo, who is often called the father of the [Roman Catholic] Church because of his great work in Church doctrine
• The term "Roman Catholic" defined by Emperor Theodosius on February 27th, 380 in the Theodosian Code.
In that document, he referred to those who hold to the "religion which was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter"
as "Roman Catholic Christians" and gave them the official sanction of the empire
• the first canon (i.e. Muratorian Canon), the progressive acceptance of other books as canonical and have them make up the 66 books of the bible
• The fall of the Roman Empire in AD 476 and the rise of the Roman Catholic Church
• the Pontifex Maximus; the highest office in the state religion of ancient Rome and at the collapse of the Roman Empire, RCC popes taking on this title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors
• the tragic compromise of believers with the introduction of pagan religions and assimilation of paganism influences
(i.e. the Romanization and paganization of Christianity and the "Christianization" of pagan beliefs)
• Apostolic succession and Pope Gregory in AD 590, upon assuming office denying any responsibility or support for any ambition to the throne of Peter
• "Church" and State fully merged as the Holy Roman Empire
• Subsequent popes exercising authority over kings and emperors, taking on imperial powers along with ecclesiastical authority (e.g. St Leo III)
• the Filioque clause/Filioque controversy and/or The Great Schism
• John Wycliffe of England, John Huss of Czechoslovakia, and John of Wessel in Germany
• Protestant Reformation; division between the Catholic Church and Protestantism over interpretation of Biblical Testaments.
• The Edict of Worms (i.e. the Holy Roman Empire, Charles V and the Pope banning all writings of Martin Luther and labelling him a heretic and enemy of the state) etc
• Calvinism (i.e. named after French reformer and theologian John Calvin, he was Martin Luther's successor during the Protestant Reformation)
• The Edict of Nantes, The Edict of Restitution.
• King Henry VIII taking over jurisdiction of the Church, after kicking RCC out of England.
• Various political and ulterior motives
(e.g. translators forbidden by King James' official order from replacing the Greek word "ekklesia" with "congregation" (i.e. the true interpretation)
Compare Psalms 22:22 with Hebrews 2:12 for more details on this, bibles translated to fit the politics or traditions of men etc)
• Evangelicalism, Revivalism, Pentecostalism, Christian science, the Charismatic Movement, Mormonism/the Latter Day Saint movement, Word of Faith movement etc
• Institutional/organised church(es); licensed or incorporated as businesses/charities etc (i.e. to gain non-profit tax-exempt status)
• Church(es) under the jurisdiction of man (e.g. unincorporated charities/church(es), unregistered/registered church(es) etc)
• details of corrupted teachings or doctrines.
• Etcetera, etcetera


As for, "Church" where did the word come from and where is it heading? Proper?
Well the word "Church", in letter and/or substance, clearly metamorphosed from "ekklesia" and as it currently stands, those/anyone called "Church" today are seemingly apostate(s) heading towards just deserts.
"Church" will be getting its divine comeuppance some point at the end.

---

1st century AD - ekklēsia founded on the teachings of Jesus
2nd century AD - Christians already denouncing teachings seen as heresies, e.g Gnosticism, Montanism etc
4th century AD - ekklēsia transformed, church evolves, finally legalized and then promoted by Emperors Constantine and Theodosius I as the state church of the Roman Empire
11th century AD - Church within the Roman Empire excommunicated each other - West (i.e. Rome) and the East (i.e. Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria) officially excluded each other
16th century AD - Lutheran Church was founded by Martin Luther
16th century AD - Protestant Reformation
16th century AD - The Presbyterian denomination began by John Knox who was dissatisfied with Anglicanism
16th century AD - Anglicanism (i.e. Church of England) founded by King Henry VIII
17th century AD - The Baptist church launched by John Smyth in Amsterdam, Holland.
18th century AD - The Methodist church launched by John and Charles Wesley in England
18th century AD - The Salvation Army launched by William Booth, who quit the Anglicans, and then the Methodists to set up his own version of Christianity.
19th century AD - The Jehovah's Witness Church developed by Charles Russell.
19th century AD - The Christian Scientist religion began by Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy, centered around an outright denial of Original Sin and its effects
19th century AD - Ballinger Booth, the son of William Booth, quit The Salvation Army and started his own church
19th century AD to date - The Seventh-Day Adventists, Apostolic Faith, Foursquare Apostolic Church, K&C, CAC, CCC, RCCG, MFM, Winners Chapel, KICC, BLW/Christ Embassy, SCOAN,
and various other Pentecostal Churches etc are among the hundreds of new churches founded by men within the past 200 years or so.

Condom4Dick:
All the millions that have given the said life to Christ how has it helped the country?