₦airaland Forum

princeloba:
it is normal for yorubas to be few in catholic church due to the fact that most of the churches in Nigeria is dominated by one ethnic group or the others base on the origin of the church, for instance you hardly see igbos in anglican church and they also few in baptist, celestial mentions but a few,those found in cherubim and seraphim has their own version like eternal c&s church.

make proper enquiries about the Igbos and Anglican Church.

cyrilamx:
Sir get ur facts well. The bishop can closed down the adoration ministry. The school is sti a Catholic school and everything mbaka owns is for the church though he has free hand in running it. When he dies, the church buries him and all his property even his personal bank account is taken over by the church. That what the Canon law says. As an ex Religious, I know muc about the Catholic Church. Everything thing a Catholic priests dies like deliverance ministry is at the discretion of the bishop. They scrutinise it to ensure it real and not fraudulent...once I strays from Catholic way, it closed down and the priest sanctions.

So you are inputting that Ede's Madonna University, Osisatec and Caritas are owned by the Catholic Church by proxy. ....aschools governed by Nigerian laws, registered under the name of his ministry and ministry with trustees that doesn't in life the Catholic Church will be handed over by fiat of a so called cannon law.


At whose discretion is Ede runnning his ministry that he has never gone on transfer in the last twenty years.

kateskitty:
Ok young man, I read at the bold and believe me, baptizing a child seems to be a NO NO from your personal perspective.
Now I'm not trying to convince you but look at it from another perspective.

Have you seen very, I mean very rich parents who open bank accounts or buy properties in their children's name?
If you haven't, I have seen lots of rich parents open bank accounts for children as old as 2years.
If a parent can open an account for a child who doesn't know what money is but just to give that child a sense of security for the future in case something bad happen to the parents, don't you think one of the best things​ a parent can give a child is Jesus by getting him or her baptized. Just in case something bad happen to the child, his soul will not be lost.

If you think opening a bank account for a child is OK, then who are you to deny the child Jesus through baptism.

Bro, you can keep any amount you like in the name of a child and then wait for him too come of age to start making the use stored money. .......when you are baptized, you receive a gift of the Holy Spirit which you are expected to put to use. ....a child can't operate the gift of the Holy Spirit.


The Bible says , unless a man be born of water and the spirit ....the key word is man not baby ...no baby will miss returning to their maker because of baptism ....wherever Abraham, Moses , Elijah, etc went to is not hell ......paradise . .......authority is for the believer Nd the believer is not a baby but a man of reason .......the whole world is waiting for the manifestation of the sons not baby.........John never baptized an infant, the apostles never did, Jesus , our ultimate guide and example never did.

Every baptized,first received Jesus, received the gospel, personally based on conviction .......the faith of parents covers a child until he or she comes of age .....Jesus fate was tied to that of his parents until he came of age and was able to hold his own....,they took him in all his weak state from one hideout to another......they could have baptized him as infant to prepare him for return since his life was at a stake.


The key word in peters message is , repent and be baptized that he receive the gift of, the Holy Spirit .....you can repent on somebody's behalf if you can't eat and he get satisfied....he has to do his repenting for himself.


As quickly as a child is able to reason and comprehend, he can go for baptism. ....not a baby ....it is not a dormant activity, it is action packed because it announces you to your world and your ministry like that of Jesus is established.

nuelsylves:
On Mark 16:17, My problem with guys is that you only read passages of the Bible that suits your ideology. Again I'm begging you go and study 1Corinthians 14, please the whole of the chapter 14. Except if Corinthians is not part of your Bible.

1 Corinthians 14:22 says: 'So then, the gift of speaking in strange tongues is proof for unbelievers, not for believers, while the gift of proclaiming God's message is proof for believers, not for unbelievers.'
Even Christ said that he came for the sinners so that they will be saved.
All the signs and wonders performed by Christ is for the unbelievers to see and believe in him and God who sent him. AGAIN STUDY 1CORINTHIANS 14 PLEASE.

On your last point about children: GNT and NIV Lk18:15 used the word "some people brought their babies....." While KJV used the word" And they brought unto him also infants..."

O'boy study your Bible and understand it. Bible is to be studied "letter by letter, line by line, lesson by lesson."

It is a proof for unbelievers that you are a believer......Jesus said , these signs shall but you believe that an epistle to Corinthians is more sacred than the very words of Jesus....study the mark, it is probably in red in your bible.

kelly72:
Maybe some of those Oyinbo priests and even their black black counterparts do the pedophilic acts because they are celibates as they are unable to employ their vows in defeating the desires of the flesh. There is the part of an individual that always reminds one of his humanity and sometimes it occurs negatively. Catholic priests who engage in such acts must continue to use the exit door.

Then I must ask you, if Catholic priests who have no legitimate opportunity for sex are committing illicit sex because of their lack, what reason can your daddies and general overseas give for doing the same, given that they are all married?

There can never be any reason for the justification of sexually abusing a child male or female, regardless if you are celibate or not . Raping an adult should also never be justified. Never any reason at all, as no reason is good enough

If so called men of God have decided to commit adultery in a society where its almost encouraged to do so, and also seen as the norm, that's between them and their congregation. To condone it or to sanction such persons.
Knowing Bible verses more than others doesn't mean you obey the Bible more than others.

Nodogragra4me:
Bro, you can keep any amount you like in the name of a child and then wait for him too come of age to start making the use stored money. .......when you are baptized, you receive a gift of the Holy Spirit which you are expected to put to use. ....a child can't operate the gift of the Holy Spirit.


The Bible says , unless a man be born of water and the spirit ....the key word is man not baby ...no baby will miss returning to their maker because of baptism ....wherever Abraham, Moses , Elijah, etc went to is not hell ......paradise . .......authority is for the believer Nd the believer is not a baby but a man of reason .......the whole world is waiting for the manifestation of the sons not baby.........John never baptized an infant, the apostles never did, Jesus , our ultimate guide and example never did.

Every baptized,first received Jesus, received the gospel, personally based on conviction .......the faith of parents covers a child until he or she comes of age .....Jesus fate was tied to that of his parents until he came of age and was able to hold his own....,they took him in all his weak state from one hideout to another......they could have baptized him as infant to prepare him for return since his life was at a stake.


The key word in peters message is , repent and be baptized that he receive the gift of, the Holy Spirit .....you can repent on somebody's behalf if you can't eat and he get satisfied....he has to do his repenting for himself.


As quickly as a child is able to reason and comprehend, he can go for baptism. ....not a baby ....it is not a dormant activity, it is action packed because it announces you to your world and your ministry like that of Jesus is established.

I agreed with you,,,, baptism shouldn't be done to a child

todaynewsreview:
There has been series of argument among folks over the few numbers of Roman Catholic members among the Yorubas. It is a common scenario seeing many Yorubas in denominations like The Redeemed Christian Church of God, Mountain of Fire, Living Faith, "White Garment Group of Churches", CAC, among others and even a good numbers among the Anglicans who are even Priests but the main subject of concern is why are there very few Roman Catholics or Revd Fathers of Yorubas?

If you know any Revd Father that is a Yoruba, you may reference him.

I implore oga Seun and lalasticlala to push this thread to front page for more responses.

Thanks.

The Portuguese came from South south nd penetrated the East.

The British (Anglican) came through Lagos and penetrated the whole country.

Lagos is a separate Colony
While there's Northern and Southern Protectorates
The mistake of amalgamation caused this question.

The Yorubas are liberal and forward thinking...That's why they actually founded their own Pentecostals way before the easterners.


Those denominations you listed are mostly Indigenous Pentecostals.. There's Assemblies of God and Lord Chosen ministry in the East as well and even their branches in the West are predominantly flooded with Easterners.

Nodogragra4me:
It is a proof for unbelievers that you are a believer......Jesus said , these signs shall but you believe that an epistle to Corinthians is more sacred than the very words of Jesus....study the mark, it is probably in red in your bible.

God have mercy on us. So some part of the Bible are more sacred than others? Nawaoo! SMH!

Anyway since your church doesn't consider Corinthians as sacred part of the Bible, let me quote John to explain to you that signs and wonders are proof for unbelievers, not for believers.

In John 4:48 "Jesus said to him, “None of you will ever believe unless you see miracles and wonders.”"

Also remember Jesus's encounter with Nathaniel in John1:43-51. At first when Philips told Nathaniel that he has seen the Messiah, he didn't believe saying in verse 46, “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” but when Jesus performed signs and wonders to him by telling him in verse 48 “I saw you when you were under the fig tree before Philip called you.” Nathaniel believeed immediately saying in verse 49, “you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” but Jesus replied him back in verse 50 saying “You believe just because I told you I saw you when you were under the fig tree"

I believe these two instances in John where Jesus himself declared that signs and wonders are proof for unbelievers to believe is enough to convince you. Except if Gospel of St. John is not also among the books you considered more sacred than others. For we Catholics, every single passages of the Bible from GENESIS through St. Paul's FIRST LETTER TO THE CORINTHIANS to REVELATION are all sacred. They're all God's words. Stop allowing those pastors who always interpret the Bible in a way that suits their personal agenda to mislead you.

Proudly Catholic!

Nodogragra4me:
Bro, you can keep any amount you like in the name of a child and then wait for him too come of age to start making the use stored money. .......when you are baptized, you receive a gift of the Holy Spirit which you are expected to put to use. ....a child can't operate the gift of the Holy Spirit.


The Bible says , unless a man be born of water and the spirit ....the key word is man not baby ...no baby will miss returning to their maker because of baptism ....wherever Abraham, Moses , Elijah, etc went to is not hell ......paradise . .......authority is for the believer Nd the believer is not a baby but a man of reason .......the whole world is waiting for the manifestation of the sons not baby.........John never baptized an infant, the apostles never did, Jesus , our ultimate guide and example never did.

Every baptized,first received Jesus, received the gospel, personally based on conviction .......the faith of parents covers a child until he or she comes of age .....Jesus fate was tied to that of his parents until he came of age and was able to hold his own....,they took him in all his weak state from one hideout to another......they could have baptized him as infant to prepare him for return since his life was at a stake.


The key word in peters message is , repent and be baptized that he receive the gift of, the Holy Spirit .....you can repent on somebody's behalf if you can't eat and he get satisfied....he has to do his repenting for himself.


As quickly as a child is able to reason and comprehend, he can go for baptism. ....not a baby ....it is not a dormant activity, it is action packed because it announces you to your world and your ministry like that of Jesus is established.

Bro! I'm not trying to convince you on infant baptism o, because everyone is entitled to his or her personal opinion.

But I will like to highlight on your method of interpreting the Bible.

1. You said the Bible uses the key words "unless a MAN be born of water and spirit...," going by your interpretation, that keyword 'MAN' shouldn't also be apply to a WOMAN because a definition of a MAN is an adult male not an adult female.

2. Using your exact word, "Jesus, our ultimate guide and example never did." But it wasn't recorded anywhere in the Bible that Jesus baptised anyone by himself.

3. Have you read in any part of the Bible that Jesus' parents was baptised? If they wasn't baptised, how could they have gotten Jesus be baptised at infant.

Again you said "the faith of a parents covers a child" that's a fact and I agreed with you. I also believed that you will agree with me that faith is a condition for baptism, and that baptism itself is not a demonstration of faith by the person baptised. Then the question can be asked, Whose faith is required? If we look now at the relevant biblical teaching, we will see that the faith of parents fully suffices for the baptism of their children.

Genesis told us that After Abraham exercised faith in God’s covenant promises (Gen. 15:6), the Lord added the rite of circumcision to the covenant arrangement (Gen. 17:9–14). He received “the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he [already] had while uncircumcised” (Rom. 4:11). Because Abraham was righteous (his sins were forgiven) as the result of his faith, he was circumcised as a sign given by God that sealed that righteousness. Physical, outward circumcision signified spiritual, inward cleansing of the heart (Ezek. 44:7; Rom. 2:28–29), a spiritual reality for Abraham and all his true, believing descendants.
Not only Abraham, but all males in his household, were to be circumcised. Henceforth, all males were to be circumcised as eight-day-old infants, throughout the generations of the covenant community (Gen. 17:12–13). Circumcision marked one’s entrance into the covenant community; without it, one was to be “cut off from his people” (vs. 14).

So we have seen, that circumcision under the Abrahamic covenant was applied to infants on the basis of parental faith (Gen. 17; Rom. 4:11). Since we today are part of that covenant through faith in Christ, the new sign of the covenant, water baptism, should likewise be applied to infants on the basis of parental faith. This conclusion is confirmed by the accounts in the book of Acts which reveal that whole households were commonly baptized on the basis of the faith of the head of the household.
The most detailed and informative account is that of the Philippian jailer (Acts 16:30–34). “Believe in the Lord Jesus,” he was told, “and you shall be saved, you and your household” (vs. 31; cf. 11:14). Accordingly, the gospel was preached “to him together with all who were in his house” (vs. 32). In response, he “believed in God with his whole household” (vs. 34), whereupon “he was baptized, he and all his household” (vs. 33).
The key word in this passage is “with.” It signifies accompaniment. When Luke says that the jailer heard the gospel and believed with his household, the implication is that everyone in his household went along with him. Any older household members, such as his wife, evidently became believers, too. But any young children went along with their father, following his lead with whatever limited understanding that they had.
This crucial distinction between “with” and “and” (regrettably obscured by some translations) is clear in similar passages in Acts: 1:14; 3:4; 4:27; 5:1; 10:2; 14:13; 15:22; 21:5. In each case, “with” introduces those who follow the lead of others and join with them in their activity, however actively or passively. In Acts 21:5, for example, Paul is escorted to the harbor by all the men in the church at Tyre, “with wives and children,” which no doubt included a number of small infants.
In the household baptism passages, the head of the house always believes “with” his household, but he and they are baptized. Just as the heads of households escorted Paul to the harbor “with” infants who were only passive participants, so also heads of households were baptized “with” whatever infants were in their families.

To conclude; if we look carefully at the teaching of Scripture, we see that the sign of the covenant was applied to infants prior to Christ, and presumably continued to be applied to them when Jesus changed it to baptism. And when we look closely at the household baptisms described in Acts, there can be little doubt but that infants were commonly baptized in the apostolic church. They were baptized then, and they should be baptized now, on the basis of God’s promise to bless the children of believers. The faith of a parent qualifies a child to be baptized and raised as a disciple of Jesus. He welcomed them into his kingdom, and so should we.

murmee:
What about the Anglican church? You are forgetting that the Anglicans and Methodist founded most of the Primary and Secondary schools in the South West after Independence. 6 out of 10 educated adult/middle age/old Yoruba person attended one of those schools. I am proudly one of them.

the Baptist owns most schools sir. I knw the Anglican also have

ALAYORMII:
The same reason you hardly see a northerner being Catholic

Do u really knw what u r sayin? North has a lot of Catholics ooo.... I'm from Adamawa State, come n see for ur self.

murphyibiam15:
low lifer
the catholics wrote the Bible

Suoooo, high lifer kudos.

BabaCommander:
Thankfully, you didn't mention holy Mary and the hundred of thousand others perpetually pleading for you. I think it's Roman Catholics that should be urged to get a bible and read it.

catholics actually compiled what u call the bible and gave it to all, so they already have bibles and read it.

BabaCommander:
Funny how u people twist and turn every issue...just like liars. I said get a bible and read it. The Romans didn't write the scripture, they only corrupted it with their pagan rituals. The English protestants translated the bible to exposed Roman Catholic idolatory. Need i say that the practised con men renamed their idols with the names of apostles and their images. Now go and tell your Father confessor what i said.

Actually it was d catholic that gave u a bible, they chose d books and put them there.

and yet Nigerian doctors and priests refuse to go back to their villages to upgrade them. everyone wan go Lagos or Abuja or get visa to UK US OR SOUTH AFRICA

nuelsylves:
God have mercy on us. So some part of the Bible are more sacred than others? Nawaoo! SMH!

Anyway since your church doesn't consider Corinthians as sacred part of the Bible, let me quote John to explain to you that signs and wonders are proof for unbelievers, not for believers.

In John 4:48 "Jesus said to him, “None of you will ever believe unless you see miracles and wonders.”"

Also remember Jesus's encounter with Nathaniel in John1:43-51. At first when Philips told Nathaniel that he has seen the Messiah, he didn't believe saying in verse 46, “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” but when Jesus performed signs and wonders to him by telling him in verse 48 “I saw you when you were under the fig tree before Philip called you.” Nathaniel believeed immediately saying in verse 49, “you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” but Jesus replied him back in verse 50 saying “You believe just because I told you I saw you when you were under the fig tree"

I believe these two instances in John where Jesus himself declared that signs and wonders are proof for unbelievers to believe is enough to convince you. Except if Gospel of St. John is not also among the books you considered more sacred than others. For we Catholics, every single passages of the Bible from GENESIS through St. Paul's FIRST LETTER TO THE CORINTHIANS to REVELATION are all sacred. They're all God's words. Stop allowing those pastors who always interpret the Bible in a way that suits their personal agenda to mislead you.

Proudly Catholic!

Your understanding of the Bible is very terrible. Firstly, I never mentioned that book of Corinthians is not sacred or important; I only ask you if between the words of our Lord and Paul which is more weighty. Jesus said in Mark, personally, that these signs shall follow them that believe and he itemized the signs that will proof to anyone that you are a believer in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Now, in the Corinth you have cited, Paul made it clear through his statement that the church at Corinth did ALL speak in tongue when he said, thank God, I do speak in tongue more than you all.....in other words, they do speak in tongue for him to say he speaks more than them all.


The issue at Corinth was the abuse of tongue. That was while the epistle was necessary. To let them know that the gift was not to be use as a kind of competition within the church and amongst themselves. .and to explain to those young Christian that tongue is not end in itself but a means ......you are speaking the language of heaven but you must understand and be able to interpret it so others know what you are doing ..........every epistle is written to address a wrong or abuse amongst the new convert. ......every believer must have the gift of tongue because every believer must have the baptism of the Holy Spirit which is evidenced or proofed by speaking in tongue........the day of Pentecost is a must for every believer........Peter said, Repent and be baptized so that ye receives the gift of the Holy Spirit........that is the package of being baptized.

Matt 28:19 Jesus, himself said, go into all nations TEACHING THEM ......a baby can't be taught ..........then baptizing them in the name of the father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit.


The gospel of John 4 you quoted has nothing to do with our discussion........our subject matter is in infant baptism.....a baby cannot recognize miracle and therefore can't be convinced. .....your identity card as a be,bier in the name of Jesus as prescribed by no less a person but Jesus in Mark is and remains: these signs shall follow them that believe in my name........it is the only proof to anyone that you are a Christian and not a followers of the narrowness of the mind of your rev Fr.......first to do e no dey pain

All the apostles including Paul you have quoted spake in tongues.....why. Jesus said it is the recognized ID CARD of a believer. Mark 16:17

Every believer is a miracle worker. Not just pastors or your church Catholic Church, mbaka and ebube munso........we are co labourers with God and God does nothing but miracles.....the ministry of Jesus from birth to death is all miracle......again it is stated by Jesus Christ in Mark 16:17

Miracle and tongue is not a special gift to Mbaka and Ede and Munso......everyone of us has the gift if we were baptized in water and not sprinkled water on and have the baptism of the Holy Ghost.


John 1:12...... as many as receive him......believe him to them he gave the power to become the sons ....not babies of god nor children but sons of God .....only sons can do miracles.......Gal 4:1 .....KJV .....THAT THE HEIR ,AS LONG AS HE IS A CHILD DIFFERS NOTHING FROM A SLAVE THOUGH HE BE THE LORD OF ALL

Proudly Winners

Nodogragra4me:
Your understanding of the Bible is very terrible. Firstly, I never mentioned that book of Corinthians is not sacred or important; I only ask you if between the words of our Lord and Paul which is more weighty. Jesus said in Mark, personally, that these signs shall follow them that believe and he itemized the signs that will proof to anyone that you are a believer in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Now, in the Corinth you have cited, Paul made it clear through his statement that the church at Corinth did ALL speak in tongue when he said, thank God, I do speak in tongue more than you all.....in other words, they do speak in tongue for him to say he speaks more than them all.


The issue at Corinth was the abuse of tongue. That was while the epistle was necessary. To let them know that the gift was not to be use as a kind of competition within the church and amongst themselves. .and to explain to those young Christian that tongue is not end in itself but a means ......you are speaking the language of heaven but you must understand and be able to interpret it so others know what you are doing ..........every epistle is written to address a wrong or abuse amongst the new convert. ......every believer must have the gift of tongue because every believer must have the baptism of the Holy Spirit which is evidenced or proofed by speaking in tongue........the day of Pentecost is a must for every believer........Peter said, Repent and be baptized so that ye receives the gift of the Holy Spirit........that is the package of being baptized.

Matt 28:19 Jesus, himself said, go into all nations TEACHING THEM ......a baby can't be taught ..........then baptizing them in the name of the father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit.


The gospel of John 4 you quoted has nothing to do with our discussion........our subject matter is in infant baptism.....a baby cannot recognize miracle and therefore can't be convinced. .....your identity card as a be,bier in the name of Jesus as prescribed by no less a person but Jesus in Mark is and remains: these signs shall follow them that believe in my name........it is the only proof to anyone that you are a Christian and not a followers of the narrowness of the mind of your rev Fr.......first to do e no dey pain

All the apostles including Paul you have quoted spake in tongues.....why. Jesus said it is the recognized ID CARD of a believer. Mark 16:17

Every believer is a miracle worker. Not just pastors or your church Catholic Church, mbaka and ebube munso........we are co labourers with God and God does nothing but miracles.....the ministry of Jesus from birth to death is all miracle......again it is stated by Jesus Christ in Mark 16:17

Miracle and tongue is not a special gift to Mbaka and Ede and Munso......everyone of us has the gift if we were baptized in water and not sprinkled water on and have the baptism of the Holy Ghost.


John 1:12...... as many as receive him......believe him to them he gave the power to become the sons ....not babies of god nor children but sons of God .....only sons can do miracles.......Gal 4:1 .....KJV .....THAT THE HEIR ,AS LONG AS HE IS A CHILD DIFFERS NOTHING FROM A SLAVE THOUGH HE BE THE LORD OF ALL

Proudly Winners

1. "is a proof for unbelievers that you are a believer......Jesus said , these signs shall but you believe that an epistle to Corinthians is more sacred than the very words of Jesus....study the mark, it is probably in red in your bible."

I copied your words exactly. There you said that Mark is more sacred than letter of St Paul to Corinthians. Bro! As far as Christianity is concern, words of God are all sacred. Whether it's Mark or Paul, Christians considers all of them equally sacred because they're words of God not that of Paul or Mark.

Concerning Mark 16:17. "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;" -KJV. meaning those that believe will be able to perform miracles: casting out devils; speaking in new tongues. Jesus never said that speaking in new tongue as you said ("Jesus said it is the recognized ID CARD of a believer. Mark 16:17" ) will be the ID CARD of a believers. Stop misinterpreting the Bible. The Bible said THESE SIGNS (it's a plural, meaning there are other signs). Jesus didn't said only speaking in tongues in Mark 16:17, shall follow those that believe. There are other miraculous signs He mentioned there. And the Bible didn't said that a believer MUST possess all the miraculous signs. So I don't see the reason why you should single it out as the only criteria for knowing a believer, if not to justify your personal ideology.

Ask yourself why Jesus made that statement in Mark 16:17. I believe you know that all the books in the Bible are inter-linked, that's why I used two instances in Gospel of St. John ( 1:43-51; 4:48 ) where same Jesus that made statement in Mark 16:17 to proof to you that signs and wonders are gifts given to believers for unbelievers which St. Paul also attested in 1Corinthians 14:22. Also Acts 2:1-42, esp. 4-13 & 40-42 will bears us witness.
Until you use bible instances to proof your point in Mark 16:17 that Jesus said speaking in tongues is the only ID CARD for believers, I will still maintain my status quo.

2. Let me quote your exact words: "Miracle and tongue is not a special gift to Mbaka and Ede and Munso......everyone of us has the gift if we were baptized in water and not sprinkled water on and have the baptism of the Holy Ghost."
I agreed with you that all Christians have equal access to the gift of Holy Spirit. But was these men you mentioned wasn't baptised at infant? How come they received the gifts which according to you can only be recieved at adult baptism? (let me not go further on this infant baptizim here because you haven't responded to my yesterday's mention on it).

Bro! Catholic church is not against speaking in new tongues. Speaking in tongues is not the only criteria to know believers neither is it an ID card to make heaven. Bible didn't tell us that.

I must apologise for responding late, just coming back from work.
Hope your day was great!

nuelsylves:
1. "is a proof for unbelievers that you are a believer......Jesus said , these signs shall but you believe that an epistle to Corinthians is more sacred than the very words of Jesus....study the mark, it is probably in red in your bible."

I copied your words exactly. There you said that Mark is more sacred than letter of St Paul to Corinthians. Bro! As far as Christianity is concern, words of God are all sacred. Whether it's Mark or Paul, Christians considers all of them equally sacred because they're words of God not that of Paul or Mark.

Concerning Mark 16:17. "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;" -KJV. meaning those that believe will be able to perform miracles: casting out devils; speaking in new tongues. Jesus never said that speaking in new tongue as you said ("Jesus said it is the recognized ID CARD of a believer. Mark 16:17" will be the ID CARD of a believers. Stop misinterpreting the Bible. The Bible said THESE SIGNS (it's a plural, meaning there are other signs). Jesus didn't said only speaking in tongues in Mark 16:17, shall follow those that believe. There are other miraculous signs He mentioned there. And the Bible didn't said that a believer MUST possess all the miraculous signs. So I don't see the reason why you should single it out as the only criteria for knowing a believer, if not to justify your personal ideology.

Ask yourself why Jesus made that statement in Mark 16:17. I believe you know that all the books in the Bible are inter-linked, that's why I used two instances in Gospel of St. John ( 1:43-51; 4:48 ) where same Jesus that made statement in Mark 16:17 to proof to you that signs and wonders are gifts given to believers for unbelievers which St. Paul also attested in 1Corinthians 14:22. Also Acts 2:1-42, esp. 4-13 & 40-42 will bears us witness.
Until you use bible instances to proof your point in Mark 16:17 that Jesus said speaking in tongues is the only ID CARD for unbelievers, I will still maintain my status quo.

2. Let me quote your exact words: "Miracle and tongue is not a special gift to Mbaka and Ede and Munso......everyone of us has the gift if we were baptized in water and not sprinkled water on and have the baptism of the Holy Ghost."
I agreed with you that all Christians have equal access to the gift of Holy Spirit. But was these men you mentioned wasn't baptised at infant? How come they received the gifts which according to you can only be recieved at adult baptism? (let me not go further on this infant baptizim here because you haven't responded to my yesterday's mention on it).

Bro! Catholic church is not against speaking in new tongues. Speaking in tongues is not the only criteria to know believers neither is it an ID card to make heaven. Bible didn't tell us that.

I must apologise for responding late, just coming back from work.
Hope your day was great!

1. "is a proof for unbelievers that you are a believer......Jesus said , these signs shall but you believe that an epistle to Corinthians is more sacred than the very words of Jesus....study the mark, it is probably in red in your bible."

I copied your words exactly. There you said that Mark is more sacred than letter of St Paul to Corinthians. Bro! As far as Christianity is concern, words of God are all sacred. Whether it's Mark or Paul, Christians considers all of them equally sacred because they're words of God not that of Paul or Mark.


What you ought have seen if you had read it more carefully and slowly is ........but you believe that an epistle .....letter.......to the Corinthians.....citizens of the city of Corinth .....is more sacred than the very words of Jesus ..........you quoted copiously from the epistle to the church at Corinth to buttress your submission that tongue is for a prove to the unbeliever.........Nobody is arguing whether the entire scripture is sacred .....that is an established fact....what is the issue is this: Jesus said , these signs shall follow them that believe .....and Mark 16:17 listed the signs and one of them is speak in new tongues.

Concerning Mark 16:17. "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;" -KJV. meaning those that believe will be able to perform miracles: casting out devils; speaking in new tongues. Jesus never said that speaking in new tongue as you said ("Jesus said it is the recognized ID CARD of a believer. Mark 16:17"wink will be the ID CARD of a believers. Stop misinterpreting the Bible. The Bible said THESE SIGNS (it's a plural, meaning there are other signs). Jesus didn't said only speaking in tongues in Mark 16:17, shall follow those that believe. There are other miraculous signs He mentioned there. And the Bible didn't said that a believer MUST possess all the miraculous signs. So I don't see the reason why you should single it out as the only criteria for knowing a believer, if not to justify your personal ideology.



If you care to go back to where my contribution where you got your first paragraph from you will clearly noticed a word called itemized ......in relation to my statement on Mark 16:17..... I stated that he itemized the signs and one of them is new tongue....you can go back .......if you continue to 18 you will find more of them ............Jesus Christ never said or gave any impression that some of them shall follow them ......He said ......these signs , plural, shall follow them not some of these signs......if these signs shall follow them it reasons to says that is it the identity .....ID card....of the believer.........if you call yourself a believer and I happened to meet you somewhere, I don't know you and you don't know me , Jesus is saying the ways to identity the person is ....everybody is an unbeliever to a stranger until he proves otherwise and the way to prove otherwise is ....Mark 16:17-18......19-Mark 16:17..... when you see a believer , you have met a miracle worker , you have met a man who communicate in the language of heaven ....new tongue ....you have met a man who when he is poisoned, remains unhurt.......it couldn't have escape my attention that there were other signs stated in that Mark.

Ask yourself why Jesus made that statement in Mark 16:17. I believe you know that all the books in the Bible are inter-linked, that's why I used two instances in Gospel of St. John ( 1:43-51; 4:48 ) where same Jesus that made statement in Mark 16:17 to proof to you that signs and wonders are gifts given to believers for unbelievers which St. Paul also attested in 1Corinthians 14:22. Also Acts 2:1-42, esp. 4-13 & 40-42 will bears us witness.
Until you use bible instances to proof your point in Mark 16:17 that Jesus said speaking in tongues is the only ID CARD for unbelievers, I will still maintain my status quo.



It would be dubious for you to anchor you arguement on me proving that it is the only sign........our subject matter or the take off point of our discussion was why all the disciples spoke in tongue and not your Pope who you guys always claims is of the order of Peter.....so I narrowed my submission to new tongue....lit is not that I didn't know that there are listed there....in reasearch you have limitation......and in this discourse , we have limitation and it is new tongue.

2. Let me quote your exact words: "Miracle and tongue is not a special gift to Mbaka and Ede and Munso......everyone of us has the gift if we were baptized in water and not sprinkled water on and have the baptism of the Holy Ghost."
I agreed with you that all Christians have equal access to the gift of Holy Spirit. But was these men you mentioned wasn't baptised at infant? How come they received the gifts which according to you can only be recieved at adult baptism? (let me not go further on this infant baptizim here because you haven't responded to my yesterday's mention on it).



You can't speak for people you know from afar......unless you were there when they were sprinkled with water you can never tell when they became Catholics....it is possible they were already matured boys when they found themselves in the Catholic environment. They could have started as members of some religious sect helping their fathers in their shrine when they were taken to be Catholics.....my dad was nominated and handed over to the missions by his dad who worshipped his ancestor until he left this world ........he was already a young man and not an infant. But more importantly is the fact that it is not water baptism that Jesus said was to fulfil all rightouesnes that confers the Holy Spirit but the second baptism of the Holy Spirit that the apostles received on Pentecost day evidenced by their speaking in new tongues.

Bro! Catholic church is not against speaking in new tongues. Speaking in tongues is not the only criteria to know believers neither is it an ID card to make heaven. Bible didn't tell us that.


Yes the Bible didn't expressly state that it is the criteria to make heaven but it a pointer to anyone that you have the spirit of God in you. For Jesus said he will send you a comforter, who will dwell inside your spirit and not in so called sacraments...if you have the identity of e believer you journey destination should be obvious ....only believers are entitled to heaven......the spirit of God doesn't reside in any other place but in man and that is why the Bible says your body is the temple of the Lord and not images and golden colored irons and cups.

I must apologise for responding late, just coming back from work.
Hope your day was great!


No need apologizing for we must earn our bread.


Extremely good ....trust yours wasn't any different.


Proudly a Winner.

Nodogragra4me:
1. "is a proof for unbelievers that you are a believer......Jesus said , these signs shall but you believe that an epistle to Corinthians is more sacred than the very words of Jesus....study the mark, it is probably in red in your bible."

I copied your words exactly. There you said that Mark is more sacred than letter of St Paul to Corinthians. Bro! As far as Christianity is concern, words of God are all sacred. Whether it's Mark or Paul, Christians considers all of them equally sacred because they're words of God not that of Paul or Mark.


What you ought have seen if you had read it more carefully and slowly is ........but you believe that an epistle .....letter.......to the Corinthians.....citizens of the city of Corinth .....is more sacred than the very words of Jesus ..........you quoted copiously from the epistle to the church at Corinth to buttress your submission that tongue is for a prove to the unbeliever.........Nobody is arguing whether the entire scripture is sacred .....that is an established fact....what is the issue is this: Jesus said , these signs shall follow them that believe .....and Mark 16:17 listed the signs and one of them is speak in new tongues.

Concerning Mark 16:17. "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;" -KJV. meaning those that believe will be able to perform miracles: casting out devils; speaking in new tongues. Jesus never said that speaking in new tongue as you said ("Jesus said it is the recognized ID CARD of a believer. Mark 16:17"wink will be the ID CARD of a believers. Stop misinterpreting the Bible. The Bible said THESE SIGNS (it's a plural, meaning there are other signs). Jesus didn't said only speaking in tongues in Mark 16:17, shall follow those that believe. There are other miraculous signs He mentioned there. And the Bible didn't said that a believer MUST possess all the miraculous signs. So I don't see the reason why you should single it out as the only criteria for knowing a believer, if not to justify your personal ideology.



If you care to go back to where my contribution where you got your first paragraph from you will clearly noticed a word called itemized ......in relation to my statement on Mark 16:17..... I stated that he itemized the signs and one of them is new tongue....you can go back .......if you continue to 18 you will find more of them ............Jesus Christ never said or gave any impression that some of them shall follow them ......He said ......these signs , plural, shall follow them not some of these signs......if these signs shall follow them it reasons to says that is it the identity .....ID card....of the believer.........if you call yourself a believer and I happened to meet you somewhere, I don't know you and you don't know me , Jesus is saying the ways to identity the person is ....everybody is an unbeliever to a stranger until he proves otherwise and the way to prove otherwise is ....Mark 16:17-18......19-Mark 16:17..... when you see a believer , you have met a miracle worker , you have met a man who communicate in the language of heaven ....new tongue ....you have met a man who when he is poisoned, remains unhurt.......it couldn't have escape my attention that there were other signs stated in that Mark.

Ask yourself why Jesus made that statement in Mark 16:17. I believe you know that all the books in the Bible are inter-linked, that's why I used two instances in Gospel of St. John ( 1:43-51; 4:48 ) where same Jesus that made statement in Mark 16:17 to proof to you that signs and wonders are gifts given to believers for unbelievers which St. Paul also attested in 1Corinthians 14:22. Also Acts 2:1-42, esp. 4-13 & 40-42 will bears us witness.
Until you use bible instances to proof your point in Mark 16:17 that Jesus said speaking in tongues is the only ID CARD for unbelievers, I will still maintain my status quo.



It would be dubious for you to anchor you arguement on me proving that it is the only sign........our subject matter or the take off point of our discussion was why all the disciples spoke in tongue and not your Pope who you guys always claims is of the order of Peter.....so I narrowed my submission to new tongue....lit is not that I didn't know that there are listed there....in reasearch you have limitation......and in this discourse , we have limitation and it is new tongue.

2. Let me quote your exact words: "Miracle and tongue is not a special gift to Mbaka and Ede and Munso......everyone of us has the gift if we were baptized in water and not sprinkled water on and have the baptism of the Holy Ghost."
I agreed with you that all Christians have equal access to the gift of Holy Spirit. But was these men you mentioned wasn't baptised at infant? How come they received the gifts which according to you can only be recieved at adult baptism? (let me not go further on this infant baptizim here because you haven't responded to my yesterday's mention on it).



You can't speak for people you know from afar......unless you were there when they were sprinkled with water you can never tell when they became Catholics....it is possible they were already matured boys when they found themselves in the Catholic environment. They could have started as members of some religious sect helping their fathers in their shrine when they were taken to be Catholics.....my dad was nominated and handed over to the missions by his dad who worshipped his ancestor until he left this world ........he was already a young man and not an infant. But more importantly is the fact that it is not water baptism that Jesus said was to fulfil all rightouesnes that confers the Holy Spirit but the second baptism of the Holy Spirit that the apostles received on Pentecost day evidenced by their speaking in new tongues.

Bro! Catholic church is not against speaking in new tongues. Speaking in tongues is not the only criteria to know believers neither is it an ID card to make heaven. Bible didn't tell us that.


Yes the Bible didn't expressly state that it is the criteria to make heaven but it a pointer to anyone that you have the spirit of God in you. For Jesus said he will send you a comforter, who will dwell inside your spirit and not in so called sacraments...if you have the identity of e believer you journey destination should be obvious ....only believers are entitled to heaven......the spirit of God doesn't reside in any other place but in man and that is why the Bible says your body is the temple of the Lord and not images and golden colored irons and cups.

I must apologise for responding late, just coming back from work.
Hope your day was great!


No need apologizing for we must earn our bread.


Extremely good ....trust yours wasn't any different.


Proudly a Winner.

“And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name they shall cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues” (Mark 16:17). The adjective “new” can only mean they were going to speak in languages new to them, that is, languages they had not learned or used until that time.
Note: Christ didn't said LANGUAGE OF HEAVEN.

Why would Christ promised the believers the signs of speaking in 'new tongues' (NOT SPEAKING IN HEAVENLY TONGUES) if not to aid them in the spreading of the Gospels and establishment of Christianity.

St. Luke even confirmed this in the Acts of the Apostles where he uses a different adjective “they began to speak with other tongues.” The word “other” simply means that they spoke in languages different from the normal language they were used to. The context substantiates this. Notice the surprised reaction on the part of the hearers—“And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:7, 8 ). Every man heard them speak in his own language (Acts 2:6 ). I believe you will agree with me that the word “language” is the translation of dialekto from which our word “dialect” comes. The two words glossa (tongue) and dialektos (language) are used synonymously, making it obvious that the disciples were speaking in known languages other than the language native to them. In verses 9-11 the languages are then identified.

Again, the promise of Christ in Mark 16:17 was solely to aid the believers in the spreading of the Gospels as it was confirmed and proved in the Acts of the Apostles I quoted above.

So Bro! The reason behind Christ promise in Mark16:17 was to aid the believers in spreading of the Gospels not for an ID CARD. Every promises Christ made to his believers was for a purpose.

An identity of every believer is to behave like Christ by imitating Him, hence, the name 'Christians'.
This will be my last response on the issue of Mark 16:17.

For Fr. Mbaka, Ebube Mounso and Fr. Edeh, I can only attest for the first two. both two was born in a Catholic family. We all know that anyone born in a Catholic family and even some that claims to be a Catholic but do not practice it normally baptised their children at infant. This assertion is predominantly in the South East. So there's no way you can proof that the first two Frs I mentioned above wasn't baptised at infant. For Fr. Edeh, it's possible that he wasn't born in a Christian/Catholic family due to his age now. So probably he couldn't have been baptised at infant. But 3 of them and all Catholic priests uphold, perform/performing and teaches infant baptism. So Bro your argument on that can't hold.

You're still avoiding my response to you on infant baptism. I mentioned you. Go to your Mentions and check it. I want to hear your response on that.

mytym:
The Portuguese came from South south nd penetrated the East.

The British (Anglican) came through Lagos and penetrated the whole country.

Lagos is a separate Colony
While there's Northern and Southern Protectorates
The mistake of amalgamation caused this question.

The Yorubas are liberal and forward thinking...That's why they actually founded their own Pentecostals way before the easterners.


Those denominations you listed are mostly Indigenous Pentecostals.. There's Assemblies of God and Lord Chosen ministry in the East as well and even their branches in the West are predominantly flooded with Easterners.

Forward thinking in creating a mockery of Christianity, right?
Aside chosen, Igbos predominantly attend saner churches.
Not everyone has time for madness

InyinyaAgbaOku:
Forward thinking in creating a mockery of Christianity, right?
Aside chosen, Igbos predominantly attend saner churches.
Not everyone has time for madness

Ordinarily I'll let it pass, but after checking your posts, I know you are very pained.

Be that as it may, if the whites are not forward thinking they won't expand the Gospel to Africa. With that, they brought other things with them (good,bad and ugly)

The founders of those local denominations meant well and altruistic in their campaign for the gospel, not withstanding whatever mess we have in Christendom now. And that has nothing to do with tribe, the region with highest frequency of churches/denominations will certainly be highly affected with this 'corruption'.


The fact that the church (Christianity in Nigeria) has been reduced to what it is now, has not removed the fact that the west has seen the need to have their own thing way ahead before the east. Also even in Islam and Arabic studies, the Yorubas have seen the need to be independent and start their own local denominations long ago before northerners despite the religion coming through the North... that is forward thinking.

Even the so called Nigerian independence has for long been conceived by the west before any region.

When you want to address issues be very versatile and civil. My best friend is igbo who was born and bred in Lagos. His wife is Yoruba. He's a good man. So I know Igbos are good people but in the words of Prof Anya, "...We (you) make too much noise..."

Apparently there's alot of assumed knowledge and underinformation in your posts that's why I replied.

Incase you want to know more, Prof Anya chaired the electoral committee that conducted the election of the President-General of Ohaneze Indigbo. He spew truths about your case. Read Page 46-49 Sun Newspaper Saturday January 28, 2017

mytym:
Ordinarily I'll let it pass, but after checking your posts, I know you are very pained.

Be that as it may, if the whites are not forward thinking they won't expand the Gospel to Africa. With that, they brought other things with them (good,bad and ugly)

The founders of those local denominations meant well and altruistic in their campaign for the gospel, not withstanding whatever mess we have in Christendom now. And that has nothing to do with tribe, the region with highest frequency of churches/denominations will certainly be highly affected with this 'corruption'.


The fact that the church (Christianity in Nigeria) has been reduced to what it is now, has not removed the fact that the west has seen the need to have their own thing way ahead before the east. Also even in Islam and Arabic studies, the Yorubas have seen the need to be independent and start their own local denominations long ago before northerners despite the religion coming through the North... that is forward thinking.

Even the so called Nigerian independence has for long been conceived by the west before any region.

When you want to address issues be very versatile and civil. My best friend is igbo who was born and bred in Lagos. His wife is Yoruba. He's a good man. So I know Igbos are good people but in the words of Prof Anya, "...We (you) make too much noise..."

Apparently there's alot of assumed knowledge and underinformation in your posts that's why I replied.

Incase you want to know more, Prof Anya chaired the electoral committee that conducted the election of the President-General of Ohaneze Indigbo. He spew truths about your case. Read Page 46-49 Sun Newspaper Saturday January 28, 2017

Crap.
You people introduced scam centres calling them churches, taking advantage of hardships prevalent among you. Miracle mongers.
Don't even equate the nonsense you do to the actual Churches the white people brought, the type practiced in the east esp Catholic and Anglican that introduced cheap mass education, healthcare, etc.
Insanity became associated with Nigerian Christianity when Yoruba's started putting their corrupt minds in it.

For every Anya article, I will show hundreds that will shame you. Igbos have far more favourable citations than bad ones, so don't go there.
Why won't they show off?
With the highest cut off marks and every stumbling block, they still do no shaking and you feel they won't blast in your faces? You haven't seen anything yet

Yoruba Traditional Religion is more satisfying than any other if you know that. Ask Babalawo and The Oluwo, Oluawo or Oluwa Awo.

InyinyaAgbaOku:
Crap.
You people introduced scam centres calling them churches, taking advantage of hardships prevalent among you. Miracle mongers.
Don't even equate the nonsense you do to the actual Churches the white people brought, the type practiced in the east esp Catholic and Anglican that introduced cheap mass education, healthcare, etc.
Insanity became associated with Nigerian Christianity when Yoruba's started putting their corrupt minds in it.

For every Anya article, I will show hundreds that will shame you. Igbos have far more favourable citations than bad ones, so don't go there.
Why won't they show off?
With the highest cut off marks and every stumbling block, they still do no shaking and you feel they won't blast in your faces? You haven't seen anything yet

Your energy is new and commendable.
You'll soon get tired.

Join [color=#000000]Mega Churches In United States[/color]

Islam came to us first unlike the Eastern part who knew the Church right from the first time they set their eyes on oyinbo!
It was Western education that's gradually washing away Islam the old orthodox Churches in the West!