Lol @nossycheek,

Upsetting as the news may be (and even more painful to the family that had to bear the loss), my prayer is that those with murderous intentions may come to the knowledge of God's saving grace in Jesus Christ.

nossycheek:

As for your warrior, we have not seen much of him in recent times, but in case you want to replace him, you are welcome on board, anyday any time.

Una no go kill person with laughter!

Perhaps it would have been better to continue in the ongoing thread of the topic, as you've already posted the same lines there:


https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-58411.0.html

thesilent1:

who is this person please?

Reverend Emeka King, leader of Christ Praying Assembly (CPA) in Lagos:

http://www.thenewsng.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1376

http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=23915&sec=55&cont=3

@silent1,

Well, like I said, I would be very concerned about the source of the million in question. It doesn't matter if it just 10 bucks or 10 million bucks; if the source is questionable, the donor could as well pocket his money, hallelujah!  

Now, as regards the issue of lottery, I don't play bingo or any other; and everyone may be persuaded as to their views on this. However, my position is that hard-working and God-honouring believers should seek to work hard rather than scratch tickets to instant wealth.

Bless God for those who are fortunate to be winners! However, I share the same persuasion as the pastor who declined to accept the tithe from the £8 million lottery winner. As donduke said, "every opportunity to give is a test for the giver"; but I would also say that every opportunity to receive is a test of our godliness!  

Hi again TV01,

Thanks for your response.

TV01:

First, man-made religion is money-driven (and a devourer of widows homes).

Ok.

TV01:

Second, there is no where in the NT narrative where a collection was evert taken for anything other than a personal/physical need of a member of the flock, be that a missionary, teacher or lay member with no functional remit.

There are various types of financial support for various needs in the NT, however they may have been expressed. What I read in Scripture is not merely what was stated there, but the undergirding principles - and that broadens my scope as to the concerns for financial support of Missions. In which case, I requested that you perhaps might look into the needs of Missions and see if they all could be pointing to merely personal needs.

TV01:

Needless to say, the Bible makes no distinction between members ( no clergy/laity split).

It all depends on what basis you make this inference, though. As to salvation, there are no distinctions; whereas as to service, there are clear distinctions made.

TV01:

Physical need of missionaries:
An itinerant preacher of the word should look for his upkeep (bed and board) from those he ministers to or those he come out from, or indeed any part/member of the body who is willing/able to supply his needs (in a s much as he cannot do so himself). That was Pauls example.

Partly true; but even Paul as an apostle (as far as examples go) also sought to make a living when he was not restrained by imprisonment (please see Acts 18:3; 20:34-35 and I Cor. 4:12).

TV01:

One who teaches/pastors amongst the local congregation should have a full time job/business to meet his needs and the needs of his family. There is no notion of paid eldership. Everyone provides for his own family.

That there is no notion of paid eldership (as some suppose) does not mean that there is absolutely no teaching for the financial support of the elders in a local church. That is not something that an elder should claim by statutory rights; but there again, we cannot discount the fact that the local church was to be responsible in this service.

1 Tim. 5:17 & 18 - "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward."

TV01:

Also pertinent to note is that eldership is always in the plural and the burden of pastoring/teaching shared amongst elders accordsing to gifting and maturity.

Ok.

TV01:

Freewill gifts to one who ministers is fine, although that should not take precedence over a real physical need, should not be cooerced or in any way taught as required by God or necessary to recieve a blessing.

True, issues on maney matters as pertaining to any form of giving is not coerced in Scripture. However, the Bible certainly teaches that our financial giving brings some blessings to the givers.

Cheers.

Em, . . . belloti et al, can you please tell us why no justice up until now? Are our suspicions on Qisas playing out so well here?

Depends on the source of the income! Make unu watch those moneybags carefully!

Telly B:

Which lot do not apply to the NT maturing believer?

@donnie, how far?

Lol. . . I worry for that guy sometimes. He's brilliant IMHO; but perhaps, he might have made nyabinghi wonder about being worked up or developing cold feet!

Okay, I'm sure he was teasing, lol.

It may not - and so, perhaps, that's why we can say we're not sure!

Lol. What wars?

@TV01,

TV01:

I repeat, money only moves in response to physical need. Money is not a pre-requisite for the propagation of the gospel.

I may agree with you that money is not a pre-requisite in propagating the Gospel; but what exactly are the physical needs of missionaries and Missions that we should assume are separate from what we have stated?

TV01:

I would appreciate your quoting chapter and verse or detailing it from the scriptural narrative. All the scriptures posted thus far, have only shown money moving in response to a physical/personal need, not in order to spread the gospel.

Before I do so, may I ask you to think about the non-personal needs of Missions, please? Again, may I ask what you mean by 'personal' needs?

TV01:

If it's money driven, it's almost certainly man-birthed.

What is money-driven?

TV01:

I never made any "stretched assumptions" about "expensive programmes and crusades", as I have re-iterated above.

No worries. I was wondering about this line of your stretched inferences, dear sir:

TV01:

Preaching the gospel does not cost money. The fact that men have decided to turn it into programs, crusades, organisations and the like which most definitely need money (and devour widows homes), is down to men and not outlined in the scriptures.

I didn't read donduke making such inferences; and that's why I came back to note that in the NB. If we can maintain the simple contexts that we read in poeple's posts, maybe that would be more helpful, don't you think? I apologise if I misread you, though.

Cheers.

TV01,

Did you read my previous rejoinder? I asked a question to help us contextualize our discussions because I'm not interested in wild statements pretended as "truth". If you're not interested in offering me a few pointers to how or where I got it wrong, no worries.

Enjoy.

@muhsin,

You added a smile to my very stressed schedule at work; but being on a short break, I thought to make these few remarks.

While we aim to be optimistic, I think we should not narrow the heavy blame on OBJ. The man did not perform as a credible leader, I agree. But the thrust of my input is simply that we can look beyond him now; and even if he were to go drive a kabu-kabu, it is his choice and that personal choice will not undo whatever katakata he left in office.

Go back to the military junta of Sani Abacha - ol'boy, my university days suffer for that man hand, no be small. And yet, was it for fear of the unknown from that man's large goggles that ASUU failed to complain?  

OBJ would not, and did  not, perform: I said so to my friends by mid-1999. The first hints that gave me that persuasion was when this headmaster agriculturist bought the idea that a super-African country like Nigeria should IMPORT beans from Burkina Faso!! Results? Ask me!    Let's just keep our fingers crossed for Yar' Adua!

However, inspite of our perennial problems, I can be grateful that even though things got so bad, at least it was during his tenure in office that GSM became popular in Nigeria. Oh, some other humongous issues are synonymous with the name 'OBJ'; but we can look beyond baba himself and try to make heads from the wahala he left behind.

My dear TV01,

TV01:

Why do your posts sound like one long issue-dodging harangue? No one is arguing for civil disobedience, no one is saying that God is not sovreign (although the enemy has a certain lien and sphere of influence).

My posts sound like that to you because you really want it to. The idea that history can be reconstructed to force it into sage's fallacies hasn't become obvious to you even after several appeals to draw your attention to that very fact. That is why I offered you repeatedly: if you feel that WWII was a CHRISTIAN event, please walk me through the facts of histroy that demonstrate this. Failing to do so makes your complaints tiresome and ineffective.

TV01:

Not everything called/labelled Christian is of Christ, including great swathes of what many believe to be traditional/denominational Christianity. After all, Catholics, Protestants, JW, SDA and other strains are often at odds on this very forum.

Is that the issue being discussed here? If you want to even take on that, please open another thread and let's go there and talk about the banes of denominationalism; and then, perhaps, you will come close to realizing that you might be preaching your own denomination as well as others have.

TV01:

To deny a religious element in may wars is just naiive. No one said WWII was a war of Christian denominations, rather each side co-opted religion (cynically and politically) as excuse and justification for their actions. You'll be hard pressed today to mention any conflict anywhere on the earth that does not have religious undertones.

I'm not hard pressed for hard facts on historical antecedents; and if you were so fluent with history, I asked you to please walk me through the hard facts for the case in WWII; which until now you haven't done so. Mr sage's inference to make WWII sound like a religious spark off is rather naive; and to come here bantering to that sick excuse is not really helping your position any further than you'd believe.

TV01:

Please answer the basic premise - How far should Christians be involved in party politics as a means to acquire and wield state power? (Does this have scriptural warrant? Is it something that can be gleaned by the example of the Lord, His Apostles or the early church? To what end? and how does this benefit the kingdom of God, or the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?)

Good that you asked this; and in time I would answer it. I had hoped that you would offer answers to my repeated requests and then we could take it off from there. The one question I would offer in answer to your question is this: what is politics? If neither you nor sage can clearly define what that is, then applying just every sort of ludicrous statement in the name of a version of truth that does not square with Scripture is an exercise in futility.

TV01:

And without any of us having to dredge up tons of material showing how political leaders often use the name of God and religion to justify and galvanise nations to war, please outline exactly how professing Christians can go to war against other professing Christians and still claim to be followers of Christ?

If you're scared of tons of material, then there's just no use offering even a single line to the point. Your problem here is that the word "politics" has been so narrowed to the idea of military engagements and warfare; so that its basic meaning is often forgotten in your drive to draw the wrong inferences. Is it too much to simply ask that we throw off all pretences and reconstructions so that the fallacies are minimized?

TV01:

Insight, ideas, doctrines, concepts, knowledge, understanding, wisdom, not personalities. Thanks.

That is exactly what I've been calling our attention to; and I hope we all shall have the largeness of heart to reason along such lines.

Cheers.

Romans 14:12-13

So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
Let us not therefore judge one another any more:
but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock
or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.


Miniskirts and trousers - if unu no careful, these things fit land unu for trouble!

My dear redsun,

Nigeria's problems are bigger than blaming one man - OBJ; which, I feel, is what initially informed this thread.

However, when we think of the many problems back home, the point still remains that greed is global; and we are all collectively responsible to advance our lot in what ever economies we find ourselves.

Nigeria's case is not hopeless, true. But no matter how much we concern ourselves with what a past leader President opts for with his personal life (be that as it may, corrupt, silly, amusing or plain hilarious), it doesn't affect or advance the destiny of our present existence.

@sage,

sage:

Did they get invoved in the politics of their day or in the military realm in anyway---------------------NO

Did they pay their taxes-----------------------------Yes

Did they obey the civil laws ----------------------Yes

Did they incite to civil disobidience---------------------------------NO

Did they disobey Ceaser when it conflicted with their Christian calling------------------YES

Did they try to reconstruct history to make it appear that WWII was fought in the name of Christianity?---------------------- NO!!

Did they have to repeat a bogus lie about WWII and keep drivelling at it?---------------- NO!!

Did they call Christianity the Big Harlot?----------------------------NO!!


The issue of Roman 13 was a debate between you and stimulus, where he articulated his point and made it clear that God is in absolute control of human governments; whereas you had stated the contrary that the devil was in control and infact it was the devil who gives human rulership to whomsoever he wishes.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-26936.128.html#msg1038964

Since you don't know the difference in the Word, and you would be happier to reconstruct history to pepper your jaundiced views, the ideas you have argued are simply ludicrous.

@TV01,

What you ask for has been offered by several others, most recently by donduke. You may interprete it however so flavours your outlook on money issues; but the point is that the verses offered speak to the same point, that the financial support of Missions and missionaries is a Biblical precedence.

-----------------

NB edited:

I observe also that donduke was not referring to your stretched assumptions of "expensive programmes and crusades"; and I wonder why you would have to draw that inference outside the ambit of his points.

@TV01,

TV01:

You seem to prefer to engage in what is essentially a side skirmish, no probs.

I engage in what is of concern to me - which is precisely what I have done. And there are no pretences you can offer to cover up sage's flawed and dishonest assertions.

TV01:

Neither did I ask after your personal political interest, rather the thread is discussing Christians and politics, as is the poser I made most recently.

Which is no grounds for sage's using the topic as an excuse to deliberately and repeatedly make false statements.

TV01:

Sage's reference to wars is not far off. Till this day, many political leaders/state goverments try and use church/religious imprimateur as an endorsement for their wars.

That is why I asked  that you walk me through the FACTS of the history of WWII specifically mentioned by sage; and not what either of you suppose in order to make it sound like WWII was a religious spark off that must necessarily be blamed on Christianity such that Catholics went out to kill Catholics and Protestants went out to do the same.

TV01:
The fact that many wars are engaged in without people (participants or observers), being aware of the religious undertones does not make them any less relevent.

The fact that WWII was not a religious war cannot be disputed, even though both Christians, Muslims, atheists and others died in that war!

Hi again TV01,

TV01:

I don't have the time to post at length here, but the scriptures you have posted point to physical needs being met (which then enables them to carry out the work), not money (expensive or otherwise, I made no such distinction), to actually do the work.

However you look at it, TV01, it still stands that the financial support of Missions and missionaries is a Biblical precedence.

donduke:

giving to the poor is not a good replacement to giving too the church and for missions.

Yep, I agree. Whatever "need" that money can meet, support for missions and missionaries is a Biblical precedence. In addition to the verses you gave above, here's another:

3 Johnn 1:5-8
Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers; Which have borne witness of thy charity before the church: whom if thou bring forward on their journey after a godly sort, thou shalt do well: Because that for his name's sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles. We therefore ought to receive such, that we might be fellowhelpers to the truth.

Lol @muhsin.


@redsun, greed is a global problem. Perhaps the industrialized economies manifest theirs in 'civilized' manners; while on the local front back home, we are quite unpretentious about it.

@TV01,

In another thread, I hinted that not many issues in politics invite my interest presently to want to make much input. (https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-52890.64.html#msg1191142)

I visit this thread a few times just to read and digest what people think from various perspectives. But I had to call sage's attention to his flawed assertions on seeing his ludicrous reposte, which he repeated after he'd earlier stated it in this link:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-26936.128.html#msg1031799

Not only was he wrong to have narrowed and re-arrange historical facts to make it appear like WWII was a religious spark off; but by doing so and repeating it, he was being mischievous and dishonest.

If you still feel that WWII and all the other wars were religious events, please walk me through the facts of the history of WWII and every single one of those wars mentioned by sage.

Cheers.

My Dear TV01,

Again, I think for the sake of winning a debate, you've rather airbrushed the facts on ground in your recent entries. Here are issues that are absolutely untrue in your assumptions:

TV01:

Neither Sage or myself or any other proponent of Christian separation from the things of the world, has ever preached disobedience to civil or governmental authorities - except were it directly contravenes God's law - so for example, I would have no problems with God fearing men and women refusing to perform abortions, indeed, I'd expect it.

Wrong. Mr sage has severally preached civil disobedience to civil governments, whether or not they were in line with God's ordination according to His Word. When I signed on, one of the first issues to have caught my attention was sage's repeated denial of this very same thing in his debate with stimulus which is why I offered the link from where the debate on Roman 13 ensued.

             https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-26936.128.html#msg1038964

I don't think your claim here has helped matters just now, as you cannot cover up for sage's misanthropy on issues he clearly does not understand.

TV01:

Neither have we exhorted Christians to not engage socially or in their communities - spreading the gospel, preaching Christ and glorifying the Father - or even take up positions as civil servants, as indeed the bible has many noteworthy examples of such.

If you were speaking for yourself, I'd have no qualms with that. But a "we" here is obviously covering up for sage's emphasis that Christians should stay out of all civil engagements simply because Jesus and the apostles did not take up such engagements.

TV01:

Our stand has always been against the misguided notion that Christians should arrogate power to themselves (whilst making erroneous/bogus claims about furthering the kingdom of God), through partisan party politics, especially in it's modern guise. And of course the corollary errors, that such is Gods will, and that it is necessary to facilitate the return of Christ (Dominionism).

That is not what sage's debate with stimulus was about. Please refer to the link I offered and read a few entries from there on the issue of Romans 13. For up to 35 rejoinders, sage constantly evaded a simple question asked, whereas stimulus consistently offered Biblical texts to show how flawed the former's premises were.

TV01:

I believe we have shown time and again that no matter how romantic it may sound, it is practically unworkable. The state works to further it's own ends, Christianity will be tolerated as long as it does just that., but once Christians stand for the pure unadulterated truth of God's word - especially in light of injustice & corruption from the state - the state will turn on the Church.

Which is no excuse for the dishonest and ludicrous remarks that invited my comments on this thread from where I called sage's attention to his fallacies.

TV01:

So I would ask that you read the thread from the beginning to be fully appraised of exactly were we reached in the discussion and then introduce some hitherto unexplored perspective or ask a pertinent question to keep the discussion live and relevent. Thanks

Do I really need to go through every single entry just to know that WWII was NOT fought in the name of any god or even of Christianity? My enquiries here are simple: please walk me through history and show me the facts to the point that WWII was a religious spark that could be blamed on Christianity so that, as sage intoned, led to Catholics killing Catholics and Protestants doing the same!

I don't think it is healthy for anyone to try and obfuscate issues for merely wanting to pep up their persuasion by falsifying known facts in history.

Best regards.

No worries. Like you said, I didn't need to defend the Bible - and that's why I didn't do any apologetics on what you posted. Enjoy!

tlops:

the women too should be rewarded with 70/72 virgin hefty guys.

Yikes!! I'm outa here!

thesilent1:

just noticed you are in town, drop me a pm

Lol, will do some not too long. I didn't trip for the wekeend because my boss _{(hope he never reads this line)} didn't approve my allowances! Anyhow, will do so maybe later today, if it's sorted out early!

Will pm you in a while.

@MIZIEYA,

MIZIEYA:

There is nothing misrepresented in any of my posts: I have done as required and posted biblical verses to prove my point as well as online references: I can quite easily produce bibliography from scholars if so required. If it comes down to it I can upload my Desktop Library to this forum as long as the bandwidth can manage the file size.

Yep, and it still boils down to reading issues backwards; which is still forgiveable even if you upload the size of a Google server. I can appreciate good sense anyhow; but this one is a red minus, sorry.  

MIZIEYA:

No doubt you are influenced by Amphetamine Logic after all- anyone who writes verbiage as stunningly as yours, as well as presumes to know my state of mind, not to mention claim they have a higher IQ than I - clearly must be on some thing.

Aww, I wouldn't have half imagined that you could be so condenscending with the accolades. Thank you.  

MIZIEYA:

A tip: try cocaine or heroine: quaaludes are so yesterday.

Nice to see you've tasted them all.    I choose a clean bill of health, thanks.  

@fantanstico,

Lol. Nevermind his rants. . . afterall he's only getting worked up and developing cold feet about what he does not understand. Lol.  

@silent1,

You have such insight: could I borrow some?    I didn't see that line earlier the way you well captured it:

Horus:

They are only able to deceive and exploit under the cloak of ignorance, and during spiritual sleep of non-white people.

I'm amused that this sophisticated chants are often self-defeating. Black racists never complain about white men (or other races) having a spiritual sleep! Next you know, the same self-defeated black racists will blame their spiritual sleep on the white folks! 

Horus:

They are only able to oppress, manipulate and exterminate Black people when the sun of Black awareness has declined.

Ahh, there again! So, who's the self-defeated black racist evangelist going to blame this time for the black awareness DECLINE? 


_{Watch now. . . he might come back screaming another sophisticated chant: OUT OF TOPIC sooner than later!}