Tonyet1's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Tonyet1's Profile › Tonyet1's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 (of 77 pages)
KunleOshob:Maybe i should also come to think or preach that Jesus was also incompetent and fraudelent to teach the people to continue tithing . or maybe i should also go back and check out just what the Jesus said about tithing ![]() Matt.23:23:. . . and Jesus continued by saying assuredly i say unto you practise justice, practise mercy, practise faithfulness and also do not neglect to practise tithing And to say our free-thinker friend should go on thinking reprobacy goes to tell me that Oshob can maybe add free-thinking to his CV after subscribing to 'gnosticism', 'anti-tithing' and 'anti-trinity' even in the glares of scriptures, it sure goes to tell me just what kind of mind you possess, free-thinking of course . [size=5pt]i just dont pray my dear friend and brother wakes up one day to tell us God doesnt exist[/size] ![]() |
paris10:No you arent just a thinker, you are a free-thinker and guess what? they are always reprobates in thoughts , else what should concern an outsider with issues that pattern to life and godliness? ![]() |
Like seriously i get really perplexed at the way folks tend to take issues too far and most annoying is the way the hype it when it regards to church and the things of God. Ok lets see it this way: Erastus stole money( as alleged) and he was known to be a 'pastor' in RCCG before and during the incident, therefore he should refund the 'stolen' monies back, OK! so what about the places he bought his automobiles from, what about the places he bought his wardrobes from, oh better still what about those fastfoods/ restaurants he bought stuffs from with the 'stolen monies'? maybe he should go back and tell them to refund. Isnt it very stu.pid to think? Alas when it comes to church and spiritual issues every d.ck n harry wants to open their mouth to talk. |
Paris10, No doubt alot of the stuffs you said are true! but once a while lets try to take our eyes/minds/energies away from criticising these supposed Men of God and do ourselves(souls) the favour of knowing God on an individual basis. sometimes i ponder if the resources we put in to criticise these men are'nt enough to spend quality time with the spirit of God in us. I keep reiterating that the problem aint with these men, the problem is with you, me and everyone who chooses to be deceived simply because we choose to be lazy regarding spiritual issues. I personally do not see anything wrong in Adeboye's nor Oyedepo's neither Oyakhilome's lifestyle, these men can be real for christ sake and they could also be fake i still dont care, but you see i'll rather choose to use my precious time removing those 'big logs' on my eyes and in the process keep getting better than 'pointing at the 'specks' in anothers' eyes. One area alot of us fail is that we look up to these men to be perfect as well as in their deeds, whereas folks like Apostle Peter even made several errors yet was loved by God. on the note: 'ur stand on tithing appears you dont read the bible, else you should know it has absoultely nothing to do with MOGs. cheers! |
Mazaje I bet you wont understand this experience, its truly unique ![]() |
wearing T-shirts with Police inscription now a ban in Ogun state? ooopps dont have the guts! big talkers, small doers - the true epitome of a typical |
Judas Iscariot was called to be a disciple --> got involved in looting funds from the treasury whilst a disciple --> Until His greed messed him up Erastus was called to be a pastor --> got involved in looting funds from Nigeria whilst a pastor of RCCG --> Until his greed messed him up whats the big deal about Daddy Adeboye and not being able to detect a thief stuff? why didnt Jesus kill Judas(his pastor) for "stealing" |
nuclearboy:lol . . .the dude is simply obs~d! ![]() |
@MyJoe, please tell me you dont believe the whole thing was arranged. If Mr.Paul had the skill as vouched for, why did it get it wrong in Euro 08.? |
Image123:We talk later then! cheers! |
Image, did you read the word 'lingeries' as used in my post? |
Image123:Am glad you know that long gowns is not a mark of holiness. Guy whichever way you look at it your assertions dont come close. because before you turn back to accuse a simple female fashioned trouser worn you could get 10,000 fingers pointing against you for wearing singlets and pantaloons that was originally designed for females ONLY and i say ONLY. Or better still, you get get rid of that singlet, pantaloon(boxers), face cap and then you may have you swell day accusing precious souls for wearing what and what. "Col.2:18 Do not let anyone who delights in false humility. . . disqualify you for the prize(heaven). Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions |
Image123:So underwears has got no origin *sighs* Image123:Image, guy you amaze me the more with these posts, we are not talking about garments here we are talking about underwears. so are you saying some people spread their pantaloons(underwears) for Jesus to ride on? goosh this guy the extent peeps will go to argue baseless stuffs |
Image if you come all out here to say that that female in pix one may look just like the female in pix 2 if she poses the way pix 2 it then means you have issues with their poses and not the cloths and therefore i dont see why we should debate this any more. Afterall someone who puts on a 'Holy Sister' long gown could still by omissions or intentionally expose here undies and end up seducing a brother. |
Pls what is seductive about the trousers in Pix 1 , yet it is a form of clothline called TROUSERS the same clothline as that of the Pix2. so you see form aint the issue but the mode in which it is sewn to be worn. |
Image123:Ok maybe i'll need to use graphics this time around ------------------------- Form = Trouser Pix 1: Decently made Pix 2: Indecently made
|
@Image, Bro, you've not responded to some questions i asked up here 1. Why do you wear underwears when it was originally designed and purpose-made for females. 2. Why dont we criticise our wives, sisters and mothers for wearing blouses knowing it was an evolved Shirts originally worn and purpose-made for males. simple questions that need simple answers. All those claim of going to heaven and hearing God fight againt trouser 'wearers' is so childish. |
Image123:@ Image, I still say "Form doesnt matter but the decency and modesty in which you put on that form is what matters" like 1Timothy 2:9 puts it , now see it this way, 1. Do you agree that average of the clothes you and I put on were all descents from the colonials (i.e. the Britons) meaning whether you like it or not, they call the shots while we both respond. Ab initio it was a long gown for females, while the men wore a long sleeve and trousers and in the 50's in Nigeria our educated males and females were seen dressing the same way. Now do you realize that even in that time, they still had alot of females who had their gowns sown to be seductive ( i mean seductive gowns like what we both call the dinner gowns) so you see it was not about the gown (form) but about the way the gown (form) was worn that mattered. 2. Now as time changed, the same britons saw the need for females who started going to schools with males to start putting on shirts (short sleeves, long sleeve and T-shirts), and with time it became known as blouses for females, meaning females wore male shirts and later 'fashinonized' it to be blouses and with all due respects i guess your wives, mothers and sisters wear this 'male shirts' in the name of blouses. how come you dont judge them oh you dont see anything wrong in it abi OK! And to make matters worse you and I are witnesses to the way perverts have turned this form to look seductive, so again you see it was not about the shirts (form) but about the seductive way the shirts (form) were worn that mattered. 3. Again, its a historical fact that females in france originated the wear called 'lingerie' which is designed to be worn under to protect their b.reast as well as buttocks from excessive exposure to heat due to their soft skin nature. it was never designed for males, ask me why? because average males where known to grow alot of hairs on their chest and buttocks which is by nature designed to protect them from heat. Now as time evolved, the same colonials saw the need to start putting on these underwears which THEY BORROWED FROM THE FEMALES and called it pantaloons and singlets. And with all due respect tell me you dont wear pants and singlets today, so you see you are very guilty too Oh do you still say it doesnt matter, before you say that, do you know its a fact today that 38% of gays are drawn to the act because of the sexy way designers (perverts) make it look seductive and attractive. so again you see it was not about the underwears(form) but about the seductive way the underwears (form) are worn that mattered. 4. I laugh when people say trousers were not for females, maybe someone should also tell these critics that pantaloons and singlets were not also designed for males. I still say, our concern as christians should be the emphasis of making these cloth-lines(trousers) decently made and modestly worn by our supposed males and females as was what Paul, Peter et al were trying to say, and to my Bro. Image, pls if you want to wear bra you should at least grow some b.reasts. God bless you! ![]() |
It damn got me surprised too. like seriously why would something that was suppose to bring its owner good box suddenly announced its retirement immediately after the WC. something's fishy i'll say An aged once told me everything in life is not real but a makeup. Beginning to see sense it those words |
Octopus indeed -------------------- Acts 16: 16 One day, as we were [watching the 2010 South African FIFA world Cup], we met [an Octopus] who had a spirit of divination and brought [its] owners a great deal of money by fortune-telling. 18 [It] kept doing this for many days. . . let the rest be story until that day 19 --> culled from the web ![]() |
"If you want to shoot, shoot and dont talk! " - The ugly from the movie [The Good, the Bad and The Ugly] |
When giving 10% is already a very big issue i wonder how you'll respond to giving your all. not so funny! ![]() |
alexleo:Thanks for the response, but i'll wish to point out some few things Response to the red line: Mr. Alex i really dont think dressing would be considered controversial, lets see it this way: 1. In the OT there were certain customs God sternly warned the Nation of Israel to observe, customs like Festivals & Seasons like the Holy convocation (Lev.23), Holy Sabath (lev.23:2), Abstinence from eating unclean animals (Deut.14 --> , Circumcision of the flesh (foreskin) and others but at the advent of the new church, here is what God had to say as regards to ancient customs- John 5: 8 Then Jesus said to him, "Get up! Pick up your mat and walk." 9 At once the man was cured; he picked up his mat and walked. The day on which this took place was a Sabbath, 10 and so the Jews said to the man who had been healed, "It is the Sabbath; the law forbids you to carry your mat." 11 But he replied, "The man who made me well said to me, 'Pick up your mat and walk.'" --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As regards Unclean animals here is how the new church addresses it Acts 10: 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13 Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat." 14 "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean." 15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Here is what Paul had to say about circumcision 1 Cor 7: 19 For circumcision is nothing and counts for nothing, neither does uncircumcision, but [what counts is] keeping the commandments of God. and the list goes on and on, now the crux will therefore mean that if God would allow those things He highly esteemed in the OT to mean little or nothing in the NT it therefore means there was something He was beginning to show more interest in and the bible simply explains it for us in Matt.23:23 they are justice, mercy and faithfulness as well as the greatest which is Love. And lastly is with the issue of the green line, Bro Alex, i am convinced God Almighty will not use those little issues like who wore whose troussers to judge us,Paul puts it better this way Col 2:16-18 16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. 18 Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize(heaven). Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions. So pls lets not come up here to say dresses could denote humility and thus all violators may be shock to see God use that to judge them. God bless you |
Alexeo, I think what you should rather be concerned with is the issue of DECENCY AND MODESTY as regards to dressing and not the form of the dress as the scriptures rightly puts it first it says: - Paul said - Let all things be done in regards to decency and in orderly fashion (1cor.14:40). (take note of the word 'all things' you'll agree that includes the way we dress, talk, and act in christianity) - Peter said - I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety,(1 Tim 2:9) Bro, in this two passages there was never a place that said the females should wear this and not wear that, rather it admonishes that their apparels should be one made with decency and worn modestly. Even in the early church, there were variations as regards the way people dressed and lived, the way the romans put on apparels (whom paul ministered to) were not the same way the corinthians dressed as well as the galatians, colosians, thessalonians. The earnest concern of Paul was to sow the word of God into the hearts of this people and allow the word do its work in them. Recall in Romans when Paul preached saying ". . .be ye transformed by the renewing of your minds. . ." meaning as the minds of these converts were renewed (internally) it will affect the way they will look outwardly (transformed). Mr.Alex we should rather be concerned with the [size=13pt]silly[/size] skirts and [size=13pt]silly[/size] trousers these ladies put on to churches this days and not against trousers that are decently sown and modestly worn. cheers! |
I know what you're trying to get at - incessant argument but i pray it should be constructive such as others could learn ok!? Deducible from your question would mean: - You dont believe Jesus was God in the flesh, else He wont have call upon another God. My tool for validation is John.1:1-2 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. The above verses made it very clear of the existence of a God who dwelt with God, yet was God himself. Now for God's original plan of salvation to be fulfilled it will mean He comes down and identify himself as Man and this He did in Humility even though He had the power to take up the fashion of a God Phil 2:6-8 6 Who, being in the very nature God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There were times in his 3 yrs sojourn He would want to have exhibited His God-image but the low-knowledge and blindfoldness of the people as well as his humility would restrain him to ( Matt.3:17). When Jesus cried to a God on the cross for forsaking Him, he did that because He had submitted his celestial glory for a servant's and thus was nothing but powerless and became obedient(def.submissive of another's will) unto death. Now when he resurrected, He could have his glory and honour back as it was before his coming - John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him(God) known. - Rom 9:5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. - 2 Cor 4:4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. - Col 1:15-20 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. There is a big difference between the Jesus in the flesh and the glory of the ressurrected Christ (one personality - two forms). cheers |
Acidosis:Therefore maybe i should say Skirts and caps are basically meant for women, meaning all the scottish christians and all dudes who wear caps will go to hell. hmmmm does it make any sense? absolutely not! ![]() |
This is really complicated! Questions: - Man of God didnt you check and ask questions before buying cars from people, knowing that "ignorance of the law aint an excuse for crime" - Imagine buying an acccent of hyundai for N335,000 how hilarious, shows how we could fall for cheap things, "awuf dey run belle" - Hear the pastor claiming that Oluwadayomi presented himself as a true believer in the church, who could be trusted. And making matters worse by saying, he (car-thief) was a strong member of the church and he(car-thief) played prominent roles. How silly he sounds all the more. May be he will need some more lectures from Jesus as per Judas Iscariot. - Pastor at least you would have prayed and believe me, the God who revealed things to Joseph and Daniel is still the same today as He was yesterday The bottom line is they are both guilty and should be made subject to the governing rules and authorities of the nation - Nigeria (scriptures) ![]() |
vicjoseph: amodiaquin:If am right, then i think the OP asked that question on: October 10, 2006, 10:37 AM ![]() |
@ nopuqeater, Which of my Jesus exactly, is it the Jesus in the flesh or the Christ after ressurection? pls explain |
Mr.Alexeo, I find your post really exhortive but like Nuclearboy said "The only comment I have on women wearing trousers is that they should be decent - one worn with thongs showing underneath or cut all over in the name of fashion is definitely wrong" lets see it this way God's dealing with Man has always been Spirit-based, for He is a Spirit and let those who worship Him do so in spirit and truth. Trying to introduce cultures into spiritual issues will mean having several doctrines and denomination as it's the case today. - Nigerians before the advent of the colonials were known to put on wrappers i.e. on the waist alone for the men while the women add a little to their chest to cover the breast, even some part of the country then where spotted to having their females going bare even on the chest. which when deduced means THE DRESSING CULTURE in this part of the world then where wrappers only. Now if when the colonials had come with the gospels to this 'primitive Nigerians' and saved souls and yet our primitives still refused to buy into the dressing culture of the white man it then means we would have prolly been seen going on bare till date. Now the onus is "will our refusal to dressing culture of the white have anything to bother God so long as His people have received the good news of Salvation? absolutely no! - Your argument that the females wear troussers to seduce men and therefore it's wrong to put it i'll say is really not a basic at all, take it or leave it, nature by God's design fashioned females to seduce their opp.gender to sexual activity. with all due respect, i'll say you were seduced by your wife's beauty consciously or unconsciously to marrying her even though she must have prolly done her's in a modest and decent way. which is where I think the issue of trousser doesnt play a part in seduction rather its with the personalities involved. Besides even the skirts females wear both have the wrong ones and do the right ones, same applies for female pants. cheers! |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 (of 77 pages)

. or maybe i should also go back and check out just what the Jesus said about tithing 


wearing T-shirts with Police inscription now a ban in Ogun state?
ooopps