Trustman's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Trustman's Profile › Trustman's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (of 20 pages)
[size=16pt]MY SUBMISSION ON F17: OBTAINING PECUNIARY ADVANTAGE BY DECEPTION[/size] Essentially a Pecuniary Advantage involves money; it is an added monetary benefit gained by being richer than previously was the case. It has become common to hear preaching and read books propagating the idea that pastors are to be the CEOs as well as Chief Accounting Officers of their churches. In practice this is what obtains in many owner-founder churches. What the combining of these two positions mean is that the pastor is solely responsible for how the church finances are utilized. As a result the decision as to how money is spent is done by them. Employing such money for personal use therefore becomes easy for such pastors. This is in addition to other means employed these pastors to fleece their sheep for personal pecuniary advantage. As recently as this October 2014 news reports carried the warning of the Chairman of the Lagos chapter of Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN), warning that the body will not hesitate to separate itself from any church leader within the body who involves in extra-biblical practices for the purposes of making pecuniary gains. This goes on to show that the issue of obtaining pecuniary advantage(s) by deception is very much around with us. In the said report the PFN Chairman warned pastors against using psychology and human wisdom to wrest money from their members, he said the time had come for the body to act fast against any pastor that indulges in such practice. This warning was not just to prevent such from happening but because, according to the Chairman, some pastors have actually been found to collect consultation fees before counseling and prayers. Other things done include sale of sand, mantle, olive oil that is purportedly from Israel and asking members to give certain amount of money from which they are told they will get ten times the money at specific time. Many now refer to pastors as “pastorpreneurs” inferring that they have turned their calling into business enterprise. Many pastors are said to use their large membership to bargain for favours and other advantages from political leaders especially in an election year. The ostentatious lifestyles of some pastors seem out of place with the economic realities of the moment and that of the poor majority of their congregation. As recently as 21 November, 2014 Pope Francis went against priests who are “attached to money”. He was said to have condemned at a mass priests and laity who impose unreasonable charges for weddings, baptisms, blessings and other services. He is reported to have said that “It is scandalous when the Temple, the House of God, becomes a place of business …” A recent post on Nairaland brought this matter very close: https://www.nairaland.com/2014407/exposed-pst-chris-caught-asking#28330302Marchman: When church members are ‘DIRECTED’ to contribute a fixed amount towards their pastor’s birthday, money which MUST be raised before a particular date, that is NO LONGER a willing giving. It has become an order or a command to give toward the birthday. It is no longer following 2 Corinthians 9:7 “Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver”. It is the exact opposite of it. And all these are for the pecuniary advantage of the pastor or his ministry. I REST MY CASE ON F17, FOR NOW. |
Gombs:It is not a verse i gave you. I gave you a whole chapter to look at but as usual you just glanced through and yet hope to get something without giving attention to details. mbaemeka:You both should see these for starters; These are from the ESV Leviticus 23: 14 And you shall eat neither bread nor grain parched or fresh until this same day, until you have brought the offering of your God: it is a statute forever throughout your generations in all your dwellings. Leviticus 23:21 And you shall make a proclamation on the same day. You shall hold a holy convocation. You shall not do any ordinary work. It is a statute forever in all your dwelling places throughout your generations. Leviticus 23:31 You shall not do any work. It is a statute forever throughout your generations in all your dwelling places. Even when you go back to Leviticus 16 the same things are found all over. PS - So maybe you can now answer my question: How many of them do you or your church still follow today? |
mbaemeka:Leviticus 23 stated many things God said were to be done forever or 'throughout your generations' or words to that effect. How many of them do you or your church still follow today? |
Gombs:First, can you see the point we are making? Your question has been answered long ago in my response to Goshen360 maybe a page or so before. Why not try and seek clear understanding of one issue before wanting to jump to another. |
Gombs:You are the ones that things are difficult for to comprehend. Now, let's go about it this way: 1. In Acts 15 the issues were clear - At that council this was said about some of them: "But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses." (Acts 15:9). In contention were: - firstly, that it is necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised physically. - secondly, that it was necessary for them to be ORDERED to keep the law of Moses. At the end of the day the decision arrived at which cancelled any necessity for physical circumcision as a precondition for anything in the spiritual life of the Christian was: "28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell." The things listed by the Apostles through the Holy Spirit ( I emphasize THE HOLY SPIRIT because it was not just arbitrarily done by the Apostles) that the believers should abstain from were specific and definite. It does not give room for anyone to want to try and add to it TODAY. Can anything be clearer than this? Now, it did not mean no one MUST circumcise again. It only meant circumcision was no longer a condition or a sign of God's covenant with the NT believer. The sign is no longer a physical one but a spiritual one - the Holy Spirit - Ephesians 1: 13& 14 Again let me point you to Romans 4: "9 Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. 10 How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. 11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well," What do we see here: 1. Abraham was saved by faith in Christ, as he was then revealed, BEFORE he was circumcised. 2. The verse 11 tells us the purpose was to make him the head representative of all who would believe WITHOUT being circumcised. What does this tell us? Simply this: circumcision is not the key issue for the spiritual life of the believer today. In 1 Corinthians 7 we are told this: "Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision." Why? Because circumcision is NO LONGER a precondition today for anything in the spiritual life of the Christian. In Galatians 6 we see this: "12 It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh who would force you to be circumcised, and only in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13 For even those who are circumcised do not themselves keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh. 14 But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. 16 And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God." This portion should again be self explanatory. Lastly, understand that the principle of INSPIRATION guarantees that God's complete message to us was put down perfectly in Scripture. |
Goshen360:Absolutely! My position also. |
GombsYou can see defense mechanism all the way. Even when advised: "Don't study them in defense mode, seek the truth out of them." Humility will make it possible to learn, arrogance and defiance will make it impossible. |
BabaGnoni:BabaGnoni, You've succinctly put forward the points. Like it's usually said: 'A word is enough for the WISE' I've said it somewhere that the label antitither(s) is a MISNOMER. None of us on this side of the divide is putting up a STOP SIGN. That will be against the liberty of the believer. Unfortunately just as the simplest of Highway Code signs is strange to many, our WARNING SIGN is perhaps unfamiliar to those on the other side of the tithe debate. Rather than take time to UNDERSTAND the differences in the signs they would rather stick to their long-held positions. Talking about road signs I've recently had to send a driver to a Driving School because, even though he 'drives', he lacked the basic knowledge about driving, not to talk about road signs. Strange? Not in our Naija context really. He was given a notebook to put down each day's theoretical & practical activities hoping that will reinforce his learning. When faced with new realities the Christian needs to take the same kind of step I gave that driver - go and relearn. Humility will make it possible to learn, arrogance and defiance will make it impossible. A pastor I've benefited from made this statement: 'A right thing done in a wrong way is wrong. A wrong thing done in a right way is wrong. A right thing has to be done in the right way for it to be right.' Our people need to know, in this case, that a legitimate thing such as giving done in the wrong way is wrong before God. Giving, which is a right thing to do, must be done in the right way for it to be right before God. |
It is unfortunate that for a Christian thread the level of truthfulness expected is only found in a few. That the forum is largely faceless should make owning up to error an easy thing. But that is not to be. Even an exact and logical subject as maths is contested because some do not want to admit error. Is that a reflection of the personal lives of the players? Those of us who say that tithing is no longer compulsorily required of the New Testament believer do so because We want Christians to enjoy the freedom into which Christ has set them free. Those who insist on tithing are leading them them into a yoke of slavery. Making Christians tithe by means of any carrot and stick approach is tantamount to manipulating them to give. Asking anyone to go back to the so-called pre-law or tithing by faith options is not only misleading but mischievous. When the Christian is not left to decide from his heart what to give, any system employed to get him to give becomes gimmick which nullifies the giving. It is that serious that Christians need to know how to give rightly. |
Gombs:I challenge you again to clearly paste where traded my honesty or else I put it to you that you are not only the dishonest one but devious. Continue to live your life of duplicity and denial. Your double-dealing will soon be exposed. |
Gombs:While you are at playing maths, I await: 1. Your 'Thank you' for my eye-opener to you on Acts 15 position. 2. Your apology. |
Gombs: You conveniently ignore Acts 15:5 - "But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses." Tithing and circumcision were part of 'the law of Moses' referred to by these believers belonging to the party of the Pharisees. Therefore if the decision was that all, except the things specified, were not binding on the Christian it follows then that circumcision and tithing are included in the all that are not binding. See what you wrote: "they decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the Law of Moses, including the rules concerning circumcision of males." 'NOT OBLIGATED' means not binding, not compelled, not under any pressure, not forced, not commanded, etc. You can see then that this renders your first sentence incorrect. If the DECISION was that the necessity for circumcision and tithing was not obligatory on Gentile Christians then it simply means those things were cancelled out for the Christian. You will agree with me too that, from the Council meeting, those things which were required of the Christians were clearly specified. It then also follows that no one has the right to insist or claim that anything not so specified is required of the Christian unless such is subsequently stated in the New Testament epistles. |
Gombs: Prove that the Jerusalem Council did not cancel out the necessity for circumcision and tithing. Your failure to do so will mean you admit it is so. Clearly paste the posts where according to you I made 'numerous blunders' for all to see. If you can't then I demand an apology for attempting to blackmail me. You and your clan are so eager to find faults rather than be objective. When you hit a brick wall you are pained. |
Gombs:Issues, context, doctrine! You can't really handle these, can you? I have thrown you a challenge. I await your response. I have equally shown you how the Jerusalem Council knocked out the necessity for Christians to either be circumcised or be forced to tithe. If you're teachable you will learn. |
Matters Arising On the issue of circumcision I want to believe we're now in agreement that it is NOT a precondition for anything today for the Christian. That was what Romans 4 clearly explained. "9 Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. 10 How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. 11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well," This agrees with the position at the Jerusalem Council. At that council this was said about some of them: "But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses." (Acts 15:9). At the end of the council the Apostles and others agreed through the Holy Spirit to this: "28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell." That decision through the Holy Spirit cancelled any necessity for physical circumcision as a precondition for anything in the spiritual life of the Christian. That decision also cancelled the necessity for any other observance, such as TITHING, as a requirement under the spiritual life of the Christian. In addition, there is NOWHERE in scripture that talks about nor recommend the so-called 'tithing by faith'. Not one. So, trying to justify the necessity for tithing by such a name is a fallacy. |
Gombs:Broken-off fragment. |
Gombs:Say, is this an open forum or a restricted one? You have your liberty but don't attempt to curtail mine. Ok? |
Gombs:You have just given yourself away again. We have not finished dealing with the matters on this thread and you want us to go off to other ones. You are confirming what i have said repeatedly. For your information, each Christian has his spiritual gift and God's allotted sphere of assignment. Within that sphere when he does his service well he receives God's approval. Success to God may be completely different from man's measure so it would out of place to begin to reduce success to figures like you guys have done in recent times. |
Gombs That's your pseudo name. Like you admitted clear truths that Abraham was not Isrealite.? Like you accepted clear truth that your noble board member said eve had sex with a...emmm... ?Until you quote where i said something out of place do not expect me to be forced into another man's issue if i don't want to. If that hurts you, sorry about that. You, my friend, are a wonderful blueprint for denial. You want me to commit to you? You must be joking. I am convinced beyond words that Pastor Chris is a man sent from God. Like it or not. You can't even teach yourself, with numerous blunders, yet you want to teach me or even more Pastor Chris. Provide me a more truer gospel, and I'd listen to you. Till thenIssues, content, doctrine! When it comes to these, you guys fall flat on your faces. You only prefer to spill out your leader's position even when it is clear to you that it does not quite line up with scripture. So you look for escape routes or resort to banter. That is why you RUN AWAY from answering so many of the questions posed to you. |
Denial When Gombs and company refusal to admit to a clear truth, they live in denial. Because they seem unable to cope with the possibility that their long-held positions on several issues are wrong they seek for an escape route in denial. They can face the prospects of changing perhaps several years of wrong teaching. As a result they put all they can muster into trying to 'prove' that their perceived opponents' positions are wrong no matter how ridiculous their arguments are. They also display excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to their leader. Even if a clear portion of scripture is shown them on an issue, as long it conflicts with their leader's position they will refuse it.This expression is cultic. That is why it is almost impossible for them to disagree with anything their leader says or any stance he takes on an issue. |
Gombs & Co, Does The Midas Touch have anything to say on the issue below: Marchman: |
Gombs:I take it then that you're unable to answer. We'll move on to some other things for now. |
Gombs:I'm saying that I'm eager to have your thoughts on those questions. |
Gombs:I would sincerely like to know your answers to those questions. |
Gombs:For starters, BabaGnoni's questions: "Why are "healing" schools FULL of genuinely and undisputedly crippled wheelchair-ridden people who NEVER GET HEALED? Why is cerebral palsy sufferer(s) turned away from approaching "healing" pastor(s) on stage at "healing" school(s)?" |
Gombs:Do you prefer this to giving straightforward answers to the questions? |
Gombs, Bidam & company lose steam very easily. When they see that their arguments are being dismantled they resort to derision, false accusation, gibe and the like so as to draw attention away from being faced with the truth of their wrong stand or false position. Quote a scripture to them that clearly points out the fallacy of their claim or position and the next thing they'll quickly do is quote another, hoping that the new passage will now become the focus of attention. All in a bid to divert attention away from their error. Because of lack of humility they find it difficult, not only to objectively look at opposing views, but also to actually admit they are wrong even when on the inside of them they know are wrong. Hero worship is another major issue for these guys. If their 'hero' claims a position with regards to any issue, they want to hold on to it at all cost in spite of a superior position being shown them. Except they become like little children ready to learn their 'salvation' is far. |
Gombs:You should clearly tell how I've been dishonest. You've been on this for a while now. We'll soon know who's been what. ![]() |
Gombs:Wind go soon blow and fowl yansh go ...... |
Gombs and co are 'tied' to the old covenant because they must necessarily use it to justify MANY of their stand and practices today. Romans 4 states this about Abraham: "10 How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. 11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, 12 and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised. This portion makes it clear that all who believe without being circumcised, have righteousness counted to them as well. Circumcision was for all successive generations of Israel and Israel ALONE. It was a sign in the flesh to mean they identified with the covenant God made. Because they can't distinguish between what is for the NATION Israel and what is for the New Covenant they (Gombs and Co) lump things up. They therefore do all they can to twist scripture to line up with their preconceived ideas. PS They even twist people's posts and run away from questions that clearly show their positions as faulty or false. |
Gombs:You too have conveniently refuse to address the issues I raised with you here; or are you waiting for help?: trustman: |
