₦airaland Forum

JeSoul:
Unfortunately been up since 6am and will be at work practically the whole of today

Aw, sorry to hear that Jess. Be sure to get some rest later.

_{TV ends vigil and breaks fast - with rare tuna steak and avo salad if you must know - strengthened and ready for battle. There is much at stake. The beauty of the kings daughter has spread abroad and the finest gentile princes head towards the holy city, hoping for the reward of her hand. Hmmmm thinks TV, just enough time to put them to flight before dessert - apple crumble and custard - then checks flights to the east coast. No dullin'  !}

God bless
TV


_{ps will revisit the heaven/hell as motivation  - or not - notion later. rushing out.}

GODSON2009:
however the part which i will comment on on this thread is that which addresses which of the elders or five fold might have pre eminence.
the way i see it,the prophet has been unwittingly given pre eminence due to the fact that most christians,especially the young christians whose faiths need regular boosting and who constitute the majority of the global church requires the services of the prohet more than even that of the pastor.

I'm sure I've touched on that already. In talking about church - the gathering and the local congregation - there is no pre-eminence amongst elders. Some may well be more mature, they may be variously gifted, minister in differing capacities, but I personally do not see pre-eminence.

In reference to the five-fold, I would still like to know what role an apostle or prophet performs in the congregation. And what is the "unbalance" that results due to their absence or not being accorded due prominence?

GODSON2009:
im not sure if you r also the one that made the comment that a christian is not bound by heirachy or structure,but if you did then i will have to disagree with that as well simply because our GOD loves order,also the bible says precept upon precept,line after lineincluding several places in the old and new testament where respect for constituted authority was severally highlighted

Without reading through I can,t say for sure, but to clarify, in the church - as gathering - sphere, we must all be subject to shepherds and duly constituted authority, just like we would be at home, in the work place or in the community at large. But my view remains that a Christian is not bound by "church hierarchy" in anything but church.

God bless
TV

Hi GODSON 2009, thanks for honouring the request.

GODSON2009:
@tv01
i didnt realise such a thred existed,funny enough i agree with most of your original assertions on this particular thread,so it seems to me that you are disagreeing with yourself more on the other thread for some reason,

Ah, ah. Come now. On the other thread you disagreed with me and on this one I disagreed with myself  . Brother please!

Everything I have said on both threads is in consonance. This one speaks more to what was a digression on the other and I gave leave there as the initial assertions regard the pastoral role were yours and we were waiting for you to enunciate and provide back-up for your position on SAP. I also pointed out that you seemed to misunderstand me as much as disagree with me, hence my efforts to clarify matters.

Having said all that, if you agree with most of my views on this thread - which are the same as on the other  !, why don't we discuss areas of difference and see if our respective positions are in any way reconciled?

God bless
TV

Deep Sight:
Thank you, but you are yet to say if YOU will be celibate for life in the event that you do not marry.

Yes. His grace is sufficient. I counted the potential cost at the outset. And as much as I desire holy matrimony, its all or nothing. His will be done.

Deep Sight sir, no offence, but in the face of one who lives it, your argument - although forcefully asserted  - simply falls apart. Its not theology, neither is it doctrine. It is not by command nor religiously enforced - I don't belong to any sect. It is not without experience of the alternative and neither has there been any detrimental psycholgical or physiological effects. In fact, quite the opposite. I could go on, but in the absence of any genuinely enquiring discussion piece, I hold mine.

Having handled always trumps having heard.

God bless
TV

JeSoul:
Oga, that one no ga happen at all hehe even if I no find for hia, I will hunt either you, Krayola or TV down

Sister JeSoul come 0? In the highly unlikely event that you do have to do a spot of hunting will you favour the unbeliever over god fearing me? Chei !

_{Bro' TV hastens to schedule more prayer, fasting and night vigils in place of his proposed trip to the east coast !}

God bless
TV

Hi GODSON2009.

Per concerns about derailing, I have ressurected an erlier thread in a similar vein to the one we are discussing. Lets resume there if you please.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-30552.0.html

Cheers
TV

Ressurected so I can discuss with GODSON2009

ilosiwaju:
Yoruba people have an adage that goes thus:
Eni meji kii padanu iro which is translated as: Two people cant both fall victim to a lie, if the listener does not know he is being lied to, the liar surely knows himself.
Meaning, it's just a test in Hypocrisy 101, you know the answer though you dont have to provide it. But i go like hear that your own gist sha, would you oblige?

Not sure about the import of your "owe"? but like I said, if you can give a cogent reason for the show of hands, I'm happy to bare my heart - or expose my ynash as the case may be !

God bless
TV

ilosiwaju:
The christian point of view on pre-marital se.x is fundamentally flawed on this one.

The Christian view is there should be no physical intimacy outside wedlock. Quite simple. I see no flaws?

ilosiwaju:
He goes further on his perversive trip by implying / recommending that men should only get married if they cant hold on their sexu.al urge. In other words, women are property(which is not new in the jewish world) and are to be taken to the altar only because of agro .

St. Paul totally lost it there, he should not get a scrap of praise from anyone of the feminine folk who knows what self-worth means. WHAT? Women only as se.x objects? That's a sweet example of condescending. I am however willing to hear some defense for him from Nlanders here(Barrister Deepsight, offering pro-bono services? ) and some enlightenment of course.

Here is my ask (jesoul, other ladies and everyone here), for those emphasizing on marriage before bang, would you as the lady(even if you were told) go into marriage because your boyfriend is se.x-starved with a piece of laminated paper as evidence of the legitimacy of the union? yeah, i thought so too. The jews are a set of chauvinists and it only amazes me why we still swallow all they spit hook, line and sinker!

If - not that it is so - the Christian position is for men to marry to slake the urge - as if women don't get it too? - how is that worse than the alternative? Don't marry her - and take on the responsibility for and care of a wife - just chop and clean mouth Does that not reduce women to lust objects? Or is there another alternative I'm missing?

So how does female self-worth play out if men get to romp without commitment ?

ilosiwaju:
By a show of hands posts, how many(of the proponents) here really adhere to the no-se.x-before-marriage thingy? You're free to lie though. Only asking.

If you give me further insight into the reason for this poll, I'm more than happy to discuss my personal experience.

God bless
TV

contd

GODSON2009
good so he/she is competent in the role of a sheperd which i agree with and has been my point however going back to your 1st point(no 1)isnt that a mild contradiction? or maybe you ment to say co-sheperd or co-elder lool

TV
No contradiction – mild, medium or mature! Shepherding is to be performed by suitably qualified elders labouring in concert. No pre-eminence. That’s not to say some may not be more gifted in certain areas than others or minister in different ways or have been elders for different lengths of time.

GODSON2009
i totally and unequivocaly disagree,the bible out of many other things is also a moral and religious compass,if you feel like you know everything there is to know as a christian and also are imminently capable of handling every single thing and situation that comes your way, then that is your personal prerogative but speaking for the majority of christians, i believe the church leadership,specifically the five fold have been relevant till today because clearly christian growth is for a lifetime pastor adeboye when asked about his level as a christian said he is still learning and taking each day as it comes,we have heard him admit to mistakes. same goes for several frontline men and women of GOD IRRESPECTIVE OF YOUR DENOMINATIONAL PERSUATIONS even romans 12;6 recognises that we do not have the same measure of faith hence enjoins us to prophecy,only in proportion to our individual level of faith

TV
And you have every right too. But again, I feel you miss my point here. I’m talking about church structure and operation. But as to individuals, three things. Has one attained to “till” as outlined earlier? Is one led by the spirit? What of the maturity Paul wrote about in Hebrews 6?

GODSON2009
again i totally disagree with you,and i will take this as what it is,your own personal and private stance which has absolutely no bearing on the bible i read

TV
I read you your rights already sir! I asked earlier, what an apostle does in the local congregation, stating your conviction here would help. Perhaps extend that to explain what an apostle does?

GODSON2009
im sorry but again you have contradicted yourself here,apostel paul,was a leader,same as peter e.t.c and they all went out preaching the gospel and convering unbelievers.what do you call what apostle paul was doing all through acts onwards if not over seeing  ? have you read all his letters to the different churches and then compare it to what an overseer does these days??

TV
Please outline the contradiction. I agree Paul – not so much Peter – went about preaching. But the outworking was the same. Preach, convert, gather local believers, raise up elders, move on. The church is then self-sufficient. The Apostolic was to erect the structure according to the blueprint and ensure the eldership function was in place. He didn’t even concern himself with the deaconate. Elders could attend to that once in place.

He wasn’t overseeing in the “G.O.” sense. He was strengthening, counselling, exhorting. These were new believers, new churches, but the apostle wasn’t shepherding or overseeing them remotely. How could one effectively oversee on the road, or by the means of communication extant in those times? He new he would be “departing”, why was there no succession plan if he was GO? He merely exhorted the shepherds to keep doing so and without self interest.

One formed even if there were apostles present, on a day to day basis, they would function as elders/pastors/shepherds, exactly as Paul claimed to do when he was in situ.

GODSON2009
no one is arguing this fact with you,which you seem to be re gurgigating,but paul did not move on,he adressed timothy as a singular leader and timothy wasnt the only one moreover he nurtured and wrote letters of encouragement to all the churches so i dont know where you got your own interpretation from

TV
Timothy laboured with Paul. Timothy’s work in Ephesus was in effect an extension of Pauls. Pauls instruction was to do what he would have done “raise up suitably qualified elders”. If you like, Timothy was working to the same apostolic blueprint. He wasn’t a presiding bishop or overseer as many would like to label him to justify what obtains.

God bless
TV

Apologies, I've been delayed.

GODSON2009
first of all,i hope you will permit me if i say that from all i have read of your comments,this is simply your own personal views of what the functions of the pastor should be in the body of believers.

TV
Permission granted. O boy you are taking this constituted authority thing to far 0! I was only joking about that elder thing!
But seriously! Absolutely. My views, based on my understanding. Presumably exactly what you posts are? Your views, based on your understanding? Hence your use of the phrase “personal convictions”?

GODSON2009
while this is clearly stated and understood in the context of ephesians 4;11,in fact a secondary school bible studies student knows that none of them have pre-eminence over each other. i dont re collect having said a pastor is more than a prophet or evangelist,

TV
You appear to be misunderstanding me as well as disagreeing with me. That’s not to say you would agree if you properly understood, so let me take it upon myself to clarify further.

Ephesians 4:11
And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,

Does this mean;
1. All those 5 are present and have roles in a local congregation?
2. Does it mean all the functions are currently extant?
3. Could it be talking linearly - historically to date - and not just at a point in time?
4. What does an Apostle do? What would one do in a local congregation?
5. Per 4. For an Evangelist?

That was food for thought and not to overly digress, let me state this. A local congregation only requires shepherds and deacons – who are not even mentioned in this verse – to operate the biblically outlined church structure.
In view here is the role of the pastors/shepherds. I am not contrasting or comparing or grading them against the other 4 roles mentioned. I hope I have clarified that point.

GODSON2009
all i said was that the traditional orthodox churches and new generation pentecostal churches as presently constituted have had "pastors" as shepherds of  the congregation,

TV
We are not debating what obtains, that is self evident. What we are discussing is what the bible outlines and the scriptural narrative depicts.

My first point was there was nothing to suggest sole authority pastorship – SAP - in the bible and the congregation was to be shepherded by a “plurality of elders” – POE.

Indeed that was the first question posed to you. Show scriptural backing for SAP, which you still haven’t done, instead referencing “what obtains”, tradition and the dictionary.

I am not suggesting a congregation is shepherded by a mix of the five – in any proportion – in Ephesians 4:11, or the seniority or right of pre-eminence (if it exists or matters) between them.

GODSON2009
now we can look at all these churches and begin to find where a collection of the five have collectively made every decision including preaching altogether every sunday the fact that a pastor leads and sheperds does not automatically mean he is "the boss" in the context you are looking at it

TV
I hope you understand my position now and realise that you misunderstood my context. Hopefully this point is now moot?

GODSON2009
but it certainly gives him/her the mandate to have a say when a brother wants to marry a sister in a church  he/she is a sheperd of. .in addittion i am struggling to see the relevance of this to the threadster's comment but oh well,

TV
As the discussion progress, we should touch on roles, scope and spheres and hopefully give a fuller answer to the OP’s question. To do that we have to build logically. IMO the short answer is no. In discussion format it would be line upon line.
No mandate – scripturally anyway – is given. Counsel can be asked for and given, but it is not a question of asking for permission. That is for the familial authority to grant and its there the responsibility lies. Church/pastoral involvement is at best adjunct. Not mandatory and not binding. Mandate ke?

So in reference to “inform the pastor” scripturally there is no such thing, which was what we honed in on. If changed to “inform a pastor/elder/shepherd” the answer is still no, and there’s still no mandate. That’s not to say there is no recourse to counsel. But first recourse is always to the family. You seem to have overlooked that point in your Abraham/Isaac example.

GODSON2009
i disagree with that unless you can show me assertive proof by back up or supporting bible verses to that effect that it has a time frame,also you should have realised that i dislike open ended statements where does "for the most part" start and end sire?

TV
Happy to do so sir, let’s read on;

12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;

Please note the first word in v13. Please read it from v11 again, And He himself gave, till. It’s for a time, serves a purpose and when that purpose is served, finito. I appreciate you may have different convictions. I say for the most part, because as long as people are being added to the body, there will be some on the path to “till”. But for an individual, as some stage “till” must be reached/attained. It’s a journey. The relevant function/role can equip/help you there. Also note that in a larger context, it’s talking about the whole church and not individuals. Is this now clarified somewhat? Your dislike of open-ended statements is noted.

GODSON2009
secondly i dont think you have read that bible verse well or else you wont say they deal with only the physical,last i read prophecies is more spiritual,same goes for teaching the word of GOD evangelising and what the five fold deals with,christian needs and development is more geared towards the spiritual which will drive the physical go and read watchman nee's book"breaking of the outer man,release of the inner man"

TV
For the most part believer fellowship will be physical. Hence the need for structure and functions during gatherings. “The fullness” comes from The Lord via the Holy Spirit. A whole new discussion. Maybe someday we’ll have the pleasure.

I managed to read a half a Watchman Nee book once. First time I never finished a book. Maybe someday. It’s not war games or fillums. You got to live it for yourself. Not to denigrate anyones writings of course.

There’s a well known “prophetess”who is big in certain circles here. I meet a lot of ladies who follow her. They go to one of her seminars and she talks about wilderness. They come out and start shouting wilderness. Christianity is not something you get taught or recieve via doctrine. It’s something you experience, something you live.


GODSON2009
while the church is a part of the life of a christian,choosing a partner from both the female and male perspective is also a very important crossroad in one's life as choosing the wrong partner can be disasterous as several biblical instances have shown us, samson and delilah is one,including several GODLY people who were led astray to their destruction due to a union with unGODLY women,there were ocassions when GOD forbade the israelites from marrying from specific tribes e.g the moabites showing the importance of GODly counsel in these matters

TV
Agreed, its important. Samson disobeyed his parent not the Rabbi. It still remains the family prerogative. Church elders can be sought out if required, but not mandatory and not binding. Basic Xtian requirements are clearly laid out. If one can’t adhere to those probably not readt to marry anyway. Ultimately a pastor cannot forcefully stop a wrong/bad/improper union happening anyway. Per your quote, even God did not force his instructions down their throats?

GODSON2009
well i am yet to see what particular part of a christian life  the church is not relevant,which i hope u will educate me on,but we are talking about marriage and without question i stand by my surmissionthat the church and also the pastor either as a "co-leader" or not is very relevant

TV
The church is only in view when believers gather. Church and by extension elders have no authority in your home, work life, social life or anything outside the gathering. What they feed can influence, motivate, colour or drive, but their authority is confined to the church sphere. As I noted, your Christian faith, beliefs and worldview should colour everything you do. Hopefully your relationship with Christ goes with you everywhere.

Apologies for the formatting, spelling and incomplete response, but its late and I’m tired. I’ll perhaps attempt to tidy it up tomorrow. Conscious of not responding in a timely manner.

Talk soon

God bless
TV

GODSON2009:
well irrespective of what you think this is about,i hope you realise the pastor and elders like mr tv 01 has helpfully pointed out in his comments are spiritual fathers to the congregation,

Hello GODSON2009, Hope you are well. I have every intention of replying to your earlier post as soon as time permits. A point to note, the statement above attributed to me - that was me you were referring to right? - is simply not a view of mine. "Spiritual fathers",  Mummies in Israel" and the like are not notions I subscribe too.

Thanks

God bless
TV

Deep Sight:
Sexual incompatibity has destroyed countless marriages. It is also a leading cause of infidelity.

I'll make my small contribution to slaying the myth that is "sexual incompatibility" (SI/SC) to rest.

But first the notion the "sexual incompatibility" has destroyed countless marriages is simply not true. SI is hardly ever cited as leading cause of diverce or seperation.

Its equally false to say its a leading cause of infidelity. Does it mean that all those who "test drive" before marriage will never be unfaithful? Lack of commitment, understanding, selfishness, weakness, lust, money and a whole host of other things come way higher up that list.

Except in extreme cases, SI is not really an issue/does not apply.


My take

intimacy, is a biomechanical function, so like eating walking or any other BF, unless you are physically impaired it shouldn't be a problem. Like othe BF, it is something that one can practice and learn, understand and improve in.

Physical attraction is good, but at best a starter for ten. On the basis of that, friendship and intimacy of a non-sexual nature can be allowed to develop. Mutual understanding, shared experiences, common aspirations, ideals and values can all be brought to the fore and explored. Real long-lasting compatibility ascertained and built into a real relationship. Or not, if things don't develop aright, in which case the exercise can be abandoned. Can I also say that even without the starter for ten, if you meet someone and the relationship develops more or less as outlined, sexual desire will follow naturally.

So you've built up the relationship, developed the non-sexual intimacy, explored, discussed, agreed and comitted. Then its time to talk about it. In detail. What, when how, why, what if. Are there physical issues. Can they be counselled for or treated? Are there mental or physological hang-ups that need resolving. Likewise? Any potential reasons why we shouldn't proceed? If not you are good to go. Please be be wary of extended courtships.

A right foundation is the way to go. Enjoy. You so will and be blessed too. It'll be secure, fresh, based on love, commitment, trust and a mutual desire to satisfy each other. Icing. Icing, as it won't be all of the relationship, but an intimate, delightful and exclusive pleasure that further binds you as one. SI or any such notions will be effectively non-existent.

You see physical love which is bourne out of the above will only make things better, deeper, stronger. Physical love in and of itself will not engender compatibility, commitment or any of the essentials for an enduring and satisfying relationship. What it will do, is leave the genders confused and at loggerheads, leave psychological scars, bring disease, lead to abortion, STD's, unwanted preganancies, unwanted children and transient relationships.

What if after ensuring SC, you meet someone, who you suspect you'd be more SC with. Someone with whom you share "mad chemisrty". Does that give you the right to leave? Chemistry/attraction as a basis, no. As a starter, yes. People change, situations change, unfortunate things happen that can alter the sexual dynamic for a period or forever. Is SI the out you were looking for. You'll probably need one if the foundation isn't right. What will keep you together?

This wasn't written for those that seek to; slake lust/natural urges? or are driven by them, hook-up, test-drive, experiment, "give-reign to their sexuality" or any other such notions. Its aimed at Christian believers for review and scrutiny in light of their understanding/beliefs. No offense.

God bless
TV

estrella:
I'm a young lady who loves God and is trying to walk with him as honestly as I can.

In truth - and if true - you are blessed and the recipient of grace. But there will be tribulations to all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus.

estrella:
I have one problem however;

Just the one? Envious looks all round

estrella:
i feel extremely carnal when I am around my fiance!

If you mean "feel carnal" as in "physically attracted to", that is to be expected and even welcomed if he is your fiance - that is you are engaged to be married no?

If you mean "feel carnal" as in you act on those feelings, that is another matter entirely.

estrella:
we have been together for over five years now and we are talking about getitng married.

So are you, or are you not engaged? Are you what is known as boyfriend/girlfriend, engaged, or courting? As has been noted, 5 years is a long time to be in a close relationship without completion. In all but extreme cases, it would be described as folly. Are you old enough and physically and psychologically mature enough to marry? Do you understand the institution, the expectations, the roles and responsibilities, the holiness and beauty of the God-given covenant? If so and if you are agreed, please send out invites.

estrella:
We made a vow to keep ourselves till we get married

Vow or no vow, that is the expectation as a god-fearing, Christ loving Christian. Non-negotiable

estrella:
and even imposed a no kissing rule, just hugs.

Given Christian licence, I wouldn't fault that, but if you are weak and it leads into "no go" areas, then you are just settng yourself up for a fall and the consequent problems.

estrella:
however,we have broken that rule a couple of times and its mostly because we both have mad chemistry. A peck can cause as much damage as a french kiss for both of us.

The chemistry does not alter the expectation. You should not allow it or use it as an excuse to alter the dynamic. As previous, don't set yourself up.

estrella:
The thing is,when he isn't around me,Im perfectly fine.I feel like Im making progress with God,I read my bible and Im on a lovely spiritual plane.

Fortify yourself here. My experience, was this;
1. Believe abstinence whilst single is what God expects
2. Renew your mind and let this be your express will - matching His
3. Trust God for the grace to resist and to change
4. Don't take the grace of God for granted or tempt Him (yourself) by being in settings that could make you stumble
5. Persevere

estrella:
The minute he comes around,I always have to fight the urge to sleep with him.

If that is an error you have made or repeatedly made, I would suggest you go back to my point above and even before.
1. Take a long hard look at yourself and consider "do you really love God"? That doesn't mean you love singing or any other a number of other things people tranlate loving God too mean. It means;

a. Trusting
b. Believing
c commiting
d. Obeying

2. Genuinely repent and commit the issue to God. Don't make promises - you mentioned a vow earlier, no? - just ask for forgiveness and help. Cast yourself on Him and ask for mercy and grace.

estrella:
I think thoughts that shock even me when i see him and it bothers me greatly.I don't feel this way for any other person except him

What should bother you are your actions as a result of those thoughts and if you are "seeing him" in settings that are conducive to those actions being the wrong one's. Flee temptation.

estrella:
As a christian, does this make me carnal?

Christianity is a journey. And every walk is individual. Until one becomes "as He was in this world" we are to a degree carnal/immature. You said earlier this was your "one problem", its a biggie, but not for Him. Recognising the desire to act on the urge as carnal is right though. If you try and sell yourself the notion that acting on it is godly, you could exacerbate things.

estrella:
does this mean I'm not really born again? Is it wrong for me to want him the  way I do? please I need the advice of mature christians,

1. There are varying understandings and uses of of born again, suffice to say you are a believer and put your faith in Christ?
2. The desire is God given and not wrong in itself. Satisfying it out of the God given context of marital union is.
3. What you need more is a true desire to follow and grace to obey. In taking advise, please seperate the wheat from the chaff.

Apart from the vow - which is not really operative - you said little about the man in question? Is he a believer? If I were to query him on maturity, understanding etc as I did you earlier, I would question his readiness as a man to be a husband. Men are supposed to take responsibility physically and spiritually. You have said nothing to suggest he is doing that?

Apologies is my replies come across as perfunctory or harsh. I am in no way condemnin or judging you, just giving my best response to the situation as outlined. But I wouldn't wan to wink at this weither. I would hope the counsel is to a degree generic.

I wish you well in your walk and a deeper love for The Lord. And I hope you are able to regularise the relationship however it develops.

God bless
TV

JeSoul:
TV you sef you try no be small to read and respond to that epistle which was nothing more than a caveman whipping up a smoke screen  

Ai! no kidding?   I'm going to put on Arte more often now  

I sense that GODSON - despite our myriad differences - is genunely open to discussion here. I hope to engage in the same vein and hopefully we shall all be the better for it.

Hope you are well.

God bless
TV

Missed the posts immediately after my last one as I was preparing this offline. I'll hopefully outline how I see the role of pastor at some stage, but to move things along and give some insight as to my postion and convictions, I put together the following;

In order to further facilitate progress and ultimately conclusion of this discussion, permit me if you will, to state some of my own convictions. Of course these are subject to question and scrutiny in the light of scripture.

1. A congregation is to be shepherded by a plurality of suitably qualified elders. With non having the pre-eminence or being in someway elevated amongst the others.
2. The five-fold functions detailed in Ephesians 4:11 for the most part should have a finite/limited use in the life of an individual believer. They represent one aspect – mostly physical, not spiritual aspect - of Christian need and development
3. Church – as fellowship – is a part of the life of a Christian, but it is but one of many spheres of life, not the most important and the others are in no way subject to it.
4. Your Christian faith, beliefs and worldview should of course colour and drive all your actions.
5. Aggregating 3. and 4. above, please note “church” as fellowship is not the full articulation of the Christian life or the sum total of it. In extreme’s may not actually be a part of that life and in any event, can take forms other than that generally espoused by CRG’ today.
6. The word rendered pastor in the bible is synonymous with elder, bishop, episcopas, presbyter, shepherd etc

Of blueprints & patterns;

In the NT narrative, God gave a blueprint for Christian fellowship. The apostles – most notably Paul – were charged with rolling out and fully disseminating this blueprint for church. This work was foundational. Not to be and not required to be endlessly repeated. Once rolled out, the church would be self-propagating. Akin in some ways to the creational seeding and the subsequent “after its kind” propagation.

The apostolic in terms of what Paul et al were doing, in terms of rolling out the pattern, is no longer required. That job is done. In reading the scriptural narrative, we must align, function, role, and above all context.

So when Paul wrote to Timothy at Ephesus? and exhorted him to “raise suitably qualified elders”, that was so the church there could be fully functional and stand alone. He was writing as an apostle (master builder), to Timothy (helping build). He was not writing to Timothy as a sole authority regional pastor developing a network of overseen churches.

Wherever Paul rolled out the blueprint of church it was the same. Raise up suitably qualified elders and move on. In writing to these same churches, he always addressed the elders/shepherds/bishops in plurality. The blueprint did not give leave to a SAP.

I’d love to go on and explore this further. The why, what, when and the how. Also happy to expatiate on and  substantiate from scripture my own convictions

GODSON2009, you must be amazed at how fast I’m growing  !

God bless
TV

GODSON2009 said;
just like your friend,you skillfully side step issues you dont have answers to and then pick and chose that which will score you the most cheap points, irrespective of whatever you say at this point the fact that "a pastor"is reffered to in the nt has proven that they have a specific role to play

TV01’ response;
Agree. There is a function which can be referred to as pastor and they do have a role to play (notice how I ignore your sly invective and stick firmly to the question at hand )

GODSON2009 said;
in the absence of a bible verse showing that role a dictionary is a proper source to use in defining the role of a pastor seeing as it has a basis in the bible.

TV01’ response;
Disagree. Why? As follows;

1. Primarily because there is no absence of “bible verses” detailing what a pastor is, what a pastor does, specifics , detail and limits. Your not seeing or accepting that,  in no way changes it.
2. If the bible is silent on what a pastor does, how does your personal conviction  or preferred practice in any way become binding on other believers. Or why is anyone compelled to follow the norm or accepted practise.
3. A dictionary does not “define”. What a dictionary does is “describes”. Further, it describes based on current usage –although it may refer to meanings from antiquity – not necessarily on original meaning. The scripture is complete, do you assert otherwise?

GODSON2009 said;
you cant quibble it with me cause i have backed up my assertion with biblical evidence namely the bible verse where the pastor was mentioned as part of the leadership

TV01’ response;
Disagree. Why? As follows;

1. I glad you used the word “assertion”, unfortunately you have in no way “backed it up with evidence”. Indeed, you contradict yourself, as you also asserted that the bible is absent of verses outlining the role of a pastor.
2. The pastor was mentioned of one of 5 functional/enabling roles. So as not to digress, I will not get all expansive regards “leadership”, but the Bible also outlines specifics and limits to these function. A dictionary is not required.

GODSON2009 said;
as for explaining i dont need to as the world wide congregation of christians has done that for me why dont you show me a church where they have five leaders as co leaders leading thew church with equal powers?

TV01’ response;
Again, the completeness of scripture is not validated by CRG practice, rather CRG practice should be scrutinised in light of scripture. I don’t need to show you a church as outlined, as that is your warped interpretation of my view. All I need to do is show the blueprint outlined in the scriptural narrative. And this I will endeavour to do, grace and time permitting (note how I slipped in a little piety for effect at the end there !)

GODSON2009 said;
you see why i have accused you of not being objective and jumping in?? even your friend/boss or leader will tell you that i have quoted the same ephesians 4;11 in my earlier comments,you can simply backtrack and you will see the comment but you had to show off that you knew ephesians 4 ;11   your leader must be soo proud of you for embarassing yopurself in your haste to show me up, in other words do i take it that you and your mentor dont have any role for the pastor in the church??

TV01’ response;
Abeg, pele 0, e ma binu sir! Sowwy!

GODSON2009 said;
dont mind me o,im just trying to clarify seeing as its a nigerian sickness if you dont get their proper titles right,they get angry

TV01’ response;
Indded your obsession with “constituted authority” – which is really thinly veiled veneration of persons – is much more likely to engender that particular sickness – Nigeria or elsewhere – I have never resorted to entitling myself as leader,  GO, Cardinal, Spiritual Father, Mummy in Israel, Pastor to Pastors or my personal fave - Prophetess to the nations etc, etc, which all obtain in the CRG’s you revere. Having said that, henceforth, kindly address me as Elder TV!

GODSON2009 said;
in cutting through your preamble,are you now saying that all churches as presently constituted are at variance with  the scriptures? also your comments and its understanding are nebulous,so i ll really appreciate some clarifications,what has catholic congregation got to do with redeemed??

TV01’ response;
Empiricaly? No I am not. What I am saying is view how one and all are constituted in light of scripture. Clarification enough?

GODSON2009 said;
sire,im appaled at your crass naivety i dont worship a pastor or any human being,but i give respect to every constituted authority

TV01’ response;
Will you fall off that “constituted authority” horse already? I mean scap that! It makes you sound like a “follow follow”

GODSON2009 said;
i am eargerly awaiting your religious convictions because so far all you have done is pick up from where your friend left off,side stepping direct questions while answering my questions with more questions in a typical naija manner,thanking you in advance and have a nice day as well  shalom

TV01’ response;
The discourse will ultimately reveal who is “side-stepping”. I have asked you just the one question so far, which you failed to answer or justify scripturally. I am anything but “typical Naija”, but won’t belabour the point if you choose to label me as such. I will stick to the points in question. Oya, bo si ile ka ja !

God bless
TV

GODSON2009:
i have not come across where the nt catalogues the specific job of a pastor

But at the very least, your "personal conviction" is that "A/The Pastor"is the head of the local church/congregation/body of believers. No? Can you find anything scriptural to back that up?

GODSON2009:
however i have come across the biblical section where the pastor is reffered amongst four others as needed for the nuturing and growth of the church,therefore the pastor evidently has a role to play or they would not have been included in the five fold

I won't quibble "the pastor/al" certainly has a role to play. Please explain why your convictions suggest that role includes headship in the absence of any biblcal outline to that effect. It is your conviction right?

GODSON2009:
it would have been four fold, like i retorted to your friend/boss or mentor's comment because i v not found the specific place in the bible i looked for and posted the dictionary meaning of the word"pastor"

Ephesians 4:11 was difficult for you to find? Even a pre-schooler like me can reel that off. I may be a kindegartner, but I can see how by reading the NT thoroughly and approaching the scriptural narrative without bias exactly what a pastors role is, what its aims are and what its limits should be.

^{and if na paddy, oga or guru nko. Wish one concain you sef ?}

GODSON2009:
in adittion,the overwhelming evidence supports my assertion as can be seen in the constitution of every single church or christian religious group all over the world where pastor are always the head of the parish/church, ill conbtinue with this later as i need to work

And if we see that the construction of every single church or christian religious group is at variance with the scriptures (let us not even discuss recause to the Holy Spirit yet), who does one follow?  What CRG' - thanks for the acronym by the way, good to see your acada is not completely wasted - do or do not do is not evidence in support of scripture. Before the advent of the Redeemed, there were a billion Catholics. Surely  - according to your lofty scholarship - evidence enough that the few million redeemers are sorely misguided?

Come? what was your result in pastor worship 101 ?

Enjoy work sir - see as respec full ground 0! - Hopefully we can continue this soon. I'll endeavour to progress things by submitting a few of my convictions to the scrutiny of your academic rigour.

God bless
TV

GODSON2009:
hello mr president of supporters club and cheerleader

Loyalty is a rare thing these days. Not to be confused with the slavish devotion those of your ilk typically demonstrate.

GODSON2009:
due to my personal religious convictions

Sorry to burst your bubble buddy, but you are 100% corn-fed religionist. Ain't nuthin' "personal" about your convictions.

GODSON2009:
if simple english comprehension is a massive issue with you,

You really shouldn't have gone there, but I'll let that one slide while I expose your unclothedness on bigger issues.

GODSON2009:
read comments and address them objectively, internet gangster i9m quaking my boots already lol

I'll take you up on that shall I? Ok lets go - I am yet to meet a Redeemer who could do more than shout "touch not" when the heat is on - Oya, Mr. Self proclaimed academic, since I'm the infant here, I'm sure you'll allow me to pose the first question?

1. Please detail what according to the scriptures - NT  - the remit of a "pastor" is. If your acada stretches that far, please also show from the scriptural narrative where a single pastor heads a congregation or body of believers. Being aware of my precarious grasp of her Majestys English, could we make that grammatically simple please  . If you can, I am transitioning to a 100% maize diet with immediate effect and will almost certainly commence tithing shortly afterwards !


God bless
TV

JeSoul:
Lol, nuthin mischievious. This ID was unrighteously suspended by the "sophisticated" spambot for posting "spam" . . . perhaps my post was too "organized" and hence looked like spam? lol I dunno. After a week and no response from the mods I decided to open a new acct as some juicy topics such as this were too good to sleep on 

Good to hear. And welcome back.

JeSoul:
and yeah I deliberately spoke like a "seasoned" NLder in the few posts I've made so that people might get some hint who it was. I did enjoy my 2 days as Arté . This ID just got liberated with an apology so I am back to normal.
Lol, me i no fit fight oh, so na the only tool i sabi use I employ
Lol  I'm glad someone else was noticing how he has been tripping all over himself. Hehe.

I percieved Arté to be a good 'un, but I've learnt to ally patience wth my discernment. The way you launched in without breaking stride suggested you were not new to NL. I certainly didn't twig. If anything, with hindsight, I would say you were slightly more commanding 

JeSoul:
Godson,
    where is the scripture that says "the pastor is the spiritual father and head of the church"? 

You will wait so tay for that one 0!. Hmmmm!


God bless
TV

yinx007:
I'm a plus size

Is losing weight an option ?

Arté:
Gbam left, right and center

Which is why I have repeatedly asked godson to show us his scripture where the pastor is the head of the church. Of course he can't cos no such verse exists. All these man-made doctrines enslaving people . . .

_{TV look behind the facade of the new id and see a very huge fan of yours. Hint beantown}

Hey you! Hows things? Hope alls well. I knew straight off Arté was not a new poster, but can't say I was anywhere near to figuring it was you. 'Sup with that? Hope all is well?.

Love the way you've let GODSON2009 talk his way into a corner and neatly parried side attacks at the same time. Kudos.

See the way he mashed up apostleship, shepherding  and then tried to introduce "dictionary definitions". The reply was so disjointed, if I hadn't been quoted, I would have thought he was addressing someone else. Religious minions, turning up for gunfights with water pistols . Its no fun anymore.

God bless
TV

_{Warning - I couldn't procure a Valentine' date for love or money, so I'm taking my ire out on religionists, monetizers, haemaphrodites or any other purveyor of nonsense  that strays into my path!}

@ OP a few points

1. There is no such thing as "The Pastor". Suggesting that one man - shepherding is not open to females - runs/heads/leads a congregation.
2. Congregations are shepherded by a "plurality" of suitably qualified elders - I'm referring to the norm here, not exceptional circumstances.
3. Marriage is between families, as the bible makes clear. Church involvement is not essential, although permitted and possibly useful.
4. There is only one Head of the Church - the body- The Lord Jesus Christ blasphemers please take note.
5. Church - the gathering of believers - is but  part of the Christian existence and the authority of church should be mostly limited to the fellowship. 6. Your Christian faith of course, should drive, colour, and motivate all spheres of your life.

woye77:
a lot of churches and pastors believe this should be the norm - pray, then speak to d pastor and pastor speaks to lady on your behalf - what do you think?

Religious organisations and their officers can enact whatever laws they deem fit. If you don't like it don't join or pay their subscriptions.

Come? Do they go as far as suggesting frequency and position? Its only that some of these organisations are run by very old, very staid people?

davidylan:
lol its just a little weird, this thread is chockfull of your own assumed self-importance.

Abi 0! It took me all of one post to figure that out.

Mavenb0x:
As much as this will shock some of you, and may not even surprise a possibly greater number, I am MALE.

He, she or it, no surprise I always had you down as a dickhead!

Mavenb0x:
I have quite a following on facebook.

Please do yourself a favour and piss off back there. If you remain here you’ll forever carry the stench of the thoroughly discredited like lady-boy Pilgrim.1/Viaro.

Mavenb0x:
I tried to quit NL in December but many people implored me to stay.

I blame these butt-wipes. I also doubt they actually exist. Popular on Nairaland indeed! Another one whose presence provided mostly nuisance value and mistook volume/lenght of output with acclaim. Why on earth does this section draw those of doubtful provenance?

Mavenb0x:
Thanks for the audience.

Not just self-important, but also delusional. Abeg, comot!


^{Oya, take your beating like a man – but then again!}

viaro:
The one I pity most is TV01.

Pilly! Pilly!! Pilly!!! This is the second time today you are taking my name in vain. The first time you co-opted my moniker to buttress you deceit about "spiritual principles". Sladerously implying that I considered tithing a "principle". Its not and I don't. Tithing is a practice, which doctrinally has pretty much zero relevence in Christian life. Practically, some may find it useful in a purely religious sense, but the mature and/or Spirit-led will really just scratch head at the notion.

The only other concession I will give is to the sovereignty of God. He does as He pleases and could indeed ask one of His own to tithe. Once, occassionally, for a period. He is sovreign. But that would not constitute a body-wide re-institution of tithing - unless of course He asked it of each and every believer, and even then it wouldn't be doctrine - that would be to contra.indicate scripture. See me bending over backwards to help you cover your unclothedness . Please don't take this and run dat your mouth in contrarily fashion 0! . Nonsense & ingredient!

Now to principles, these are essentially derivatives of love. Loving God and your fellow man. Love does no harm to a neighbour. Indeed it makes you willing to act sacrificially on his/her behalf. It means you will render fair justice (equity, judgement), be merciful and have faith in them even in the face of the most appalling behaviour.

Its on that count that  I have relented this once and address you directly. As while you have totally discredited yourself and been glaringly exposed thereto - A Pilly word   - having to re-incarnate as Viaro to cover your shame - and unfortunately continue your falsehood - I wish you well and can still remember that your presence and contributions were in many regards a blessing to many. Why reduce youself to adding only nuisance value? I have long harboured deep suspicions about your motivation and spiritual provenance. Please prove me wrong.

As ever God bless
TV


^{Now, has anyone figured out the alias "Traugott", or do I have to do everything around here  !}

For the avoidance of doubt and to clarify some of the deceitful sleight of hand labelling that some insist on employing let me state simply as follows;

1. Tithing under the law has been abolished along with the law of which it was part.
2. There is nothing to suggest that Abrahams tithe to Melchizidek constituted a practice - mandatory or otherwise that Christians are to follow.
3. Tithing as a notion is superceeded by the Christian imperative of needs based or Spirit-led giving
4. If anyone wishes to tithe or is led to do so, no problem, but there is no "Body binding" tithe.
5. There are no tithe specific blessings that are withheld from those who simply give, nor curses for non-tithers.

The principles and spirit of Gods laws are eternal and unchanging. The way of fulfilling their demands is not and has. Please note point one above. Justice, mercy and faith will always be in view, however Gods righteous requirements are spelt out or satisfied.

Does that mean that the "weightier matters" are indivisable from the way of fulfilment given in previous dispensations as some claim in order to imply that The Lord taught tithing? No. Hebrews 7 clearly shows the annulling of "written-law" based righteousness. However the principles and spirit  behind them remain, there's just a more excellent, more glorious way of fulfilling them.

So there you have it. The headline news about tithing in a few short and simple sentences. With no need for multiple id's, lying in Hebrew, foul mothed vituperation, co-opting some religious leaders & theologians and castigating others. No dissertations, treatises, tomes or lengthy turgid pieces of discourse that will make you feel like chewing your own tongue, which you'd pay not to have to read them - which is really what they are after .

Monetizers, religionists oya !

God bless
TV

Hi @ Zikky,

I am a bit confused by this talk on levi paying tithe to melchizedek. My understanding of such talk here would amount to saying Zikkyy  is a tither because his grandfather paid tithe. Maybe you need to educate me more cos I don’t think that is the message being passed across by Paul here. I think the emphasis here is on the superiority of Christ priesthood over the levitical priesthood (this I have seen in your posts and agree with) and not tithing. Hope you will be able to take some time out to educate me on how verse 8 shows“continuity” to tithing.

I agree. The emphasis is on priesthood. Specifically the superiority of Melchizedeks over the Aaronic/Levitical. The paying of tithe by Levi via Abraham was to underline this. Verse 7, the lesser is blessed by the better.

The lesser Aaronic/Levitical type and the law that undergirded it including mandatory tithing has been done away with as it made no one perfect and crucially did not engender intimacy with God  - which is  the whole point.

Verse 8. Here - under the law/Levitical priesthood/Judaism - mortal men recieve tithes, but there he - Melchizedek - recieved them of whom it is witnessed that he lives.

Now, is that saying that as the High Priesthood of Christ is after the type of Melchizedeks, therefore Christ recieves - or indeed requires or needs - a tithe from believers now? Or need/requirement apart, is there some other  significance? In annuling the old law was a new one introduced that encouraged or mandated tithing? Since the Levites forward tithed a tithe of the tithe they recieved to the High Priest, how would we, a nation of priests forward tithe to The Lord under this new law/commandment/dispensation? And what is it to be used for? And by whom?

In my opinion, based on what I believe scripture teaches, no. But if anyone differs no problem. And if anyone can make bold to show differently I am happy to engage. Indeed if it can be shown simply and conclusively that I am in error, I am happy to repent, recant and renounce my position.

I seek truth, not my own, I have no vested interet and nothing to defend.

God bless
TV

Hi TV01

Long time no greet!!

You know you are going to cop some of the abuse in a minute.

Anyway, you've always been thicker skinned than me!

Great post though and reflects my underlying thinking and indeed my reason for persevering on this topic over time.

God bless you, my brother.

Salute Enigma, I trust you are well and once more, appreciation for your unflagging focus in your efforts here. As you can see, you were somewhat generous in your estimation of time . Knowing the reality of Christian witness, I am not unaware of what to expect.

As ever, I have no doubt that God will reveal His truth in Christ to those that truly seek Him.

God bless
TV

KunOsh, Enigma, et al, greetings and great work.

In your sincerity, you may well believe this discussion is merely about the truth of tithing as a Christian practice in regards to it is mandatory or not. Please be mindful that is not the aim of those who are ever so subtly championing the practice.

Their aim is to keep it in view, ensure that it remains out there as a notion that Christians ascribe too, on any basis, under whatever terms.
At one point or another, they have claimed that it is not based on the law and prophets, not necessarily 10% and not mandatory - essentially ending the debate right there - but they care little about scriptural or moral backing for tithing. They just want to ensure there is modicum of doubt as to its validity and ensure that it remains afloat in believers minds.

They will seek to tire you on the minor, the inconsequential, or artfully employ as Enigma put it, "Semantic Pedantry". Note the lengthy discourse on "honouring God", based on Malachi 3, but never once discrediting Malachi 3 as a reason for Christians to tithe - which was the thinking of the original posters reference to that portion of scripture. Or skipping around “abolished” or not abolished. Don’t be fooled by talk of “non-tithers, “anti-tithers”, “pro-tithers” or observers. Whatever it takes to keep it out there.  

Note the cry that "it’s a lie that Jesus did not teach tithing", knowing very well that it was to those under the law, referring to produce and not money and was not intended as a blueprint for Christians. They are not seriously or honestly discussing, just keeping it in view, seeding doubt.

They will continue to use it interchangeably or lump it as one with “freewill giving”. They will ally this with their attempts to spiritualise it in reference to Abrahams one off tithe to Melchizedek, which was in its essence to demonstrate the superiority of the Melchizedek priesthood over the Levitical, not to presage tithing as a worship form for Christians. They will mix in anecdotal testimonies of the benefits of tithing – seemingly different to the blessings of freewill giving – they are deepening the impression, if not the understanding.

In all the aim is to enable the practice to be retained whilst transitioning it from a "mandatory" to a seemingly "freewill" practice, thus ensuring their control and source of filthy lucre remains intact.

There is a practice whereby animals are chained or tethered within a limited locutory ambit. After a while, when unchained, they still will not move outside this ambit. They are keeping it in view, ensuring it stays afloat.

What they won’t do is permit the discussion to venture on to broader theme’s around tithing and money in the body of Christ. To do that would pose too great a risk to their control and source of filthy lucre. As it would also expose many other “commandments of men” that pervade what many mistake for Christianity these days.

Note the introductions as such things as the clergy/laity split, or notions of upkeep for “leaders”, again non-Christian. The tithe underpins the whole thing, if that goes it all collapses.

Like the missing president saga, be it a case of death, coma, or incapacitation to a degree that renders him physically unfit for office, the cabal behind the throne realise that as long as no one has sight of his true condition just calling him president, will be enough for many to continue to believe that he is and refer to him as such, regardless of the constitutional imperative about length of absence, handover and succession.
Spiritual deception is real and the physical outworking of this deceit ever more fluid. Please keep contending for the faith.

God bless
TV

Joagbaje:
There are different levels of truth in God. There are lesser truths and higher truth.

Really

Joagbaje:
In primary school, 1 minus 2 is imposible but in secondary school ,1 minus 2 has an answer which is -2.

For posterity' sake you understand ?

Joagbaje:
So you must have faith in the finished work of christ that you have an inheritance. You draw ffrom your heavely account with your mouth rcognising you are blessed already,God knows your need and has mad provisions for all your needs. You call forth what you need. " i receive my car this year  in the name of Jesu"  You Thank God For them " Father I thank you,I have my admission in Jesus name" etc.¦

Just taking notes here ;

Maturity => Access to heavenly bank account with physical withdrawals.
ATM Card => the mouth
Pin # => In Jesus name.

At OP

estrella:
Hi folks! I would really appreciate it if the bone crushing Christians in the House help me with this issue.I've always been the independent kind of girl who would rather die than to ask anyone for money.When i became born again,I noticed that it spilled over into my walk with God.I would heistate about asking him for money because I was always afraid that he would let me down.I pay my tithes and give offerings but i also try as much as possible to have a littel cash so i wont have to ask him.
Is it unchristian to ask God for a certain amount of money when you don't have it? Like if you were dead broke and you asked God for a certain amount by a certain day and you didn't get it,what are the factors that would have caused the delay in your prayer? Is there a process involved in asking him for money? I'm at a point where I want to trust him with all including my finances and I want to get it right, when it comes to money and God,what is the christian way to do things?

The Lord will supply the needs of his children. Notice my emphasis on need. So if you need food, the supply may be a meal, not necessarily cash for a burger. How He does or will do this may not be clear to you. Your aim should be to know God and walk in His will for you as an individual - easier said than done I know - but the true way to perfect peace aboout such things.

Oft times what we desire is driven by our own desires - however righteous they may appear - and not necessarily Gods will. Also one thing many fail to realise is that Gods express will is to bring us to maturity, which may at times mean withholding, denial or scourging. The Christian walk is not a gauranteed bed of roses or satisfaction of every wish.

Hope this helps. Be encouraged

God bless
TV

Pastor AIO, good evening,

Thanks for your post below. It both encouraged and enlightened. I pray you reap as you have sown this day.

The "monetizers" it seems will always be with us. There is seemingly no quit in them. As it suits them they spiritualise their position, imprecate, employ legalism, twist scripture, employ outright deceit - especially when it comes to the languages of antiquity - and at times bring weighty intellucts to bear.

Tragically reducing the reward of eternal life in Christ and intimacy with God to a physical, temporal, debt instrument

I repeat, there are only two reasons to preach - in any guise - mandatory giving to Christians as divine writ; because you are either 1. mischevious or 2. misguided.

And for the sake of those who fall under 2. above, I thank everyone for their perseverance, ask that the discussion be kept about issues and not people and remember that many are being strengthened in their walks. Spiritual deception is real!


Gods truth in Christ Jesus will out.

Pastor AIO:
Why shouldn't I expose my lack of understanding, if indeed I lack understanding? After all how else will I learn unless it is evident that I need to learn. Menh, don't gag me. Let me talk and if in talking it turns out that I lack knowledge and subsequently acquire the required knowledge then isn't that a good thing. Unlike you, I don't claim superior knowledge to anybody, but I know what I know.

But I know why you said what you said. You are trying to claim superiority to me. and having done so you hope to gag me from speaking my mind at all. Well I'm afraid it won't work. I am not impressed by you and your shenanigans and I will always state what I believe. And right now I believe that you are an hoax.


Actually, "Mr superior knowledge" what the bible says is He who [b]LIVES [/b]by the sword shall die by the sword. But that apart, you actually have a point and now we're getting to the crux of the giving and receiving matter.

What is sown is not the gifts (whether of money or otherwise) but something altogether more subtle. The spirit with which the gift is given. If I give money solely for the reason that I want to receive money in return than what I'll reap is that manipulative spirit with which I sowed in the first place.

However if I give out of compassion, no matter how much, then what I will reap is the compassion. I'll be repaid by compassion in my dealing with others. The attitude and the spirit in which an act is done is what goes forth and then returns to the actor in multifold.

If I give money in church so that God can smite my enemies, then that wicked intention will manifest against me in my life.

If I give money in church so that my business can profit better then I'll possibly find that my employees do not care for my business but rather are only there for what money they can make out of it. Their level of commitment will be low. Subsequently, my business will do badly.

If I am a thief and I tithe of my earnings because I believe that that way God will help secure my ill-gotten gains, I'll might find that those gains will sooner or later be appropriated by another thief in as callous a way as I acquired it.

Yes, but what is of the essence is not the material aspect of giving but the spirit of the giving. Very true that God hates a grudging giver. He also hates a hateful giver, and a covetous giver, and a greedy giver. He loves the Joyful giver, the loving giver, the truthful giver.

God bless
TV

Pastor Bakare's

Prophetic Blunders

By Ihechukwu Njoku

I feel obliged to write this piece based on an article I read in ‘The Nation’, entitled ‘I was wrong about Yar’Adua, says Bakare’ (Monday 25th January 2010). The title says it all I guess. On the waves of several public demonstrations and passionate calls for Yar’Adua’s resignation and handover of power with Latter Rain’s Pastor Tunde Bakare at the forefront, it is pertinent to remember that the same Bakare had proclaimed Yar’Adua as Nigeria’s coming messiah upon his crooked assumption to office in the ridicule we called an election of 2007. “We have been ruled by base men, but now a servant-leader has arisen,” declared Bakare of Yar’Adua. “I have fought every leader since 1979, but now I will stand and watch over the president, that no evil shall befall him. I can’t stop blessing him, because I believe God has prepared him for the good of the nation.” The tune has now changed. “I deceived myself and I shouldn’t blame anyone,” Pastor Bakare is quoted to have said in his church on Sunday 24th January 2010. “When they brought Umaru, I danced here before you. You know I prayed for this man; you were here… We sang because they said he did not steal from where he was coming. That he left so much billions behind. I got excited. I said wonderful. I was not thinking well. The best of men are still men at the very best. It is better for me to admit – I was not thinking well… They didn’t put all the cards on the table for us. I danced useless dance, I have taken my dance back. Even my prayer I’ve withdrawn it… I was wrong. I’m only human.”



With the admission that such opinion presented in the guise of divine proclamation was formed purely from hearsay and incoherent reports, it casts a deep and worrisome aspersion on the other words the man has purportedly revealed from the Almighty. Don’t get me wrong or misunderstand this to be a blind vendetta mission. I respect and admire Pastor Bakare’s fiery stand against corruption, injustice and hypocrisy in our land, a belief I share whole-heartedly with him – but there is a huge difference between the words of a zealous activist and an anointed prophet. My problem is not in advocating your stand, but in using God’s name to present these personal opinions under the appellation of sovereign prophecy, confusing and misdirecting many followers in the process. God cannot lie, is not induced or influenced by current conditions nor does He change His mind at whim. As The Sun’s Femi Adesina said on the issue, “Tunde Bakare, the man, has a right to take a position on the state of the nation. It is his fundamental and constitutional right. He can go back and forth on any issue for as many times as he likes, it is his inalienable right. But can Tunde Bakare, the prophet, do the same? No. That is incompatible with the office of a prophet. Prophets hear from God, and deliver the messages to we lesser mortals for guidance and instruction. And because God watches over His words to perform it, such words are not frivolous, not flippant, not something you take with levity.”



It is also of note to remember that in 1999 Bakare said he ‘eavesdropped’ on a conversation in the heavenly realms regarding Nigeria where Jesus Himself had said, “Obasanjo is not your messiah. He is King Agag and the prophetic axe will fall upon his head before May 29.’ ” If we held his words sacrosanct, it would appear as though the Lord had erred. Good intentions, inspiring sermons and noble principles aside, the scriptural standard is very clear on this issue: “You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.” (Deuteronomy 18:21-22) Durability, consistency and accuracy confirm the words of a true prophet. It has nothing whatsoever to do with preaching prowess or political persuasion. A prophet is a communicator between the seen and unseen, the visible and invisible. Declarations ending with ‘Thus saith the Lord’ leave no room for even the most miniscule of errors. When such appears, it merely points to the fact that they were of human origin from the very onset.