₦airaland Forum

tlops:
TV01??

That's my tag  !

tlops:
hi the world was made by what?, words right, ?

Right, as follows;

Hebrews 11:3 By faith we believe that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

tlops:
God made the world by his word and he made man in His Image and Likeness.
Image--Shape
Likeness-- character, to be creative wt our words like God is.

I find that something of a stretch, would you care to demonstrate?

tlops:
Christian confession is not incarntation. Jesus said if you say to this mountain, your words(poverty is a mountain).

Funny you should say that, there's just such a mountain covering large parts of Africa, and wierdly enough, it's called poverty.

Could you please speak to it just as you outlined and let me know how far in your next post.

And I'm still waiting for that MOG's name!

Ta!

Backslider:
quote Scripture and let me know where you anchor from ?

There is a thread we we have discussed the doctrinal aspects of theis exhaustively. Please review that and if you still have concerns, ask away and I will answer quoting and expounding the relevant scripture.

God bless

babyosisi:
why are you always so dogmatic?

Dogma goes hand in hand with tradition and denominationalism. As I have no received traditions and don't belong to any denomination, could you please accuse me of something else. Thank you.

babyosisi:
Do any of these matter in the grand scheme of things?

I think so, more importantly I believe the Bible attests to it. As ever, you are at liberty to feel as you wish on that point.

babyosisi:
Whether your Church is "Church in the Spirit" or The church at Bob Greene's house

Like I said, I don't have a church . I belong to it (The Church of The Lord Jesus Christ). I worship wherever, whenenever and with whomever. Simple.

babyosisi:
I am not one to quickly condemn or write off any Church

One could go further and not see "church/es" (as in denominations/traditions), but see individual believers.

babyosisi:
that chooses any local doctrines as long as it does not contradict Biblical teachings

I examine each precept (as much as it is core/essential) on it's own merits and trust to be led into all truth by The Holy Spirit & The Word.

babyosisi:
and as long as they don't condemn or see other Churches as Babylonian just because they don't abide by their own human doctrines.

Like I said, I don't view things on a church by church basis. I see my fellowship as with individuals.

Babylon is real. How you choose to discern and respond to it is your responsibility.

babyosisi:
Whether you wear or don't wear earings,wear or don't wear trousers as a woman,put on make up or not or choose a name for your church or not.

I think my response so far have spoken to this.

babyosisi:
The question should be are you saved,washed in the blood and awaiting his appearing.

Agreed.
Which presumably is a question one would address to individuals and not corporately. Again see my responses above.

babyosisi:
The Bible says they'll know we are Christians when we have love one for another and all this little insisgnificant differences that will not take anyone to or from heaven should not be given the weight some Christians place on them.

True to the love bit!
Not all differences are insignificant, but in those that are we have liberty.

babyosisi:
We ought to worship on Saturdays only and all that crap ought not to be,unbelievers hwo should look up to us are not being challenged by all this war of denominations.

Confused maybe, but not challenged !

babyosisi:
It makes no sense.

If you mean denominationalism and the stand off between various factions, then I agree, which is why I don't belong to any denomination or subscribe to any tradition wholesale.

I hope that clarifies things.

Backslider:
Tithe and Offering is necessary but you need to know that you cannot buy protection you must be holy and serve God.

No Backslider, Nothing in NT Christianity (including offering) is by compulsion. And the tithe is not even a Christian notion.

God bless

tlops:
3-pay your tithes- so he will rebuke the devourer for your sake and cause more to come.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Tithing is not a Christian notion. God does not give blessings for cash. (God is not a Labour party supporter, or a Tory, or a Republican, democrat etc  )

tlops:
5- your confession matters, for job he constant had a fear that he'll one day loose everything and kept saying it. in christianity what u say matters u shall be justify or condemn by your words.

In as much as Christiasns are to make a confession/profession of faith, it does not extend to include mantra's or incantations. Saying it will not necessarily make it happen. As ever the Nigerian style "bubble Christianity" articulates faith primarily from what men want and not God's will.

This "Say & Have" concept is not a Christian notion either. As long as God was protecting and prospering him (in light of his eschewing evil mind), his confession mattered not a jot. Your precept denies the sovreignty of God.

Tlops please provide the name of the MOG who sold you this stuff, so I can add him to the blacklist  .

Thanx.

babyosisi:
TV01 just curious,what church do you attend?

I don't articulate "church" as something I attend. I see it as something I am a part of. Something I belong too.

More practically, I fellowship in a house church local to me.

What about you?

God bles

babyosisi:
TV01,most Churches preach the 10% rule not just the 2 you mentioned.

I was hoping our original "tithe" thread would touch on money as a whole in the church. Both in antiquity, and in contemporary times, especially the practical outworking. As ever gainsayers conspired to scupper it before we expounded in full, robbing many of edification.

I don't believe "most churches" do preach tithe, unless you are specifically refering to the Nigerian context. Looking at it denominationally, most of the older churches have their historical equivalents (indulgences etc).

Also pertinent to note is the fact that through land & property acquisitions, shrewd business dealing and political manouvering many older denominations have considerable financial resources at their disposal. So the Anglican church for example has no need of a mandatory tithe, as they are well funded already. The Catholic Church is one of the worlds richest organisations.

The newer churches have yet to establish themselves in the same way and are still jockeying for financial ballast, political clout and full social relevance/acceptance. Hence the mandatory tithe and the associated "blessing/curse" to further one aspect of that.

babyosisi:
I read some where that this doctrine only came back into Christiandom in the last 4 centuries or so,early Christians paid no tithes and asked for none including Paul.

It was never a Christian notion. Some have taken advantage of the fact that it is contained in scrupture to claim it is/was. It was a Jewish (although God ordained) practise. It was used historically by some of the high churches to achieve the positions of political leverage and financial resourcing I outlined earlier. In fact I understand that as late as the 20th century it was enshrined in law in some Europrean countries.

babyosisi:
I am interdenominational by heart although I'm a member of a Pentecostal Church now and I am convinced that God does not require 10% of my salary to bless me.

I have totally discared all such labels. I am content to be a Christian (which leaves me receptive to all and does not engender exclusivism). I also eschew membership. The book of life is the pre-requisite roll to belong to. Once a believer you are a member/part of the body of Christ. I hesitate to go further, but I see real spiritual consequences of joining oneseff to things that may not in truth represent Christ.

babyosisi:
I am convinced that God does not require 10% of my salary to bless me.

A simple truth that many would twist for pecuniary gain.

babyosisi:
We cannot buy God or his blessings by any amount.

Ditto.

So Grouppoint, 'fess up, what denomination/church do you belong to?

God bless

Grouppoint:
The principle of 10% is clearly God ordained. In

Actually it was extant in civilisation pre-Israel. If by God you mean the God of the Bible, then in a sense yes. It was ordained for the Israelite nation as part of the law.

Grouppoint:
In as much as a believer is not bound by the curse of the law.

Not unless you voluntarily put yourself back under it! Please don't buy into the subtle selling of a works based salvation and income stream blessings.

Grouppoint:
The law also has its blessings.

Really? What would they be? Please expound on this. The law is bondage and for the flesh. It's for the ungodly. Whilst the law is good and holy and just, Christians don't attain to righteousness or blessings through keeping it or being bound by it in part or in whole.

Grouppoint:
It is then up to you if you wish to avail yourself of the blessings of this particular law.

One cannot be selective about the law. To ascribe to any part of it is to be bound by the whole of it. Being law bound means you fall from grace, profit not from the Lords sacrifice and cannot be justified in the sight of God.

Grouppoint:
Therefore, I am saying clearly that you do need to pay 10% of your increase towards the work of God, if you want the blessings that accrue to that principle.

There is no notion of a mandatory tithe in NT Christianity. Giving is the way. Give little, give much, give judiciously or sacrificially, as long as it's cheerfully, whole-heartedly, God is pleased.

Feel free to call your giving of any amount "tithe" if you will. But do not tie it to law keeping or ascribe any spiritual accroutements to it.

Let me take a wild guess RCCG or some other Pentacostal outfit?

God bless

TayoD:
As usual, I am not surprised by your ignoring that which is written and going about to establish your own truths.

Sorry 0! Learned one who knows what is written, yet clearly fails to understand it  !

TayoD:
Knowing how well you are quick to dismiss everything that does not meet up with your narrow expectations, I copied and pasted scriptures which have obviously suffered the same fate in your hands.

Quick to dismiss, Moi? Au contraire mon frere! I always go to great lengths to enunciate my position and to understand that of other discussants. Freely stating where my position is not yet fully formed or subject to change. You on the other hand have been nothing less than absolutely certain in all your offerings. Unfortunately you are usually "certainly wrong".

Funny how you pointedly refused my request that you expound in addition to C&P .  

TayoD:
As I once told you, when you start going down such self-destructive paths, you are absolutely on your own.

The faith path is one everone for the most part walks alone. I assure you you can walk better and further if you remove your head from up the Mogsbottom and clean off the religious poo-poo that is clogging up you sensory perception .

Here, extend your hand so I can pass you some virtual loo paper. Actually you'll probably require a shovel!

Salute!

Hi Syrup,

I think cyber-space makes its easy to overlook the fact that there's a a huge community of religious/faith believers out there of which all of us are at best tiny dots.

I've said severally that I prefer not to discuss people/personalities, issues. I posted in response to a particular point, on which we seem to have differing takes. No problems. We can discuss that if we wish.

As far "Pastor Chris" or the matter of the "49million seed/tithe", not only do I consider us in very differnt places on many planes, but I have very little knowledge of him, his ministry or the particular incident, as such I have hitherto refrained from comment. Hence my blanket type statement.

If you would like me to speak specifically, I'll happily oblige, just outline the points or facts stating what requires clarification or comment and I'll respond.

God bless

syrup:
@TV01,

Thank you, TV01. But I don't think that I ever used the word 'ministry' in any of the sense you thought to have read in my post.

Okay Sis' Syrup, please tell, in what sense exactly did you mean it  

syrup:
Okay, I trust that following TayoD's outline from Scripture, the concept of "my ministry" is not erroneous afterall:

If you are referring to TayoD's grandiloquent (but low tariff) cutting and pasting exercise, then no!

syrup:
Could you be more specific, please.

Certanly, if you care to be more specific about what it is specifically you'd like me to be more specific about!

syrup:
I hope for love's sake you have not been precisely self-descriptive. This is a very touchy issue; but whether for or against, I don't think it was ethical to have alleged the "virulent strain of unthinking religious zeal," no matter what your persuasion or position may be in the discussion.

Touchy? to whom exactly? I say it like I see it, and on an issue by issue or point by point basis. If people take offence, apologies. But I'm not given to exaggerated expressions of piety.

syrup:
Yet, for all that, could I propose to ask the discussants: what exactly is/are the accusation(s) that disqualifies(-y) Pastor Chris as a minister of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ?

As ever I'm not overly concerned by any individual, just commenting on what I see as the scriptural imperative on the matter. But I'll say this, what disqualifies/qualifies, any "true believer" is exactly the same in all cases.

God bless

TayoD:
2Co 4:1 - Therefore, since through God's mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart.

2Co 5:18 - All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation:

2Co 6:3 - We put no stumbling block in anyone's path, so that our ministry will not be discredited.

Ga 2:8 - For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles.

2Ti 4:5 - But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.

2Ti 4:11 - Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry. [color=#990000]

Oh my, how could I have overlooked all those references to "ministry" in the scriptures? Me bad.

Excellent work TayoD, you've certainly demonstrated that you can cut & paste. Now please articulate it as a concept. Something that you build around and construct into an entity in it's own right. That's seperate from the person and their walk with God & service to Him.

Let me give you a hint. The early believers understood and articulated ministry as service, an act. The religiously inclined in this age think it's a thing! I kind of doubt you'll see it though!

There was a time I quite admired you fervour. I now understand that for what it truly is. A virulent strain of unthinking religious zeal - which I must say is apparent in many proponents, both for and against Pastor Chris, (both of them) - Evidenced by your focusing on people, a refusal to appreciate questioning of your position, the fear of scrutinising it, or ability to fully articulate it.

Have a good day.

God bless

Hi Syrup,

As ever I have to commend you for the academic rigour you bring to the discussion. I particularly appreciate it in light of the fact that it is in many ways a contradistinction to my approach. Fond memories of how you dealt with me on my use of the term “theocracy” a while back.

Likewise Bobbyaf, thanks for the scholarly depth you bring it lends to the robustness of the discussion.

Now back to said discussion.

Syrup wrote;
Not so; the wicked do not have to be given eternal life so as to suffer eternal punishment. The gift of eternal life does not mean merely 'continued existence'. The Bible shows that many who do not have 'eternal life' yet are in a state of conscious existence beyond the grave even though they are described as "the dead". I have made that clear once and again.

My response;
So you are necessarily saying some or all of the following;
~ All humans already have eternal life? Surely it’s required to suffer eternally?
~ The eternal life offered by God in Christ is not in contradistinction to perishing?
~ Also note John 3:16 which states everlasting life. You are of a necessity saying that those who perish already/also have everlasting life
~ The eternal punishment is perhaps spiritual in nature (conscious existence), or do the wicked also get resurrected bodies?
~ Does this suggest immortality of the soul? Not that I have any deeply held position on that point as yet, I’m just clarifying.

When you say that many have a state of “conscious existence beyond the grave”, please clarify that. Is the bible not clear that those who sleep do so until the first or second resurrections? Who are those who have this “deathly state consciousness”? Is resurrection purely a physical experience?

Syrup wrote;
Judaism verily had the concept of eternal punishment, although it may be argued only in terms that it was not a fully developed theological concept until the NT. Whatever understanding anyone derived from the concept of eternal punishment, at least Dan. 12:2 speaks of a rising from the dead unto "everlasting contempt." The contempt was punishment, no doubt; and its duration was there declared to be "everlasting."

My response;
My understanding is that Judaism does not teach or believe in eternal punishment. In Judaism, death is final. I am not talking about Christians developing a doctrine through new and old testaments. The verses you quoted from the OT are not read as eternal punishment in Judaism and by some in Christianity I might add).

So again, no matter how much you insist that the eternity is in the punishment and not the irrevocability/finality of the judgment, this has not yet been clearly illustrated from scripture.

Syrup wrote;
You would recall that the blood of bulls and of goats never took away sins (Heb. 10:4), else Christ would not have needed to die on the Cross afterall. At best, the Bible teaches that the blood of those animals only served in the sense that it "sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh" (Heb. 9:13).

It was only in Jesus Christ that the "one time death" satisfied the question of sin (Heb. 9:12). This is underscored again in Rom. 3:25 ~~ "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God."

My response;
Here you have shifted focus somewhat. My point was that punishment for sin (the wages of) was death. I was not referring to the taking away of sin, or sanctification, just the penalty for.

Syrup wrote;
#1. Not only the Psalms employ poetic language; but other books as well. However, that is not to mean that the Psalms are only poetic.

#2. The parables may be figurative; but then they express solid literal truths - for that is why the Lord often interpreted and explained them.

#3. The expressions perish, destroyed, consumed, no more, burnt up, etc. are all variously expressive of judgement, and not annihilation. Yet, Rev. 20:10 furnishes us with graphic detail of the nature of eternal punishment.

My response;

#1 Same difference here, which is no difference at all!
#2 Likewise
#3 Agreed, they are expressions of judgment - and presumably the consequence of the judgement

Taking verses that read different to Rev 20:10 and insisting that they buttress it or it somehow adds depth to them, just  doesn’t give a unified clear-cut whole. It’s a force-fit. If the Bible teaches it, it should be clearly and variously outlined.

Syrup wrote;
What other interpretations are there to the parable in Luke 16 about the rich man and Lazarus? The issue is not whether or not anyone is in heaven or hell right now; but rather, the solid truth expressed in the parable that hell is a real place of torment.

My response;
Please note, I am not arguing against hell, or against torment for the wicked in it, which is why I feel no need of introducing (and complicating) alternative renderings. My point remains that I don’t see a clearly defined (and non-contradictory) doctrine of eternal punishment.

What I am hearing is scripture that speak to the finality and irrevocability of the judgment being read to insist eternality of punishment.


Syrup wrote;
#1. We are told that the incidence as reported in Jude 7 is "set forth as an example"; which clearly means that the final judgement spoken of in Revelation had not taken place. Rather an example of what is to come was meted out in the case of the judgement that fell on Sodom and Gomorrah; and that is a figure of the lot that the wicked will experience.

#2. Also, Jude 7 should not be taken in isolation apart from a study of other verses. The tense used in Jude 7 is a present continuous tense ("suffering"; and its meaning certainly does not suggest that Sodom and Gomorrah iare still suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Rather, Jude puts the case perculiarly in contrast to what ungodly and wicked people will experience when the final judgement takes place.

Notice that the whole gist begins from verse 6 - " And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." And then he opens verse 7 with these words: "Even as. . ." It therefore becomes obvious that until we open the read the graphic nature of the eternal punishment in Rev. 20:10, we would never be able to understand what exactly the wrath of God entails.

My response;

#1 An example of what? Surely it’s of the total destruction after the final judgement of the wicked? It does not speak directly or indirectly to eternal torment.

#2 The tense changes nothing. And we could even read from verse 5. Unbelief is rewarded with destruction. Verse 7 qualifies verse 6 and emphasises verse 5. We can look long and hard, but there is no eternal torment explicitly or implicitly cited here.

Nothing speaks of eternal torment until Rev 20:10. Proponents of eternal torment  back-read all the other scripture to somehow mean the same thing.

Syrup wrote;
The term "destruction" only strengthens the warning of the Lord; rather than conflict with declaration of Rev. 20:10. Further, the Lord Jesus elsewhere warned about the severity of God's outpoured wrath in other terms: "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. . . And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal." (Matt. 25:41 & 46)

My response;
I will agree that in isolation verse 46 – everlasting punishment – could be read as just that; the punishment is forever.

But then again, verse 41 buttresses claims that it is the fire that is unquenchable, everlasting (and in the sense that it burns until everything is consumed – as in S&G). So, verse 46 could be equally and validly read as the punishment being everlasting in application. That is, no more resurrection, no possibility of repeal or of the sentence being commuted.

Bobbyaf, I have heard the discussions around the use of aion/eon before. But one must confess, that it must in some instances mean eternal/forever, especially in light of Deity. Or are you implying that ages apply differently to different beings? Or perhaps ages are overlapping or run concurrently as opposed to being distinct and separate.

It would help if you could outline a clear concise end-to-end doctrine that speaks to annihilation or at least overwhelms eternal torment by sheer weight of scripture.

Could Revelations 20:10 be referring solely to the unholy trio?

So, my position remains unchanged. I have not seen a clear unforced exposition of the doctrine of eternal torment. I still await a convincing explanation for the few scriptures that seems to fly in the face of (or could be read as opposing) a doctrine of eternal destruction (annihilation). I am yet to be fully convinced either way, but on the balance of probabilities and for sheer weight of scripture I’d go for the latter.

Thanks everyone so far.

God bless

Have you thought about asking God yourself ?

syrup:
At the end of the day, I don't think it is happier for anyone to lose their ministry regardless.

Syrup, I believe the idea that one has a ministry as a construct, franchise, or entity in it's own right is erroneous thinking.

NT Christianity is about salvation and serving. Children of God serving their Father. You are either a vessel meet for His use or you are not. If you are God can/may use you, if you are not, He won't.

For emphasis, God doesn't need any of us to get His will done. It's His work, we are fellow labourers, if we choose to be and He chooses us.

The error of "my ministry" is evident when people look to it and it's results to justify what the Bible abhors. You can't lose a ministry because you don't have one. What you lose or keep is your salvation.

^{This is not about anybody per se. Just a word for believers.}

God bless

Hi Syrup,

I appreciate your input so far and your approach to this discussion, but I am yet to be convinced. That is not to say that proponents of eternal, unyielding, never-ending torment are wrong. It’s just that I see as equally plausible the case for "eternal destruction" of the wicked.

The NT teaches “Eternal Life”. Now Eternal Life is clearly outlined as being In the Father son and given to whom He wills. It is a reward for the righteous (John 10:28), and those who receive it will not “perish”

Now, for the wicked to suffer eternal punishment, they also must be given eternal life so as to suffer eternal punishment, as opposed to eternal destruction.

As for the OT references, first, my point was that Judaism does not have the concept of eternal punishment. Secondly, punishment for sin was obtained by the one time death of the animal type not torture or endless punishment. Thirdly, the impenitent sinner in the OT was “cut-off” that is destroyed from among the people.  Fourthly, there are literally dozens of references to the fact that the wicked perish, are destroyed, consumed, no more, burnt up like stubble etc, etc and not just in the poetic Psalms. I note your referring to the Psalms as “poetic”. The parables are often figurative and not literal

So, to parable of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16. We should note that this is just that, a parable. Are there any people in heaven or hell right now? Where is Abraham bosom? I won’t overly make an issue of your interpretation of this, however, it is pertinent to note that there are other interpretations.

Cross reference Luke 17, immediately after the Lazarus parable in 16.

Luke 17:29 but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. 30 Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.

How does one explain the fate that S&G suffered? Especially in light of Jude 7.

Jude7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

It was noted as being by eternal fire, and indeed, the judgement was final (everlasting), but is it still burning?

Likewise, the broad way (Matthew 7) leads to “destruction” not to eternal burning

So what the case for eternal torment essentially boils down to is the verse in Rev 20:10 (which I am not denying and will not overlook) and the Lazarus/rich man parable (which is debatable). But neither can I overlook the equally cogent proposition by proponents of eternal destruction meaning just that.

So can anyone reconcile the two?

God bless

Hi Everyone,

Syrup, I appreciate your considered responses so far. However, regards the quote  below;

kmcutez:
If the wicked are tormented forever and ever, then we can rightly say Jesus did not pay the price for our sins. For if he had paid the price for our sins then he should have been tormented forever and ever in the context which you describe forever and ever(that is without an end) and should be in hell right now still being tormented. But since the only price he paid for our sins was to die for us, then it makes sense that the wicked should only die in the context which Bobbyaf described die(that is cease to exist). The bible says God is a just God. If his son cannot pay the price of being tormented forever and ever, then why should we pay that price.

I am not sure you answered quite as posed.

If the wages of sin = death (not eternal anihilation, but eternal torment). How was that price paid at the cross. And how can it be satisfied short of the "propitiator" suffering eternal torment?

And you wrote this;

syrup:
and there is no need for anyone to introduce a foreign interpretation of "cease to exist" as the Bible nowhere teaches the doctrine of annihilation.

That is I believe the heart of the discussion at this point. Is the punishment eternal or is it the finality of the judgement that is thus termed?

The Bible says this;

2 Thessalonians 1: 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.

So if one replaces the "anihilaton" or "cease to exist" with "eternal destruction", what exactly is the difference? We are still at the same point.

Can anyone point to a type of eternal torment in the OT that corresponds to the new. I understand that the Jewish religion has no concept of eternal torment.

God bless

Hi Syrup,

syrup:
I haven't changed my views on that as long as Rev. 20:10 remains unchanged: "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

Okay. It could be read as meaning the three only. The devil, the beast and the false prophet.

I'd really appreciate if you could buttress the concept of eternal torment for all the wicked with other scriptural references (if indeed you feel this is the case).

I also note verse 14 which reads; "and death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death"

This would suggest that death, hell and the lake of fire are all seperate? Could anyone give an in-depth explanation here?

Bobbyaf, please don't dissapear (as if ), I'd appreciate some added depth to this.

God bless all.

babaearly:
This thread will surely die quick.

Amen!

mubowa:
@TV01, you are absolutely right, but remember that something you don't know is still a secret to you.

True!

mubowa:
like my pastor use to say

Ah, a "MyPaS" girl. I should have guessed. Hint; God would like to speak to you personally. Please allow Him.

mubowa:
like my pastor use to say, ''the lord will show up from you according to the name you call him''

I like "Father" personally. Please ditch this your pastor kia kia!

mubowa:
and the fact that when you get to heaven God will show you what you should have become on earth if you did not fullfill your purpose of coming to this world. ask God and he will tell you that am not lying about that.

If you get to heaven, you have fulfilled your purpose on earth. LiKe I said, no tears, no sorrows, no regrets and no recriminations. What would be the point?

Luke 12:15 - And He said to them, "Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one's life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses."

Matthew 16:26 - For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?

God bless

Hi Syrup,

syrup:
@Bobbyaf,

Your spiritual eyes have really helped you confuse my gender - keep slobbering. If your lullaby is about winning an argument on the Forum, it is no wonder you sweat it up and still take such thorough beating.

Pray go easy on Bobbyaf 0! We all take a few licks, and sometimes Bobby is really under fire .

Bobbyaf:
I am sure you didn't mean for it to come out this way, did you? Of course syrup with his spiritual eyes was ready to show both of you toppling over each other, without reading between the lines, just to win an argument.

Bobbyaf, open your physical eyes now. For how long and how many times on how many threads have you engaged Sister Syrup on this forum? We don't want anyone to think you are punch drunk do we !

After me, Syrup na lady 0! (echo)

syrup:
The Bible actually teaches that there is a literal place of eternal punishment for the wicked dead; and this is described in various appellations throughout Scripture.

So Syrup my sister, do you still hold to this?

God bless

35 Reasons Why The Organisational- Hierarchical Model Of Church is Wrong

1. There are no qualifications outlined in the bible for anything other than the eldership and the deaconate.

2. There is no biblically prescribed ranking order within the remit for elders. Which is to be plural and equal. As such, they are always addressed as a group in the scriptural narrative.

3. It introduces a clergy/laity split which is patently unscriptural and particularly hated by The Lord. It’s called the the Nicolaitan heresy.

4. It will become top-heavy and deny the fullness of communion and impartation available too and between all believers in properly prescribed body fellowship.

5. It denies the Priesthood of all believers and re-introduces the OT mediatory priesthood model. Mediators other than the Lord are introduced.

6. It gives “headship” to a man. And takes the focus off The Lord. The scriptures are unambiguous in Christ’s Headship of His church.

7. As the model is organisational instead of familial, it becomes bureaucratic, political and flesh-driven instead of Spirit led.

8. It blunts and denies the ministry of the Holy Spirit. He leads those who seek Him into all truth. He points to Jesus (as do the scriptures), not to MOGS.

9. Gifts are given to all as the Spirit wills for the profit of all. But the ordained/no-ordained split focuses attention on a certain subset and consistently on a certain few. This means that in almost every gathering, the main focus is on the one person, instead of the whole body.

10. It denies that Sons of God are led by the Spirit of God. To often the focus becomes on the SAP, MOG or Mentor (Guru'ism).

11. It means that prophesy from non-titled, non-ordained believers without ministries, churches, religious organisations or other platforms (or high profiles), can be ignored.

12. It unbalances scripture by focusing on “feeding” at the expense of “maturing”. God is after sons. The leader/follower split requires that some remain babes (dependant) on others. Please note, babes are no more than servants, and servants do not inherit, sons do!

13. It leads to an ever worsening personality cult/sleazy celebrity circuit problem. It means those titled “MOG” foster (and often downright fabricate) an image of their own hyper-spirituality in order to burnish their own legend, raise their profiles and increase their following.

14. Did I mention the ridiculous outfits?

15. Or the ludicrous (and often blasphemous) titles?

16. It engenders pride (whether you agree or not), as man are not built to handle that kind of authority or adulation that MOGGERY inculcates. Please ask rock-stars how they feel when performing to an adoring audience.

17. It allows error and heresy to become entrenched as there are virtually no checks or balances on the MOG. Followers are prone to reverencing MOGS (hence unbiblical titles such as “reverend”). See 12 above.

18. In a primitive house led, community based church format, error would be contained and checked locally. As congregational autonomy and absence of hierarchical top-down enforcement would stop spread or dissemination.

19. It would be easier to confront error. It’s why Paul could confront Peter. Peter was not his senior and had no authority over him. It’s hard to challenge someone who you feel is in some way spiritually senior to you. How much more so, when there are others senior to him who are re-enforcing the very same thing.

20. It changes Christianity into a “mass march” instead of an individual walk. The focus on hierarchy figures instead of the one-to-one relationship means that everyone is fed the same thing at the same time. Every relationship with His children is at a different stage The Holy Spirit is able to meet every single believer at their unique point of need. It further means that believers are kept away from the Word, either by policy or practice. Further deepening the split and the dependence.

21. The structural flaws lead to doctrinal aberrations and vice-versa in a vicious cycle. Examples are unbiblical covering and warped authority & submission precepts. In attempts to reform or correct the institutional church, many look to doctrine. The truth is that structure and model are equally responsible for its flaws.

22. Because the model is increasingly carnal, worldly mores are introduced into the body. Political correctness, PR budgets, Feminism, etc.

23. Introducing Worldly mores has as a consequence, the application of worldly measures of success. So it becomes about numbers and not disciples. The splendour of the temple as opposed to the maturity of the body. It focuses on things men will applaud, not what will please God.

24. As rampaging flesh is given its head, the church becomes more and more like the world instead of witnessing against it.

25. Like any organisation, it becomes an end in itself and needs money to survive. Hence the propagation of lies like “enforced tithing” (you have to fund this thing somehow!), and that oft repeated lie “It takes money to spread the Gospel”. It does not.

26. It perverts the true use of Christian resources. Money only ever moves in response to need in the body or outside it, but the basis is always true physical need. Instead funds are diverted to paying salaries, temple construction, building empires (ministries) and the like, for which there is no requirement.

27. Working for a salary makes you a hireling. It also means many are motivated by the temporal reward. Note worship leaders for hire and the revolving door policy for many salaried pastors (doubtless there are specialist recruitment agencies for church staff these days). It further gives head to the fixation with temporal things, such as temple building. After all, every CEO wants a shiny new corporate headquarters (and the phalanx of staff/offices/departments to go with it), as a focal point for the enterprise.

28. Ultimately it leads the church to partner (read fornicate) with, endorse and become subject to the state/world. Hence misguided (at best) initiatives such as “Political Christianity”

29. As it goes deeper into the world, it loses the sure anchor of the Word of Truth. Scripture has to be discarded or adulterated to ensure worldly acceptability. Hence re-interpreting or questioning the inerrancy of scripture. (The leaven of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Herod). Disastrously compromising pure Christian witness. Female and Homosexual bishops are a case in point. 

30. It abounds further to contextual criticism & reinterpretation. Attacking the very foundations of the faith. Leading to the erosion of core Christian belief both within and without the body. Calling parts of the biblical narrative myth or fairy tale. Denying or re-ascribing the authorship of certain books.

31. It brings imbalance to the family/church alignment as outlined in the bible. Undue authority and influence is ceded to the church and its authority structure.

32. Because in truth, there is no remit or requirement for these “management” positions, they have to create work to justify their salaries/positions/titles. Hence the daily, weekly, monthly, annual rituals (vigils, power nights, anointing nights, youth conventions, dominion hours etc.). Which are really in order to justify the salaried/titled bureaucracy.

33. The deviation increases and morphs into a product led approach to Christianity. I have a ministry of/to – singles, deliverance, prosperity, marriage, family, healing, witchcraft etc – All these things are incidental to Christianity. As a Christian grows and matures, wisdom, experience and discernment increase to enable them to tackle any problem and be delivered from any issue, which are first and foremost a product of an unconverted spirit and un-renewed mind. Keeping them babes, means they are always looking for a product expert in the form of the SAP or MOG.

34. So people are “Deliverance ministers”, instead of deliverance being something that may be required in certain instances and God being able to use any vessel available.  Or take prosperity preachers. In truth, true Christianity is oblivious to wealth or lack thereof. And in any event riches would not be meant for all, all the time, depending on the stage of their walks, calling and purpose.

35. So eventually the MOG, the ministry and the church are all institutionalised. It becomes wholesale idolatry (my pastor, my church, my ministry) and a legalistic human construct that brings men into bondage to the very thing Christ came to set them free from, ritual religion!

A tragic mix of the unscriptural the blasphemous and the carnal. All wrapped up in the idolatrous and the adulterous. It’s why He says “Come out of her my people”.

Let God be true and every man a liar!

God bless

Analytical:
Or do you have a flawless one?

Please feel free to critique it !

syrup:
Right. I was waiting for the moment when you gentlemen would start falling on each other!

Synthesis:

sage: "Nothing like hell exists!"

TV01: "I agree."

. . .then:

TV01: "Hell is true!"

sage: "Em. . . nothing like hell exists!"

sage: "Don't get me wrong. There IS hell!"

Thanks for pointing that out Syrup.

I should clarify that the existence of hell-fire is not my dispute, but that the wicked will spend eternity tormented in it. I believe Sage meant the same thing (and that's what I was agreeing with). Apologies if that was not abundantly clear from my previous posts.

So if there are no more questions on that point, could we proceed to discuss. I'd appreciate if someone could respond to my questions in post #7.

Regards

God bless

mubowa:
but if you don't know the secret to wealth or you don't apply some kingdom rules, you will die poor and when you get to heaven, God will show you what you would have become if u had applied the rules and you will now be sorry and saying ''oh had i know''

When and if one gets to heaven, tears, sorrows, pain along with all recrimination, regrets and such like will be totally forgotten. Our time here is nothng more than a staging post, and has no glory or promise that can be compared with that which is to come.

Some people will never take their gaze of worldly things. "Jehovah Jireh" doesn't have secrets He expects you to unearth. He's a Father who provides for His children. Keep on subtely tying wealth to works!

mubowa:
why is Bill Gate one of the richest person we know on earth? i know some people will be thinking because he invented computers. but that is not the answer, the answer is because he has a divine idea

Pray tell, where do divine ideas come from?

God bless

Hell-fire is true, but is it the fire that burns without quenching, or those in it?

syrup:
"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matt. 10:28)

He destroys both body & soul (of the wicked) ~ Can they be at once destroyed and burning?

Indeed, God will punish the wicked, but how?

syrup:
"And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched." (Mark 9:43).

Eternal life, absolutely, for the righteous. So, for the wicked Eternal death or Eternal punishment?

What does anyone think? What sayeth the Scriptures?

God bless

Analytical:
From my very first post on this thread (#29), I did make it clear that I'm not comfortable with that appellation of 'sole authority'. It connotes a case of someone who is power-mongering, control-seeking and position-drunk!

I don't agree it connotes that. What you are unwittingly saying, is that that is what it tends to become in these times. Don't let us confuse the office, with the conduct of the officer.

And let me say this, "position-mongering/control-seeking/powerdrunk" is a spectrum. All eyes tend to be on the obvious Jim Jones/Rev. King type instances, but it is no less evident (if more subtle, stylishly sold and better masked) in all instance where power evolves into the one position.

Analytical:
Authority has to be delegated for it to be optimally effective, except the pastor wants to kill himself before his time with too much burden and responsibility. This is unwise and unnecessary, especially as the church grows. Jethro advised Moses about it in the wilderness and what a sound counsel it was!

Well said. And in the model I see clearly outlined in the Bible it is. Again you are muddying matters. To much authority never killed anyone. Authority is not synonymous with burden. I feel you are confusing authority with workload here. Either there is one SAP or there isn't?

I like your reference to Jethro & Moses, but that was for their time. We have a differnt blueprint for ours. Not to mention that scripture testifies that Moses was the most humble of men.

The model is either true to scripture or it isn't. You shouldn't need to qualify it. The personal qualifications are outlined in scripture. Your model should stand on it's own merits. The flaws in your model are both obvious and numerous, as the discussion progresses, I will detail them.

God bless

sage:
My Guy, i am really skeptical about having a discussion with the zealots here who rather than accept clear truths try to say that somebody is advocating the teachings of a cult , just like they did in the politics thread

Hi Sage, You ran off and left me to fight the "Christians in Politics" battle by myself. I don't know if you saw, but Analytical , TayoD et al used style to scupper the debate, called it a draw, then ran off

sage:
I know that by saying the truth ie that nothing like a fiery Hell exists i am setting off a storm but the truth remains what it is.

I agree with you on this one. Will you fight the good fight if the storm rages?

Backslider:
THIS IS THE SECOND DEATH.

If hell is eternal burning, then surely it can't be death?

Contenders ready!!!!!!!

Hi everyone,

Could we please have a discussion about this. I'm very much interested in hearing peoples scripture based views.

God bless

Analytical:
There is no SAP in my model! Nobody with sole authority. That model is yours. The leaders/elders still provide the checks, advisory roles etc.

So, are you categorically stating that there is no "Sole Authority Pastor" over an individual church?

Okay, we'll work with your model exactly as you describe it.

Are you saying;

1. How ever many churches there are in an area, there is just an increas in the number of SAP's and there remains the 1 overseer for that area?

2. At whatever level of office above SAP, the position will always be filled by someone who is a SAP at church level?

3. You've tapered it into a regional overseer. What happens if the regions are multiplied say 100 fold?

4. What do those above SAP in your model do?

The reason why Paul did not put Timothy in charge (your word not mine), would be because they were two different regions/two different works.

Regards

Analytical:
Here is an illustration of my position using your scenario:

The structure of the different mature churches will look like the one in the attachment (Church Structure) and the administrative structure for the region is also as attached (Admin Structure).

Note:

[list]
[li]There could be variations. Also nomenclature may vary depending on preference (e.g. overseer=superintendent=bishop, shepherd=pastor etc).

[/li]

[li]The overseers are also shepherds of their respective churches in addition to their supervising offices[/li]
[/list]

Hope this explains your question.

Yes, absolutely. Not to misascribe anything to you, I thought I'd let you outline it first.

This was my extrapolation of the model;

If each area has say ten mature churches, then you’d require say, 1 OB for each one. That would be 32 OB’s for the whole of the south. Now according to your model, those 32 OB’s would have to be further overseen. Let’s say by PB’s. How many would one need? Lets say 1 per 8 OB’s. That gives 4 PB’s. This of course leads us ever upwards as your authority pyramid always tapers to the one person. So we would require a higher ecclesiastical authority, say a Senior PB.

If one were to replicate this in all four areas N. W, E & S, we would require someone to oversee the 4 SPB’s. Say an Overseeing SPB (OSPB) And that’s in one region. Lets say they are hundreds of regions. You can see that all your model does is add never ending layers of ecclesiastical bureaucracy which tapers into one man.

Next I'll post my thoughts.

God bless

charm01:
Poverty is a trap.

Riches are a snare. For a christian to break away from this snare,he has a great need of knowledge,revelation knowledge about the promises of God for His children as spelt out in his word.