₦airaland Forum

spongeback: Come on guys use the offering money to fix the roof.

i doubt you have been to the church in question, it is well roofed. It is ok to seek an alternative explanation for what seem to be a shadow in the wall but sn you know the church in question has a good roof.

shdemidemi: Could you please elucidate on what you don't agree with.
Are you saying God did not reveal the secrets which were hidden in God to only apostle Paul?
Or
Are you speaking about our contemporary ministers who says they receive a fresh revelation to propagate another gospel e.g prosperity, health, finance, etc.?

ok i'll explain.
i totally disagree with the idea that there is one gospel for paul and a different model for peter and a different model for john. I also disagree with the idea that only apostle paul had d mysteries.
I believe the gospel to be one, not of different models.
Peace
I believe there is only one gospel entrusted to all these apostles

DrummaBoy: Thus we enter into the meat of this discuss. The reason why I opened this thread. Please notice how far apart verse 8 and 9 are to each other; in fact they are opposite:

[/color]

When Paul describes the Corinthians here as being rich, full and reigning as kings, there is only one picture that comes to my mind: the prosperity gospel. The health and wealth gospel. The gospel that teaches that Christ would have you rich or die trying (the bolded is my addition). This gospel is not just taught; it is lived out in its full splendor. Large cathedrals, large congregation, exotic cars, king-palaced-houses and homes, etc. They even use Paul's literal words here: we are kings; we are gods; we are called to enjoy all of God; etc.

Paul contrast these with the lives of the apostles as one set by God to be appointed to death. We catch a glimpse of a bit of this in 2 Corinthians 1

[color=#000099]

This are the realities that confronted Paul's ministry. My question: is this a reality that is expected in the life of modern day Christians or this was unique to Paul because Jesus had said of his ministry in Acts 9

[color=#000099][/color]

Well, let me answer myself partially, while awaiting other responses: it cannot be because Paul had said that it is the apostles, not just himself, that God has set forth and appointed unto death. Then in 2 Cor 1, he says of all believers that God comforts us in our tribulations. So tribulation is not unique to Paul but is for all believers.

He said of these corinthians, like one could say to modern prosperity gospellers, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you[/b]. In other words , you think you are reigning as kings; I wish you really were, so that we too could reign with you. There is a deep contrast between apostolic Christianity and today's Christianity, and the essence of this thread is that we may discover this and begin to inch more and more to the apostolic way of doing things no matter what it cost us.

it is true that the circumstance determine the challenges to be met but in scripture paul show is the test of a true minister, he show us what the life is. Their lives is and must be SACRIFICIAL, it must be lived for the people of God, today's ministers may never experience the physical agony paul went thru, but for them to be true ministers they must give themselves up to their brother and sister and by so doing offer their lives to God.
This is the most important thing, he must daily "give up his life" for the salvation of his fellow men. This is not just for ministers but in a sense for each individual christian
Peace

Pastor Kun: So far so good, in my opinion there is hardly any church today that operates strictly based on the standards set by the apostles.

i do not think the is the main issue, atleast every church i can think of expects her minister even admonish them to follow truly the standards of d apostle according to a good concience, whether or not that is true of every minister isn't dependent on any church but on the decision of the individual to truly and strictly follow that standard.

It seem i have lost my post, but suffice to say that i disagree with the idea of a different gospel for a different minister.

DrummaBoy: We proceed

[/color]

I wish to focus on the bolded for now. My pastor here talks about the fact that we all start out preaching someone elses message until we have ours. Jesus seem to have preached John the Baptist messages before he preached his own. Paul, then Saul, preached Barnabas' message before God gave him his own. The problem is with those who seem to plateau on somebody elses' message and never change it. I think God uses men to inspire us but we should never remain in that position. For many years, Tunde Bakare was a model for me, but today, I believe I have my own message different from his. That is why it is foolhardy for some people to come to this forum and be asking frosbel what church does he go to (in a bid to discredit him). The fact that Olaadegbu foolishly publicizes deeper life and their program on this forum does not make it a standard for others. In fact he is only opening himself for the criticism that he so rightly deserves. The tragedy of the likes of Olaadegbu is that they will never discover the message God has given them for their generation.

Yes, it is one gospel, but God in his sovereignty has so crafted men in such a way that this one gospel can reach all kinds of men and minister to their personality and needs without offending any. But if we get caged in one kind of model and never evolve, we will never be effective for Christ in our own right.
Thus the need to follow the apostles' admonition here not think of men beyond what is necessary. No one should be a tin god. The litmus test of the fact that we have not made a human being such is the fact that we can openly criticize them in public, the same way Paul welcomed people's criticism of him.

[color=#000099]

So these men we tend to glory in are just mere men. They have treasures in earthen vessels. I cannot fathom why anyone would think a General Superintendent should be above rebuke or church discipline because he is GS? What does a man have that he has not received from above? But this is not a critic of the Deeper Life church, it is an expose on the fact that many of us have strayed far from the apostolic ways.

In 2 Corinthians, Paul is seen as someone who is weak bodily but seems to assert himself in his letters. He said he could be strong bodily if they wanted him to. Then when he discussed the false prophets, he said they where the ones that brow beat the people and these people seem to like it that way:

[color=#000099][/color]

The apostolic way of life and ministry is not one that glories in anointing, sign and wonders, that lords it over the flock, that brow beats people into line with rules and regulation, that is so high up you cannot approach them until you fill form, etc. The apostolic lifestyle is simple and can be taken for granted.

My question: in the light of these two verses, how far, in your opinion, have we strayed from the apostolic way of life?

I'm sorry guy, i arrived late for this discussion but please permit me to drag you back a little.
1cor 4:1, my translation uses stronger word so pls permit me. people should think of us as christ servants, stewards entrusted with the mysteries of God
this seem to b d bedrock of d chapter,
pls note unlike most translations, my translation doesn't say minister is says 'servants', not just that but stewards, the passage of scripture is a direct parallel to lk 12:42-44, and i quote the lord replied "who then is wise and trustworthy steward that the master will put over his household to give them at the proper time their allowance of food?", if i laid down precept upon precept then it becomes clear.

The minister, is truly a servant, Jesus is his master. The food which he is to to give the household of christ, the church on earth is no other thing but the mysteries of God which he himself was entrusted. It is important to note that the steward isn't suppose to invent the mysteries, no! The mysteries are entrusted to him, i believe goshen touched this point a little. Unlike frosbel i believe the true steward is both a guard and a guide, as a guide he must lead people even more deeper into these mysteries, he must proclaim it and minister it unto the people that is what christ meant when he said "to give them their food in due time", the steward must feed the household but must also guard it. The mysteries must be kept whole without stain, he must guard those mysteries against every lie, falsehood and heresy.
In this passage paul shows us what is expected of a trustworthy steward(cf vs 2), and reminds us that d steward is always accountable to his master Jesus christ, to him be glory for ever.

striktlymi: Oh, okay!

Has the Church done its investigation?

i doubt that, the alledge apparation may have been a one time thing, there was no message according to a friend of mine. There is hardly anything to investigate.

striktlymi: Hi Airh,

Interesting post!

I admire your 'devotion' to the blessed virgin but how do you know that this apparition is authentic?

hehehe, i doubt this particular report is new, it seems like very old news.

Boomark: Can't view the document. This is not about doing what you convincingly think is right but having knowing the truth.

You will always be taught what you want to hear and be shocked by the truth you never knew. About the blessed trinity, You need to study again.

sorry my dear, the catholic church isn't one of those protestant churches where they tell u what u want to hear.
What we teach is the truth, and if he studies again i'm confident that if he is sincere he will arrive at the same conclusion.

Boomark: Ok...i will wait for you to ask Rome what to say on the matter.

a cheap insult, i choose to ignore.
It seem you could takle my response so you had to resort to this.
You were unable to show how the woman in genesis 2 relates to sarah and your response to that failure is d above.
Weldone.

Boomark: "I can imagine Moses writing things he never witness." these are the words of unbelievers. When you say you believe in the Holyspirit, is it for mouth or mere recitation of nicene creed?

are you saying the holyspirit described the cherub to the artist? Please be clear.
Beside my belief in the person of the holyspirit personal and communal, that means i believe it and share that believe with other christians. The last time i check u guys said d holyspirit is 'God's active force.

With regard to Christ,The apostles said "we regard no man according to the flesh" those who take this advice will never make an image of him. Those who can possibly do that are the type that worshiped Paul, calling him god despite his warning. This is where you borrow what you practice.

ofcourse a man is regard according to the spirit and that isn't a prohibition my dear, against images. Your insinuation on type of people are simply your ill informed opinion.

Your assumption that people saw and described Jesus is faulty. You don't assume in this kind of thing cos it might turn out that you are bowing to an ordinary man.

it is not an assumption, there are images of christ dating to the earlier times of christianity, that christ was described isn't an assumption but a conclusion based on historic and archelogical facts.

noetic16: @Frosbel
Dude, go and sleep . . ..your abominations have been thoroughly thrashed. My only problem is the FALSE identity you claim as a christian. It is inconceivable that you utter such abomination about the identity of Jesus, but still have the audacity to call yourself a Christian.

Dude, you are either an atheist or an anti-Christ, far from being a Christian.

personally i doubt frosbel is any of the things you called him above. I see him as a person not very different from C S Lewis, he is only avoiding anything that smells catholic, that is because he sees the catholic church as the mystery of evil. His rejection of the trinity is for him a rejection of the evil he believes the catholic church stand for, atleast i understand that much about him.

frosbel: Lol, I have so researched into this topic that I have had sleepless night because of it.

Majority of the creeds and dogmas into the mysterious christian churches today are Pagan , even Paul predicted this would happen.

"Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction," - 2 Thessalonians 2:3

"They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." - [b]2 Timothy 4:4[/b]

The reason why the world is engrossed in darkness, why there is confusion in the church, why the church is full of hypocrites, why 70% of new converts do not endure, why muslims, atheists etc ridicule our belief system , is because we have deviated from the right path, we have left the simple gospel of the early church and embraced a mythical , mysterious and complex maze of unintelligible , complex and outright pagan ideas.

We need to return to the faith of our fathers.

Because of you , I will remain on this thread and despite the insults by that 'brat' Noetic ( ) , will endeavour to explain every single point you raise.

My response may not be immediate, but it will come.

Thanks.

nah, i doubt you really research about these topics, you simply jumped on d net and bookshops and got as many "christian conspiracy theories" as posible.

Tgirl4real: Are you simply playing the devil's advocate here? Cos I still don't get what you are on about. This is becoming rather embarrassing. Lol!

If Jesus was merely flesh n blood just as u and me, so, what makes his blood special or different from dat of Abraham, Elijah, Moses and co. I guess they weren't just lucky and the word didn't manifest itself in them.

We all are on the same page that Jesus is the son of God, but saying that he is lesser and not equal to God or that he is a glorified flesh n blood or that he didn't pre-exist is turning a blind eye to what is clearly stated in scriptures.

sorry i doubt frosbel is trying to play d devils advocate, he is simply stating his convictions.

frosbel: You cannot eat your cake and have it, calling one experience predestination and another pre-existence is selectivity disingenuous.

This is bible language for you , which was also used to reinforce the truth that the sacrifice of the Son of God was a plan , right from the beginning , even before Jesus existed , in the mind of GOD.

sorry that passage didn't say we pre-exist, it said "he chose us in him", God have already chosen us before the foundation of the world that is predestination not pre-existence. It my turn to say your exegesis is heavyly flawed.

frosbel: The sacrifice was on the cross , made once and for all forever.

I believe Jesus rose from the grave with the same body in which he died , albeit in a glorified fashion.

atleast i can agree with the above.

frosbel: God is Spirit , those who worship him must do so in spirit and truth.

The Spirit of GOD is God himself in action, in creation, salvation , revelation etc.

"But it was to us that God revealed these things by his Spirit. For his Spirit searches out everything and shows us God's deep secrets." - 1 Corinthians 2:10

Notice the bolded singular pronouns used to reinforce the truth that this is not 3 persons in the plural but one person.

God is an individual , indivisive and singular in being. To divide him into 3 separate beings is PAGAN to the utmost.

maybe dear frobel, you will like to explain the passage in jn where Jesus said "I will ask the father and he will send you another comforter".
According to your idea of the holyspirit that means Jesus was sayin "i will ask of the father and he will send himself". Abi no be so?

frosbel: You are calling Jesus GOD which in itself is a contradiction of sorts.

1. If Jesus was GOD and the bible says God cannot be tempted, then the temptation in the wilderness was a prank.
2. If Jesus was GOD and GOD is 1 , it means GOD was 2/3 and not 1 when Jesus was on earth, something totally PAGAN and blasphemous.

you alone have the above problem fros because you have refused to accept the biblical truth that Jesus came as both fully God and fully man.

Giovanni Ponzi: I think the dude read his bible from behind, there's a reason why its called [size=16pt]"TRINITY"[/size] not "Shape shifters"

lolz, shape shifters, seriously?

Tgirl4real: But Frosbel, why are you twisting scriptures like this?
What about scriptures that categorically say he is God? Why are you ignoring those scriptures?

i am a bit suprised you are not very sympathetic of the above theology. Frosbels theology is the classical protestant either/or theology, according to that theology if Jesus is man then he can't be God, if mary is a creature then she can't give birth to her creator, if God is one he can't be 3 person, if God is totally loving there can't be hell of everlasting shame for the damned, if Jesus was born in time then he couldn't have pre-existed, the list goes on. The only difference between frosbel and most people in the religious forum is that frosbel applies his either/or theology over a wider range.
Unfortunately scripture has a different stance, it isn't 'either/or' it is most times 'both/and'. Jesus is both God and man, thru christ d world was created, everything including mary was created thru christ, and truly the creature still gave birth to her creator, God is both merciful and just hence eternal life for d just and everlasting shame for the wicked, in one God there are 3 persons, christ preexisted and was later born about 2000yrs ago. Both are true, and ignoring the passage that say Jesus is God and holding only to the passage that say he is man is to seriously disfigure the truth of scripture base on preconcieved ideas of what you think.

frosbel: The Image of a thing is not that thing.

People often say to me, " Your Son is a splitting image of you ", this does not mean my Son is me, it means he looks, talks , walks and behaves like me.

if someone speaks and behaves God and even has the attributes of God the there is only one conclusion. That person has the divine nature and merits to be called God and merits also the honor due to God.
According to scripture, Jesus fits d above profile perfectly.

Boomark: And this how you debunked the bible verse i gave you out of your own imagination?

All you want someone that will say it is Mary whether true or false. With Sarah and hagar in mind, read Gal 4:25-26 and see how Sarah corresponds to the free Jerusalem which is the mother of us all and how Hagar correspond to the Jerusalem in bondage. Jerusalem is the woman.

You should be thanking me No! Thank God for me.

sorry my dear sarah is an allegory, a symbol of the new jerusalem, that doesn't in any way mean that the woman in genesis 2 is sarah. Your explanation of scripture is flawed, my dear.

Boomark: I am actually shocked that the images have different/random faces which you guys refer to as one person.
In God's standard, things are made to His specification not by human imagination. Besides in the new covenant, Christ said true worshipers must worship God in spirit and in truth. Don't you know that?

it is interesting that God didn't didn't show moses the faces of the cherubs he asked him to mould. At least people saw Jesus and could describe his features, i could imagine moses telling an artist to mould a cherub the artist had never seen only height and width, that was the specifications!

Besides tell me what you understand by the term "in spirit and in truth".
That aside the main variation in the ancient artworks i know are mainly of art not mainly of features.

Boomark: I don't practice lawlessness. Adding, remove and making things null and void as it pleases me.

neither do i, it is a fact that the bible wasn't written english, it is another fact that the greek word for until doesn't have the same meaning as the english.
The fact that you are ignorant of those facts doesn't make me lawless it simply means you need to to learn more.

Boomark:
Your brothers could not confidently correct me. They don't like things that comes with questions.

The woman in Rev 12 is what i desire to know from you. Have you been able to know who she is?

Have you read Gal 4:21-31? It solved the issue of the woman in Genesis and Rev.

unfortunately galatians doesn't has any reference to genesis 2.
Sarah isn't the woman who gave birth to the messiah. Sorry she of genesis nor of jeremiah or isaiah.

Boomark: So how is this different from what i wrote above or is it because i used the word "something"...that is not the real thing.

Go for the real thing, that is where we are now not the shadow. The real thing came in its fullness(Christ fulfilment of the old) not half half or with some missing part that you can patch with the shadows.

have you seen the real thing without it shadow before? I bet you have a shadow too, right?
Christ fulfilled the old covenant and rendered it void, but the new covenant will be an illusion if it was something without a shadow. That is why you have both old and new covenant in your bible.
If the old covenant had images i'm not shocked the new covenant has both images and a better understanding of it.

Boomark: I believe the word inspired by the Holyspirit. if you don't, its not my fault. This is the English meaning, if that is the problem.

Main Entry: until
Function:conjunction
Date: 14th century
:up to the time that:up to such time as
<play continued until it got dark>
<never able to relax until he took up fishing>
<ran until she was breathless>

preposition&conjunction
up to (the point in time or the event mentioned):
[as preposition]:
the kidnappers have given us until October 11th to deliver the documents
he held the office until his death
[as conjunction]:
you don’t know what you can achieve until you try

Up to the time of his birth, they never had intercourse but they(Mary and Joseph) did it after his birth. God did not prevent them from enjoying their marriage.

It still stands as truth.

the bible wasn't written in english my dear! So go and learn a little greek.

shdemidemi: What on earth is this! Must you twist and use semantics to make a lie become true.

it is simple knowledge that "until" in the language the bible was written has no effect on the future unlike in english. That is what syncan was showing you with those quotes.

Boomark: ^of course. See more proof here.

Matthew 1:25
New International Version (©2011)
But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

New Living Translation (©2007)
But he did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born. AndJoseph named him Jesus.

English Standard Version (©2001)
but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.

You must not believe everything in the bible cos you were coached not to believe the truth.

What we are doing is for those that might not know before they enter. Those who are there already, man cannot help. I have proffered solution and a way out for them. Dissociate yourselves from all man made idols and God may be merciful.

in greek the word until has no effect on the future.
Go and learn at least a little greek if you will ever excel in biblical studies.

chukwudi44: THE SAMEBTHING REPEATED HERE. THE HIBLE IS THE INTERPRETER OF ITSELF. MARY IS THE MOTHER OF JAMES AND JOSES. THIS IS THE SAME MOTHER OF JESUS. THIS A PROVE THAT MARY ALSO IS A CREATURE AMD A MERE MORTAL THAT DO NOT DESERVE TO HE WORSHIPPED.

This is simply ridiculous!! The mother of James and Joses suddenly becomes the mother of Jesus!! This would be the 8th wonder of the world.

Now let us examine that narrative three gospel writers Mattew,Mark and John narrated this same event.



Matthew 27:56 KJV
"Among which was Mary
Magdalene, and Mary the
mother of James and Joses,
and the mother of Zebedee's
children."

Mark 15:40

"Some women were there looking on from a distance.Among them were Mary magdalene,Mary the mother of the younger James and of Joses and Salome

John 19:25 "Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene".

Even the dumbest student would see from this three narratives that Mary the mother of James and Joses is the same as Mary thhe wife of cleopas the sister of Mary the mother of Jesus through whom Jesus and James are related.

hehehe i was suprised he didn't notice that mary the mother of jose and co was not the wife of joseph and isn't the mothe of christ.
Peter you read scripture without understanding.

Boomark: I believe demi saw it and he is also waiting for you people to say the truth of the matter.

So for now, this is the truth. Sarah is the woman not Mary.

hehehe, so sarah is the young woman prophesied in genesis, isaiah, jeremiah, to bring forth the son of God?
You disappoint me.

Boomark: Something that is not real. Shadow of something: something that is not the real thing.

I hope you will not sing love songs to me like syncan as we proceed?

a shadow is the imitation of a particular reality. It is not the real thing but it gives us an a replica of the reality. The old is a shadow of the new.
Can you now figure it out?