₦airaland Forum

9inches:
By your logic, one would ask, if Christ really died for everyone's sins as He claimed, why is everyone who has heard the gospels not coming forth to claim their own salvation?

Secondly, given that students stand more chance of passing their O'levels exams in special 'magic' centers, how strongly would you be making the argument that it was their school had failed them?

Lastly, @bolded; evangelicals and fundamentalists disagree on central issues such as baptismal regeneration and the necessity of baptism (is it merely a sign to other Christians, or does it have a real role in the process of justification?), whether or not one can forfeit salvation (some protestants say that’s impossible to do, others say it is possible). You all claim to be 'bible-only Christians', but which group is right?

So you don't believe Christ died for everyone's sins according to the Scriptures. Well, He died for mine and by His mercy and grace, I responded to the gospel message and got saved on that particular day though I had heard the gospel preached couple of times earlier without surrendering. It is the desire of Christ the Saviour for everyone who hears the gospel to repent. But sadly, some will not repent immediately while some will not repent at all. We are not robots but free moral agents - free to decide whether to obey God or not and the consequence of obeying or not is entirely ours. Faith also plays a major role. A lot of people may hear the same message, but only those who mix it with faith (that this is true and real) will benefit (Hebrews 4:2). On the special 'magic' centres issue you mentioned, I thank God that there are places like magic centres according to you, where sinners who had been long in certain religious organisations can come in and by His grace, get converted within a record time. Well, there are certain reasons why virtually everyone in some Assemblies attend church there for years without genuine salvation. One may be that the Holy Spirit Who is responsible for conversion is absent leaving the people with empty, dry religion. Another may be that the clergy or preachers are not living right to the knowledge of the congregation and as such, their messages do not carry weight. Another may be that there are so much formalism and ceremonies even in the presentation of the gospel that it hardly moves people. Also, if sermons are more of entertainment and display of knowledge, oratory and eloquence, conviction can hardly come out of such. Apart from that, where people are not challenged to pray seriously concerning what they heard, then it will not benefit them. On the issue of water baptism, it is an open declaration that one had decided for Christ. One needs to be born again before voluntarily presenting himself/herself for water baptism. Water baptism on its own, without genuine salvation does not save anyone. If a sinner repents and receives Christ and dies without being baptised in water, such a one will go to heaven (Luke 23:43). But once there is opportunity for water baptism, a born again Christian who has not been baptised must of necessity, make himself available. On whether one can lose his salvation, the answer is YES. That is why Christ Jesus said that it is only those who endure to the end that shall be saved (Mark 13:13). He warned us to remember Lot's wife (Luke 17:32).There is initial salvation (conversion) and there is final salvation(heaven). There were people who were converted but later backslided and unfortunately did not return to God before they died. Such people went to hell fire. Saul, the first King of Israel, Balaam, the prophet and Judas Iscariot are good examples. May that not be our portion in Jesus' name, Amen.

9inches:
The Catholic Church is the most authentic and reliable of all interpreters.
There is listening and there is understanding. Martin Luther probably listened but lacked the understanding part.
The benefit of the interpretations? As there are confusion amongst protestant evangelicals and fundamentalists even on central doctrines concerning salvation; who then would be right in their interpretations? Or do you think the scripture is open for subjective interpretation?

You claim that the Catholic Church is the 'most authentic and reliable of all interpreters'. My question then is that if so, why are there billions of people in the Church who are yet to benefit from such interpretations of the Bible to come out of sin and into Christ? I was there and I know many who were there and remained sinners for decades only to join those, who according to you are not qualified to interpreted the word, yet got converted, within days or months, some even within hours. As I type, there are millions, if not billions of devoted Roman Catholics, some highly placed in the Church, who are deep in sin and occultism, with all the 'authentic and reliable interpretations' (though there are sinners in all congregations). Sentiment aside, don't you think something must be wrong with such 'authentic and reliable interpreters' or the manner of such interpretations? If our so-called authentic and reliable interpretations do not help people out of sin to know the Saviour and be on the way to heaven, how authentic and reliable is that and of what benefit is that to them? So according to you, the multudes of sinners in the Church who listen to your 'authentic and reliable interpretations' lack understanding but once some of them get to some other places of worship where the interpreters are not authentic and reliable, their understanding comes back and they get saved. Let me tell you sir: There is no two ways about salvation and there is no confusion about it. As a sinner acknowledges of his sins, genuinely repents and accepts Christ as Lord and Saviour, he will be saved. There is no other interpretation. A sinner is not a Christian and s Christian is not a sinner. Thank you.

Ubenedictus:
That is not just the emphasis, speaking the truth is important and that is what i have been doing.



First i have showed you that there exist a ministerial priesthood in the new testament as Paul testify, I have showed you that it is conferred by the laying of hands and that has continued since the time of the apostles till today for 2000yrs.


Do you have the ministerial priesthood in your church? Does your church have any relation to the apostles or is it a gathering of men?


Who is Your pastor and who gave him authority to teach in the house of God.

There is nothing like ministerial priesthood in the New Testament sir. The Bible states that "God gave (appointed) some Apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some teachers and some pastors for the perfecting of the saints............." (Ephesians 4:11-14). As such there are Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers (of the word of God) where I worship. Knowing the name of my pastor is not important. The authority to preach the word of God was given to Him by God (Matthew 28:18-20). What we have in common with the Apostles of Christ is by His grace, the sound teachings of the word of God to enable sinners find the need to make their ways right by coming to Christ the only Saviour and Sanctifier and for the saints to be edified to continue with His word, in His will and by His grace be steadfast till the end (Ephesians 2:20). Of course, our gathering is that of men, women, youths and children who come in mostly as sinners and through the sound teachings of the word, become converted to saints and heavenly candidates in Christ. Thanks.

Ubenedictus:
I have been saved from sin, sanctified and made ready for heaven.

If so, that is what you should be preaching to those who are yet to be saved. The emphasis should not be on Church membership, but on getting the spiritual experiences that will transform a sinner, who is on his/her way to eternal perdition, to a saint and then make him/her heaven worthy. Thanks.

Ubenedictus:
Sir Stop shifting the goal post.

But
You claimed the Catholic priesthood is unbiblical after i showed you the new testament priesthood and its ordination, you are here talking about something else.



Who told you that the Catholic Church doesn't consider genuine conversion and right living as important requirement for the priesthood?

I never shifted any goal-post. The Roman Catholic priesthood is unbiblical. The errors in Catholic doctrine are too many to mention. Yes, they don't emphasis conversion from a sinner to a saint. Infact, they do not believe that any living mortal can be righteous or a saint. That is why they pray for the dead to be forgiven. They teach Purgatory, which is false doctrine. They pray through 'Mary' and the departed saints. They bow down to 'Mary's' statue. They removed the second Commandment which says "thou shall not make for thyself any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; thou shall not bow down to them nor serve them, for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God....." (Exodus 20:4,5). To deceive the people, they divided the tenth Commandment into two so that the 'Ten Comnmabdments' can still be complete in their Cathecism.They count the Rosary in prayers, which Christ called vain repetitions (Matthew 6:7). They engage in infant baptism, contrary to the Scriptures (Matthew 3:5-16). They teach salvation by works and according to them, if your 'good deeds are greater than your sins', then you will get to heaven. What an error! (Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5). They used to descourage the laity from reading the Bible on their own, that it is only the clergy that can interprete it, they even claimed that reading the Bible was making people mad but people are getting wiser etc. God delivered me, a former devoted Roman Catholic religious sinner and millions of others. I believe He will yet deliver more from this grave Institution of deception in Jesus' name, Amen.

9inches:
Don't you think the most authentic and reliable of all books should go with the most authentic and reliable of all interpreters?

And who are the most authentic and reliable of all interpreters?
Do you mean those whose interpretations of the Scriptures have not helped their multitudes of adherents, who have been listening to them for ages, to know the need to be born again, come out of sin and to embrace the salvation that is in Christ alone according to the first 'Pope'? (Acts 4:10-12). So what is the benefit of such interpretations if I may ask?

Ubenedictus:
Do not be ignorant.

The Catholic priesthood priesthood does not consist in seminary attendance, that is simply a requirement to ensure a priest priest is well learned and knowledgeable. One becomes a priest when he is laid hands upon by the bishop and the presbytery and empowered for the priestly ministry of the new testament.


Just as Paul was ordained, so catholic priests. That is the Catholic tradition and has been observed for 2000yrs

That is not the issue sir. The issue is that conversion and right living should be basic requirements to serve God in any capacity. I think those should be the emphasis of the Church. Theological and secular education though necessary, are not as important as the life and character of a servant of God. Paul was first of all saved before he ventured into the ministry of saving souls because the blind cannot lead the blind and one cannot give what he doesn't have.

Ubenedictus:
No you are Wrong again.


The books considered were about 100 the books canonised were 73, after 1000 years martin letter started the Protestant Church and removed 7 books.


You Protestants have an incomplete bible.

OK sir. I just hope that from your complete Bible, you have been saved from sin, sanctified and made ready for heaven. If not, your owning a 'complete' Bible is of no eternal benefit. Thanks.

Progressive01:
Oh please, don't feel too important. I pray fervently every day that you get your damn country and would have created dozens of threads to support it but guess what.. The last time I made a comment in support of it, was banned for violating rule 9!

So you see, if it were within my powers, I would grant you your desires before nightfall.

As for your prayer that it comes to pass before this year runs out, from the depths of my heart, i say a thunderous AMEN!

So kiddo, stop crying in my mentions thinking I'm the one holding down your future.

Bye.

So you can't even stand for something. You supported what you believed was right only to capitulate and turn against same just because you were banned for supporting it. So much for your character. Who then is a kid between the two of us?

wale0911:
If Kanu is seen as a true patriot I can't fault his raising profile, however, I ask my Igbo friends why is it now that this call is strong? Jonathan, a President from SS was in Aso Rock for more than 4yrs, no such agitation came up. If there could be a perfect time, I think it was during Jonathan. He could not even push further the recommendations from the CONFAB he convened under his watch. Now, every one is calling for restructuring and Kanu is not stopping his agitation. Can there be more to this?

Thanks for your questions. This call for Biafra became strong now (though it did not start now just as you rightly implied) because the person elected to preside over Nigeria decided to treat the Southern parts especially the Old Eastern region a conquered territory. He made it clear that the Eastern region which has been marginalized for long will be further alienated. I know my oropke did not vite for him but that is not the first time s region will vite in block against s candidate who eventually won. It happened in 1999 (the Yorubas voted against former president Obasanjo) and in 2011, (the north voted against Goodluck Jonathan and even killed some people because he won).
But those two, to the best of my knowledge did not alienate the 'enemy' regions after they got into power. On the CONFAB recommendations, former president Jonathan could not push forward the implementation of the 2014 CONFAB for reasons best known to him. Probably he wanted to secure his second mandate before doing that. Concerning the widespread call for restructuring, it is so because that has been in the front burner for long before now: that the centre is too powerful and the states always going to the centre, caps in hand begging for federal allocations which is against the spirit of true federalism. But that is not my concern. My concern is that Mr. Joe Igboke is wrong in calling NNAMDI KANU - a man who has suffered and is willing to suffer more for his peoples' freedom, a kid. He also insulted us by his biblical allusion "the blind cannot lead the blind" meaning that we are all blind including himself. I think he just wants to endear himself to the APC government where he is feeding from. Nothing bad about that. But he should know that APC will not be in power for ever. I expect him not to support Biafra (of course, he cannot support Biafra openly even if he supports at heart). But he should be wise enough not to castigate his people because some day, he will come back to them. The bottom line us that we have been pushed to the wall. We just have to take our destiny into our own hands. Thanks for your concern sir.

skedman:
Most of the youth glamouring for birafia are not present in the east right now including those on nairaland. If eventually the war starts those in lagos,kaduna and others will surely be the first victim.please my follow birafians let us preach and pray against any war.

What kind of mindset do you people have? Did you attend school at all? (just a question, no insults intended). I ask because you should have known that the desire for freedom is not synonymous with the call for war. Are you inferring that those who championed Africans' independence from colonial masters were calling for war then? Or do you think you can frighten us to chicken out of our agitation by chanting 'war, war and war' every time Biafra is mentioned? You are wrong sir? I am a preacher and I preach and pray against war but I equally preach justice, fundamental human rights and freedom. Thanks.

hatchy:
They have already put a crown on a CLOWN.
He is now a king wearing chieftaincy regalia and carrying himself with all pompous wherever he goes.

"The blind is leading the blind" and the result will be disaster of unimaginable level when it finally begins.
Its so unfortunate that Buhari made a hero out of this nonentity and Scammer by arresting and detaining him.I don't know what use is the secret service, they should have done the elimination option two years back before this kid became a threat to National unity.

Igbos will loose in all ramifications and would never recover from that loss for century to come should this country be balkanized.

Thanks for your concern. But your evil wishes to my people will never come to pass because One Nigeria is not in any of the Holy Books. It is not your business who we elect to lead us. You call a person who is ready to suffer inconveniences and imprisonment for the liberation of his people is a 'kid, a clown, blind, a nonentity and a fraudster'. Little wonder, 'wise men and saints' have been leading you for decades. Please leave Biafra alone. Face your own people and your own destiny. God bless you.

Progressive01:
This is what they certainly cannot deny. This whole nonsense was fuelled by Jonathan's defeat because 99% of those who call themselves ipob yoots were the same people who called themselves transformation ambassadors of Nigeria, a campaign organisation of jonathan/PDP.

Very interested in seeing how it all ends, but these guys better do all they can to get their damn country this time, otherwise, the political backlash of this ill thought out adventure going forward would be really huge.

It is not ill-thought sir so it will come to pass and your evil machinations against us will not materialize. If Biafra agitation started with the defeat of GEJ as you people claim, may it not come to light but if it has been before 2015 elections, may it come to pass this very year I J N, Amen.

GLOBALINF:
Hmm!
He that have ear let him hear
War is not the next thing in our agenda!

Secession is in our agenda, not war. May those who desire peaceful secession from Nigeria (Biafra) get it and those who want war not get it IJN, Amen.

9inches:
History books, including the bible.

You said I should come back 'home'. If where I can find home is in history books including the Bible (which is the most authentic and reliable of all books), then I am already home sir. Thanks.

9inches:
Home is where the early Church fathers live and my faith, amongst all other things you might know of, lies on the tradition and authority to interpret and as well teach the Good News of our Lord Jesus Christ to all mankind.

If that sums up your faith, good luck to you sir. My own faith in based on the teachings of Christ and His Apostles handed over to us through the Holy Bible. It is based on the sacrifices and vicarious death of Christ on the Cross of Calvary to redeem me and take away my sins. I heard the gospel, repented of my sins and surrendered my life to the Saviour in line with the Scriptures after being a devoted religious sinner for years. My life changed from a sinner to a saint. I was also healed of certain ailments as I had faith in His power to heal. I am presently being used by God to help others find the truth, be saved, healed and delivered (where necessary) and have a lifelong relationship with the Saviour as He commanded. My faith is not in a denomination. It is only on Christ Who loved me so much as to suffer and die for me and rescue me from sin and its consequences of eternal damnation. I pray you will realise what I have realized if you are yet to I J N, Amen.

9inches:
Home is where the early Church fathers live and my faith, amongst all other things you might know of, lies on the tradition and authority to interpret and as well teach the Good News of our Lord Jesus Christ to all mankind.

And how do I find where the early Church fathers live or lived sir?

chipower:
Wikipedia lied because it's not in your favour. At this point, im going to quit the discussion because i don't deal with people who are not truthful. You want to change history just to gain advantage. And you claim to have gotten salvaged etc. Well if you deny the the obvious,i wonder. Even many protestant apologists don't deny this fact rather they give reasons why they believed those books deserved to be removed. You said limited information as if this history is not well documented. Your comments baffle me, to be truthful to you. Don't expect me to respond again. Bye

I never said Wikipedia lied. I only said the writers, just like you and I, are limited in their knowledge. I don't want history to be changed to gain advantage either. By the way, which advantage am I trying to gain? Let us assume that all the 73 books are all inspired by the Holy Spirit. It then means the 66 which are in the Bible are inspired. Millions, if not billions of people have been delivered, saved, sanctified, healed, blessed, fulfilled in life and ministry as well as gone to glory by listening to and living by the gospel/messages based on the 66 books (Genesis to Revelations). So to me, one does not need to go further. It is not necessary. Thanks.

chipower:
Wikipedia has council of hippo and council of catharge held by the early church fathers.I don't want to qoute catholic sources.

Wikipedia though very reliable, does not have all the information because the writers do not know everything as human beings that they are. So their information is limited to what they are privileged to know. Thanks.

chipower:
This illogical statements is getting too much. You want to lie too. Pls qoute your source

Please what is illogical about my assertion? To lie means to say something that one knows is not true with a view to deceiving others. The person I quoted said something about some books being removed from the Bible thereby making it incomplete. I quite agree that some were removed or to put it more correctly, not added and why it was so. This is what I learnt years back and as soon as I get the link to the source, I will send it. Thanks.

chipower:
Was paul ordained priest in your church? We have hundreds of thousands of protestant churches with different doctrines. All of them are accusing the other of getting it wrong. Pls tell us which one paul was ordained in. I have been reading your comments. You seem to have your own dictionary. You define words the way you like.

The problem with this discussion is that there is no common ground. For example, you are insisting that the Bible has 66 books while the church fathers declared it to be 73. The church was using the Bible with73 books for more than 1000yrs until Martin Luther came and removed the deutroconical books. He even removed books like Hebrews and James though it was added back by some of the protestant fathers. I believe in what the church fathers said, not in what Martin Luther said.

You interpreted Revelation 22, 18 -19 as if it's talking about your whole Bible but actually those verses are talking about the book of revelation alone. The book of revelation was written when john was exiled to the island of patmos. When it was written the church fathers have not compiled the Bible. The book of revelation and other books of the new testament were hotly debated before they were declared scriptures and added to the Bible. Your interpretation is wrong or perhaps your church's interpretation is wrong as far as the Catholic Church is concerned. If i follow your interpretation, it then means that Martin Luther and other protestants will encounter damnation because they removed books from the Bible the church fathers authorized. Pls it will serve you right if you read a little bit of church history.

If the protestants removed Books from the Bible what prevents another group from removing more books from the Bible in the future and still call it holy scriptures.

I didn't want to comment on this issue cos i know we can never agree on anything because how your church interprete bible is not how Catholic and other churches do. We don't even use the same bible. Thanks

According to Church history, about 73 books were recommended by the Church Fathers to be considered for canonization as Scripture. After prayerful and careful consideration by Spirit filled men of God using certain parameters and yardsticks, 66 of them passed the test and became canon. Littje wonder, whatever you need and will ever need, whatever is of concern to any human being born or yet to be born, there is provision for it in the (66 books of the canonized) holy Bible. Go no further sir except there is something else, other than how to walk and please God as well as get His abiding presence and reward in this world and hereafter that you are looking for.

Ubenedictus:
Yes


To ordain is for a minister to lay hands on the ordained for the ministry. Paul was ordained for ministry in Antioch.



While they were worshiping the Lord and
fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me
Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have
called them.’ So after they had fasted and prayed,
they placed their hands on them and sent them
off. Acts 13:2-3

You are wrong sir. Saul of Tarsus who was renamed Paul after his conversion was not ordained a priest after the tradition of the Roman Catholic Church. He did not attend Seminary preparatory to becoming a priest after the Order of Melchizedek. It was after his conversion that he was commissioned for the ministry having been selected by the Holy Spirit along with Barnabas. My point is that the Roman Catholic priesthood is alien to the New Testament. It is purely Roman Catholic dogma. You may as well show me the scriptural justification from the other 'books that were omitted from the Bible' according to you.

chipower:
Was paul ordained priest in your church? We have hundreds of thousands of protestant churches with different doctrines. All of them are accusing the other of getting it wrong. Pls tell us which one paul was ordained in. I have been reading your comments. You seem to have your own dictionary. You define words the way you like.

The problem with this discussion is that there is no common ground. For example, you are insisting that the Bible has 66 books while the church fathers declared it to be 73. The church was using the Bible with73 books for more than 1000yrs until Martin Luther came and removed the deutroconical books. He even removed books like Hebrews and James though it was added back by some of the protestant fathers. I believe in what the church fathers said, not in what Martin Luther said.

You interpreted Revelation 22, 18 -19 as if it's talking about your whole Bible but actually those verses are talking about the book of revelation alone. The book of revelation was written when john was exiled to the island of patmos. When it was written the church fathers have not compiled the Bible. The book of revelation and other books of the new testament were hotly debated before they were declared scriptures and added to the Bible. Your interpretation is wrong or perhaps your church's interpretation is wrong as far as the Catholic Church is concerned. If i follow your interpretation, it then means that Martin Luther and other protestants will encounter damnation because they removed books from the Bible the church fathers authorized. Pls it will serve you right if you read a little bit of church history.

If the protestants removed Books from the Bible what prevents another group from removing more books from the Bible in the future and still call it holy scriptures.

I didn't want to comment on this issue cos i know we can never agree on anything because how your church interprete bible is not how Catholic and other churches do. We don't even use the same bible. Thanks

Thanks for your long epistle. Sir, I think you are becoming emotional. I never said Paul was ordained a priest let alone in the Church where I worship. Let me repeat my question. Was Paul the Apostle ordained a priest according to the tradition of the Roman Catholic tradition? Are you inferring that the other 'books' which you claim were not added permit you to ordain human priests in 'the Order of Melchizedek' when the Old Testament priesthood is over and only Christ is eternally our High Priest in that Order. See, it is not only in Revelation that God warned us not to add or subtract from His infallible word (Proverbs 30:5,6). If anyone added or subtracted that is the person's cup of tea. The one I heard and keep on hearing by His grace brought me salvation, sanctification, baptism in the Holy Spirit, divine guidance, healings and other blessings snd miracles and I trust will take me Home. I need to other argument, I need no other plea. It is enough that Jesus died and that He died for me.

It was God Himself that acknowledged that "there was none like Job on the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feared God, and eschewed evil". God boasted about Job to Satan before his calamities started (Job 1:. It was even the boasting of God concerning Job's righteousness that brought about Job's calamities in the first place (Job 1:9-12; 2:3-. So it is very wrong to claim that Job was only 'self righteous' who only became righteous after his ordeals. It is true that Job was wrong in believing that God was the cause of his problems. It was also wrong for Job to think that it was God who took away his children and properties. Job's theology was wrong but his heart was right. The problem with Job and some of us believers today is that we are limited in our knowledge. God understood. That was why he revealed some mysteries to him after which Job repented for blaming God. Yes, a righteous man can repent. This clearly shows that his heart was right. God even accepted the flawed theology of Job rather than the posturings of his friends who even defended God and blamed Job (Job 42:7-9). The fact is that God used Job to showcase to Satan that one can suffer untold hardship and still remain faithful. May you and I never disappoint God when he uses us to prove Satan wrong I J N, Amen. If God did not find faults with Job, who are we? May non of us suffer half of what Job suffered I J N, Amen.

Ubenedictus:
There is also a ministerial priesthood in the new covenant, that is the priesthood of those ordained in the line of the apostles....






Romans 15:15-16 --"But I have
written to you rather boldly in
some respects to remind you,
because of the grace given me by
God to be a minister of Christ
Jesus to the Gentiles in performing
the PRIESTLY service of the Gospel
of God, so that the offering up of
the Gentiles may be acceptable,
sanctified by the Holy Spirit."

Was Paul the Apostle ordained a priest in the Roman Catholic tradition then?

It has been about three months since our amiable President Muhammadu Buhari went back to the United Kingdom on medical vacation and the Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo declared the Acting President. I know that the constitution has a role for the president and his Vice also has a role. Now that the (former) Vice President has been acting the role of the president, who then has been acting the role of Vce President? Has Professor Osinbajo been acting both roles? If so, will the burden not be too much on him? Secondly, is Nigeria as a country not being shortchanged in leadership? Please reasonable and mature answers from patriotic-minded people are expected. Thanks.

billyG:
Like what decisions?

The Acting president knows better but the matter will become clearer once he is declared the substantive president without the fear of anyone coming up later to query him.

StOla:
But you are refusing to leave a country where you have called the natives parasite. Now the parasite has said you should go, but you still want to reside with these parasites you separated from, even when they don't want you.

Are my a Northern Igbo? Why would I fret?

I don't know who called you parasites. All I know is that we want a country of our own - Biafra. Those Biafrans who desire to remain as aliens in Nigeria may do so and vice versa. I didn't want to use the word 'crying' that is why I used fretting instead. Your body language shows you are not happy that we are leaving. But sorry we are. We can still be friends or partners as foreigners. Thanks.

StOla:
So what is the definition of that if not begging for unity from their Northern hosts who have given them quit notice since that is what IPOB has decided for them - to return to their home land and have their Biafran utopia.

They can only leave if there is a law banning every foreigner from northern Nigeria. Otherwise, we are having our Biafra and Igbos can still live as foreigners in any country. Stop fretting because we want to leave. You can exist without us, can't you?

StOla:
Please tell that to the Northern Igbos or whatever they call themselves.

They are the ones having a parley with the Northerners, who still rejected their peace moves.

The northern Igbos to the best of my knowledge are not begging for unity but to be allowed to peacefully coexist with their northern neighbours.

Ubenedictus:
it is a religion for it includes belief in a supreme being,.... You can say it goes further and transcends all other religions but it is untrue and incorrect to claim Christianity isn't a religion.

That is a false dichotomy.

I agree with you sir. As far as the academic definition of religion is concerned as the belief in a Supreme Being, Christianity is a religion but as far as life of a Christian is concerned, being a Christian is quite different from being religious. It takes being a Christian by the experience of the new birth to understand this concept. Thanks.

9inches:
I encourage you to come back home; share my faith, it's beautiful. It comes with the best gifts you can ever imagine. May the Spirit of truth do His work in you.

What do you mean by 'home' sir and what is your faith about?