There is absolutely something wrong with black race


That's why I so much respect the Chinese, India. Japanese.

ThompsonJoo:
Is it wrong for a Christian to obtain a chieftaincy title?
If yes why?

. It is not wrong , we are Africans, most of the things we do in the name of religion is the culture and traditions of Arabs and Europeans.

If idol worshipping isn't involved, it's okay.
1John 2: 15-17. Love not the world neither the things in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. Verse16 says ''For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life is not of the Father, but of the world.
1. Lust of the flesh meaning you always want to satisfy the deeds of the flesh
2. Lust of the eyes meaning you always want to give attention to all what your eye sees and desire
3. Pride of life meaning you always want to feel belonged, recognized and trend in every circle of life.
The Word of God and the commandment of God are for His Children and NOT for Church goers. Jesus Christ is the Perfect Example and Model of any Child of God and not a mere christian

erniok:

First, in being so excited to judge, you never bothered to read my post. I never said I was a member of the Roman catholic church. I said I'm a member of the catholic church. They are 2 different things. Secondly, if you have issues with that scripture I quoted, I can't help you. Take it out with the Holy Spirit that made it part of the holy scriptures.

You can say you are a Christian, not a catholic. It makes you look like an impostor. Catholic church is catholic church. Be it that of Rome or elsewhere. It's England that started using the word Roman Catholic church for catholic church at Rome where the head resides. If you don't know another name for catholic is universal. Your being catholic can only be as a result of being a protestant, knowing fully well you guys broke away from catholic. So Catholic is catholic. Whether that of Rome or elsewhere it doesn't make.

Mind you, I am not judging. It's you guys that know how to judge. It's you guys that think you are full of Holy Spirit that know who worship God and who doesn't. Meanwhile I am not against any church, even any religion, per se but I just wanted to correct some impression, hence my first post on this thread.

YinkaOlusesi16:
if someone like baba ADEBOYE doesn't have any chieftaincy title, then I don't think I need one as a Christian. because baba is my role model.

If this is actually your reason. U need help

Certainly before the advent of Christianity in Africa and other parts of the world, they have been established cultural practices in those communities and countries..

The church respects those culture and still blend Christianity with it.

If a Christian faithful has done well for his community and they see him fit to be recognized and appreciated by giving him a title as a cheif, it is a welcome idea..

It's still service to humanity and the church also encourage christians to do that...

For me it's nothing...
That one na less...

YinkaOlusesi16:
if someone like baba ADEBOYE doesn't have any chieftaincy title, then I don't think I need one as a Christian. because baba is my role model.

As from today, make Jesus your role model, not a fellow human

AntiChristian:
Of course, Jesus was tittled "King of the Jews" despite no coronation!

Was that title given to him by the Jews or by the Roman armies. To accord him honor or to spit the Jews?
Why did he refused to be accorded the honour of being called a 'Good Teacher' by which he replied No one is good except God.

“Most Reverend”, “Doctor”, “Elder”, “Right Reverend”, “Deacon”, “Father”, “Bishop”, “Reverend”, “Holy Father”

Honorary titles sound good to the ears of man, but do they sound good to the ears of God? The only way to judge these titles is by God’s Word, the Bible. This article shows what God thinks of titles used by clergymen and what it means to you.

PEOPLE are so used to hearing clergymen called “Reverend,” “Doctor” or “Father” that they seldom question the fitness of these honorary titles. Yet if any professed Christian will read his Bible he will discover that Christ Jesus, the Founder of Christianity, absolutely refused creature-honoring titles. The clergy, though, ever since the days of Jesus, have been fond of high-sounding titles. When called just “Mister” or even “Brother,” the clergy often respond with words and mannerisms indicating that they feel they have been addressed in terms beneath their dignity. So there is no doubt that honorary titles tickle the ears; they sound good. The prestige produced by titles such as “bishop,” “deacon,” “Reverend Doctor” and “Father” gratifies a desire for honor and praise of men. Titles also make one feel different, separate from others. Yet Christ said: “All you are brothers.” This should prompt us to search the Bible to find out whether honorary titles befit true Christians.—Matt. 23:8,

To appraise honorary titles intelligently we must know what the effect of using them is. Since they are a designation implying distinction and dignity, they create class distinctions. That is what exists among professed Christians today: the clergy and laity class distinctions. Early Christians were all brothers. They had no class distinctions, not the slightest trace of a hierarchy. If class distinctions cropped up, they were condemned and uprooted. Class distinctions were never condoned, as the Bible writer James showed: “You have class distinctions among yourselves and you have become judges rendering corrupt decisions, is that not so?” (Jas. 2:4, Since honorary titles create class distinctions, could they really befit Christians?

It is noteworthy that James, the brother of the Lord, was given charge over the congregation of Christians at Jerusalem, and on occasions he presided over the councils and announced decisions. (Acts 21:18) After Peter was released from prison by Jehovah’s angels he told some Christians: “Report these things to James and the brothers.” (Acts 12:17, Peter did not say: “Report these things to Father James and the bishops and deacons.” No, Peter recognized all Christians as brothers. So James, even the head of the congregation at Jerusalem, was never called by honorary titles.

“A DISGUSTING THING IN GOD’S SIGHT”

Creature-flattering titles make men look lofty in the eyes of other men. They arouse fear of men. They take away from the fear of Jehovah God. This disgusts God. How do we know? The authority is none other than God’s own Son who told the title-craving Pharisees: “You are those who declare yourselves righteous before men, but God knows your hearts; because what is lofty among men is a disgusting thing in God’s sight.” (Luke 16:15, NW) How disgusting, then, it must be to Almighty God when men flatter one another with a title such as “Reverend”—one of the most popular honorary titles in Christendom!

Really, is any man worthy of the designation “Reverend”? The way to answer this question is to go to the Bible. Do we find any examples of a man’s being called “Reverend”? Not one! In fact, the word “reverend” occurs in the King James, the American Standard and the Rotherham Version Bible just once; and then it is applied only to Jehovah God: “Holy and reverend is his name.” (Ps. 111:9, AS) Yet today clergymen arrogate to themselves a term applying only to God. And even “Reverend,” for many clergymen, does not sound illustrious enough, so they embellish it and call themselves “Right Reverend,” “Very Reverend” or “Most Right Reverend.” Can you honestly picture in your mind Christ Jesus in a long, flowing ecclesiastical robe warmly receiving from his followers high-sounding titles? In truth, it would be difficult to discover in all history any person whose life record and personal habits conflicted more openly with ecclesiastical display than Jesus of Nazareth! Declared Jesus: “I do not accept glory from men.”—John 5:41, NW.

It would have been a disgusting thing in God’s sight had Jesus accepted the honorary titles that were in vogue in his day. Do you know what happened when anyone tried to dub Jesus with an honorary title? Let us go to the Bible: “A certain ruler questioned him, saying: ‘Good Teacher, by doing what shall I inherit everlasting life?’ Jesus said to him: ‘Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God.’” (Luke 18:18, 19, NW) Why did Jesus, who certainly was a teacher and of all men one who could qualify as good, rebuke the man for calling him “Good Teacher”? Because he was using “Good Teacher” as a formalistic title, for in his heart he did not really believe that Jesus was a good teacher; otherwise he would have accepted Jesus’ teaching. But he spurned Jesus’ counsel. He deserved the rebuke, a rebuke that unquestionably showed honorary titles do not befit Christians.

THE TITLE “FATHER”

Did you ever read in the Bible of one Christian’s calling another “Father” as an honorary title? Search as diligently as you can, and you will find that not even the apostles bore the title “Father.” No authority for using the title “Father” for Christians is given in the Scriptures. Indeed, the title is expressly condemned! By whom? By Christ himself! Speaking of the title-loving clergy of his day, Jesus said: “They like the most prominent place at evening meals and the front seats in the synagogues, and the greetings in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ [“My great one; My excellent one,” footnote] by men. But you, do not you be called ‘Rabbi’, for one is your teacher, whereas all you are brothers. Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for One is your Father, the heavenly One.”—Matt. 23:6-9, NW.

Did Jesus mean what he said? Certainly! He was not uttering idle words. Does it take a mental giant to understand his command? No, his words need no special interpretation, for Jesus was speaking no parable. He was giving clear-cut instructions about creature-exalting titles: “Do not call anyone your father on earth.”

The Roman Catholic clergy water down the force of Jesus’ command by saying that his words cannot be taken literally, otherwise we could not call our male parent “father.” Is their reasoning sound? Hardly! Read the context. From the setting it is unmistakably clear that Jesus was not condemning the use of “father” for the male parent, for he himself repeatedly referred to the male parent as “father.” (Matt. 15:4-6; 19:5; 21:31) His condemnation was of the honorary title.

To defend the use of “Father” for priests the Catholic clergy claim that a priest becomes a spiritual father when he baptizes a person. They point to one particular scripture as authority for disregarding Jesus’ explicit command. This scripture is Paul’s statement to the Corinthians: “For although you have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet you have not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, through the gospel, did I beget you.” (1 Cor. 4:15, Dy) Was Paul here telling the Corinthian Christians to begin addressing him as “Father Paul”? Obviously not! Nowhere in the Bible is he ever called “Father Paul.” Peter called him “our beloved brother Paul.” (2 Pet. 3:15) Unlike Catholic priests Paul did not claim to have become a spiritual father by reason of having baptized someone. As he himself says, he did very little baptizing. (1 Cor. 1:13-16) But it was by virtue of Paul’s being the first one to instruct the Corinthians in the truth of God’s Word that he begot them through the gospel.

Paul was using the earthly relationship in the human family to illustrate the true picture of his position relative to the Corinthian congregation. His use of the term “father” was not disobeying Jesus’ command because no one ever addressed him as “Father” and because he himself used it not as a title but as an illustration.

Further, it is enlightening to note that the Roman Catholic translation of the Bible by R. A. Knox, at 1 Corinthians 4:15, reads: “You may have ten thousand schoolmasters in Christ, but not more than one father; it was I that begot you in Jesus Christ, when I preached the gospel to you.” Now Catholics do have more than “one father.” Indeed, they have more than “ten thousand” fathers, for every priest, regardless of whether he was the first to bring their religion to them, is still called “Father.” So the practice of calling clergymen “Father” is still in direct violation of Jesus’ command and is not supported by Paul’s illustration to the Corinthians.

What, now, are we to think of the title “Holy Father” that is applied to the pope? We can only think the way Christ Jesus would think: that it is ridiculously wrong. For no man is holy. “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Rom. 3:23, NW) True, Christ Jesus did use the term “Holy Father,” but he did not apply it to a man; he knew that Jehovah God alone is worthy of that name: “Holy Father, watch over them out of respect for your own name.” (John 17:11, NW) Receiving or using the honorary titles “Father” and “Holy Father,” as it is done in Christendom today, is a detestable thing in the eyes of Jehovah God.

BISHOPS, DEACONS AND ELDERS

Common today is the title “Bishop.” The word does appear in some translations of the Bible, especially those translated from the Greek two hundred to three hundred years ago. But the word is not in the original Bible text. For “bishop” is simply a mistranslation of the Greek word “epískopos.” This word was never intended to be an honorary title. It was used to designate a privilege of service within God’s organization. The word really means “overseer.” Why, then, did some Bible translators render “epískopos” as “bishop”? Because many translations were made by men who were members of religious organizations having so-called “bishops.” Naturally these translators inserted such words into the English translation of the Bible in order to give seeming support to their ecclesiastical system of offices. Accurate modern translations do not use the word “bishop.”

So likewise the title “Deacon” is a mistranslation of the Greek “diákonos,” which really means “ministerial servant.” To the Philippians Paul wrote: “To all the holy ones in union with Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, along with overseers and ministerial servants.” (Phil. 1:1, NW) This, as is quite evident, is not a flattering title.

What, now, of the title “Elder”? The Greek word translated “elder” in the King James Version Bible is presbýteros. Literally it means “older one” or “more aged one.” So it really is not a title. Paul said: “Make appointments of older men [“elders,” AV] in city after city.” (Titus 1:5, NW) Note carefully that those appointed to special privileges of service were not appointed to be elders but because they were elders or older men. The rule was that those who were to be appointed to be overseers (epískopos) over the flock of God were required to be “older men,” namely, those whose fruits of word, doctrine and conduct proved them to be “older men” or mature ones in a spiritual way. So the Bible gives no authority for using “elder,” “bishop” and “deacon” as honorary titles.

Since God’s Word condemns honorary titles, would it be wrong for a Christian to address a king as “King” or a judge as “Your Honor” or “Your Lordship”? No. When Christians address rulers and judges, they are addressing them as civil servants and not in worship or as spiritual leaders. When before King Agrippa, the apostle Paul said: “Concerning all the things of which I am accused by Jews, King Agrippa.” And when before Festus, the procurator of Judea in the reign of Nero, Paul said: “I am not going mad, Your Excellency Festus.” Though Paul paid official respect to civil servants, he never addressed Christians or non-Christian spiritual leaders by special titles.—Acts 26:2, 25, NW.

What does all this mean? It means that those who want to serve God in his prescribed way will stop addressing clergymen with titles such as “Reverend” and “Father.” True Christians do not use any kind of honorary titles. It means much more: the use of honorary titles is a sign of false religion. Abandon such false religion. Practice true religion by associating with the New World society of Jehovah’s witnesses. There are no class distinctions among these true Christians; all are brothers. All abide by the principles of God’s written Word, and that includes the principle set forth by God’s prophet at


Job 32:21, 22 (AS): “Let me not, I pray you, respect any man’s person; neither will I give flattering titles unto any man. For I know not to give flattering titles; else would my Maker soon take me away.”

Is a traditional King not a chieftaincy title

Are there no Kings in the Bible that served God with all they have

You can also read about Oba Sir Isaac Babalola Akinyele, (18 April 1882 – 30 May 1964) ..the famous born again Christian Late Olubadan of Ibadan.

Mpanyi:


You can say you are a Christian, not a catholic. It makes you look like an impostor. Catholic church is catholic church. Be it that of Rome or elsewhere. It's England that started using the word Roman Catholic church for catholic church at Rome where the head resides. If you don't know another name for catholic is universal. Your being catholic can only be as a result of being a protestant, knowing fully well you guys broke away from catholic. So Catholic is catholic. Whether that of Rome or elsewhere it doesn't make.

Mind you, I am not judging. It's you guys that know how to judge. It's you guys that think you are full of Holy Spirit that know who worship God and who doesn't. Meanwhile I am not against any church, even any religion, per se but I just wanted to correct some impression, hence my first post on this thread.

You first paragraph is laughable so I'll let it slide.
On your second paragraph, you had issues with the scriptures and I simply advised you to take it up with the author. I'm judging no one. The word is our judge whether you live right or not.

First, from the beginning, kingship was not God's design for his children, but when the children of Israel at that time when they mixed up with the inhabitant of the Canaan they requested for a King and God gave them Saul and it continued from there. There is nothing bad in obtaining a Chieftaincy title whether in Nigeria or anywhere in the world. It is only unscriptural to bow, serve mammon with the Living God, the Creator and owner of the Heaven and Earth, who sent Jesus Christ to atone for the sins of these world, which is almost impossible in this part of the world because most of our traditional rulers are idol worshippers. So for a Christian it is unscriptural, our allegiance should be to God and God only. [/b]Matthew 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon[b]
Joshua 24:15 [/b]And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.[b]

Any Religion that does not have synergy with your tradition is a scam. Your tradition is greater than Christianity.

If your oyinbo overloards are happy with duke, marquess, earl, viscount, baron (of Essex, Cornwall, Winchester, etc) - and don't find it inconsistent with their religion - then yes, you their perpetual copy-paster, can also be happy with the chieftancy titles your own ancestors have bequeathed you. You're saved, oyinbo god won't send you to his hell.

John 5:41. Jesus said, I receive not honour from men.

If He received not the honour from men, why should we? Maybe because we are smarter or wiser than Him.

Georgejeez:
Of course , yes
Once I make small money I collect Chieftaincy title , then God will just call me , I open Church .
I will then be the first G.O who is a Chief .

Imagine I being called to come and preach on the alter and the intro will be like " People of God , stand up on your feet as we make welcome our Spiritual father , Gods general and Founder of this great Church ,,, help me make welcome to the pulpit ,,,, Chief,Arch Bishop , Dr ........... ............ 😂😂😂
E go too sweet

See u see hellfire oo. Worldly carnal sombori

YinkaOlusesi16:
if someone like baba ADEBOYE doesn't have any chieftaincy title, then I don't think I need one as a Christian. because baba is my role model.

Just look at what you are saying!!!

So if he kills, you will be motivated to do the same?

Jun

NoahHadNoArk:
You can’t collect a a chieftaincy title, but if you invited to England to accept a Knighthood from the king you will go.

We’ve been programmed to despise, refuse and reject our own traditions while we adore, worship and embrace another man’s culture as being superior.


Who did this to us?!?

Not just knighthood even national awards....

Depends on the culture. In igbo land, there are titles given for recognition and there's nothing fetish about those.

vdestro:


Talk true, you meant to say he is your god? Role model is just your coded way of saying god since you know that if you say so, you don finish everything.

Why are you confusing yourself after the man made himself very clear to all

erniok:

You first paragraph is laughable so I'll let it slide.
On your second paragraph, you had issues with the scriptures and I simply advised you to take it up with the author. I'm judging no one. The word is our judge whether you live right or not.

You continue to hype on this your quote that I ordinarily don't have issues with, as that's primarily catholic way of life. This is one of the reasons people that lived holy life are beatified and made saints in catholic church because they were imitators of Christ and people that knew them or grew in their generation can easily relate with and imitate them.

You now accept one can imitate Paul, not Jesus as it were. Soon you will ask Paul to help you in prayer, even when Christ is only mediator. After all, he did it while alive. So why can't he do it when he is no more? After all, our God is God of the living and not of the death. And whoever is in Christ Jesus doesn't die. Oops, holy digression! It's good though. But that's by the way

Problem with you guys is you pick what you like and leave the ones you don't like or should I say you are oblivious of. I asked you before what you meant by worship. Before that, remember Joseph told his brothers they would worship him, which happened. And it's God that made it so! Did it make Joseph a God? No. Did it make his brothers idolaters? No. So again, what is the description of this your worship, worship thing?

Op. Poverty is a disease. When you have money, you will grow in status and assume a higher level of societal responsibility.

Chieftaincy title is meant for the nobles in any community. You can hardly sit with titled men in any community to have fruitful discussion if you're not titled, no matter how rich you are. It is also a sign of responsibility.

vdestro:


Talk true, you meant to say he is your god? Role model is just your coded way of saying god since you know that if you say so, you don finish everything.

role model nobi coded way of saying he's a god...understand d meaning

Chieftains nor good o...peganism join inside

Mpanyi:


You continue to hype on this your quote that I ordinarily don't have issues with, as that's primarily catholic way of life. This is one of the reasons people that lived holy life are beatified and made saints in catholic church because they were imitators of Christ and people that knew them or grew in their generation can easily relate with and imitate them.

You now accept one can imitate Paul, not Jesus as it were. Soon you will ask Paul to help you in prayer, even when Christ is only mediator. After all, he did it while alive. So why can't he do it when he is no more? After all, our God is God of the living and not of the death. And whoever is in Christ Jesus doesn't die. Oops, holy digression! It's good though. But that's by the way

Problem with you guys is you pick what you like and leave the ones you don't like or should I say you are oblivious of. I asked you before what you meant by worship. Before that, remember Joseph told his brothers they would worship him, which happened. And it's God that made it so! Did it make Joseph a God? No. Did it make his brothers idolaters? No. So again, what is the description of this your worship, worship thing?

You see, you are all over the place because of excitement.

The title saints are for all believers else brother Paul would have been writing to the dead when he wrote his epistles. That's why I said some traditionsnof the Roman catholic church is wrong.

Second, paul put a caveat: as I follow christ meaning once I stop observing all that he commanded, stop following me. Paul has never asked anyone to pray to him so I don't know what you are going on about. Imitating is have me as a role model which is entirely different fro worship. The dictionary should help you out on this because you seem confused about those terms: imitate and worship.

Now, I'd like the place in scriptures where joseph told his brothers they will worship him.

AntiChristian:
Of course, Jesus was tittled "King of the Jews" despite no coronation!

Did he accept the title? John 6:15

ThinkSmarter:
It depends on the type of Christian you asked.
Catholics, Methodists, Anglicans, Presbyterians, etc will be okay with it.
But Deeper Life, Lord`s Chosen, JW.org, etc frowns at that.

what did you mean, deeper life that's full of gurship, hatred etc lord's chosen have same xtenstic like deeper.
Don't deceived people, you can take tittle, you know your self, we have kings of Christian who are doing well on the throne.
The same way we discouraged Christian in politics /govern, but if you refuse to do and make meaningful change, those unbelievers will accept and be controlling you.

NoahHadNoArk:
You[b] can’t collect a a chieftaincy title, but if you invited to England to accept a Knighthood from the king you will [/b]go.

We’ve been programmed to despise, refuse and reject our own traditions while we adore, worship and embrace another man’s culture as being superior.


Who did this to us?!?

You took that right out of my thoughts.

riczy:
Did he accept the title? John 6:15

But you guys keep calling him that. And not only The King of the Jews but also Lord of Lords despite Jesus not ruling even a village in the whole of Judea.

He was called King of the Jews by his enemies to put him in the Romans trouble as an affront to the Roman rule but the Christians believe such.

He was labelled King of Kings/Lord of Lords by Christians yet he never ruled anywhere forgetting that the term was cribbed from the Persians who have called their Kings such for centuries before Jesus was birthed.