Gombs:
Winsomex, 11 posts all day in that Facebook page you pasted here.

These 11 posts were from 5 people. Zadok 5, you had two (you were busy of course), the rest splitted the four slots.. PastorKun even abandoned you...

Come hug it out
I'd patiently wait for the end of that thread. I'd wait.

trustman:

You forgot to give us one statistic - the number of views and the names of the viewers.
Please do that and get back to us.

Gombs:
Awwwww.... Winsomex, it's just fours posts yesterday...
Come hug it out bro...

Gombs wrote: . 1.Jesus is Oyakhilome is their god.while discussing cult organizations, Walter Martins made it clear that cult organization usually refer to a man or woman as their sole authority, not the bible. For Jehovah Witnesses it was Charles Taze Russell . For Christian Science it is Mary Eddy Baker. For Mormons it is Joseph Smith . And for Christ Embassy, it is Chris Oyakhilome. We only need to see how these other cult organization equate the literatures of their founders to the bible, and in many cases, subordinating scriptures to the words of their founders, to agree with me. That's the tragedy of literatures like Rhapsody of Realities, etc, in the CEC.

1. You lie, as always. Pastor Chris is not my god, he however, is my father in the Lord, and the bible clearly asked me to copy/imitate...let me just quote it for you

1 Corinthians 11:1 New Living Translation
And you should imitate me, just as I imitate Christ.

1 corinth 4:15 New Living Translation
For even if you had ten thousand others to teach you about Christ, you have only one spiritual father. For I became your father in Christ Jesus when I preached the Good News to you.

In CE and many other churches, we do not worship our pastors, we simply love them as our fathers in the Lord, Pastor Chris taught me the word, I follow him as he follows Christ

WinsomeX:


If you are so confident of yourself, go to that discussion and leave a comment there, especially one bothering on your CE cultic gibberish and watch how those brethren will instruct you aright.

Gombs:



Tell them to all come here, an open forum, and I single handedly will tutor them properly, as I have done you consistently.

Gombs:


You had to twist my intentions, no?. Nothing is wrong as a believer, in RCCG marrying CEC, or CEC marrying Winners, RCCG or Catholic or JW or even Muslims.

I said it is not encouraged, I did not say "CEC actively discourages" it. It is unfair to clamp it on CE as a flaw, most (if not all) churches do not encourage marrying outside, because of doctrines, majorly.

This is my last on this. Stop derailing this thread, if you want to discuss marriage further, open a thread and call me in.

trustman:

You, tutor? You don't seem to have the capacity for that.

You prefer to play pranks in other people's thread so I'm sure you'll run from where you'll be exposed for who you are.

Gombs:

Tell them to all come here, an open forum, and I single handedly will tutor them properly, as I have done you consistently.

deborah777:

As much i have checked out CE book Now you want to marry-foundable via googleing- it says concerning choosing partner from different churches that finally it is needed to decide which church couple wants to remain which is compareble with other churches understanding about marriage as far as i know.

WinsomeX:


Facebook is actually the "open" forum where you need not hide under an anonymous monicker as you do here. But, honestly, if you think you have anything worthwhile to say, register an anonymous name on FB and come to that forum with your Oyakhilome jargons and see what becomes of it.

Gombs:

This is a huge challenge i am willing to pursue, i'd consider that before the day's end. Thank you

WinsomeX:


You're welcome.

Gombs:
I didn't understand your post ma'am.

deborah777:


Sorry i just tried to quote from my head one paragraph what i had read from Now you want to marry -book what is used in ce for marriage counselling. Basically i meant this from page 8 under title specific cases-when both persons are committed in different churches: "Both parties MUST eventually end up in one Church. It is also an illusion to plan to continue attending different churches. You cannot support yourselves spiritually this way and it also limits the level you can get to in such respective churches. There is no hard and fast rule that the couple should end up in the man’s Church but this is usually the case, sothe lady must ensure she is comfortable in the man’s Church."

in that same title it is say also: "Sharp or opposite doctrinal differences may eventually divide a home.Initially when the euphoria or novelty of love is still fresh, these things would appear to both parties as unimportant. This is an illusion as when they finally settle down to living, there would be constant conflicts." and "When both parties also have not been exposed to the same set ofdoctrines, there would need to be a time for ‘catching up’ by one party.This would result in a delay with respect to making spiritual progress when compared with another couple who also started at the same time but were previously exposed to the same set of doctrines."
In generally i agree with those paragraphs from that book because really every church have different beliefs and it have to make sure before getting married. Maybe even Rev Anita did not knew at beginning what his "lovely" husband believes until now when she decided for divorce.

And it ends "The best thing to do in these instances is to submit to the advice of the leadership of your Church. It is very wrong to go against the Pastor’s advice in the place where you are fed the Word of God and are seeing evident fruit of that Word in your life (Hebrews 13:7, 17). God’s dealings with individuals are also different and what is OK for one person might not be appropriate for another. Also at a higher level of commitment, some things are not the best for you. This is where the Pastor (or his delegated authority) comes in.He hears from God and can help set you in the right path for your life."
With this paragraph there is some things, i can not agree bit. Yes I can agree that it might be good to talk with spiritual leader who is above you -like to listen his oponion on this case. But I can not agree with that what it seems saying like I personally can not be able to listen from God (which is against word of God for exampe Rom 8:16 all who spirit of God leads are children of God) and must to obey the guidance the pastor gets from God if i want to be in line with him. Because there is always a option that pastor might make mistake in his listening from God and if person is trustful towards the pastor he or she may loose his or her mate and his or her happiness.
It proves the cases i have read before from web about ce members who literally had left their church and married somewhere else because their leaders in ce had not agreed with their marriage.

anyway you can download the book on your own from this blog https://timothyblogs./2014/02/13/a-marriage-guide-from-christ-embassy/ or just put into google christ embassy marriage counselling.

deborah777:


Sorry i just tried to quote from my head one paragraph what i had read from Now you want to marry -book what is used in ce for marriage counselling. Basically i meant this from page 8 under title specific cases-when both persons are committed in different churches: "Both parties MUST eventually end up in one Church. It is also an illusion to plan to continue attending different churches. You cannot support yourselves spiritually this way and it also limits the level you can get to in such respective churches. There is no hard and fast rule that the couple should end up in the man’s Church but this is usually the case, sothe lady must ensure she is comfortable in the man’s Church."

in that same title it is say also: "Sharp or opposite doctrinal differences may eventually divide a home.Initially when the euphoria or novelty of love is still fresh, these things would appear to both parties as unimportant. This is an illusion as when they finally settle down to living, there would be constant conflicts." and "When both parties also have not been exposed to the same set ofdoctrines, there would need to be a time for ‘catching up’ by one party.This would result in a delay with respect to making spiritual progress when compared with another couple who also started at the same time but were previously exposed to the same set of doctrines."
In generally i agree with those paragraphs from that book because really every church have different beliefs and it have to make sure before getting married. Maybe even Rev Anita did not knew at beginning what his "lovely" husband believes until now when she decided for divorce.

And it ends "The best thing to do in these instances is to submit to the advice of the leadership of your Church. It is very wrong to go against the Pastor’s advice in the place where you are fed the Word of God and are seeing evident fruit of that Word in your life (Hebrews 13:7, 17). God’s dealings with individuals are also different and what is OK for one person might not be appropriate for another. Also at a higher level of commitment, some things are not the best for you. This is where the Pastor (or his delegated authority) comes in.He hears from God and can help set you in the right path for your life."
With this paragraph there is some things, i can not agree bit. Yes I can agree that it might be good to talk with spiritual leader who is above you -like to listen his oponion on this case. But I can not agree with that what it seems saying like I personally can not be able to listen from God (which is against word of God for exampe Rom 8:16 all who spirit of God leads are children of God) and must to obey the guidance the pastor gets from God if i want to be in line with him. Because there is always a option that pastor might make mistake in his listening from God and if person is trustful towards the pastor he or she may loose his or her mate and his or her happiness.
It proves the cases i have read before from web about ce members who literally had left their church and married somewhere else because their leaders in ce had not agreed with their marriage.

anyway you can download the book on your own from this blog https://timothyblogs./2014/02/13/a-marriage-guide-from-christ-embassy/ or just put into google christ embassy marriage counselling.

Gombs:
^^
"I don't know of any" is not equal to "there is none".

That said, this is a marriage counseling manual, I don't suppose it was for all churches, as it will/may differ from another's.

WinsomeX:


Joagbaje,-

In your rush to put that person in his place, you missed the point he was trying to make. His point was not the validity of tongues, his point was the falsehood behind the CE. He mentioned tongues as an example. You will notice that I have also not enumerated tongues as a reason why CE is a cult.

But even at that, you yourself agree that the method of teaching people how to speak with tongues is wrong. And you must agree that this practice is very common in your church; it will be wrong of you to fain ignorance of it here.

Lastly, the distinction BTW speaking and praying in tongues is not true. The bible talks of only one type of tongues, a language that can be understood. This tongues you practice where you just speak or pray with no understanding of what you are saying has no foundation in scriptures. The man you quoted is right after all, despite not being that knowledgeable in scriptures.

That said. I hope you can find time to respond to the real issues raised on the thread. The things that make your church s cult.

WinsomeX:


What I can prove is what I have information on. I cannot prove that Satan is the custodian of CE.

I had long suspected that CE is a cult but I had no information until vooks provided the online book. That's we are discussing at the moment.

Can you prove Satan is the custodian of CE?

vooks:

You never knew of its existence back then? Was you a single boy last year?


I was clear I needed CEC's 'wisdom' on marriage and this sure attempts to present that. Are you embarrassed that it has been shared seeing you had no intention of sharing it?

Btw, am dying to read Rev Chris marriage books. What do you recommend?

deborah777:

Where this online book is found,winsomeX? I would like to read it.

Gombs:


No need replying the above.

I see how you ignored the fact that that manual is a masterpiece.

As for the above bold, no need to lie... See what you wrote here

deborah777:

WinsomeX,

Enough i honor how you have researched info about ce to expose it in this matter i can not agree with you.

deborah777:

In the books of Acts is four examples of disciples of Jesus speaking in tongues both prayer language and understandablely to the people in upper room in Acts 2:1-21.

deborah777:

But lets go bit before. In Mark 16:17 Jesus said that believers are followed by those signs: they cast out devils in my name, talk in news tongues.
In Luke 24:49 Jesus commanded disciples to stay in Jerusalem until they are builded up with power from above what they did in Acts 1 until in Acts 2:3 they got baptised by Holy Spirit. And then there was thast sign of tongues what God let to happen.
But it happened also in Acts 8:14-17 and also in Acts 10:44 where gentiles got baptised and in Acts 19:1-6 when disciples got revelation of Holy Spirit and later baptised by Holy Chost with evidence of speaking of tongues. From all the passages can see that all disciples got baptised so it means that in this time all who is born again can expect the gift of baptism of Holy Spirit with evidence of speaking in tongues into their life. It was Father's promise to disciples at that time and is Father's promise for now to everyone who is born again. It is vital experience for every believer as Acts 1:8 says.

deborah777:

Praying for person by laying hands on that person is normal practice in christian circles not only in ce and it is based upon those passages in Bible where we can see that disciples prayed for people by laying their hands on them. But baptism of Holy Spirit do not have happen only by someone laying their hands on you. It can happen everywhere. I for example got baptised in street privately by Him.
And Apostle Paul makes in his first letter to Corinth clear difference btw message given in tongues and praying in tongues for edifying himself for example in 1 Cor 12: 4-11,v10 and v 28,30 and about edifying thru praying in tongues Paul talks in 1Cor 14:2-4.

deborah777:
,
So it is biblical to pray in tongues for edifying himself or herself. And there is also gift of giving message in tongues in the front of the church.

WinsomeX:
deborah777

I see your PM. I don't have access to the email for this monicker anymore. Please post your message here.

Thankss.

deborah777:


I was just thinking when i read your posts about ce as cult that is it allowed to translate them into my own language if needed or post them separately in blog? I have tried to find blogs of ce ex members but there is no blog on it. Only your research and one other guy material i have who is against Ps Chris. I started to help in ce church in my town 2013 nov and all this time i have tried to understand what kind or type is ce as i have been related more than 5 years with movwment called new apostolic reformation movement and i gave to myself promise after being committed member of NAR church via web that i do not help in anywhere which is pastor centered ministry because it is out of focus and not biblical. I believe in apostolic alignment and in fivefold ministry today that in churches have to be offices of apostles and prophets.
So far it seems to be that ce is just this pastor centered ministry which is not aligned with some present day apostle and instead Ps Chris is believed to function in all five office the Eph 4:11 talks about. That said to me ce bremen pastor when i was in beginning of finding out about movement ce belongs and this answers seemed to me bit weird because theologically only Jesus Himself is believed to function in all those five gifts. Like Ps Chris is taken into place of Christ.
Somewhere said that ce is WOF which is taken into extreme and it might be right.
Anyway your thesis on wof is good reading and helps me too recognize the faults of ce.

Gombs:


well, your opinion, but judging from the number of followership i have on NL (i cant follow a handful back for reasons best known to me), mails i get from my signature box and ROR thread, me thinks you're on the far side of hilarious assumptions. If you don't think i have the capacity, then i must laugh. Ever wondered why we don't have tithe threads of late as before? The issue is someone is busy praying, teaching and preaching winning others to Christ here on NL, the other is busy looking for Pastor Chris, WoF, fake miracle etc.

Gombs:
Oh well... The thread on Facebook had no comments today.

Life goes on.

WinsomeX:


Thank you Ma'am.

This thread is not on tongues. I usually do not debate tongues. My position against CE being a cult is not bc they speak in tongues. A lot of churches do speak in tongues and remain sound churches in my estimation. Nonetheless, I will accommodate your response here.

Before you can tell whether tongues are valid or not, you need to find out what the bible means by "tongues". KJV translated the word "languages" as "tongues". So everywhere you hear people spoke in tongues in the bible, they spoke languages. These were supernatural occurrences that happened as the Spirit enabled people to speak languages they never learned. If you understand this, the scriptures you enumerated will take on a new light:
Now those who claim to have this experience, how much of these "languages" have they interpreted? As long as whatever you speak has no interpretation, you are not speaking in tongued; rather you speak gibberish. This is the reason Paul counselled the Corinthians to seek to interpret whatever tongues they spoke.
Tongues is not a vital evidence for baptism in the Spirit. Holy living is. For that is the fruit of the Spirit.

WinsomeX:

Incidentally, when scripture speak of people "tonguing", it was more concerned with "speaking" and not "praying". Praying in tongues, if I'm not, is mentioned only in 1Cor14. Others spoke of people "speaking" and not necessarily "praying". Unfortunately all we hear today is people praying. Where is speaking, except for the fact that what thru are doing is not biblical.
Again, I usually do not debate tongues bc I think Pentecostals are still OK. As long as they have not plunged into the false gospel of Word of Faith.

Vooks, my biggest ally on this thread, is Pentecostal. I respect his conviction. I think the first step to the false doctrine of WoF is Pentecostalism. Vooks disagrees. In all we agree to disagree. There is a greater enemy out there.

Every prayer in the bible was intelligible. If you pray in tongues, do not go on forever without finding out what you're saying.