reposted COVENANT INTERPRETERS But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, HE SHALL TEACH YOU ALL THINGS, AND BRING ALL THINGS TO YOUR REMEMBRANCE, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:26) ACT ONE, SCENE THREE INTRODUCTION: Tony is one of the emergency landlords in their city; Tony inherited a set of twin flats and eight detached rooms within the same compound. Lazarus and Kate are one of the tenants in the row of single rooms as husband and wife. Tony had been warning all the tenants that they should not welcome any visitor into the premises to avoid using the common toilet so as to prevent it getting being filled up in a short time. Lazarus’ mother visited but Tony denied her access to the joint toilet and a hot argument ensued between Tony and Kate over the denial. Lazarus began to counsel Kate based on the word of God. Perfect Law Of Liberty: 4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. 5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. (Proverbs 26:4-5) The Discourse (Argumentative): Kate: Mr Tony, why did you prevent my mother-in-law from using the general toilet? Tony: Haven’t I mentioned it strictly to all the tenants that nobody should entertain visitors that would require the use of toilet? Kate: Yes, we all heard it but we all know as well that it is practically impossible to agree with you on that. By the way, why did you put that across to us? Tony: You know I inherited this property and all of you are yet to pay me the first rent until your current rent paid expires, which will still be in seven months time and if the soak-away is filled up I have no money to evacuate it yet. Kate: Should that now pass for a good reason why our family members should not be accommodated or invited for visiting us at all? What if visitors come when you are not around and they use the toilet? Tony: That is more than enough good reason why nobody should visit any tenant in this house until you pay me the first rent. No visitor can come here until that time and that is the reason why I have suspended myself from other works and I am fully supervising and monitoring events in this house till after seven months. Kate: I think you need to see a psychiatrist, because this is just abnormal and I don’t think we tenants can agree to it. Tony: You can call it any other name, don’t speak for others only speak for yourself, what I will do is what I will do, period! Kate: Where do you now expect my mother-in-law to go and ease herself in the wake of all this parochial and myopic reasoning and actions of yours? Tony: Let her go to the refuse dumping ground and settle her case out there; she is not my tenant and besides if any of my tenants stays more than ten minutes in the toilet I will force him/her out as well. Kate: I suppose this is a progressive silent mental problem that needs urgent attention otherwise no tenant is safe here in the night. Mr Tony, if the soak-away tank is filled up while the seven months has not lapsed, what would you do to help the tenants? Tony: Very simple case, either all the tenants decide to contribute money and evacuate it on their own, without refund later or they all pay their next rents before it falls due, so I can use part of it to do that, otherwise I will lock up the toilets till the rents are paid. (The whole arguments ensued in the morning while Lazarus was already out to work. In the evening Kate narrated the argument between her and Tony and that gave birth to another round of scriptural discourse between husband and wife.) Kate: Welcome Lazarus, see what happened after you left to work this morning. Lazarus: You shouldn’t have engaged him in any argument at all, since you know him as an illiterate inheritor. He has never worked for money in his life; he only inherited his father’s portion of property that felled to him. Kate: I see a trace of wickedness in him for doing all those things. Lazarus: He is a fool and the Bible says you should not answer a fool according to his folly; otherwise you also will be like unto him (Proverbs 26:4). Kate: But the next verse of that scripture also says that you should answer a fool according to his folly, otherwise he will think he is wise in his eyes (Proverbs 26:5). Lazarus: Is that not even a contradiction now. The next verse of that scripture has silenced my point of defense and argument. Kate: But Lazarus, why should God’s word bring a sharp contradiction just in the next verse of that scripture? Lazarus: Your question is beyond my ordinary understanding and explanation. I will like to refer it to the COVENANT INTERPRETERS. OUR FRIENDS, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO COUNSEL LAZARUS AND KATE ON THIS SCRIPTURAL PASSAGE IN ORDER TO SHED MORE LIGHTS ON IT, SO THAT THEY MAY BE DELIVERED FROM CONFUSION? N.B:- WHERE NECESSARY, MAKE YOUR POINTS CLEARER WITH SCRIPTURAL SUPPORTS.
Posted on: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 07:20:32 +0000