Author: Onyedikachukwu George Nnadozie

Onyedikachukwu George Nnadozie is the creative director of Funtrick Technology, an agency offering website development and brand support. He is also an author, a Bible teacher and a public speaker. George takes time to write on his personal blog, George's Diary. He also writes his opinions on politics and some other subject on Gist Afrique.


Bible and Ipad
Bible and Ipad

The misconception continues…


Someone once asked me when I went to minister in a program “Sir, where is your Bible?”. I showed him my 10.1 inches Pad.

“But Sir” he said “This is not Bible, this is iPad, you need to carry Bible or are you shy of the gospel” I did not reply him, I was marvelled because the person saying this is a Pastor, I expected him to know more.

Now this is my point, before the advent of printing press, the scritpures was orginally written on a scroll! The 10 commandments was written on a stone! Not on a Book called “Holy Book”. No Book is Holy, it is the words inscribed in it that is holy. If the Book where bible was printed on becomes Holy Book, then my iPad is “Holy iPad” because God’s word is inside it. Thank God we call it “Holy Bible” and not “Holy Book”. The Bible in your iPad is as powerful as the one in the paper you are carrying, the Bible in your little phone is as powerful as the one in that large book in the altar of your church. Some sleep with Bible hoping its gonna save them from demonic attack! Forget the nollywood tricks where bible can vomit fire… If the word is not in you, it is useless to you! In my iPad, I have 7 translations of the Bible, I have all my notes and prepared messages there, I have my greek dictionary and english dictionary there, I have even an advantage of the internet where I can make Bible history research! Wow!!!! I also have my Ancient and Modern as an Anglican! Isn’t that better than carrying all the books and discomforting myself simply because I wanna show everyone that I am a Bible fan? When you don’t bear good fruit, even your bible will not make you look good! Carrying bible around in our hands is not the identity of Christians! The rule is this: let the word be written in your hearts (let it be in your thoughts) and in your fingers (be familiar with it)-Proverbs 7:3

The delivery method has changed but the words have not changed. Moses preached from a stone, Jesus and the Apostles preached from scrolls, when the printing press was invented in the Roman Empire by Johannes Gutenberg, around 1440 preaching continued from printed books. The advent of technology makes it more easier, with the invention of iPads and Tablets, the message is still been preached from them! The method of delivery has changed from stone to scroll, from scroll to papers and gradually from Papers to Tablets and iPads… But what is being delivered is the same message! Just like emails and text message is begining to replace letter writting, technology is begining to replace various paper books. I am a student of a university where our textbooks are mostly e-books which must be accessed with iPad and other technologies, where our quiz is done with a computer or iPad, where our exam is also computer based. Yet we are learning the same thing others are learning with even more advantage! The same applies to Bible. So in my school, a student can actually use an iPad to download all his textbooks for the entire levels without necessarily carrying loads of books! It doesn’t make him not to remain a student! The same applies to Christians.

No matter how large your bible is, it doesn’t prove your Christianity. It was not carrying of Bible that brought about the name “Christians”. In Act 11:26, it was the results that caused people to call them Christians (Christ-like) and not carrying of Bible. I am not discouraging people from carrying Bible but we must not quickly assume that it carrying the Bible that makes a Christian! No! It is having the word in you, meditating on it day and night and revealing it to others with power that will really make people say “yes, he is a Christian”. All my life as a student in the university, I have never carried a Bible to school! But my course mates often call me a Christian and some even call me “Pastor” or “Man of God”, that is because of the results they see in my life not because of the book called Bible. The Apostles was not known by carrying scrolls around, they were known by carrying power and extra ordinary anointing which was fueled by the word of God inside them!

George O.N is the current president of The YAC Ministry (Diocese on the Niger), he is a model, a teacher, a writer, a poet, a singer, a leader, a Pastor and still counting. He is committed to reaching out to young youths and he is a young man full of passion for the kingdom of God. George O.N is the founder of GraceLife International, Prayer Mandate Network, Alive Foundations and The Crusaders Outreach Mission.

I noticed:

Ministers are always not in good terms with other ministers especially those who thinks they are more mature than others. When they hear you preach or read your posts, they will never commend you or encourage you, they will pretend they never saw it. They are only looking out for mistakes you’ll make. When they see you on the road, they puff their head up and walk away. They are usually jealous and envious of you, it is pride and they don’t know they have it. You will only know they exist on your friends list when you post or preach something they don’t agree with, with that slightest opportunity to tell you that they are more mature, they will rebuke you publicly. You can also know they exist when you only talk good about them and their ministry. With the level of hatred and jealousy among Pastors, preachers and ministers of the gospel, there is no mutual respect for the office of each other, there is even unhealthy competition among followers of these people. In this kind of scenario, the words of Jesus is so true “A kingdom divided among itself will not stand”. I seize to be identified as such.

woman wearing black jacket blue distressed jeans and brown boots sitting on gray concrete barrier
Photo by on

I don’t think condemning female trousers is doing justice to the “being” decent! Just as there are indecent gowns, skirts and wrappers; there are indecent trousers too! But then, we shouldn’t single out trousers and start condemning the act of wearing trousers. No matter the system your local assembly decided to accept, it can’t change the biblical truth! If women shouldn’t wear trousers, they shouldn’t wear T-shirts too because it was originally designed for the military men!
It is curious how those that forbid trousers on women, based on their idea of separation, never seem to consider the clothing norms in the Bible. Even the most basic study into biblical clothing norms reveals that there was very little distinction between the articles of clothing worn by men and women.
In Genesis, we find the first accounts of clothing mentioned in the Bible. First, we find that upon recognizing their nakedness, Adam and Eve sewed garments of fig leaves together to cover themselves (Gen 3:7). This is an interesting account in that we find humans attempting to clothe themselves, but obviously God was not pleased with their choices, as later we find that God made new clothes for them. Gen 3:21 records that God made “coats of skin” for them to wear. The word coat in this verse is the Hebrew word ‘kethoneth’ and means “a long shirt- like garment.”
Interestingly, Moses, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, chose the exact same word to describe the specific type of clothing that God made for both Adam and Eve. Where is the distinction here? If God chose to make so little distinction between a man’s and woman’s clothes that a single word can describe the specific clothing worn both by Adam and Eve, then who are we to require a greater distinction?
Later, throughout the Old and New Testament, common dress consisted of two separate pieces. In the Old Testament, the first part of the Jewish costume was still the ‘kethoneth’ such as was worn by Adam and Eve. In the New Testament, this garment is called ‘chiton’ in the Greek and is often translated as coat in the King James Version Bible. According to the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, the kethoneth/chiton was, “…a long-sleeved tunic worn over the sadhin, likewise a shirt with sleeves… Here the ‘coat’ (Hebrew ‘KThohneth) was the ordinary “inner garment ‘worn by the Jew of the day, in which he did the work of the day (see Mt 24:18; Mk 13:16).
It resembled the Roman tunic, corresponding most nearly to our ‘long shirt,’ reaching below the knees always, and in case it was designed for dress occasions, reaching almost to the ground.”
Easton’s Bible Dictionary states that this basic garment was worn by both men and women: “The ‘coat’ (kethoneth), of wool, cotton, or linen, was worn by both sexes.” Easton’s further states that, “The robes of men and women were not very much different in form from each other.” The second part of the common Jewish costume was the “outer garment.” Throughout the Old and New Testaments, the outer garment varied in size, shape and purpose. It is given various names (both in the original Hebrew and in translation) and is used in a variety of ways. This outer garment was commonly used to cover the head of both men and women (cf. Ruth 3:15, 2 Sam 15:30) and was also commonly wrapped around the shoulders (cf. Isa 3:22). While the outer garment served many purposes and was at times used in different ways by men and women, the way it was used was not consistent with either sex. The garment itself does not appear to have been made functionally different to any significant degree, and the distinctions between the male and female outer garments were merely stylistic (i.e. color, trim, size, etc.). In light of the ample information we have on male and female garments in the Bible, it is hard to justify the radical distinction between men’s and women’s clothing required by Christians that forbid women from wearing trousers. There is no evidence that such a radical distinction existed in biblical times. While there was a difference in men’s and women’s clothing in the scriptures, these differences were merely stylistic and not functional differences. The differences were only found in color, trim, size, etc. and not in the actual form or function of the clothing as is seen in trousers and skirts or dresses. The differences between men’s and women’s trousers today are as great as the differences between men’s and women’s garments in the Bible. Essentially, Christians today that forbid women from wearing trousers demand a difference in form and function in men’s and women’s clothing, whereas the Bible only records a stylistic difference. This amounts to adding to God’s Word and placing requirements on our sisters in the Lord that the Bible does not support.
Many that forbid women to wear trousers argue that if it is acceptable for women to wear trousers, then it should be acceptable for a man to wear a dress or a skirt. This is a valid point. However, there is no inherent sin in a man putting on a skirt-like garment, which is a common practice in some cultures around the world just as it was in the Bible. The error would be in the fact that a man wearing a skirt in modern American society would be deemed as counter-culture to the very people we, as Christians, are trying to be examples to — namely unbelievers. However, women wearing trousers is hardly counter-culture. While there was once a time in our society when a woman in trousers would have been viewed negatively by society, such is not the case today. Is that because society’s morals have declined, and it no longer sees women in trousers as the sin that it is? Of course not, it is merely a change in fashion. Just because society had a particular view in the past, does not mean that such a view was inherently more moral. Ford once made only black cars and refused to make any other color. Today, Fords come in every color under the sun. Was that the result of some sort of moral backsliding? No, it is just that society’s tastes have changed. In Renaissance Europe, silk hosiery was considered appropriate attire for men, yet today they are deemed as feminine. Changes in style and fashion aren’t inherently sinful and most of the time only reflects a change in taste. Women’s trousers are no different. Women did not start wearing trousers as a means of rebellion or to be more “manly” but because they were more comfortable and functional. Fashion has been moving in the direction of more function and less style for well over a century now. This is evidenced most recently by the fact that suits and ties are much less common in the workplace now, having been replaced by khakis and button-up shirts. Does that signal some moral decline? Absolutely not — it only reflects a trend in fashion for more basic and functional clothing just as women’s fashions did in moving toward trousers. It is important that we do not have a knee-jerk reaction to every change in fashion. Clearly, some are indicative of moral decline, but many are not. As with everything, changes in fashion must be weighed against biblical truths to make the determination. In short, the issue of clothing must always be carefully, thoughtfully and honestly studied from a scriptural perspective while allowing the scriptures to be the ultimate authority on such issues. A thorough study into the clothing norms of the Bible reveals that there was no distinction between men’s and women’s clothing in the Bible beyond stylistic differences such as trim, color and size. In fact, God Himself made clothing for Adam and Eve that was so similar that one word (kethoneth) could describe the specific garment he made for each of them. This same word describes the clothing worn by Godly men and women throughout the Bible from the Old Testament to the New Testament. Yet today, many Christians demand much more than even the Bible did by requiring not only a difference in style but a difference in function and form as well. If God makes no such clothing demands on His people, then who are we to make them? Do we know better than God? Ultimately, we were never given the law and to those whom it was given, they were set free from it! So, no basis of this argument at all.
Originally Written by: