m.k.o2005:
Every one including the roman catholics knows that they (rcc) worship Mary,does not believe the scriptures for they hold their man made traditions high above the scriptures,and they also don't follow Christ but pretend before their own members and the world to be following Christ !
But God will soon deliver all HIS children in their grip before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ....Amen
God help the innocent ones and deliver then on time in Jesus name.... Amen

God help us

Everyone knows you are a liar.

Ukuts gp: Read these scripture and explain it to me one after the other.
Leviticus 19:4.
Leviticus 26:1.
Leviticus 26:30.
2kings 23:24.
2kings 17:9-20.
Revelation 21:8.
1corinthians 12:2.
Psalm 115:4-9.
Isaiah 2:8.
Isaiah 45:16.
Exodus 20:1-6.
Deuteronomy 4:14-19.
Ezekiel 14:6.
Acts 19:21-28, 33-41.
Deuteronomy 5:6-10.
Micah 5:12-13.
Habakuk 2:18-20.
Judges 2:11-15.
Exodus 32:1-26.
Matthew 4:10.
1 John 5:21.
Psalm 78:58.
Romans 1:22-25.
Leviticus 18:21.
Jeremiah 7:8.

Explan those passages and verses of the scripture and let me see ur lack of bible knowledge displayed in the forum b4 i bring more.

U hv been talking history dat u know nothing about since, now let us face the word of God now. Or u want to say the bible is not d written word of God again?

Now u can begin.@italo and his crew.

I should explain those verses one by one?

I really think you should stop smoking weed!

adsonstone:

I trust Italo. I'm sure He'll say the same thing he has been saying over and over which is 'The Catholic Church compiled the Bible'.

No. I said he should stop smoking weed.

And that goes for anyone else who expects me to explain all those verses one by one to he who decided that intercession is a sin.

asco15:
i did all wat u r nw doing in d name of defending d cath ch. But wen i say let me visit oda ch, dats wen i saw d light and d different was clear. U cn't remain in d dark 2 see ur path, only wen u come 2 d light dat u will be able 2 see d false teachings of d cath ch.
U r capitalizing on samiramis as if u dn't knw her history, go and google it and learn more.
Hv u ever see me bow down to apron or praying 2ru it? Beside hw does apron concern my xtian life?

*yawning*

Just stop worshipping samiramis and your apron and come into the light.

italo:
How do you know? How do you know the epistles of Peter, Paul and John weren't actually written by Pilate, Ananias and/or Herod? Or as one of your protestant brothers implied, samiramis inspired the Catholic Church to compile the Bible. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

In other words, do you want me to start doubting the authenticity of the bible??
If yes, I'm sorry.....'You're on a long thing.'

italo:
Christian, dont pretend like you dont know that those practices are part of the ones the Holy Spirit calls "tradition. ..by letter." What about the ones the Holy Spirit calls "tradition...BY WORD OF MOUTH?" Why do you ignore them? Why do you disobey the Holy Spirit?

I do not disobey Him. I obey exactly as He teaches me with what I have.
Now, I want you to list those traditions by word of mouth since I don't have them and let's see if they are in line with the ones that are not oral afterall they shouldn't contradict.

italo:
Any sincere Christian can access the wrings of the Church Fathers online. Indeed, they have led many sincere protestants back home to the Catholic Church.

and Honestly, I wouldn't ask you to post them if I actually found them. I'll be grateful if you provide a link. (Church Fathers as you said....I'm not requesting for Catholic Fathers)

italo:
I dont know what you concluded as you seem to ashamed to give a clear and honest answer.

The Catholic Church compiled the Bible. Yes or no?

YES
The Catholic Church authored the Bible!

Stop being mischievous! You know the Catholic church NEVER authored the bible!

italo:
Unverified! Unverifiable!

Who founded your "church" and when? Does your Church teach God's one true doctrine?

Yes, My Church does!

italo:
You can possibly be wrong about your interpretation of something or anything the Bible says. Yes or no?

No! I can't. The spirit of God guides me.

italo:
No.

Who are those few who follow what the Holy Spirit's says and not the Pope? Your "church" that cannot come out in the light? The Pope authorized the canon of the New Testament and you followed what he declared. No?

Thank God that stated date wasn't given by your Church.

Not just my Church, all bible believing Christians that do not seek what the pope wants and truly search and study with the Holy Spirit's help.
I think high time you stopped all these 'the catholic church compiled the bible', 'the pope authorized the New testament canon'....and just declare 'The Pope and the Catholic church wrote the bible and gave it out to everyone!' I think that's a better representation of all your words.

italo:
In other words, only your "church" doctrine is that which the Holy Spirit teaches? Every other human being that has a different teaching is not following the Holy Spirit? Yet this Church operates like an underworld organization that cannot come out in the light? Neither the identity nor the teachings of your "church" can be known.

Am I not a member of that church? Am I not speaking? Can't you figure what is taught in my church from what I say? Must I say the name? Don't I read the teaching of your church from your speech?

italo:
Who are the "some people" that I accused of lying that didnt lie?

Enigma

italo:
There is nothing in Catholic teaching and practice that is contrary to scripture.

I challenge you to show me any Catholic practice and how scripture forbids it.

Are you sure you really want this?? If we start highlighting these things.....30pages won't be enough to finish it all.
By the way, before this, I want us to wrap up the oral tradition discussion.

adsonstone:
In other words, do you want me to start doubting the authenticity of the bible??
If yes, I'm sorry.....'You're on a long thing.'

How do you know the Bible is authentically the writings of the apostles? How are you sure that the gospel of Barnabas which was excluded was not genuine; while the book of Mark which was included isnt a fraud?

adsonstone:
I do not disobey Him. I obey exactly as He teaches me with what I have.
Now, I want you to list those traditions by word of mouth since I don't have them and let's see if they are in line with the ones that are not oral afterall they shouldn't contradict.

First things first. You dont obey oral traditions as the Holy Spirit commands. Yes or No?

adsonstone:
and Honestly, I wouldn't ask you to post them if I actually found them. I'll be grateful if you provide a link. (Church Fathers as you said....I'm not requesting for Catholic Fathers)

"Church Fathers" on google will provide you several links in less than a second. If the Early Church Fathers (successors of the apostles) seem to be Catholic, it is because they were Catholic. Here are some links
m.ccel.org/fathers.html

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Fathers

adsonstone:
Stop being mischievous! You know the Catholic church NEVER authored the bible!

They did. Except you do not know the meaning of author.

Now can you answer the simple question I have asked at least 3 times?

The Catholic Church compiled the Bible. Yes or no?

adsonstone:
Yes, My Church does!

No! I can't. The spirit of God guides me.

Wonderful! All hail infallible Pope Adsonstone. I want to be a part of this your Church that teaches God's one true doctrine and can NEVER teach wrong. Can I open a thread so that you can teach me what your Church teaches about key Christian issues? E.g the role of good works in salvation.

adsonstone:
Thank God that stated date wasn't given by your Church.

Not just my Church, all bible believing Christians that do not seek what the pope wants and truly search and study with the Holy Spirit's help.
I think high time you stopped all these 'the catholic church compiled the bible', 'the pope authorized the New testament canon'....and just declare 'The Pope and the Catholic church wrote the bible and gave it out to everyone!' I think that's a better representation of all your words.

LMAO! You search what the Pope declared to be "Bible." No?
The Pope authorized the canon of the new testament and you followed. No?

adsonstone:
Am I not a member of that church? Am I not speaking? Can't you figure what is taught in my church from what I say? Must I say the name? Don't I read the teaching of your church from your speech?

Catholic Church teaching is there in the light for all to see. All you need to do is google Catechism or Canon law...etc. How can you be taken seriously when your "church" has no identity and no standard teaching, yet you say it has God's teaching. Even Boko Haram, as clandestine and evil as they are, have more credibility than this your unknown, underworld "church."

adsonstone:
Enigma

Can you show me where I called Enigma "Liar?"

adsonstone:
Are you sure you really want this?? If we start highlighting these things.....30pages won't be enough to finish it all.
By the way, before this, I want us to wrap up the oral tradition discussion.

"Follow oral tradition" was the command. Not "wrap up oral tradition discussion. "

What are you wrapping up?

I repeat: there is nothing in Catholic teaching that contradicts scripture.

I challenge you and all your "church" members to show me.

Ukuts gp: we dnt follow Marthin luther or what have u. We follow Jesus the author and finisher of our faith. (HEBREW 12:2).

Hypocrites!! Do we catholics follow the ancient roman emperors you quoted?

italo:
How do you know the Bible is authentically the writings of the apostles? How are you sure that the gospel of Barnabas which was excluded was not genuine; while the book of Mark which was included isnt a fraud?

I know that nothing could have been mixed up with it because God guards it personally.

One major thing I have learnt in life is to love what I have and value it preciously. If the gospel of Barnabas is genuine, and I don't have it, the one I have is sufficient and adequate for me....I do not need to start a search for the books. The fact that the book of Mark tallies with other books in both the old and new testament, I'm good to go with it.

italo:
First things first. You dont obey oral traditions as the Holy Spirit commands. Yes or No?

How on earth is it possible to obeythe ones that are not available? By the way, I obey the ones that are available.

Now to you who know the oral traditions and obey them, can you list them (the ones you can remember now)

italo:
"Church Fathers" on google will provide you several links in less than a second. If the Early Church Fathers (successors of the apostles) seem to be Catholic, it is because they were Catholic. Here are some links
m.ccel.org/fathers.html

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Fathers

Thank you for the links. I'll visit them and read through.

italo:
They did. Except you do not know the meaning of author.

Now can you answer the simple question I have asked at least 3 times?

The Catholic Church compiled the Bible. Yes or no?

Here's the meaning of Author.
au·thor - /ˈôTHər/
Noun:
1. A writer of a book, article, or report

You'll agree with me that writing and compiling (or perhaps publishing) are two different things.

Now, did the catholic church write the epistles or any book in the bible? Yes or No?
By the way, I have answered your question, not once and I'll answer again.
The Church in Rome compiled the bible. (Possibly catholic). Has that been answered?

italo:
Wonderful! All hail infallible Pope Adsonstone. I want to be a part of this your Church that teaches God's one true doctrine and can NEVER teach wrong. Can I open a thread so that you can teach me what your Church teaches about key Christian issues? E.g the role of good works in salvation.

Perhaps, I'll consider doing that. You'll be welcome in the thread.

italo:
Catholic Church teaching is there in the light for all to see. All you need to do is google Catechism or Canon law...etc. How can you be taken seriously when your "church" has no identity and no standard teaching, yet you say it has God's teaching. Even Boko Haram, as clandestine and evil as they are, have more credibility than this your unknown, underworld "church."

Perhaps, at the end of our discussion. I'll tell you the name.

italo:
Can you show me where I called Enigma "Liar?"

You can check this thread for that.

italo:
"Follow oral tradition" was the command. Not "wrap up oral tradition discussion. "

What are you wrapping up?

I repeat: there is nothing in Catholic teaching that contradicts scripture.

I challenge you and all your "church" members to show me.

What I mean by wrap up is 'let's finish the discussion on oral tradition before moving to the popular catholic teaching and practises as your oral tradition will aid the discussion on the catholic teaching.

italo:

No. I said he should stop smoking weed.

And that goes for anyone else who expects me to explain all those verses one by one to he who decided that intercession is a sin.

self defeat, why do u think u cant?

Catholic are just following man-made tradition imported from hell. Nobody should follow their distructive ways. They are simply practising idolatory which will lead them to doom and damnation.

Ukuts gp: Catholic are just following man-made tradition imported from hell. Nobody should follow their distructive ways. They are simply practising idolatory which will lead them to doom and damnation.

keep on deceiving your self




may God help you

Ukuts gp: Catholic are just following man-made tradition imported from hell. Nobody should follow their distructive ways. They are simply practising idolatory which will lead them to doom and damnation.

As funny as it may sound, I'd tell you that you need to understand the meaning of and the difference between IDOL and SYMBOL to free yourself from these very cheap shots you are throwing here. If I carry a printed book(bible) and clutch it to my chest and pray, does that imply that i had worshipped the said book? How could a printed book be holy? Ask yourself that and pick up a dictionary and search the word SYMBOL to save yourself from this gates-of-hell syndrome.

Before I became a catholic, I asked myself amongst the question of this thread several other questions, I then began to study NOT just the bible but church history after christ and I blamed my ignorance on not being a catholic since.

After intense study, I understood why the church would have done some things in history, how changes in times and kingdoms and lately governments affected religion and belief systems.

I believed it would have been christ's wish that his dear church remains ONE even in the weakness of man. Have you noticed that catholics hardly swipe protestants? If you don't read church history, you would remain in delusion and always be the attack dog without weight as you clearly is displaying here.

No pun but from the way you type I can even tell your thought process and I believe you need to work on those and remember that to know the truth you must first importantly take away SENTIMENTS of any sort.

I was once like you.

Pax tecum

adsonstone:
I know that nothing could have been mixed up with it because God guards it personally.

How can you know that God personally guards a book he never mentioned. The Catholic Church gave you a book and you say the book was guarded by God. Is it for you to say or is it for the Catholic Church to say? You're just been hypocritical! You faith has no legs to stand on without the Catholic Church! I understand that it would be a disgrace to admit it...but real Christians seek truth, not ego.

adsonstone:
One major thing I have learnt in life is to love what I have and value it preciously. If the gospel of Barnabas is genuine, and I don't have it, the one I have is sufficient and adequate for me....I do not need to start a search for the books. The fact that the book of Mark tallies with other books in both the old and new testament, I'm good to go with it.

Its not that "Mark" tallies. It's that the Catholic Church declared that Mark tallied and included it in the Bible. If they had included "Barnabas," you'd have been here swearing that Barnabas tallies. And Mark could well have been written by anybody. The truth is smiling at you lovingly, dont look away now. Without the Catholic Church, your faith has no legs to stand on.

adsonstone:
How on earth is it possible to obeythe ones that are not available? By the way, I obey the ones that are available.

How on earth is it possible for the Holy Spirit to command Christians to obey what doesnt exist?

Which ORAL traditions do you obey and where do you get it from?

adsonstone:
Now to you who know the oral traditions and obey them, can you list them (the ones you can remember now)

The Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church. The Bible is also part of that tradition, as it was nowhere mentioned in scripture.

adsonstone:
Thank you for the links. I'll visit them and read through.

Please do. Please read and educate yourself. Read also the history of the Bible. Its unacceptable when Atheists, Buddhists, Hindus know Christian and Bible history more than so-called "Christians" simply because these "Christians" are ashamed and averse to the truth. Everyone (except deluded pentecostals) knows that the history of Christianity is Catholicism. There are scriptural, histotical, archaeological, scientific proofs. Even Anglicans and other Orthodox Churches laugh at some of the senseless things some of you say.

adsonstone:
Here's the meaning of Author.
au·thor - /ˈôTHər/
Noun:
1. A writer of a book, article, or report

You'll agree with me that writing and compiling (or perhaps publishing) are two different things.

Now, did the catholic church write the epistles or any book in the bible? Yes or No?

au·thor (ôthr)
n.
1.
a. The writer of a book, article, or other text.
b. One who practices writing as a profession.
2. One who writes or constructs an electronic document or system, such as a website.
3. An originator or creator, as of a theory or plan.
4. Author God.
tr.v. au·thored, au·thor·ing, au·thors
1. Usage Problem To assume responsibility for the content of (a published text).

Author 1

Definition: The beginner, former, or first mover of anything; hence, the efficient cause of a thing; a creator; an originator.

ardictionary.com/Author/10758

The epistles of the New Testament were written by the first leaders of the Catholic Church.

adsonstone:
By the way, I have answered your question, not once and I'll answer again.
The Church in Rome compiled the bible. (Possibly catholic). Has that been answered?

How do you know the "Church in Rome" that compiled the Bible in the 4th century?

adsonstone:
Perhaps, I'll consider doing that. You'll be welcome in the thread.

Perhaps, at the end of our discussion. I'll tell you the name.

You dont want me to open the thread? Why are you hoarding your "church" and its infallible teaching? What are you afraid of?

adsonstone:
You can check this thread for that.

Dear friend, will you do the honourable thing and apologize for accusing me falsely? Or will you, as is common with you guys, prefer to hold onto this LIE than face up to the truth?

I never called any "Enigma" "liar" on this thread. Can you show me where I did?

try69:

As funny as it may sound, I'd tell you that you need to understand the meaning of and the difference between IDOL and SYMBOL to free yourself from these very cheap shots you are throwing here. If I carry a printed book(bible) and clutch it to my chest and pray, does that imply that i had worshipped the said book? How could a printed book be holy? Ask yourself that and pick up a dictionary and search the word SYMBOL to save yourself from this gates-of-hell syndrome.

Before I became a catholic, I asked myself amongst the question of this thread several other questions, I then began to study NOT just the bible but church history after christ and I blamed my ignorance on not being a catholic since.

After intense study, I understood why the church would have done some things in history, how changes in times and kingdoms and lately governments affected religion and belief systems.

I believed it would have been christ's wish that his dear church remains ONE even in the weakness of man. Have you noticed that catholics hardly swipe protestants? If you don't read church history, you would remain in delusion and always be the attack dog without weight as you clearly is displaying here.

No pun but from the way you type I can even tell your thought process and I believe you need to work on those and remember that to know the truth you must first importantly take away SENTIMENTS of any sort.

I was once like you.

Pax tecum

You have done well, brother.

But save your energy for those who are ready to reason.

@ Adsonstone, do you see the bold.

Read Church history, like I told you.

try69:

As funny as it may sound, I'd tell you that you need to understand the meaning of and the difference between IDOL and SYMBOL to free yourself from these very cheap shots you are throwing here. If I carry a printed book(bible) and clutch it to my chest and pray, does that imply that i had worshipped the said book? How could a printed book be holy? Ask yourself that and pick up a dictionary and search the word SYMBOL to save yourself from this gates-of-hell syndrome.

Before I became a catholic, I asked myself amongst the question of this thread several other questions, I then began to study NOT just the bible but church history after christ and I blamed my ignorance on not being a catholic since.

After intense study, I understood why the church would have done some things in history, how changes in times and kingdoms and lately governments affected religion and belief systems.

I believed it would have been christ's wish that his dear church remains ONE even in the weakness of man. Have you noticed that catholics hardly swipe protestants? If you don't read church history, you would remain in delusion and always be the attack dog without weight as you clearly is displaying here.

No pun but from the way you type I can even tell your thought process and I believe you need to work on those and remember that to know the truth you must first importantly take away SENTIMENTS of any sort.

I was once like you.

Pax tecum

so u think it is funny when u can see the truth staring at you on the face. Mind u, i follow the word of God and not mere church tradition and dogma. The Church history that u carry on ur head like government work will nt save u on the last day. U better decide to leave that gathering now.

italo:

How can you know that God personally guards a book he never mentioned. The Catholic Church gave you a book and you say the book was guarded by God. Is it for you to say or is it for the Catholic Church to say? You're just been hypocritical! You faith has no legs to stand on without the Catholic Church! I understand that it would be a disgrace to admit it...but real Christians seek truth, not ego.

You know this that Jesus always mentioned the scriptures. If the scriptures were corrupted, Jesus would never mention them.

italo:
Its not that "Mark" tallies. It's that the Catholic Church declared that Mark tallied and included it in the Bible. If they had included "Barnabas," you'd have been here swearing that Barnabas tallies. And Mark could well have been written by anybody. The truth is smiling at you lovingly, dont look away now. Without the Catholic Church, your faith has no legs to stand on.

Now, I can see this is what you choose to bank on....the Catholic Church did this, the catholic church did that. Not without the catholic Church, without the scriptures, my faith cannot stand.
By the way, the Church: the pillar and ground of truth is where the truth rests and it is to uphold it. The truth (Jesus) is ever existent!
if your catholic church choose to change it (His teaching), then it has lost its way.

italo:
How on earth is it possible for the Holy Spirit to command Christians to obey what doesnt exist?

Which ORAL traditions do you obey and where do you get it from?

That of the communion, that was not by a letter. It was orally said by Jesus to the apostles, and reserved in a written form (in the Gospels) for us to access.

italo:
The Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church. The Bible is also part of that tradition, as it was nowhere mentioned in scripture.

Hmmm.... I see.... and do they agree with the ones in the scriptures and epistles?

italo:
au·thor (ôthr)
n.
1.
a. The writer of a book, article, or other text.
b. One who practices writing as a profession.
2. One who writes or constructs an electronic document or system, such as a website.
3. An originator or creator, as of a theory or plan.
4. Author God.
tr.v. au·thored, au·thor·ing, au·thors
1. Usage Problem To assume responsibility for the content of (a published text).

Author 1

Definition: The beginner, former, or first mover of anything; hence, the efficient cause of a thing; a creator; an originator.

ardictionary.com/Author/10758

The epistles of the New Testament were written by the first leaders of the Catholic Church.

The Church Christ Created was not the catholic church so the Apostles were not 'catholic' christians as they don't practice what you all practice in your catholic church today.

italo:
How do you know the "Church in Rome" that compiled the Bible in the 4th century?

The same way you know that the catholic church compiled the bible.

italo:
You dont want me to open the thread? Why are you hoarding your "church" and its infallible teaching? What are you afraid of?

I'll definitely open it after thinking over it. You may also open the thread and invite me to it.

italo:
Dear friend, will you do the honourable thing and apologize for accusing me falsely? Or will you, as is common with you guys, prefer to hold onto this LIE than face up to the truth?

I never called any "Enigma" "liar" on this thread. Can you show me where I did?

Have you searched the thread?

Ukuts gp: so u think it is funny when u can see the truth staring at you on the face. Mind u, i follow the word of God and not mere church tradition and dogma. The Church history that u carry on ur head like government work will nt save u on the last day. U better decide to leave that gathering now.

The way you comment was exactly the reason I said something about thought process and this will further stress my point.

What did the said reformation do to the ONE church other than proliferation of doctrines?

What truth is staring at my face? You believe you know more than I do or the other 1 billion plus catholics?

Why are you ashamed to disclose your "true" church? Are you supposed to be ashamed to stand for the truth?

In your delusion, you don't think one needs history to be able to understand how the word of God was passed to us and why xtians do some things they do?

Do you understand why catholic priests have to study philosophy and theology for almost 8 years before ordination to preach and teach?

You need to learn how to apply reason before you start showing your delusion on forums.

try69:

The way you comment was exactly the reason I said something about thought process and this will further stress my point.

What did the said reformation do to the ONE church other than proliferation of doctrines?

What truth is staring at my face? You believe you know more than I do or the other 1 billion plus catholics?

Why are you ashamed to disclose your "true" church? Are you supposed to be ashamed to stand for the truth?

In your delusion, you don't think one needs history to be able to understand how the word of God was passed to us and why xtians do some things they do?

Do you understand why catholic priests have to study philosophy and theology for almost 8 years before ordination to preach and teach?

You need to learn how to apply reason before you start showing your delusion on forums.

please educate him,that dude is a clown

chukwudi44:

please educate him,that dude is a clown

if atall he is ready to learn

italo:

*yawning*

Just stop worshipping samiramis and your apron and come into the light.

can a dog go back to it vomit?
I rather bow down 2 budha since it is d same with wat u do in cath. Ch.

adsonstone:
You know this that Jesus always mentioned the scriptures. If the scriptures were corrupted, Jesus would never mention them.

Jesus never mentioned the Bible. The whole New Testament wasn't written when Jesus was speaking. The Catholic Church gave you the Bible. Without it, you'd probably be worshiping Amadioha or Sango.

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

adsonstone:
Now, I can see this is what you choose to bank on....the Catholic Church did this, the catholic church did that. Not without the catholic Church, without the scriptures, my faith cannot stand.
By the way, the Church: the pillar and ground of truth is where the truth rests and it is to uphold it. The truth (Jesus) is ever existent!
if your catholic church choose to change it (His teaching), then it has lost its way.

It's what YOU bank on! The authenticity of the Catholic Church which made the Bible.
All you are saying, you'd never know, if the Catholic Church didnt tell you and give you the Bible.

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

adsonstone:
That of the communion, that was not by a letter. It was orally said by Jesus to the apostles, and reserved in a written form (in the Gospels) for us to access.

How do you know that Jesus said such to his apostles? The Catholic Church gave you Bible! How do you know the parts of the New Testament that talk about communion aren't falsified? You trust the Catholic Church.

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

adsonstone:
Hmmm.... I see.... and do they agree with the ones in the scriptures and epistles?

Which "scriptures" and "epistles"? The writings that the Catholic Church told you were scriptures and epistles?

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

adsonstone:
The Church Christ Created was not the catholic church so the Apostles were not 'catholic' christians as they don't practice what you all practice in your catholic church today.

What do you know about Christ besides what the Catholic Church presented to you as Bible? You are just talking blindly. You dont even know if the parts of the Bible that mention "Church" were not falsified.

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

adsonstone:
The same way you know that the catholic church compiled the bible.

There is no hiding place for your ignorance on this matter. You make a mockery of yourself when you try to sound knowledgeable on things you know nothing about. You simple are ashamed to say it because an honest answer will further vindicate the Catholic Church. But isnt it the devil that makes you ashamed of the truth?

adsonstone:
Have you searched the thread?

I didnt call any "Enigma" or whatever the name is "liar."

Isnt it a sin to tell lies in that your "infallible"underworld unidentifiable unverifiable "church" doctrine? I guess not.

I am about to open the thread on your "church" and its doctrine. Can we have the name of your "church" now? Or do you and your "church" still prefer darkness to light?

try69:

The way you comment was exactly the reason I said something about thought process and this will further stress my point.

What did the said reformation do to the ONE church other than proliferation of doctrines?

What truth is staring at my face? You believe you know more than I do or the other 1 billion plus catholics?

Why are you ashamed to disclose your "true" church? Are you supposed to be ashamed to stand for the truth?

In your delusion, you don't think one needs history to be able to understand how the word of God was passed to us and why xtians do some things they do?

Do you understand why catholic priests have to study philosophy and theology for almost 8 years before ordination to preach and teach?

You need to learn how to apply reason before you start showing your delusion on forums.

God has given us the great miracle - the human brain.

Many choose not to use it. For those who have chosen that path, there is no way you can reason with them.

asco15:
can a dog go back to it vomit?
I rather bow down 2 budha since it is d same with wat u do in cath. Ch.

You dont need Bhudda. You already worship Samiramis and your apron.

adsonstone: ....the Catholic Church did this, the catholic church did that.....

I like this line. And it gets interesting because if you ask the lying mumus to explain or define what they mean by "the Catholic Church", they wont! Why? Because it would expose their lies and also expose the Roman Catholic church denomination as a shamelessly fraudulent organisation.

When they say or imply that "they" are "the Catholic Church", they are simply engaging in wuruwuru Mathematics. According to their fraudulent mathematics 5-4=5 (five minus four = five)

The Catholic Church = Alexandria + Antioch + Constantinople + Jerusalem + Rome!

The Roman Catholic Church = Rome

Now the frauds are trying to pass off only Rome i.e. the Roman Catholic Church as "the Catholic Church".

In any event, whether it is the fraudulent Roman Catholic church denomination or even the Catholic Church, the Bible had been written and "compiled" before either of them came into existence --- by Christians! Hallelujah.

If you want to catch the liars, when they say "the Catholic Church", ask them which one e.g. the Orthodox Catholic Church aka Eastern Orthodox who even have a better claim to be called "the Catholic Church" than the fraudulent Roman Catholic church denomination?

Ukuts gp: Why do we have so many different doctrines in churches today? Is the bible not one? Is God not one?.

Some will say pay tithe others will say no need. Some will say ladies can wear trouser others will say ladies should not wear trouser. Some will say, ladies must cover their hair others will say ladies should not cover their hair in church. Some will say, there is hell other will say there is nothing like hell fire. Some will say God is three in one others will say God is only one. Some will say u can pray through mary and jesus others will say pray only through jesus christ. Some will say fast others will say no need to fast. Some will say the earth shall be turned into paradise other will say there is no such thing, that we will all leave earth to heaven in the last day. Some will say give your first fruit offering other will say there no need for that anymore. Some will say we should worship God only on saturday which is the sabbath day others will say it is on sunday we should worship God. Some will say no christmas others will say there is christmas. Some will say christians can marry more than one wife other will say they cannot. Some say you can wear earing and fix nails others will say you must not wear earing and fix nail(for ladies). Some say you can do blood transfusion and take drugs others say you cannot do blood transfusion and take drugs that all you need is to apply faith. etc.

Somebody tell me, is this not confusion?. Hw can we know the truth now. Or who have a clear answers to the above different doctrines peddles by different denominations today. I wonder sha!

God help me o.

I understand your delima, many people ask such question and it is reasonable. however, the fact remains that one answer in each question is the truth while the other is false. also know that there is one faith not faiths. I believe the bible gave the identity of this true christians. search your bible and find them.

to find which of the answers to the questions is correct from the bible, you have to first search the answers given by different groups to support their points, PRAYERFULLY consider which of the positions agrees with ALL parts of the bible, and choose that as the truth.

For eg, someone can say that a woman shouldnt wear trouser, quoting Deutronomy to support his claim. Another will say no, that what is a woman and what is a woman should be decided by the culture the christian finds himself instead of generalising the choiced attire. he may support his reason by saying that what is for men in ancient israel is not trouser but gown, and women dont put on skirt and blouse. so culture defines though no one is advised to stumble anybody.

From this two individuals[just an eg], you ask yourself: which one makes sense?

There is no way we all will believe in one thing for now, if so, then the prophesy about false religion will never arise.

Satan told Jesus to jump from the battlement of the temple that nothing will happen to him, and he quotes scripture. but Jesus refuted it that that scripture is not a leverage to tempt your God, he buttress his point by quoting a scripture too.

the question is, which one makes sense? You make your choice. Also note that the bible do not leave us in the dark as to the identity of true christians.

Not All Images Are Idols.

God’s law not to form images (Ex 20:4, 5) did not rule out the making of all representations and statues. This is indicated by Jehovah’s later command to make two golden cherubs on the cover of the Ark and to embroider representations of cherubs on the inner tent covering of ten tent cloths for the tabernacle and the curtain separating the Holy from the Most Holy. (Ex 25:18; 26:1, 31, 33) Likewise, the interior of Solomon’s temple, the architectural plans for which were given to David by divine inspiration (1Ch 28:11, 12), was beautifully embellished with engraved carvings of cherubs, palm-tree figures, and blossoms. Two cherubs of oil-tree wood overlaid with gold stood in the Most Holy of that temple. (1Ki 6:23, 28, 29) The molten sea rested upon 12 copper bulls, and the sidewalls of the copper carriages for temple use were decorated with figures of lions, bulls, and cherubs. (1Ki 7:25, 28, 29) Twelve lions lined the steps leading up to Solomon’s throne.—2Ch 9:17-19.

These representations, however, were not idols for worship. Only the officiating priests saw the representations of the tabernacle interior and, later, of the temple interior. No one but the high priest entered the Most Holy, and that only on the Day of Atonement. (Heb 9:7) Thus there was no danger of the Israelites’ being ensnared into idolizing the golden cherubs in the sanctuary. These representations primarily served as a picture of the heavenly cherubs. (Compare Heb 9:24, 25.) That they were not to be venerated is evident from the fact that the angels themselves were not to be worshiped.—Col 2:18; Re 19:10; 22:8, 9.

Of course, there were times when images became idols, although not originally intended as objects of veneration. The copper serpent that Moses formed in the wilderness came to be worshiped, and therefore faithful King Hezekiah crushed it to pieces. (Nu 21:9; 2Ki 18:1, 4) The ephod made by Judge Gideon became “a snare” to him and to his household.—Jg 8:27.

Images as Aids in Worship.

The Scriptures do not sanction the use of images as a means to address God in prayer. Such a practice runs counter to the principle that those seeking to serve Jehovah must worship him with spirit and truth. (Joh 4:24; 2Co 4:18; 5:6, 7) He tolerates no mixing of idolatrous practices with true worship, as is illustrated by his condemnation of calf worship, although the Israelites had attached his name thereto. (Ex 32:3-10) Jehovah does not share his glory with graven images.—Isa 42:8.

italo:

Jesus never mentioned the Bible. The whole New Testament wasn't written when Jesus was speaking. The Catholic Church gave you the Bible. Without it, you'd probably be worshiping Amadioha or Sango.

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

This is something you know you can't deny. Stop being cunning!
Jesus always referred to the scriptures and those scriptures are the ones we have in the old testament of the Bible today.

italo:
It's what YOU bank on! The authenticity of the Catholic Church which made the Bible.
All you are saying, you'd never know, if the Catholic Church didnt tell you and give you the Bible.

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!


How do you know that Jesus said such to his apostles? The Catholic Church gave you Bible! How do you know the parts of the New Testament that talk about communion aren't falsified? You trust the Catholic Church.

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

Which "scriptures" and "epistles"? The writings that the Catholic Church told you were scriptures and epistles?

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

What do you know about Christ besides what the Catholic Church presented to you as Bible? You are just talking blindly. You dont even know if the parts of the Bible that mention "Church" were not falsified.

GO AND READ THE CHURCH FATHERS!

Church Fathers, I have read articles online abuot these men. Many of whom were not even 'catholics' they contributed a lot to 'Christianity' in general.

I think you should go back and read extensively about how the Bible came into being and stop saying or claiming what the catholic church did and what they did not do.

italo:
There is no hiding place for your ignorance on this matter. You make a mockery of yourself when you try to sound knowledgeable on things you know nothing about. You simple are ashamed to say it because an honest answer will further vindicate the Catholic Church. But isnt it the devil that makes you ashamed of the truth?

When you have read, then come and reprove what I have said.

italo:
I didnt call any "Enigma" or whatever the name is "liar."

Isnt it a sin to tell lies in that your "infallible"underworld unidentifiable unverifiable "church" doctrine? I guess not.

I am about to open the thread on your "church" and its doctrine. Can we have the name of your "church" now? Or do you and your "church" still prefer darkness to light?

Deeper life bible church. You can find out more on it as there are information everywhere for you to see.

Enigma:

I like this line. And it gets interesting because if you ask the lying mumus to explain or define what they mean by "the Catholic Church", they wont! Why? Because it would expose their lies and also expose the Roman Catholic church denomination as a shamelessly fraudulent organisation.

When they say or imply that "they" are "the Catholic Church", they are simply engaging in wuruwuru Mathematics. According to their fraudulent mathematics 5-4=5 (five minus four = five)

The Catholic Church = Alexandria + Antioch + Constantinople + Jerusalem + Rome!

The Roman Catholic Church = Rome

Now the frauds are trying to pass off only Rome i.e. the Roman Catholic Church as "the Catholic Church".

In any event, whether it is the fraudulent Roman Catholic church denomination or even the Catholic Church, the Bible had been written and "compiled" before either of them came into existence --- by Christians! Hallelujah.

If you want to catch the liars, when they say "the Catholic Church", ask them which one e.g. the Orthodox Catholic Church aka Eastern Orthodox who even have a better claim to be called "the Catholic Church" than the fraudulent Roman Catholic church denomination?

....The worst part of it is that they are not willing to learn and that's so pathetic, justify false things with 'oral tradition' and the claim that the catholic church compiled the bible.... etc.

God help us all.

adsonstone: .... Church Fathers, I have read articles online abuot these men. Many of whom were not even 'catholics' they contributed a lot to 'Christianity' in general......

This is what I have been saying.

First of all, let us even go back to the Apostles. The apostles never heard of "the Catholic Church" or the Roman Catholic church denomination. They only knew the Church of Christ aka the Christian Church.

The "church fathers" who lived before 110 AD never heard of "the Catholic Church" or the Roman Catholic church denomination. It was not until 110 AD if not even later that Ignatius used the expression "catholic Church".

Now watch this: even Ignatius who coined the expression "catholic Church" did not know of "the Catholic Church" let alone the Roman Catholic church denomination.

Even more interesting, the Roman Catholic church denomination have declared the church of Ignatius as anathema --- yet they are stealing and misusing the word "catholic" that he coined.

When Ignatius coined the expression "catholic Church", he meant universal Church; he did not believe in any "pope". Remember that "catholic" according to Roman Catholics means submission to the Roman catholic "pope". Ignatius did not know or even know of that particular monstrosity.

According to Ignatius, each bishop of whatever church is equal to any other bishop. The bishop of Yaba is equal to the bishop of Oyingbo is equal to the bishop of Bariga and is equal to the bishop of Rome. In fact, we can say what he meant by "bishop" was not much different from "parish priest" or "head of congregation".

It was not till much later that some people turned Ignatius' catholic i.e. universal Church into something else that they called "the Catholic Church" and which much later in AD380 (over about 300 years after Ignatius coined the word 'catholic') that they used the law to say that only some people can call themselves "Catholic".

NOTE in the context of this thread: the reason why some insisted on being the only ones to be called "Catholic" even then was ----- denominationalism. In other words, even in those days they created denominations because of their theological differences.

Ah, now let us have a little play.

For all the fraudulent Roman catholic claims, see how one of the Roman Catholic "popes" botched up a Roman Catholic version of the Bible --- to the horror of other Roman Catholics. The episode and its aftermath is of course a clear demonstration that the Roman catholic denomination's idea of "papal infallibility" is complete hogwash.

Read here about the Vulgata Sixtina: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgata_Sixtina

"The Vulgata Sixtina was a Latin edition of the Bible from 1590, prepared on the orders of Pope Sixtus V. It was the first edition of the Latin Vulgate authorised by a pope, but its official recognition was short-lived."

"On 8 April 1546 the Council of Trent required that the Vulgate be printed quam emendatissime (fewest possible faults).[1] There was no authoritative edition at that time.[2]

The first committee was appointed by Pope Pius IV in 1561 to undertake the work, but the committee worked slowly and ineffectively. The second committee was appointed by Pope Pius V in 1569 (Congregatio pro emendatione Bibliorum), with four Cardinals Marcus Antonius, Sirleto, Madrutius, and Antonio Carafa.[3][4] The committee was resolved under the Pope Gregory XIII.[5]

The Pope Sixtus V had appointed the 3rd committee of scholars to continue the work. The committee was under the presidency of Cardinal Carafa. The work was prepared on the basis of the edition of Robertus Stephanus from Louvain (1583) and good manuscripts were used as authorities, including notably Codex Amiatinus.[6] Carafa presented the result of their work, in the beginning of 1589, but Sixtus rejected their work and in 18 months prepared another text he corrected to agree with the Greek and Hebrew,[7] He used Codex Carafianus,[8] but it was hurried into print and suffered from many printing errors,[9] as well as serious problems reflecting the inability of the headstrong Sixtus as a Bible scholar. After his death Robert Bellarmine warned that his work was an embarrassment, and a great danger to the church.[10] In May 1590 the completed work was issued from the press in three volumes.[2]


And from elsewhere, here is a statement attributed to the same Bellarmine on the matter: he was advising a subsequent "pope" on how to deal with the matter of the dodgy Sixtus Sixtine Vulgate. He effectively advised that they should lie!

"Some men, whose opinions had great weight, held that it should be publicly prohibited. I did not think so, and I showed the Holy Father that, instead of forbidding the edition of the Bible in question, it would be better to correct it in such manner that it could be published without detriment to the honour of Pope Sixtus. This result could be achieved by removing inadvisable changes as quickly as possible, and then issuing the volume with Sixtus' name upon it, and a preface stating that owing to haste some errors had crept into the first edition through the
fault of printers and other persons."

.

.