Zikkyy:

The bible does not show 'everything' Christians should do or not do, that is my position. if you want to argue that a practice is false, you don't go looking for commands or laws in the bible. The bible is a guide, not a list of dos and don'ts.

You talk like a Catholic.

Zikkyy:

you dey dodge my question you don't believe God can appear to the Pope? yes or no

"Even though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:8 ).
..................

That ^ is how efficient the bible is.

If i so wish, i can even use only the bible to answer all your questions here.

Syncan:


A catholic apologist? Since when Did that stop being a good thing? That does not make the Israelites who made the cherubs children of Hagar while their father Isaac is not.

How assumptions! Who said anything about it being good or bad?

How did the Israelites make cherubs, children of Hagar?

Is Roman Catholic thesame as Israel?

Zikkyy:

you dey dodge my question you don't believe God can appear to the Pope? yes or no

I don't believe that. If you think He can asides through the Word, show me what gives you such idea.

Enigma:
It is possible that God speaks to a "pope": God even "speaks" to people who are not Christians --- for example by calling them.

Thank you jare

Enigma:
However, we do know of "popes" who have pulled doctrine from their backsides in circumstances that we can safely say that if anyone instructed them about the doctrine, it could not have been God but must have been satan.

The above is possible.

Enigma:
I will give you an example.

In the Bull (very appropriately 'bull' too) Pastor Aeternus, the "pope" Leo X declared effectively that the Roman Catholic Church does not believe in chapter 15 of the Book of Acts of the Bible. He declared that the "pope" is higher than an ecumenical council. For his proof he did not rely on having heard from God, rather he relied on false statements from the forged document known as Pseudo-Isidore!

again, you may be right even though have never heard of the "Pseudo-isidore"

On Roman Catholic versus Christian issues, I am generally careful about trusting Wikipedia. In fact I will not be surprised if sometimes after this my post, the entry I'm about to quote is modified.

Anyway from Wikipedia about Pseudo-Isidore http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-Isidorian_Decretals

"The Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals (or False Decretals) are a set of extensive and influential medieval forgeries, written by a scholar or group of scholars known as Pseudo-Isidore. The authors, who worked under the pseudonym Isidore Mercator, were probably a group of Frankish clerics writing in the second quarter of the ninth century. They aimed to defend the position of bishops against metropolitans and secular authorities by creating false documents purportedly authored by early popes, together with interpolated conciliar documents."

Further from that entry

"The Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, along with certain fictitious letters ascribed to early popes, from Clement to Gregory the Great, were incorporated in a ninth-century collection of canons purporting to have been made by the pseudonymous Isidore Mercator. Collections of canons were commonly made by adding new matter to old; the forger of the Pseudo-Isidore collection took as the basis of his work a quite genuine collection, Hispana Gallica Augustodunensis, and interpolated his forgeries among the genuine material that supplied credibility by association. The official Liber pontificalis was used as a historical guide and furnished some of the subject matter. The Pseudo-Isidorian collection also includes the earlier (non-Pseudo-Isidorian) forgery, the Donation of Constantine."


That part refers to another major forgery known as the Donation of Constantine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine

"The Donation of Constantine (Latin, Donatio Constantini) is a forged Roman imperial decree by which the emperor Constantine I supposedly transferred authority over Rome and the western part of the Roman Empire to the Pope. Composed probably in the 8th century, it was used, especially in the 13th century, in support of claims of political authority by the papacy."

Mercifully, if Wikipedia is tampered with, there are other sources of information on these matters --- incidentally including the Roman Catholic denomination's own encyclopaedia!

truthislight:

Of what use is the Bible if christians have to be "infallible" ?

Leave the bible out of this infallibility matter. if you are not infallible, on what basis do you accuse the other person of propagating false doctrine? So if you agree you are fallible, then you can only give your opinion which may or may not be correct. abi

shdemidemi:
I believe the bible is 100% correct .......

...what about the people interpreting the bible? are they all correct?

shdemidemi:
..........it clearly states who is correct.

where?

truthislight:
You talk like a Catholic.

This is why i avoid this kind of discussion, instead of focusing on the discussion you are assessing the person behind the post unlike you i can say my view is not influenced by the denomination(s) i associate with. If my views tend to align more with the catholics, maybe i am more catholic than JW

Zikkyy:

Leave the bible out of this infallibility matter. if you are not infallible, on what basis do you accuse the other person of propagating false doctrine? So if you agree you are fallible, then you can only give your opinion which may or may not be correct. abi

The bible is my basis. No ?

How can i "leave the bible out of this" ?

How can i be a christian in the 21st century without the bible ?

Do you listen to yourself at all ?

Smh for you.

Zikkyy:

We are not saying the same thing regarding the highlighted bit. Who is a Christian? and who decides what is truth? this is the part i agree with italo, you have to be 'infallible' to make that statement believing you are 100% correct.

Common sense is still available. Deo gratias!

truthislight:

"Even though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:8 ).
..................

That ^ is how efficient the bible is.

The above is what we call 'out of point' (OP) back in the days. If you write this kind answer for exam, you don fail be that am asking if you believe God can appear to a Pope, you are quoting irrelevant bible verse

shdemidemi:
I don't believe that.

Thank you jare. simple question, and truthislight is dancing atilogwu round the question

shdemidemi:
If you think He can asides through the Word, show me what gives you such idea.

i will not pretend to understand you here, kindly clarify. thanks.

Zikkyy:

...what about the people interpreting the bible? are they all correct?



where?

Now you are talking, the people using the bible are imperfect, that is why we individually have to be like the Bareans and make sure that all that is being said is in tenents with the bible.

You have to consistently study the bible for yourself, and ever ready to stick only to what the bible say. As long as you closely follow the bible, it will keep you in the right.

"That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:17).

italo: @ adsonstone,

It so happens that you have my respect on this thread.

You're the only one challenging the Catholic faith who is trying to reason it out logically.

The rest I see here are not interested in reason.

They just want to vomit their frustration on us, and that's not what this thread is for (Someone correct me if I'm wrong).

...and I thought you were one of the worst...

and sincerely,
I respect you a lot likewise Syncan.

So far, your replies have been well presented.

Zikkyy:

...what about the people interpreting the bible? are they all correct?



where?

So, because cars have accident we should stop getting into cars? No. The bible never promised everyone will speak the truth but you can't go wrong if you stick by what the scripture says.

In the bible

Zikkyy:

...what about the people interpreting the bible? are they all correct?



where?

Zikkyy:

Leave the bible out of this infallibility matter. if you are not infallible, on what basis do you accuse the other person of propagating false doctrine? So if you agree you are fallible, then you can only give your opinion which may or may not be correct. abi

They will not give you a straight and honest answer.

If they could, they'd be validating Catholic teaching.

Zikkyy:

This is why i avoid this kind of discussion, instead of focusing on the discussion you are assessing the person behind the post unlike you i can say my view is not influenced by the denomination(s) i associate with. If my views tend to align more with the catholics, maybe i am more catholic than JW

Where did you learn that christians must be infallible from ?

adsonstone:

and sincerely,
I respect you a lot likewise Syncan.

So far, your replies have been well presented.

Thank you.

Zikkyy:

i will not pretend to understand you here, kindly clarify. thanks.

All I am saying is, God never promised He will speak to any man today (not even the pope), not even through the Holy Spirit. But through the Word of God we can all know what He had said hence we can latch on to what had been said and not what is to be said.

truthislight:
The bible is my basis. No ?

Okay then, using the bible kindly prove that zikkyy is fallible on matters that has to do with the interpretation of the bible itself. Thanks.

truthislight:
Do you listen to yourself at all ?

okay na, am listening to you. answer the question above.

This is what RCC can do to a person.

You start thinking you are the Judge.

Your opinion my friend is inconsequential.

Zikkyy:


The above is what we call 'out of point' (OP) back in the days. If you write this kind answer for exam, you don fail be that am asking if you believe God can appear to a Pope, you are quoting irrelevant bible verse

"Even though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:8 ).
.............

Read that scripture slowly over and over till it sinks in.

Babalawo also beliefs it is God that appears to him.

Zikkyy:

Lol! You are arguing with anger

lol

exactly my problm wit him

i dnt want him to cry dats y i stop quoting his post

italo:

... and you say every sculptor, artist, person who has a picture of anything is sinning ?

I would like for you to tell me whether those "Bible-believing Christians" are right or wrong.

Truthislight and every other non-Catholic I have ever met say you are fallible.

JMAN and Truthislight say Jesus is Archangel Michael.

Are they right or wrong?

regarding the bold, I did not say that.

The fact still remains: God does not permit making 'graven images' as he taught in the Mosaic laws.

...and for the rest, I have said that until I talk to Jman, I have nothing to say about their position.

truthislight:
You have to consistently study the bible for yourself, and ever ready to stick only to what the bible say. As long as you closely follow the bible, it will keep you in the right.

what do mean by 'stick only'?

@ Zikky

I get what you are trying to say to truthislight but I have a question.

Does one himself have to be "infallible" to say that the Roman Catholic "pope" is not "infallible"?

For example can a person who is not infallible not say that a Roman Catholic "pope" who says the below when compared with the Bible --- cannot be infallible?


"Infallible" "pope"

"... after Christ, we find in Mary the end of the law and the fulfillment of the figures and oracles."

versus

Romans 10:4

"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believes."

This on red below is a lie against me and Jesus christ that repply accordingly.

italo:

They will not give you a straight and honest answer.

If they could, they'd be validating Catholic teaching.

I dare you to show me even one lie i have posted on this thread even though i am fallible.

If you dont, ever remain silent and stop lying on my head.

Meanwhile, i can show us lots of errors that your infallible popes have made.

shdemidemi:
So, because cars have accident we should stop getting into cars? No.

Thats not what am saying. my question is this: who decides the car that will be involved in a collision?

shdemidemi:
The bible never promised everyone will speak the truth but you can't go wrong if you stick by what the scripture says.

I agree. how do we identify the person speaking the truth? when they are all quoting/interpreting the scripture (as they see it, maybe) and we on our part also processing their interpretations as want to understand it. so who is heading in the wrong direction?

truthislight:

Where did you learn that christians must be infallible from ?

Nairaland

Zikkyy:

Thats not what am saying. my question is this: who decides the car that will be involved in a collision?



I agree. how do we identify the person speaking the truth? when they are all quoting/interpreting the scripture (as they see it, maybe) and we on our part also processing their interpretations as want to understand it. so who is heading in the wrong direction?

We identify who is saying the truth by going back to the scriptures to verify what anyone says.

Zikkyy:

Okay then, using the bible kindly prove that zikkyy is fallible on matters that has to do with the interpretation of the bible itself. Thanks.



okay na, am listening to you. answer the question above.

"For we know in part, and we prophesy in part." (1 Corinthians 13:9).

"For we all stumble many times. If any man does not stumble in word, this one is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body." (James 3:2).

"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:" (Romans 3:10).

Not even the pope, if he says he is righteouse, christ ransom sacrifice is not for him.