alextayo:

It is very obvious that you are suffering from crude ignorance and gross unpopularity syndrome and you are just looking for cheap popularity by attacking the Catholic Faith...We Catholics have decided to ignore like a contingent being(if you understand what that means and i bet you wont ...unless you visit google).

If you truly need this popularity, why dont you pitch your tent on the 3rd mainland bridge and I bet you, you will become a celebrity overnight.

clefstone: You keep twisting d Bible to foster ur anti-Catholic agenda. Where in d Bible did Jesus call himself son of David? Please read Matt 22:42-46 to correct your lies.

Annaka: i pray u dont die of high bp becos of catholic church

dejilg:

Why dnt u tell us what's in Matt 22:42-46 and hw it supports ur case?
Now how does dis refute the fact that Jesus is David's Son? Jesus is asking them that if David calls Him Lord how then is He his Son? How is dis fact twisting?
You as a catholic believe Jesus is God (I do too)...how den did Jesus call the Father God?

Does dis sound familiar? Answer it and let's see who is twisting Biblical facts...are u dis so confused?

Well let's look at Jesus' statement in Revelations 22:16

16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the OFFSPRING of David, the bright morning star."

Now don't u hv dis in ur Bible? Or did I twist dis in mine?

Infact this statement answers the question of why David calls Jesus His Lord n Jesus cud stil say He is David's Son. Jesus is David's Son according to the flesh!

Why is dis hard for u? Are u no longer a Christian?

dejilg:

Yh Yh tell us more abt ignoring all dat I hv typed on this thread...so far so good, none of u catholic liars hv been able to defend the man made Marian devotion

I dnt need popularity, perhaps ur church does, like it did before the reformation, by usurping absolute authority to overturn real Biblical doctrines for dea man made money thrivin doctrines!

clefstone: If then David calls him Lord, how can he be His son(Matt 22:44). Jesus rightly called the Father God because while on earth he lowered himself to take the form of man. Since men depended on God, Jesus had to do d same in his human nature. Hence a Apostle Paul wrote, ''though his nature was divine, he did not cling to his equality with God, a thing to be grasped. Thr is no corelationship between David/Christ nd Father/Christ relationships.
How is Jesus David's son according to d flesh?

clefstone: If then David calls him Lord, how can he be His son(Matt 22:44). Jesus rightly called the Father God because while on earth he lowered himself to take the form of man. Since men depended on God, Jesus had to do d same in his human nature. Hence a Apostle Paul wrote, ''though his nature was divine, he did not cling to his equality with God, a thing to be grasped. Thr is no corelationship between David/Christ nd Father/Christ relationships.
How is Jesus David's son according to d flesh?

clefstone: Usurping authority? Who established the Bible as an authority; d Church or d Bible itself. Where in d Bible is it written that a book of authority be compiled? Who compiled d Bible and gave it authority? Is it documented in the Bible that any idea outside it is false?
Now, the Bible is an authoritative document compiled by THE CHURCH through the gaurdiance of the Holy Spirit which is the divine councellor of d church. For the Church to compile such a document, it has to have authority itself. No wonder Jesus invoked authority on the Church, when He said to Peter, ''you r the rock and upon this rock i will build my Church.............whatever u bind on earth is bound in heaven and whatever u loose on earth is loosed in heaven''. Such is the power/authority of the Church, d same authority wit wc she established d Bible as a spiritual document to guide the faithfuls. (to be contd......)

clefstone: Usurping authority? Who established the Bible as an authority; d Church or d Bible itself. Where in d Bible is it written that a book of authority be compiled? Who compiled d Bible and gave it authority? Is it documented in the Bible that any idea outside it is false?
Now, the Bible is an authoritative document compiled by THE CHURCH through the gaurdiance of the Holy Spirit which is the divine councellor of d church. For the Church to compile such a document, it has to have authority itself. No wonder Jesus invoked authority on the Church, when He said to Peter, ''you r the rock and upon this rock i will build my Church.............whatever u bind on earth is bound in heaven and whatever u loose on earth is loosed in heaven''. Such is the power/authority of the Church, d same authority wit wc she established d Bible as a spiritual document to guide the faithfuls. (to be contd......)

dejilg:

Now I know u r a catholic and not a Christian and u dnt know ur Bible, I quoted Rev 22:16 to u and yet u pretend not to see it...

Luke 18

37 They told him, "Jesus of Nazareth is passing by." 38 And he cried out, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" 39 And those who were in front rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!" 40 And Jesus stopped and commanded him to be brought to him. And when he came near, he asked him, 41 "What do you want me to do for you?" He said, "Lord, let me recover my sight."

Here did Jesus questioned being called Son of David?? And what gave the man d impression that Jesus is David's Son?

Seems u only read dat part of the Bible ur priests wants u to read. Did u read d Geneology of Christ?

If so, why ask, how Jesus is David's Son according to the flesh? To answer ur question abt Jesus asking d Jews how come David called Him Lord. Read Rev 22:16....Jesus is d "root" i.e Creator/Sustainer of David and also has descended through David's lineage! How come u dnt know dis?

Are u being dishonest with Biblical truth? Or u r doin what ur priests asked u to?

dejilg:

Now I know u r a catholic and not a Christian and u dnt know ur Bible, I quoted Rev 22:16 to u and yet u pretend not to see it...

Luke 18

37 They told him, "Jesus of Nazareth is passing by." 38 And he cried out, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" 39 And those who were in front rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!" 40 And Jesus stopped and commanded him to be brought to him. And when he came near, he asked him, 41 "What do you want me to do for you?" He said, "Lord, let me recover my sight."

Here did Jesus questioned being called Son of David?? And what gave the man d impression that Jesus is David's Son?

Seems u only read dat part of the Bible ur priests wants u to read. Did u read d Geneology of Christ?

If so, why ask, how Jesus is David's Son according to the flesh? To answer ur question abt Jesus asking d Jews how come David called Him Lord. Read Rev 22:16....Jesus is d "root" i.e Creator/Sustainer of David and also has descended through David's lineage! How come u dnt know dis?

Are u being dishonest with Biblical truth? Or u r doin what ur priests asked u to?

clefstone: You keep on running in circles. You claimed Mary is not Mother of God because Jesus did not call her mother. However, on multiple occassions d Bible author referred to her as his mother and the people of his time called Mary his mother just like the blind man called him the Son of David as u cited. Don't even try to use d passage he said ''my mother and my brothers are...........'' cos if u r smart enough u'l know why he said that given d context. Learn hw to undastnd d scripture in context instead of reading a line nd thinking its ur eureka moment.
Secondly, how can d geneology account of Matthew explain Jesus' relationship wit David in flesh when the said account traces down Jesus' lineage from Abraham through to Joseph. Or don't u know Jesus nd Joseph were not related in flesh?

Wislet: So.... The Redemption plan of the Lord Jesus excluded Mary? You are all trying to say that the Lord Jesus came to die for everybody else on earth except her....cos she was without sin? Really??
Why didn't Jesus worship her then? Is there anywhere it's written He did? We'd love to know pls.
The fact that God favoured her to be the one to give birth to the Lord meant she was without sin? It meant she was soooo holy she was the only one qualified?

Is that what you think or are being taught?

She was sooo holy she was not part of the sin of Adam? She was not born of man but dropped 'hollily' from the skies?

Are YOU sure about that? Or you swallow teachings without seeking knowledge from God's word?

Not gonna argue the word with anybody...but, no one will use another person as an excuse that he was taught anything. The Bible is there for you to read for yourself, and the Holy Spirit is there to give you understanding.

POPE II:
THE SAME WORDS WE GAVE YOU ?

dejilg:

No, u ddnt give anyone anything!

The early church fathers predated catholicism, quoted extensively from the NT so much dat we can construct the NT with exception of 11 verses which bear no doctrinal issues!
So if these early church fathers, whom are even model for us and ur so called church quoted from these NT books, how come u r d one who gave us the words!!!

Perhpas u shld scroll up to see my earlier posts regarding d issue of canon of NT.

dejilg:

I dnt know where u kept ur glasses! Now show me where I typed or insinuated "Mary is not the Mother of God, becos Jesus ddnt say Mary is His Mother...! Show me! Simple show us where Jesus said Mary is His mother, dats all I asked for. U catholics are such bad liars, u cudnt show what I asked from the Bible, now u turn to commit fallacy and throw out red herrings! I only pointed to the fact that Jesus ddnt consider His relationship with Mary as important as that of David...what cnt u get here? Since u catholics say its because Mary z Jesus' Mother, dats why u "honour" her, I hv challenged u to show us from the Bible if Jesus made any reference to her that portrays her being able to pray for u. Like I said, Jesus made mention of David as His ancestor according to the flesh, while he made no mention of Mary at all. Simple challenge, prove otherwise! Stop misrepresenting me!.....I dnt wanna call u a liar! But u fit well for one

Again u claim that "my mother and my brothers are"....u claim this "mother" in d verse of Matthew refers to Mary! Dude are u dis desperate?

Let me post the surrounding context, since u really like context but here u failed to keep ur advice!

Matthew 12:46-50

Jesus’ Mother and Brothers
46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his
mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to
speak to him. 47 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.”
48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”

This verses shows Jesus saying that "My Mother is anyone that does the will of My Father" and He even points to His Disciples in this regard and not Mary!......why are u desperate? Now u hv just shot ur catholic stage of Mary having no other children, since this verse says Jesus' mother and brothers are outside, while His Disciples are with Him. Again who are dis brothers? Perhaps u will talk about brotherhood in jewish thinkin! Mind u, this ppl calling out to Jesus for His mother are jews too! So given ur "brotherhood in jewish thinkin" holds! How are the Gospel writers supposed to relate this story if it were to be His very own siblings? Tell us how they would hv reported it.

Wow my eyes caught ur foolishness! So if Jesus wasn't related to Joseph in the flesh, so He can't be related to David? Wait are u a Chrisitan? Ok, let's put dat aside? What abt Jesus' genealogy through Mary, found in Luke 3:23-38? Or is dat one too a failed attempt?! Infact u dnt even know the mystery of why Jesus considers His relationship to David more important than Mary's.....jewish people in Jesus' time understood dat the Messiah is to be from the line of David, even more so through his Son Nathan, from which Mary is descended, but Nathan had no child and Solomon had to marry his wife and raise children for Nathan! hence the tree up to David, on Joseph's side, Jesus can be rightfully crowned King because Joseph is a direct descendant of Solomon and David!.....dude how much of ur ignorance do I need to cure??!

Even on this issue of Jesus' virgin birth, just check the thread, I hv explained why it was necessary for Jesus to hv such birth, and why Mary immaculate conception is a hoax and has nothing to do with Jesus' Divinity and coming to earth!....wake up from ur slumber

I kindly advice u to stop misrepresenting the Bible based on a man made doctrine of catholicism!

POPE II:
THE SAME WORDS WE GAVE YOU ?

dejilg:

No, u ddnt give anyone anything!

The early church fathers predated catholicism, quoted extensively from the NT so much dat we can construct the NT with exception of 11 verses which bear no doctrinal issues!
So if these early church fathers, whom are even model for us and ur so called church quoted from these NT books, how come u r d one who gave us the words!!!

Perhpas u shld scroll up to see my earlier posts regarding d issue of canon of NT.

dejilg:

Thirdly, it cannot be proven that the Catholic Church is solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the
New Testament books. In fact, it can be shown that the New Testament books were gathered into one volume and
were in circulation long before the Catholic Church claims to have taken its action in 390 at the council of Hippo. In
the following we list some of the catalogues of the books of the Bible which are given by early Christian writers.
326. Athanasius, bishop at Alexandria, mentions all of the New Testament books.
315-386. Cyril, bishop at Jerusalem, gives a list of all New Testament books except Revelation.
270. Eusebius, bishop at Caesarea, called the Father of ecclesiastical history, gives an account of the
persecution of Emperor Diocletian whose edict required that all churches be destroyed and the Scriptures
burned. He lists all the books of the New Testament. He was commissioned by Constantine to have transcribed
fifty copies of the Bible for use of the churches of Constantinople.
185-254. Origen, born at Alexandria, names all the books of both the Old and New Testaments.
165-220. Clement, of Alexandria, names all the books of the New Testament except Philemon, James, 2 Peter
and 3 John. In addition we are told by Eusebius, who had the works of Clement, that he gave explanations and
quotations from all the canonical books.
160-240. Turtullian, contemporary of Origen and Clement, mentions all the New Testament books except 2
Peter, James and 2 John.
135-200. Irenaeus, quoted from all New Testament books except Philemon, Jude, James and 3 John.
100-147. Justin Martyr, mentions the Gospels as being four in number and quotes from them and some of the
epistles of Paul and Revelation.
Besides the above, the early church fathers have handed down in their writings quotations from all the New
Testament books so much so that it is said that the entire New Testament can be reproduced from their
writings alone.
Thus, the New Testament books were in existence in their present form at the close of the apostolic age. As a
matter of fact, the apostles themselves put their writings into circulation. "And when this letter has been read
among you, see that it be read in the church of the Laodiceans also; and that you yourselves read the letter from
Laodicea." (Col. 4:16). "I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read to all the holy brethren." (1 Thess. 5:27).
The holy Scriptures were written for all (1 Cor. 1:2; Eph. 1:1) and all will be judged by them in the last day (Rev.
20:12; John 12:48). Jesus said that His Word will abide forever (Matt. 24:35; 1 Pet. 1:23-25).

Peter being the first pope is another catholic myth! Peter ddnt head d church in rome...big hoax! Stop spreading it. Show us proof not word of mouth!

POPE II:

Jesus was Catholic.
Besides before the great schism you all heretics were Catholics . So Catholic gave u everything even Christmas and Easter, stop being ungrateful and don't let your hate blinds u

dejilg:

Wow! He said my hate could blind me...well pays off than my naiveness blinding me to the truth of the Bible and historical facts! Easter n Christmas aren't celebrated by me and my family as well as many Christians in the world, so how are we supposed to be grateful for dis ur pagan repackaged holidays!

Secondly Jesus wasn't catholic, why lying through ur teeth (so to speak; if speaking).....dude come up with a better lie! Before catholicism, wea dea no Christians or Churches Are u dumb or just naïve?

Call us heretics, u r right, since we do not follow ur man made doctrines, but follow the Bible only! Not some stupid church tradition!

fragil gal: Church can't take u to heaven not even u pastor okotie,stop criticizing and pray hard u make heaven too!

clans:
mister you just judged too. i rather u keep quiet than say things u aint sure off. biko!!! its called HONORING Mary not Worshipping

clans: i just don't get the beef with people and Catholics. im a proud catholic and loving it, and i seriously take no offense to whatever pastor Chris says. instead i will take an offense when someone says we aint worshiping God, where did you get such an idea from. but as a peace loving Catholic i am, i would pray for your souls and ask the good God to grant you pardon and pray its not to late for you.. peace be with you...

clefstone: with all due respect, you don't argue intelligently. You just copied and pasted wikipedia without reading through nd matching it wit d topic. When Paul wrote tht d Holy Scriptures were written for all as u rightly quoted, was he referring to d NT texts which were not even written then? My brother, that there are 27 books of the new testament, with 4 gospel accounts is a Church dogma. Yes, the ultimate decision was influenced by d writings of the early church fathers but even these writing had some discrepancies with each other. For example, if u go back to read wikipedia, u will discover that some did not believe Revelation to be scripture, some did not consider some pauline letters as written by St. Paul. But it was when the Church(notice i try to avoid using Catholic) made it a canon that those 27 books began to be seen universally as d books of the NT. I am only using this as an example to show the authority of the Church. And it is significant that it is not written anywhr in scripture that the Bible is an exclusive document of instruction. As 'Catholics' we believe in sacred tradition, scripture and divine revelation. We believe that everytin in d Bible is true but we also hv other sources of inspiration.

chrissy3: so honouring mary means you have to go against God's command not to make image of anything in heaven,earth and beneath the sea,you must not bow? Now mary is now 'the way the truth and the life,no one comes to the father except through her? Funny I thought that was suppose to be jesus? Listen jesus christ had to be born as human so he must be born by a human and mary was picked for reasons know to God but the name mary can easily be Martha if someone else was picked .if I ask you catholics why mary was picked you can't say and your saying honouring mary.yes you would give her respect but she has no teaching of the bible and was a vessel for the birth of christ,she is just human nothing more.

POPE II:

Jesus------> God
Jesus to Peter--------> on this rock I will build my church


Peter----------> Catholic and first pope (this debunk your so called existence of churches before catholi church(which is the early church)

Therefore

Jesus--------> Catholic

What about being grateful for the bible? For the blood we shed to protect the Christendom against Moslems ? For the sign of the cross ?

Catholicism is the Alfa and omega , God's own church .