ByfireByfire:


Where you there? Did you witness it. Several reference to the old testament scriptures were made in the new testament.


Jesus himself stated in the new testament that the scripture cannot be broken jn. 10:35. So if there was anything wrong with the sacred scriptures then Jesus or his apostles would have spotted it and condemned it as they condemned a lot of unwholesome practices in their day.


I reject every Catholic Church history trying to make the scripture irrelevant or trying to allude that Roman Catholic wrote or compiled the scripture.


As far as neither you nor I were there to witness it such claims are false especially when they are made by a backsliden, idolatrous church.

Neither you nor I were there when Jesus came o. But you accepted it anyway didn't you?

PastorAIO:


A couple of things. My purpose was to put an end to the back and forth bickering between you and kamxin. That purpose has been served.

Bro, I appreciate ur effort , but I believe you should have left us to finish our discussion, the discussion is more than the compilation
Of the scriptures, it is more about how the compilation of the scriptures made the church believe they can also make an image of mary for any religious purpose without reference to the scriptures they said they compiled.

Secondly, the very form of your questions suggests that you are not aware of my position on issues like this.

My questions where more directed to him than to you, but since you answered the questions that he is afraid to answer, I decided to ask you the next questions. Personally I do feel he is not in support of ur response, but he wunt tell you that.

1. I have no idea what you mean by this special inspiration that the bible is supposed to have. I believe that the entirety of history and all that it contains would proceed according to the will of an omnipotent being. That includes the words on the newspapers I read in the morning. I can be spoken to from any angle. I can see a flower and receive a 'rhema' from it. Our inability to see the work of God in everything around us is due to our spiritual blindness and not because God concentrated all he has to say into a book.

So my answer to your first question would be Yes. Yes, as with all else they are inspired.

There are some words you used here that I might need clarification on, but it might derail the thread.
He knows about the "special inspiration " I'm talking about. For now, I would not comment on your view of inspiration unless he supports it .

2. You would have to ask the catholics that. Everyone has their agenda in picking texts. The Ethiopian Orthodox church use Jubilees, for instance, but the Catholics don't. Martin Luther King removed the book of James from the bible because it didn't fit into his agenda. To understand why books are added or removed from the bible you have to understand the doctrines of the Church that is using said bible.

That is why I asked him, as I have the view that he is catholic, what criteria did they use in compiling the bible if he views that there are other books that are inspired!
Can you see the dilemma?, if he claims that his church is perfect because they selected some books out of a whole lot of books,and compiled it without giving reasons and criteria for the selection, what stops another church from claiming perfection by doing there own different selection!

Kamxin:


You have your work cut out by PastorAIO, I wonder why it is hard for you to throw Google questions to Google.

Good for you to know that he is responding to questions you are afraid to answer. Do you agree to everything he has said ?

1. Any book that someone sits down to write, he is inspired by someone or something to write it.

So which books where inspired by god that was not compiled by the catholic church, and why was it not compiled.

2. They were not added because the holy spirit led the Catholic church not to do so(John 16:13). Is your church led by the holy spirit? If you say yes why?.

And others added and ommited some in their compilation cus the holy spirit led them to do so!
Can you see how ur claim can be claimed by others too!?
Yes, they excibit its fruitage.

But why are you asking , do you accept what the Catholic church have given you hook, line and sinker or do you reject it(bible)?

What has the catholic church giving me?

Kamxin:

These people that orchestrated the war, did they publicly declared themselves Catholic, even Hitler, did you see him in Catholic church?.

Pictures dnt lie Bro, at least not during those days. Wish I could post the pictures here .

alamoministries.com/content/english/Antichrist/nazigallery/photogallery.html

http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

Remember, these Germans are the ones that fought the Catholic church through Martin Luther, and have more protestants than Catholic. So the question goes back to you. Did the protestant denominations condemned hitler and his associates or is world wars not part of protestant reformation?

Irrelevant question, finding the Protestant guilty does not make the catholic innocent!. Both where guilty of participating in the war, whichever side they are on.

Both members were known to participate and kill each other in wars after the second word war.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles

Secondly, during during Spanish inquisition, protestant reformation the state is more powerful than the church, so the church cannot stop them, even modern slave trade, when the Catholic church was the most powerful, it brought salve trade to an end, only for it to restart with protestant reformation.

So the Jews were safe, when the Catholic church is powerful than when protestants were powerful.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition

Go and read it , or do you want me to quote some parts out?

Ubenedictus:
stop lying dear. Nobody killed galileo and the church didnt support hitler in his war.

Yep, you are right, nobody killed galileo, he died under house arrest by the church.

Yep, the church did not support hitler, the members did! .

Ubenedictus:


before i do so, kindly tell me ur point cos u seem to be shifting d goal post every now and then.

Are u saying it is sinful to make any image for religious use, or that it it sinful to make such images without express divine command.

If i dont know ur position then i'll nt know how to respond.

You claim the use of the image of mary has scritural support, I just want you to show me which image was used in the scriptures, and we will compare its use with that of the use of the image of mary.
If truly there were images that was made by man in the scriptures,and its use is similar to that of the use of mary's image, pls let us see it.

dolphinheart:


You claim the use of the image of mary has scritural support, I just want you to show me which image was used in the scriptures, and we will compare its use with that of the use of the image of mary.
If truly there were images that was made by man in the scriptures,and its use is similar to that of the use of mary's image, pls let us see it.

read (1
Chr. 28:18–19). (Ex. 25:18–20). (Num.
21:8–9).does that mean that God is confused since he said don't make yet he asked them again to make.

dolphinheart:



That is why I asked him, as I have the view that he is catholic, what criteria did they use in compiling the bible if he views that there are other books that are inspired!
Can you see the dilemma?, if he claims that his church is perfect because they selected some books out of a whole lot of books,and compiled it without giving reasons and criteria for the selection, what stops another church from claiming perfection by doing there own different selection!

The main criteria used was to figure out what books matched up with the Church's sacred tradition (i.e. [1]Was the book written by an apostle or someone who was reporting the words of an apostle. [2] how much the book was being used by other bishops and priests in their Masses [3] how often the book was quoted by the Church Fathers in their writings.) Only the books which “scored” high on all three of these criteria made it into the canon.

There was only one church in the first 1000 years therefore the compilation was done by the bishops of this one church. Looking at Christianity with 21st century eyes always causes confusion because you see the thousand's of different denominations and think it's always been so.
It was one church that was given the power to bind and loose, it still does so today - no other church comes close to even claiming this right.

Empredboy:
read (1
Chr. 28:18–19). (Ex. 25:18–20). (Num.
21:8–9).does that mean that God is confused since he said don't make yet he asked them again to make.

1 chr 28:18-19
18. for the altar of incense refined gold by weight; and gold for the pattern of the chariot of the cherubims,
that spread out their wings, and covered the ark of the covenant of the LORD.
19 All this, said David, the
LORD made me understand in
writing by his hand upon me,
even all the works of this
pattern.

ex 25 :18-20
18 Make two cherubim of gold; make them of hammered work at the two ends of the mercy seat.
19 Make one cherub at one
end and one cherub at the
other end. At its two ends,
make the cherubim of one
piece with the mercy seat.
20 The cherubim are to have
wings spread out above,
covering p the mercy seat with
their wings, and are to face
one another. The faces of the
cherubim should be toward
the mercy seat.

num 21: 8-9
8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass,
that every one that is bitten,
when he looketh upon it, shall
live. 9 And Moses made a
serpent of brass, and put it
upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass,
he lived.

First , the instruction was not " don't make", it was " do not make for yourself " or " you shall not make for yourself" or as gods word translation puts it : Never make your own carved idols or statues that represent any creature in the sky, on the earth, or in the water. -ex 20:4

Not making for myself means I should not make by myself and for myself or my own image with the hope of using it in the worship of god. I should not decide to make such images.
That god gave the isrealites a definite direction to make some images and no harm comes to them, after the people/person instructed to make them did so, and that isrealites making images without divine direction and got purnished should further tell you what god meant by " do not make for urselves".

U read about these images, that even read that when there was an attempt to use some of these images for veneration or worship, god did not allow it.

So the question is , does the use of mary's image follow or have similarity with any of these images mentioned in the scripture?

dolphinheart:



1 chr 28:18-19
18. for the altar of incense refined gold by weight; and gold for the pattern of the chariot of the cherubims,
that spread out their wings, and covered the ark of the covenant of the LORD.
19 All this, said David, the
LORD made me understand in
writing by his hand upon me,
even all the works of this
pattern.

ex 25 :18-20
18 Make two cherubim of gold; make them of hammered work at the two ends of the mercy seat.
19 Make one cherub at one
end and one cherub at the
other end. At its two ends,
make the cherubim of one
piece with the mercy seat.
20 The cherubim are to have
wings spread out above,
covering p the mercy seat with
their wings, and are to face
one another. The faces of the
cherubim should be toward
the mercy seat.

num 21: 8-9
8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass,
that every one that is bitten,
when he looketh upon it, shall
live. 9 And Moses made a
serpent of brass, and put it
upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass,
he lived.

First , the instruction was not " don't make", it was " do not make for yourself " or " you shall not make for yourself" or as gods word translation puts it : Never make your own carved idols or statues that represent any creature in the sky, on the earth, or in the water. -ex 20:4

Not making for myself means I should not make by myself and for myself or my own image with the hope of using it in the worship of god. I should not decide to make such images.
That god gave the isrealites a definite direction to make some images and no harm comes to them, after the people/person instructed to make them did so, and that isrealites making images without divine direction and got purnished should further tell you what god meant by " do not make for urselves".

U read about these images, that even read that when there was an attempt to use some of these images for veneration or worship, god did not allow it.

So the question is , does the use of mary's image follow or have similarity with any of these images mentioned in the scripture?

you are very funny. OK since you use the phrase (God said) in all the verses to say all those images were under God's command. What is the assurance that God told the Catholic Church to do it. (this is a case of unwritten law) just as 'our' people wakes up one day and say God has called them to be a pastor or GO. What about some GOs who build their church camps and say that is where God ask them to build their church. Can they too prove it that it was truly God's command, just as you too want Catholic to prove why they have those images since God didn't officially say it in your own way??

Empredboy:
you are very funny. OK since you use the phrase (God said) in all the verses to say all those images were under God's command. What is the assurance that God told the Catholic Church to do it. (this is a case of unwritten law) just as 'our' people wakes up one day and say God has called them to be a pastor or GO. What about some GOs who build their church camps and say that is where God ask them to build their church. Can they too prove it that it was truly God's command, just as you too want Catholic to prove why they have those images since God didn't officially say it in your own way??

I did not say " god say" , the scriptures made us to understand that god gave the instructions.

God is not a god of disorderliness, neither does he do things anyhow.
There was an order in the instruction.
1. The person or persons to do it where mentioned, not just anyone.
2. The instructions, though giving by divine means where recorded down, so that future generations will know the source of the instructions.
3. Jehovah guided the use of such images so that it will not lure them to do something contrary to what he had in mind. For example, the images in the temple is only seen by one person once in a year. The image of the serpent was later destroyed when it was seen that it was used contrary to instruction.
When the isrealites lost the temple, god made sure that non of these images where later used. 4. God physically showed to the isrealite beyond natural dought that he approved of such images, he showed it physically for the ark, the serpent and temple during its dedication.

This the GO's don't have, I personally don't believe anyone professing personal inspiration from God without a physical manifestation of such inspiration.
Look at the building of the ark by Noah.
Look at the building of the temple.
Look at the pillar built by a prophet during the baal worship.
Look at bethel by isreal.

God said christians should gather together, he did not set a precise location.

I've not been discussing my own way. I've been discussing bible way. And if ur assumption where to be taken, you have to first accept that the use of such images for mary does not follow bible way.

dolphinheart:


I did not say " god say" , the scriptures made us to understand that god gave the instructions.

God is not a god of disorderliness, neither does he do things anyhow.
There was an order in the instruction.
1. The person or persons to do it where mentioned, not just anyone.
2. The instructions, though giving by divine means where recorded down, so that future generations will know the source of the instructions.
3. Jehovah guided the use of such images so that it will not lure them to do something contrary to what he had in mind. For example, the images in the temple is only seen by one person once in a year. The image of the serpent was later destroyed when it was seen that it was used contrary to instruction.
When the isrealites lost the temple, god made sure that non of these images where later used. 4. God physically showed to the isrealite beyond natural dought that he approved of such images, he showed it physically for the ark, the serpent and temple during its dedication.

This the GO's don't have, I personally don't believe anyone professing personal inspiration from God without a physical manifestation of such inspiration.
Look at the building of the ark by Noah.
Look at the building of the temple.
Look at the pillar built by a prophet during the baal worship.
Look at bethel by isreal.

God said christians should gather together, he did not set a precise location.

I've not been discussing my own way. I've been discussing bible way. And if ur assumption where to be taken, you have to first accept that the use of such images for mary does not follow bible way.

it's seems God has not been talking since after the Bible was compiled. Since we should look up to the Bible

Empredboy:
it's seems God has not been talking since after the Bible was compiled. Since we should look up to the Bible

That, I cannot say. But what do I know, I know that the scriptures is completely equipt for every good work. It is suitable for setting things straight!

dolphinheart:


That, I cannot say. But what do I know, I know that the scriptures is completely equipt for every good work. It is suitable for setting things straight!

that means that God told pastors to wear suit or agbada. Abi?

dolphinheart:


I did not say " god say" , the scriptures made us to understand that god gave the instructions.

God is not a god of disorderliness, neither does he do things anyhow.
There was an order in the instruction.
1. The person or persons to do it where mentioned, not just anyone.
2. The instructions, though giving by divine means where recorded down, so that future generations will know the source of the instructions.
3. Jehovah guided the use of such images so that it will not lure them to do something contrary to what he had in mind. For example, the images in the temple is only seen by one person once in a year. The image of the serpent was later destroyed when it was seen that it was used contrary to instruction.
When the isrealites lost the temple, god made sure that non of these images where later used. 4. God physically showed to the isrealite beyond natural dought that he approved of such images, he showed it physically for the ark, the serpent and temple during its dedication.

There are some very interesting implication here. Sorry if this detracts a bit from the direction of the thread but ...

There is obviously a distinction between the letter of the law, following what God set down by law Vs a later inspiration from God.

God writes in the law not to make images, but inspires prophets to later make images.


This makes me think also of the law: Thou shalt not kill. This law is later contravened by instructions to kill Canaanites amalekites and other various random peoples.

This brings up the issue of morality and whether morality is sourced from God or from our innate moral disposition. What if we have a certain moral disposition but we hear from God to act in a way which contradicts our moral beliefs. Which way will be the right way?

dolphinheart:


You claim the use of the image of mary has scritural support, I just want you to show me which image was used in the scriptures, and we will compare its use with that of the use of the image of mary.
If truly there were images that was made by man in the scriptures,and its use is similar to that of the use of mary's image, pls let us see it.

if i understand the above correctly, it means u've gat no argument, u are not saying no images but instead 'let us examine d passage', or are u simply trying to avoid taking a position so u can continue shifting d goal post?

dolphinheart:


Pictures dnt lie Bro, at least not during those days. Wish I could post the pictures here .

alamoministries.com/content/english/Antichrist/nazigallery/photogallery.html

http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm


Irrelevant question, finding the Protestant guilty does not make the catholic innocent!. Both where guilty of participating in the war, whichever side they are on.

Both members were known to participate and kill each other in wars after the second word war.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition

Go and read it , or do you want me to quote some parts out?

i hope u are aware d pic u posted is not a catholic priest. It is easy to know a catholic priest by the vestments they wear.

dolphinheart:

Bro, I appreciate ur effort , but I believe you should have left us to finish our discussion, the discussion is more than the compilation
Of the scriptures, it is more about how the compilation of the scriptures made the church believe they can also make an image of mary for any religious purpose without reference to the scriptures they said they compiled.

i think you've gat your timeline wrong. The use of images in the Christian church predates the compilation of the bible.

Secondly u seem to think the bible is d sole authority for what is done in d church, that is wrong, the bible is not a catalog of every Christian practice, the use of images doesn't have to be recorded in d bible before we know it is an apostolic practice.

The worship place of some early Christian communities are still there till today and in each and every one of them there are image! The bible was not written to record everytin.

PastorAIO:



There are some very interesting implication here. Sorry if this detracts a bit from the direction of the thread but ...

There is obviously a distinction between the letter of the law, following what God set down by law Vs a later inspiration from God.

God writes in the law not to make images, but inspires prophets to later make images.


This makes me think also of the law: Thou shalt not kill. This law is later contravened by instructions to kill Canaanites amalekites and other various random peoples.

This brings up the issue of morality and whether morality is sourced from God or from our innate moral disposition. What if we have a certain moral disposition but we hear from God to act in a way which contradicts our moral beliefs. Which way will be the right way?

you are too much. Talking about the amalekites, this refusal of Saul to please God by not killing them let to his downfall and his kingship ruined.

dolphinheart:


That, I cannot say. But what do I know, I know that the scriptures is completely equipt for every good work. It is suitable for setting things straight!

my bible says the scriptures is profitable (it was talking abt d old testament because d new testament hadnt been written) it didnt say it was solely sufficient.

dolphinheart:


Yep, you are right, nobody killed galileo, he died under house arrest by the church.

Yep, the church did not support hitler, the members did! .

sorry, but please allow me to ask this question.

Is ur church held responsible for d sins of each individual member esp sins ur church had clearly condemned?

Empredboy:
that means that God told pastors to wear suit or agbada. Abi?

I do not understand your question Bro.

PastorAIO:



There are some very interesting implication here. Sorry if this detracts a bit from the direction of the thread but ...

There is obviously a distinction between the letter of the law, following what God set down by law Vs a later inspiration from God.

God writes in the law not to make images, but inspires prophets to later make images.

Bro, god did not say "not to make images" , he said " do not make images for yourself
The gods word translation translated that part this way : Never make your own carved idols

This makes me think also of the law: Thou shalt not kill. This law is later contravened by instructions to kill Canaanites amalekites and other various random peoples.

that law was against unlawful killing resulting in bloodguilt.
For a better understanding , research the hebrew word used in those verses to represent the "kill" as used by you.
Do you not know why some mordern translations now use "murder" instead of "kill"?

This brings up the issue of morality and whether morality is sourced from God or from our innate moral disposition. What if we have a certain moral disposition but we hear from God to act in a way which contradicts our moral beliefs. Which way will be the right way?

Jeremiah 10:23 says : O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.
God did not create us to be
independent from him, to choose right and wrong for ourselves.
What may seem good to us may, in fact, be very harmful.
For prov 14:12 says : There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
Therefore man cannot determine morality.
So who determines morality? Jehovah , our creature does.
Has his moral values and sense of justice changed or has been adjusted ? The answer is no! Jehovah does not change, he has and will deal with every soul the same way. He judges each individual not on what we see the person doing, but on much more than that.

Ubenedictus:


if i understand the above correctly, it means u've gat no argument, u are not saying no images but instead 'let us examine d passage', or are u simply trying to avoid taking a position so u can continue shifting d goal post?

Bro, we are discussing , we will use the scripture to help us take a position, if you feel that the use of images in the scripture goes along with use of the image of mary, qoute the scripture and let us examine it. I've not erected a goal post , talkless of shifting it.

Ubenedictus:


i hope u are aware d pic u posted is not a catholic priest. It is easy to know a catholic priest by the vestments they wear.

I'm aware Bro, my statements is not meant only for catholics and its priests.
What about those pics in the two websites posted, are those catholics or not.

Ubenedictus:
i think you've gat your timeline wrong. The use of images in the Christian church predates the compilation of the bible.

Does it predate the scriptures that where compiled . At least the scriptures have been written down in different scrolls before compilation, does your use of images predate that?
If the answer is yes, pls show evidence.

Secondly u seem to think the bible is d sole authority for what is done in d church, that is wrong, the bible is not a catalog of every Christian practice, the use of images doesn't have to be recorded in d bible before we know it is an apostolic practice.

Now you are just talking. We cannot use the scriptures to defend the use of the images of mary, we have to look at another source.

The worship place of some early Christian communities are still there till today and in each and every one of them there are image! The bible was not written to record everytin.

The question is, when was the image erected.? Does it predate when the scriptures where written?
The scriptures does not contain everything, but it is completely equiped for every good work. Does the use of marys image have scriptural backing ?

dolphinheart:


I do not understand your question Bro.

since you said that the Bible is so equipped and God commanded the people to 'do' then we can say that God commanded the pastors too to wear suit or agbada

Ubenedictus:


sorry, but please allow me to ask this question.

Is ur church held responsible for d sins of each individual member esp sins ur church had clearly condemned?

The church is not held responsible for the sins of individual members even if it does not condemn such sins. The church is judged based on what it does with or the actions it takes before or after the individual members sin .

Now the question is, did the church as a body order the killings of people?
Did they condemn the atrocities mentioned?
What did they do to the member(s) who committed the sin .?
What happens to the church if it allows sin to creep in

Rev 2:1-5
1 “To the angel of the
church in Ephesus write......... I know that you cannot tolerate
wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. 3 You have
persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary.
4 Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken the love you had at first. 5 Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and
remove your lampstand
from its place.

1 cor 5:6, 11-13
Your boasting is not good.
Don’t you know that a little
yeast leavens the whole batch
of dough?

11 But now I am writing to you
that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a
drunkard or swindler. Do not
even eat with such people.
12 What business is it of
mine to judge those outside
the church? Are you not to
judge those inside? 13 God
will judge those outside.
“Expel the wicked person from among you.”

1 Tim 5:20
But those elders who are
sinning you are to reprove
before everyone, so that the
others may take warning.

Has your church fufilled all these admonitions to absolve itself of blame? Condemning a sinful act is not the only thing the church should do Bro.
I'm killing and killing and you as a church are condemning my actions while refusing to do something about my membership and association .

Empredboy:
since you said that the Bible is so equipped and God commanded the people to 'do' then we can say that God commanded the pastors too to wear suit or agbada

I never said that the bible is "so equipped and you did not state what god commanded to "do".

Man has been wearing things to cover his unclothedness since the time of adam and has devised different materials and method of putting them together through time.
The scriptures does not stipulate a particular design or material but it says we must be modest, modest even in the eyes of fellow humans. So if humans take suit and agbada as a modest way of dressing expecially for official purposes. I think its appropriate for those doing gods work officially to dress in such manner.
The scriptures is a guide for us when Making day to day, personal decisions.

sincerely I have been following this thread and I see comments here and there and I want to ask some question;
1. Did the bible tell you anywhere that anything outside what is written in it is wrong and termed a false teaching.
2. People seem to forget that the power of God are not held by space and time.
3. Revelation's book spoke of 24 elders who offer incense and fall on their knees day and night praising God, where are they from.
4. Christ said that when we have conquered we shall be like Him, why den do u begin to now limit those like Him with space and time
5. Our work as humans is to worship and offer praise to God both on earth and in heaven, meaning Christianity isn't only limited to earth moreover it is perfect in heaven hence Christ said we shall worship God in Spirit and truth.
6. We are spirits living in dust clothes, when we die we begin a new life which is determined by the former lived.
7. The heavens are not closed hence u can't say that Christ doesn't speak to people or visit them, same way Elijah and Moses came to Jesus same way Mary visits people with messages, same way saints visit people, heaven isn't locked, hence it's written in revelations " saints keep asking for the judgement of the wicked".

Peace

dolphinheart:


I never said that the bible is "so equipped and you did not state what god commanded to "do".

Man has been wearing things to cover his unclothedness since the time of adam and has devised different materials and method of putting them together through time.
The scriptures does not stipulate a particular design or material but it says we must be modest, modest even in the eyes of fellow humans. So if humans take suit and agbada as a modest way of dressing expecially for official purposes. I think its appropriate for those doing gods work officially to dress in such manner.
The scriptures is a guide for us when Making day to day, personal decisions.

listen to what you just said again, you said you didn't say the Bible is so equipped then what other books do we support the Bible with to make it equipped? You said God to them to "make images" of his no 1enemy "serpent" and you are angry that we make images of our saviour Jesus? That double standard bro. Plz don't shift the Bible to please yourselves but understand it under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Empredboy:
listen to what you just said again, you said you didn't say the Bible is so equipped then what other books do we support the Bible with to make it equipped? You said God to them to "make images" of his no 1enemy "serpent" and you are angry that we make images of our saviour Jesus? That double standard bro. Plz don't shift the Bible to please yourselves but understand it under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Bro, I think you are trying to twist my words so as to either find fault with me or to try and confuse others. If you are sincere, pls quote what I said! Not what you think I said. Never said it is " so equipped, neither did I say "not equipped".

Bro, god did not tell them to make images of his number one enemy! Haba!
I'm not angry that you make images, and I've never discussed "images of jesus" with you on these thread. Stop trying to force things on me Bro.

You say I shift the bible, how? Have I said something that we can't find out when we read the scriptures?
I asked you guys, does the use of the image of mary have scriptural backing?
Are there similarities in the use of images as recorded in the scriptures and that of the use of the images of mary?
This questions still await answers.