Ubenedictus:
Another wile goose chase, i rebute this some yrs ago on nairaland, why are u guy also reharsing already rebuted lies?

Ubenedictus:
Is it a must that paul must mention him? john was in ephesus for a long time but no one mention him not even paul in his letter to the ephesians!

act isnt a biography of d apostles, infact the narration on peter stopped at chap 11 and dat on paul took over.

it is largely puerile bothering on fallacious to claim peter wasnt in rome becos u cant find it in ink in d bible.
where did adrew preach?

Ubenedictus:
u have been quoting eusebeuis church history here all day, I quoted it back at u and now it is suddenly incompetent.


if it is incompetent over go and delete d places u quoted it.

Splinz:


Very lame my dear. You really need to try harder in defending your Simon Magus church.

Andrew's ministry was in Scythia, Upper Asia Minor.

DoctorAlien:


What rebuttal did you give? Does that oath not belong to the jesuits? Can't the you see the reference before the article?

Splinz:


Let me give you a brief of Eusebius.

Eusebius- AD 260-340. A main historian that documented the first three centuries of both the true Church and the false church; compiled from other historians, mainly Hegesippus; his chief theme was to justify and eulogize Constantine and the church of Emperor Constantine's choice. (ACBCC, les. 49, p. 15.)

DoctorAlien:


What rebuttal did you give? Does that oath not belong to the jesuits? Can't the you see the reference before the article?

DoctorAlien:
Ubenedictus, When was Peter the Bishop of Rome?

Ubenedictus:
SO HE WAS WRONG WHEN HE WROTE THIS?
"Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul [2 Tim. 4:10], but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Epistle to Timothy [2 Tim. 4:21] as his companion at Rome, was Peter’s
successor in the episcopate of the church there, as has already been shown. Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as Paul testifies, his co-
laborer and fellow-soldier [Phil. 4:3]" (Church History 3:4:9–10

HAVE U EVEN READ HIS WORKS OR U JUST ACCEPT U COPY AND PASTE SITE.

DoctorAlien:
I enjoin you all to follow the link below to see the kind of organization found in the catholic church, which claims to follow Christ:

www.nairaland.com/3555177/jesuit-oath

Ubenedictus:
It is not a jesuit oath, it has been rebutted severally online and even on nairaland, i do not have d energy to join issues wit u, u guys are usually blinded by hatred that u cant see what is glaring before u.

how a human being can claim that the catholic church arose from heresy she had already condemned and fought against is just beyond silly.

u guy arent sincere, all u care abt is to discredit the church, u dont even care that the claims u are making are lies.

lord have mercy.

Splinz:


How can the mother of all heresies fought and condemned what she created?

What do you even understand by the word "heresy?"

Splinz:


Very simple! Did Paul mentioned Peter's name in this Scripture as one in Rome? No!

Besides, Eusebius writing of a 'Peter' in Rome shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. We've already established who bored that title in Rome as your pope.

Ubenedictus:
this is another fallacious arguement called arguement from silence

I guess we can conclude u conjured ur story from thin air, it is refuted even by eusebius u quoted

Splinz:


Lol... Defense of a drowning man.

My dear, verifiable sources are scattered everywhere. Anyways, this is staggering history to people like you. I know you're already used to the lies of your false church.

Simon Magus is the 'peter' Eusebius is talking about. Just learn to deal with it my brother.


PS: Eusebius is not the only historian quoted. So quit it!

Ubenedictus:

tell me who do u think condemned and fought against gnosticism.

may God save u from bais.


heresy is a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its teachings.


if ur aim is simply to condemn the catholic and u will continue even when clearly rebuted let me know so i can kindly leave u guys alone.

i dont know how a sincere xtian will claim he isnt aware d catholic church fought gnosticism, it is either a lie or ignorance.

Ubenedictus:
It is clear u havent read eusebius.

the begining of conspiracy theories is certainly ignorance. have a bliss.

Splinz:


Of course, you're free to excuse yourself. This is certainly beyond you.

Insisting on Eusebius isn't a surprise. We know he was a promoter of your false church too. He was loyal to the emperor.

Splinz:


Did your false church fought against Gnosticism during its (church) early formation years or when it assumed governmental control?

Yes, heresies. Ironically, all of your church doctrines are all heresies!

Who commanded sunday's observance

Ubenedictus:
Have u read what he wrote?

Ubenedictus:
there was no governmental control of the church, some time the church worked with civil authorities that acknowledged her other times the church and state were at loggerhead.

and the church fought gnosticism before and after she was persecuted.

i hope u know that your new testament also came from the same church u call false and full of heresy, abi u think a heretic and false church gave u scriptures?

Splinz:


Of course, you're free to excuse yourself. This is certainly beyond you.

Insisting on Eusebius isn't a surprise. We know he was a promoter of your false church too. He was loyal to the emperor.

Splinz:


Lol... Defense of a drowning man.

My dear, verifiable sources are scattered everywhere. Anyways, this is staggering history to people like you. I know you're already used to the lies of your false church.

Simon Magus is the 'peter' Eusebius is talking about. Just learn to deal with it my brother.


PS: Eusebius is not the only historian quoted. So quit it!

Ubenedictus:


I hope you know that no historical source support what you wrote, not the encyclopedia, not edward gibbon, not iranaeus, nada, nothing.
it seem your only coraborating source is ACBCC or whatever that is, try again dear and this time try to do a good work. not even a single historic soure that say catholicism supported gnosticism, infact u have borne false witness against justin martyr who actually opposed the simeoners.

you can try again.

Splinz:


I've already given you a brief of Eusebius, that he recorded both for the true and your false church. After all, he was a historian anyways, with greater loyalty to the enperor of course. So I have seen his works, both for the true Church and yours!

Why can't you deal with other notably historians? What is it with Eusebius? Is he the only one I quoted?

Splinz:


Tales by moonlight. Do I look to you like one of those pentecostal members?

Please, find them and narrate these tales to them.

Ubenedictus:

eusebius diffentiated them
5. And coming to the city of Rome, by the mighty co-operation of that power which was
lying in wait there, he was in a short time so
successful in his undertaking that those who dwelt there honored him as a god by the erection of a statue. 6. But this did not last long. For immediately, during the reign of Claudius, the all-good and gracious Providence, which watches over all things, led Peter, that strongest and greatest of the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others, to Rome against this great corrupter of life. bk 2,

Splinz:


No, you really need to try harder!

All you keep doing is running from pillar to post. I have provided my own sources and they are verifiable.

Where are your own sources

PS: The earlier you deal with the true history and sorcerer founder of your church, the better for you.

Ubenedictus:
I guess u arent a xtian then, weytin u dey find here?

Splinz:


At this point, I'm convinced that you didn't read about Simon Magus well and his venturing into Rome.

Did I not said that this sorcerer also parades himself as an apostle of Christ, and he was the one that bear the title of a 'peter' in Rome?

Please go back and read well.

Splinz:


I refused to be a Christian of your kind. I refused to be part of Babylon!