@lawyer

lawyer:

I have to give up at this moment trying to convince you to be your brother's keeper no matter what he or she is spiritually inclined to.

I've always been my brother's keeper - that's why I warn you guys of the dangerous grounds you have settled yourselves on, and yet not able to defend your convictions from God's WORD. It's easy enough to "give up at this moment" because people who have no answers from God's WORD often give up.

lawyer:

As long as its not disturbing the way you eat, sleep or pray, what does it matter to you.

The Roman Catholic Church should have applied that same code in the years they persecuted other Christians who refused to swallow their unbiblical tenets.

lawyer:

At least the Nigerian constitution provides for freedom of worship of whatever choice you choose. You can rant all day about catholics being idolatory in their form of worship, but it doesnt stop us from beleieving that there is only one true God and his son who died for our sins Jesus Christ.

I'm sorry for you, lol. The Nigerian Constitution does not care a hoot about the rants from the Vatican. Second, the one true God is to be worshipped in spirit and truth (John 4:24), and not in the hoax and facade of Catholicism which we can't find in the Bible. No matter how you guys have tried to cheat behind the counter with the molten images, God condemns that practice in every verse relating to it in the Bible.

lawyer:

It doesnt matter whatever perspective or mode of worship we use to honour the lord but we all accept that Jesus christ is our saviour.

It matters to the Lord that you don't disobey His WORD and claim to be honouring Him with the very same things (molten images) which He calls "abomination". See again:

[list]
Deut. 7:25
"The graven images of their gods shall ye burn with fire:
thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that is on them,
nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein:
for it is an abomination to the LORD thy God."

Deut. 7:26
"Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into thine house,
lest thou be a cursed thing like it: but thou shalt utterly detest it,
and thou shalt utterly abhor it; for it is a cursed thing."

Deut. 27:15
"Cursed be the man that maketh any graven or molten image,
an abomination unto the LORD, the work of the hands of the craftsman,
and putteth it in a secret place. And all the people shall answer and say, Amen. "[/list]

Nor be una talk say na Catholic write the Bible for us? "Catholic wrote the Bible" - na una talk am! Una no dey read wetin una write again?

@lawyer

lawyer:

What else do you want? Tomorrow we follow your idea and stop " idolizing" according to you, then you bring up another issue until your exhausted and we begin to follow your own creed and form of worship.

If the Catholic Church stops idolizing and start following the truth of God's WORD, the better for over 1 billion souls mesmerized by Mariolatry. I have no 'creed' to bend your necks unto; but it's always my aim to discuss God's WORD and never deviate from that sole purpose until we arrive at what God has spoken in His WORD.

lawyer:

We are not zombies and we have the right to follow what we believe in, no matter how you criticize, insult, stir up the embers of hate and antagonism that you have created on this forum.

If you care to be honest, I've not created hate or antagonism on this Forum. Simply go to the Bible, show us where Protestants are wrong for not praying TO Mary or subjecting our souls to the PAPACY. If Catholics cannot face up to the Bible, what's the point in bearing the facade of 'original' Christianity when the Vatican holds a scepter of disobedience to God's WORD?

lawyer:

Please grow up and spread the word and not spread hate.

That's precisely what I'm doing - and that's what you need to grow up to: face up to the WORD and drop the tenets you cannot and have not been able to defend from the Bible.

lawyer:

The annoying thing is that if you want people to pick holes in your own doctrine or church, why don't you boldly tell us the church you worship in and see what fellow christians that are not members of your church would say!

I've boldly said I'm a Protestant. Pick holes with as many sickles as you want - we're here to defend our refusal to pray TO Mary; our refusal to be hypnotized by the PAPACY; our refusal to follow the Vatican's diobedience against God's warning of molten images; and our refusal to bow down to any image! If Protestants are wrong, please show us from the Bible rather than being "annoyed" for not telling you the name of my denomination.

lawyer:

i hope your ready for the scrutiny and cross fire, if your dare bold to tell us where you worship.

Hehe. . . I never even start to shoot nobody, and Catholics dey tear race! My dear, pilgrim.1 no dey fear una shakara, you hear?

lawyer:

You want to turn us to shallow christians that have no respect for religious institutions, plz be my guest and bring it on

Ahh, you make a huge mistake. Another reason why I've been reserved about my denomination is so that nobody will come back alleging that I'm seeking to "steal sheep" to our church. Biblical truth is plain for anyone who dares to read the Bible prayerfully. At the end of the day, when God opens their eyes and hearts to His WORD, they of their own accord will seek fellowship with all who call upon the name of the Lord in sincerity and truth. For now, I only offer you the same:

[list]"And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified." (Acts 20:32)[/list]

Your security is in His WORD - and not in the traditions of Catholicism that you can't defend in the Bible.

Cheerio.

Hi @HOO,

HOO:

The Facts

Firstly Images: Their Use commanded by God – Exodus 25: 18 -21
Further references: Num xxi 8,9 ; Paral xxviii 18,19 ; Ex. Xxxvii 6-9 ; 3Kings vi. 29,31,32 , 3Kings vii 35,36 ; 2Paral. iii 7,10,14

"You shall then make a propitiatory of pure gold, two cubits and a half long, and one and a half cubits wide. Make two cherubim of beaten gold for the two ends of the propitiatory, fastening them so that one cherub springs direct from each end. The cherubim shall have their wings spread out above, covering the propitiatory with them; they shall be turned toward each other, but with their faces looking toward the propitiatory. This propitiatory you shall then place on top of the ark. In the ark itself you are to put the commandments which I will give you”.

Nothing new - we've already dealt with the question of images/statues from those references in your quotes. Please scroll up and see them, or quick access to the points by clicking the following links:

(https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-74061.384.html#msg1465195)
(https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-74061.384.html#msg1465200)

The salient points:

[list]NO Jew ever bowed down or prayed TO the Cherubims in Exodus 25:18-21.

No Jew ever bowed down or prayed TO the bronze serpent in Numbers 21:6-9.

The bronze serpent was destroyed in 2 Kings 18:4.[/list]

Since nobody ever -

*prayed TO the serpent
*"honoured" the serpent
*asked the serpent to "intercede" for them
*bowed down to the bronze serpent

. . . then from WHERE do Catholics get the idea that that they should do those things above to statues of Mary, statues of the Pope, and statues of other "saints"?

@HOO,

HOO:

Secondly, the History of christendom and catholism are inseparable. Speak to the historians or reference any public encyclopedia such as

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic

Catholicism did not start with the apostles. No historian worth his salt will bare his face in public to weave any story to trace the PAPACY and/or Mariolatry to the apostles and early Christians.

Interestingly enough, when many people today speak of the term "Catholic", they assume that it often has to refer to the Roman Catholic Church under the orders of the Vatican with the Pope as the head. Little do they realize that the term "Catholic" has other meanings that have no connections with the Roman Catholic Church. For example, we find another Wikipedia article where this distinction is made:

Divergent interpretations of the term "Catholic"

---

Many individual Christians and Christian denominations consider themselves "catholic" on the basis, in particular, of Apostolic Succession. They fall into four groups:

[list]1. The Western and Eastern Churches of the Roman Catholic Church (often referred to simply as "the Catholic Church". These understand "Catholic" to involve unity with the Bishop of Rome, and hold that "the one Church of Christ , subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure."

2. Those others that, like the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Old Catholic, Anglican, and some Lutheran and other denominations, claim unbroken Apostolic Succession from the early Church. Some of these identify themselves as the Catholic Church (the Orthodox Churches), while others see themselves as constituent parts of it (the Old Catholics, Anglicans, and others).

3. Those who claim to be spiritual descendants of the Apostles but have no discernible institutional descent from the historic Church, and normally do not refer to themselves as catholic.

4. Those who have acknowledged a break in Apostolic Succession, but have restored it in order to be in full communion with bodies that have maintained the practice. Examples in this category include the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada vis-à-vis their Anglican and Old Catholic counterparts.[/list]

For some confessions listed under category 2, the self-affirmation refers to the belief in the ultimate unity of the universal church under one God and one Saviour, rather than in one visibly unified institution (as with category 1, above). In this usage, catholic is sometimes written with a lower-case "c". The Western Apostles' Creed and Nicene Creed, stating "I believe in, the holy Catholic church, " is thus recited in worship services. Among some denominations in category 3, "Christian" is substituted for "catholic" in order to denote the doctrine that the Christian Church is, at least ideally, undivided.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholicism#Divergent_interpretations_of_the_term_.22Catholic.22


Don't assume that anywhere you read the word "Catholic", it must be referring to the Roman Catholic Church. That is the mistake that many people have made in order to assume that the RCC traces her origin to apostle Peter. If Catholics today are asked to determine the foundation Biblically, they have had nothing to say.

Cheers.

I read your post and almost wanted to ignore you because i think you have a personal grouse with catholics world wide and i dont think they have actually disturbed you in any way. You want me to defend the catholic faith so that you would continue to pick holes in them. I am tempted to question the protestant faith just the way i used to dismantle them years back, but i have grown up to understand the issues of faith and religion is the basis of war and hatred on this planet when people refuse to be tolerant of other people's views. I dont owe you any explanation and your ilk. You can keep on picking holes all you want but i'll respect the christian faith and whatever denomination you worship in because it's your choice not mine.

I doubt if the pastor is also a religious zealot like you that continues to castigate " so called idolatrors" but i have to tear you apart just the way you derive joy in disrespecting people's faith, no matter how unpleasant it sounds to you.

But for the benefit of doubt, i'll clear some issues for you so you dont end up confusing your self any more:

1. THE POPE: Just the way you have a pastor in your church who leads the congregation and organize the way things should be done, is the same way we have a leader called a pope. I believe you call yours DR, PASTOR, REVEREND or whatever title you choose to call him, ( by the way since you said there is no pope in the bible, where did they write Pastor in the bible as a leader?) and for your information, i dont know of any body that prays to the pope. He is just a man and has no spiritual powers.

2.BOWING DOWN TO MARY: For your information, the catholic church only bows down to the name of Jesus because it's a sacred name. The catholic church decided to honour Mary being the Mother of Jesus. Well if you dont respect and honour your own mother, i dont expect you to understand this particular statement. Mothers generally interceed for their kids when ever there is a crisis or a time of need, so catholics being naturally respectful to family values believe being the mother of Jesus, she is a saint and being the mother of Jesus while on earth would natural interceed on behalf of them in their time of need ( except you only believe that it is only God and Jesus that are in heaven and no one else)

Meanwhile as a protestant, can you tell me why every nook and cranky, you see small mushroom churches with funny names all springing up because the former leaders had disagreements with the head pastor and had to form their own and they willingly promise them all sorts of miracles and they all flock these churches hoping to recieve those miracles? If you want to wow me with those miracles, go to Sabo in yaba and cure all the lepers there instead of stage managing all those phoney miracles and bombarding the airwaves with all your televangelism. The funny thing is that the dumb bleeps that follow these so called miracle healers, havent even improved either physically or financial and they donate their meagre earnings to make these televangelists super rich. Maybe the point of this thread if for me to become one and since i know how to bamboozle people and i have the garb of speech, i might be able to own a rocket in 5 years time, shebi all i need to do is shout, dramatize, quote the bible and interprete it in my own words since these dumb bleeps dont know the difference between " thee and thou" and probably arrange some scum bags to pretend they have been afflicted by some horrendous disease and touch them with my magic fingers and after falling down, i provoke a great wow or arghhhhhhh! from the crowd and am a millionaire! Please all of you get a life, i might be accused of being an idolatror but at least am not that stupid to fall for a circus show and being fraudulently ripped off by a man like me. The funny thing is that these protestants so beef themselves that it's so amusing to watch. You would hear, ahh! i only go to redeem o, what is my own with chris okotie's church or kai that pastor joshua na jazz man o, my own na matthew oshimolome or whatever his name is, whoses decieving who?, protestants would always be rebels and lack the ability to forge unity and you guys will single handly pull your selves down. The way i see you, you should hop on the bus too and form your own church and probably call the "the church against catholics" i swear, you'll be a billionaire before the year runs out and your fellow protestant fake wanna be Jesus Christ re-incarnates would envy you to death

@lawyer,

I was busy enjoying myself in another thread and would've simply ignored your bloviates above. The simple thing we've been asking all this time still receive no answers from Catholics, and you have the temerity to allege that I've "a personal grouse with catholics world wide".

For the record, I was done with this thread much earlier; but since Catholics miss me so much that they'd have nightmares without pilgrim.1, I've decided to hold you guys down on the same Bible you pride yourselves so much on and yet unable to defend your tenets therein.

lawyer:

want me to defend the catholic faith so that you would continue to pick holes in them.

Nope. I wanted you guys to sit up and grow up. Finito.

lawyer:

I am tempted to question the protestant faith just the way i used to dismantle them years back, but i have grown up to understand the issues of faith and religion is the basis of war and hatred on this planet when people refuse to be tolerant of other people's views. I don't owe you any explanation and your ilk. You can keep on picking holes all you want but i'll respect the christian faith and whatever denomination you worship in because it's your choice not mine.

Rubbish! If you had any medals at all for "dismantling" the Protestant faith, we would have read you simply and eruditely defended the issues we have asked once and again and up until now received no answers. You've tried to substitute rascality for reasoning by alleging me as a muslim fanatic - and that was supposed to have been your "testimony" for dismantling the Protestant faith?

lawyer:

I doubt if the pastor is also a religious zealot like you that continues to castigate " so called idolatrors" but i have to tear you apart just the way you derive joy in disrespecting people's faith, no matter how unpleasant it sounds to you.

This is the greatest mistake you will ever make on Nairaland! You don't address pilgrim.1 that way - never! Go and ask those who are still nursing their bruises for attempts, and they will advise you to wise up!

lawyer:

But for the benefit of doubt, i'll clear some issues for you so you don't end up confusing your self any more:

1. THE POPE: Just the way you have a pastor in your church who leads the congregation and organize the way things should be done, is the same way we have a leader called a pope. I believe you call yours DR, PASTOR, REVEREND or whatever title you choose to call him,

Point #1 - we don't entitle our leaders as "DR this-and-thus", nor as "Reverend". Certainly we have pastors (plural); but none of them go about with overblown titles such as "Pope" to shakara anybody.

Point #2 - you cannot equate the "Pope" to the same thing as a "pastor" in a local church. The PAPACY assumes what is not taught anywhere in Scripture; and you can't try to make them the same by any stretch of imagination.

lawyer:

( by the way since you said there is no pope in the bible, where did they write Pastor in the bible as a leader?) and for your information, i don't know of any body that prays to the pope. He is just a man and has no spiritual powers.

First, don't betray your brethren by saying that the Pope "has no spiritual powers" - they would be sadly disappointed!

Second, don't bring another wahala you can't defend - that is how Catholics have attempted denying that they pray to Mary, until I set them straight!

Third, if you'd like to see where "they write Pastor in the Bible as a leader", please see the following:

[list]
Jeremiah 3:15
"And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding."

Ephesians 4:11
"And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ"[/list]

There!

lawyer:

2.BOWING DOWN TO MARY: For your information, the catholic church only bows down to the name of Jesus because it's a sacred name. The catholic church decided to honour Mary being the Mother of Jesus.

It's not true. It's clear that Catholics bow down to statues of Mary and the Pope. I have more graphic pictures to show you - but for now let me remind you with the few posted earlier:





Tell me what those children are doing if they are not bowing down to the statue of the Pope?


If you keep denying the obvious, you'll only end up disappointing your brethren. I ask you to jeje leave wahala wey you no fit carry O!

lawyer:

Well if you don't respect and honour your own mother, i don't expect you to understand this particular statement. Mothers generally interceed for their kids when ever there is a crisis or a time of need, so catholics being naturally respectful to family values believe being the mother of Jesus, she is a saint and being the mother of Jesus while on earth would natural interceed on behalf of them in their time of need ( except you only believe that it is only God and Jesus that are in heaven and no one else)

When Catholics offer this "honour your own mother" in defence of their Mariolatry, I have just two questions for them:

[list]
[li]do you ever pray TO your own mother because you want to honour her?[/li]
[/list]

[list][li] where in Scripture is Mary said to be the intercessor/mediator for Christians?
[/li][/list]

I am just laughing at this excuses you guys keep trumpeting every now and then in weak defence of your Mariolatry. The simple thing is this: praying to Mary is directly opposed to God's WORD. The earlier you guys come to understand that, the better for you.

lawyer:

Meanwhile as a protestant, can you tell me why every nook and cranky, you see small mushroom churches with funny names all springing up because the former leaders had disagreements with the head pastor and had to form their own and they willingly promise them all sorts of miracles and they all flock these churches hoping to recieve those miracles?

I'm sorry, I can't tell you WHY that is happening - because I didn't send them. For all I know, they're fulfilling prophecies in the NT (e.g., Acts 20:20-30); but everyone will answer to God. It doesn't then mean that the Catholic Church has had no experience of funny names and diagreements between their leaders either.

lawyer:

If you want to wow me with those miracles, go to Sabo in yaba and cure all the lepers there instead of stage managing all those phoney miracles and bombarding the airwaves with all your televangelism.

I see you're beginning to get desperate. Wetin happen to the Catholic Church? Miracle don finish for una convent?

lawyer:

The funny thing is that the dumb bleeps that follow these so called miracle healers, havent even improved either physically or financial and they donate their meagre earnings to make these televangelists super rich. Maybe the point of this thread if for me to become one and since i know how to bamboozle people and i have the garb of speech, i might be able to own a rocket in 5 years time, shebi all i need to do is shout, dramatize, quote the bible and interprete it in my own words since these dumb bleeps don't know the difference between " thee and thou" and probably arrange some scum bags to pretend they have been afflicted by some horrendous disease and touch them with my magic fingers and after falling down, i provoke a great wow or arghhhhhhh! from the crowd and am a millionaire!

Your frantic rehearsals are not bad! Applause!! All the language and gestures and cues as highlighted are apt for the Catholic dramatist you are! Carry go.

lawyer:

Please all of you get a life, i might be accused of being an idolatror but at least am not that stupid to fall for a circus show and being fraudulently ripped off by a man like me. The funny thing is that these protestants so beef themselves that it's so amusing to watch. You would hear, ahh! i only go to redeem o, what is my own with chris okotie's church or kai that pastor joshua na jazz man o, my own na matthew oshimolome or whatever his name is, whoses decieving who?,

Bros, I no fit laugh! Abeg send me your number make I hear your voice. . . you're sooooo funny!

lawyer:

protestants would always be rebels and lack the ability to forge unity and you guys will single handly pull your selves down. The way i see you, you should hop on the bus too and form your own church and probably call the "the church against catholics" i swear, you'll be a billionaire before the year runs out and your fellow protestant fake want to be Jesus Christ re-incarnates would envy you to death

First, thank you for the highlights: "protestants would always be rebels" - we know from time that not all Catholics use such deviant lingo to dialogue with people.

Second, you miss the whole point, mr lawyer! If you think I'm clamouring for anyone to be envious of me, you really miss the whole point. I've taken a stand to share God's WORD without the shakara you've just posted, and who would envy me for pointing you guys to Biblical truths you don't want to ever receive?

Lol, lawyer. . . I've just teased you. Call your best apologists and borrow him/her or them some towels to dry their eyes when I begin to walk them through your own Bible.

For now, adios!

"Nightmares without pilgrim.1"? You are going overboard@pilgrim, please refrain from that.


@Lawyer, unless you can show us a verse in the Holy Bible, which should be the Final Authority on our worship of the Supreme Being, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, where it is written that Mary serves as an intercessor between Mankind and God, then it is totally wrong and blasphemous to acknowledge that she serves as some sort of mediator for us. Lets not follow man made rules, but commandments ordained by God. Jesus Christ has Rightly stated that No man comes to the Father except through Him. That's the Truth. The Holy Bible corroborates this Truth by this message " And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8 v. 32) Jesus Christ is the Truth, not Mary, and He is the Only One who can set us, mortals free.

Ndipe:

"Nightmares without pilgrim.1"? You are going overboard@pilgrim, please refrain from that.

@Ndipe, I apologise, and I heed your advice to refrain. Thanks for always being there to help when I need it most.

pilgrim.1:

@lawyer,

I was busy enjoying myself in another thread and would've simply ignored your bloviates above. The simple thing we've been asking all this time still receive no answers from Catholics, and you have the temerity to allege that I've "a personal grouse with catholics world wide".

For the record, I was done with this thread much earlier; but since Catholics miss me so much that they'd have nightmares without pilgrim.1, I've decided to hold you guys down on the same Bible you pride yourselves so much on and yet unable to defend your tenets therein.

Nope. I wanted you guys to sit up and grow up. Finito.

For the record, i think its you that should grow up for being a religious zealot and stirring up a thread to insult beliefs that has not harmed you personally in any way

Rubbish! If you had any medals at all for "dismantling" the Protestant faith, we would have read you simply and eruditely defended the issues we have asked once and again and up until now received no answers. You've tried to substitute rascality for reasoning by alleging me as a muslim fanatic - and that was supposed to have been your "testimony" for dismantling the Protestant faith?

Trust me zealot, below i have dismantled the protestant faith that you have falsely clinged unto. You are a charlant and a zealot and that's all you will ever be until you take the ultimate commandment into your heart which is "love your neighbour as your self" and not castigate your neighbour till your heart desires

This is the greatest mistake you will ever make on Nairaland! You don't address pilgrim.1 that way - never! Go and ask those who are still nursing their bruises for attempts, and they will advise you to wise up!

Tough and daft talk from a professed child of God! Since your already preparing ascerbic words and statements that can rock the bottomless pits of hell and you still have the guts to tell me you are here to save me; well zealot, sorry i mean pilgrim, i can't be listening to an angel and a witch doctor at the same time. Since this is going to be my greatest mistake then, there is no point listening to a self proclaimed christian who has seen the light and has a history of making people "nurse their bruises". If that's what your own bible or church professes then, the next time i come in contact with any of your threads, i better be armed with band aids. One more thing, am shaking in my boots O wise and intelligent saviour wannabe

Point #1 - we don't entitle our leaders as "DR this-and-thus", nor as "Reverend". Certainly we have pastors (plural); but none of them go about with overblown titles such as "Pope" to shakara anybody.

Point #2 - you cannot equate the "Pope" to the same thing as a "pastor" in a local church. The PAPACY assumes what is not taught anywhere in Scripture; and you can't try to make them the same by any stretch of imagination.


Of course, once again your right. I guess am the only one on the planet that has heard of an overblown title of the " our leaders" maybe am the only one that has heard of a Dr reverend bishop Idahosa or a pastor being refered to as the owner and founder of a certain church and when the person dies, the lovely wife or favourite son of the "Our leader" takes over. The annoying thing is that most of them are low lifers who havent seen the 4 walls of an ivory tower, come out and dramatise on t.v that you refer to as "our leaders". I guess the next time i meet one, i'll simply address him or her or it or whatever you people wake up sunday morning to go and watch to entertain you as our leader and tell the pope to bow down to him. Have you ever heard of the pope saying he founded the catholic church. JESUS is the only founder of the christian faith and any other person ascribing himself as a church founder is a charlatan. So even if i didnt have a choice on who to believe, it boils down to "the leader and founder of so so so church" and the pope who owns no church but traces it to the rock of christ as his foundation of carrying on that tradition, zealot men, this would be a no brainner any day! 

.

First, don't betray your brethren by saying that the Pope "has no spiritual powers" - they would be sadly disappointed!

I wont betray them because i dont think i have seen the pope on the 700 club performing a miracle. Maybe it's you that shouldn't betray your brethren and kindreds counting on you to show me the magics of the world. I'll gladly pay top dollar to see a live miracle, only clause is,when am bored please bring david Blaine or david copperfield to complement the magical acts


Third, if you'd like to see where "they write Pastor in the Bible as a leader", please see the following:

[list]
Jeremiah 3:15
"And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding."

Ephesians 4:11
"And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ"[/list]

There!

Here i have to commend you for actually pinpointing the exact quotes from the bible. Your a genius and I am bowing at your feeting oh mighty scripture extractor!. But am compelled to question whether you actually pulled it out of the internet or your brain is the Encarta of the bible or wait! dont tell me! the only person that knows the bible front and back is the dreaded one, the Anti-christ well help me answer my multiple choice question because right now i feel totally intellectually inferior to my scripture leader and since your madam know all, i would love to be under your extremely superior tutelage

It's not true. It's clear that Catholics bow down to statues of Mary and the Pope. I have more graphic pictures to show you - but for now let me remind you with the few posted earlier:





Tell me what those children are doing if they are not bowing down to the statue of the Pope?


If you keep denying the obvious, you'll only end up disappointing your brethren. I ask you to jeje leave wahala wey you no fit carry O!

Once again zealot your correct and i wont disappoint my own brethren, but wait, which one is worse, going nuts over a lifeless statute or losing your mind by placing your belief in a human being like you as a saviour and healer of sick and the cripple. Someone that is obviously a charlatan and fake wooing people like zombies who throng to large parks and stadiums to see the man of god replicate what jesus did 2000 years ago! He must obviously be twin of JESUS or how else can we explain such likeness in character and powers? Well to refreshen your mind, i also have some zombies pictures to illustrate what the protestant church is all about.



When Catholics offer this "honour your own mother" in defence of their Mariolatry, I have just two questions for them:

[list]
[li]do you ever pray TO your own mother because you want to honour her?[/li]
[/list]

[list][li] where in Scripture is Mary said to be the intercessor/mediator for Christians?
[/li][/list]

I am just laughing at this excuses you guys keep trumpeting every now and then in weak defence of your Mariolatry. The simple thing is this: praying to Mary is directly opposed to God's WORD. The earlier you guys come to understand that, the better for you.

For your information, prayers come in various ways and mode and yes i have prayed in the past for my mum to assist me in my dire needs and she has interceeded on my behalf a countless number of times. Agreed, according to you, its a weak defence of my mariolatry, but at least am proud to call mary my mother. As i said before, i dont expect you to understand. I guess you grew up having parental issues. But not to worry, i understand, it's a protestant rebellious thing as you rightly accepted. No offence. I love my mama, i dont know about you!

I'm sorry, I can't tell you WHY that is happening - because I didn't send them. For all I know, they're fulfilling prophecies in the NT (e.g., Acts 20:20-30); but everyone will answer to God. It doesn't then mean that the Catholic Church has had no experience of funny names and diagreements between their leaders either.

Of course, how you go understand and know? Shebi your faith and the word of God which you proudly proclaim, is free of defect unlike ours. And by fulfilling FALSE prophecies in the N.T,the protestant faith has proudly carried that banner for years. You guys are too much! We dont know who the fake is or the super fake is. Your all justling for the number one position to decieve people with your power of garb and wonder miracles. Please do me a favour and tell me in future, when next you would be changing your denomination again, since you have a very unstable appetite from switching from one religion to another. Maybe next week you would be paying glowing tributes to buddah, i'll understand because it's your nature.

I see you're beginning to get desperate. Wetin happen to the Catholic Church? Miracle don finish for una convent?


Haaaa! your hilarious! We dont perform miracles, because that would be a lie. When a miracle occurs, it's by the power of the lord to heal that person and no one catholic would ascribe it to one pope, bishop or catholic faithful unlike you, miracle night is prime time viewing on t.v. To be frank, it's very entertaining and could be struggling with PRISON BREAK for T.V RATINGS.

Your frantic rehearsals are not bad! Applause!! All the language and gestures and cues as highlighted are apt for the Catholic dramatist you are! Carry go.

Thank you. I appreciate it. Learnt it from watching all those miracle soap operas on TBN or the 700 club. It's a shame, the oscars has been ignoring them all these years. I think am going to write a strongly worded letter to the people at the Oscars. Your leaders deserve to give Denzel Washington a run for his money. And frankly speaking, from your posts, your not too bad yourself. TheBAFTA could be yours for grabs next year, you never know. Probably for the best actress in a religion switching role, from muslim to christian and back and forth, God, it's all so confusing! Please stay in one place for once! At least finish as a Christian this year and next year, you could tell us the gains of being a scientologist.

Bros, I no fit laugh! Abeg send me your number make I hear your voice. . . you're sooooo funny!

Abeg if na joke, stop am o! Wetin you de write de fear me, talkless of when you use your voice hypnotize me. Na only my bruises i wan de nurse from you o! No turn me to permanent deaf and dumb o!


First, thank you for the highlights: "protestants would always be rebels" - we know from time that not all Catholics use such deviant lingo to dialogue with people.

Well maybe i shouldn't classify you as part of the group called PEOPLE. It's meant for unstable religion switching zealots. Sorry for not clarifying that earlier on

Second, you miss the whole point, mr lawyer! If you think I'm clamouring for anyone to be envious of me, you really miss the whole point. I've taken a stand to share God's WORD without the shakara you've just posted, and who would envy me for pointing you guys to Biblical truths you don't want to ever receive?

Envious of you? Please dont promote your self yet to the position of God. If you wanted to share the word of God responsibly, you wont have started such a malignant thread to offend the sensibility of millions. And since your the almighty wise one that knows the truth which no other catholic knows the so called truth, arent there more sensible ways to drive home your point, rather you chose what has become your hallmark, irritantancy and i dont think such hypocritical  truths are worth listening to from you. I can get it from your leaders on the 700 club and be entertained. At least those ones still have an iota of decorum to present their grieviances against the catholic church which we would gladly welcome constructive criticism, but not from unstable zealots. I can imagine when you were a muslim, how arrogant and self assuring you would have been, attacking every known christian. Well once a zealot, forever a zealot. A zebra can't change its spots, so am not worried. Am only concerned about the next religion you would pick up the Gaunlet to defend in future.

Lol, lawyer. . . I've just teased you. Call your best apologists and borrow him/her or them some towels to dry their eyes when I begin to walk them through your own Bible.

Am finally convinced with this statement. You mos def are the anti-christ! You know your own bible front and back, you know our own bible front and back and am sure you know the Koran like the back of your palms. O boy! I don de fear you! Master I hail o! I go do anything you want, please no just bite me

For now, adios!

Adios? C'mon am just getting warmed up for you and your apologists. Now to my original post if you hadn't replied such rubbish!

The real issue isn't what church a person belongs to, but whether the person individually has Jesus Christ living inside of him or her, if they really have a personal relationship with God.

In the Gospel of John, we are told, "to all who received him [referring to Jesus], to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."1 Why do we have to become children of God? Because until then, God is distant. We may know he's there. We may know we are supposed to worship him. We may even know that in times of need, he's the one to pray to. But there is a distance we are aware of, and it is because of our sin.

Now, as long as we live and breathe, guess what, we're going to sin. We're going to do things our way instead of God's way. But our sin need not remain a barrier between us and God.

[The claim to privileged knowledge is the besetting evil of the protestant churches and it's ever knowing and one track minded spokesmen or should i say women[/b]. This has contributed to their lack of credibility and their speechlessness in dealing with outsiders -- who are in the majority. Anyone who refers here to SELECTED PARTS OF THE BIBLE TO PROVE A POINT is simply doing what the present-day sects also practise.

I am forced to conclude that the Protestant Faith is based on faulty and selective Biblical interpretation as well as erroneous reasoning. While Protestants can of course be good Christians, at its heart Protestantism is religious anarchy which will lead many devout souls to perdition. Jesus prayed that we may "all be one"(JN 17:21) and that there may be "one flock, one shepherd" (JN 10:16). I believe that He established a Church against which "the gates of Hell shall not prevail" (MT 16:18). I don't believe Jesus intended for Christianity to be an eternal debating club

Why is Pentecostalism a danger for Christianity? Well, mainly because I think its distinctives are only tangentially Christian. I think the New Age faith has entered into the church (and by extension society) through Pentecostalism. One could take dozens of individual issues in which Pentecostalism has perverted the Gospel, from Word-Faith to the Prosperity Gospel to the ever crowded national stadium crusades and Blessing to tongues to phony signs and wonders to cultish behavior, but I think the main negative characteristic that covers all the errors is the elevation of the emotions and subjective experience over the mind and over legitimate authority. Historical Christianity, whether Catholic or Protestant, promised man a glorious afterlife if he would have faith in what he couldn't see and live according to God's commandments. Pentecostalism, with its promises of health, wealth, worldly prosperity, miracles and a direct, exciting experience with God Himself, appeals to something very carnal in mankind, which probably explains its incredible growth.

The whole process starts with the method of Pentecostal worship, which emphasizes excitement above all, with loud, emotionally manipulative music and loud, emotionally manipulative preachers combining to agitate the listener into a state of emotional frenzy. In such a state, with the added peer pressure of pastor and fellow believers, it is a short step for the baby Pentecostal's mind to click into neutral and to begin "speaking in tongues", a mental process exactly like that engaged in by ancient pagans (very popular at Corinth), modern day spiritualists, voodoo witch doctors and other practitioners of ecstatic religion. From glossolalia, which undoubtedly makes a person feel good, the individual is compelled, like a drug addict, to seek greater and greater subjective religious "experiences" from Slaying in the Spirit, to trances, visions, divination and other mind-altering, emotional experiences which have their parallels in pagan and New Age practices and which can be explained by the mind's proven ability to convince itself of anything. The culmination of such an escalation would seem to be the Vineyard Revivals, typified by the popular pentecostal church along the ibadan express road, in which a whole megachurch congregation were seen rolling around on the floor, screaming, laughing uncontrollably and imitating barnyard animals, and blaming it all on God. I would highly recommend smoking weed to really understand the hypnotic basis of those kinds of manifestations that self proclaimed defenders of the protestant churches would gladly defend.

Another problem with such emotional subjectivism is that it makes a person spiritually arrogant and immune to any argument or correction. It is the common belief that once one "receives the Holy Spirit", it is the third Person of the Trinity who is behind every thought, feeling, opinion, prejudice and inclination in the individual's head. It is a common refrain in Pentecostal circles that "God told me" and obviously there is nothing you can say to such a person that will convince them otherwise. This presumption extends so far that the individual's "feeling" trumps even the Bible's authority. I remember asking a Pentecostal pastor how he could justify a service I had attended where he and his church violated every single one of the rules St. Paul laid down for speaking in tongues. (1 Cor 13:22-36) He simply responded that "the Holy Spirit" was guiding them. Obviously, if you haven't had the same "experiences" that they've had, then you're at a lower spiritual level than they are and have no right to question the Holy Spirit's instructions to them. When you're receiving instructions straight from the Holy Spirit, you're your own ultimate authority and have no need for anyone else, let alone the teachers that Jesus left us to ensure we would not be swept away by false doctrines. (Eph 4:11-14) Pentecostalism has little or no time for doctrine or truth. It's all about experience. The low educational and intellectual level of so many, if not most, Pentecostal pastors only exacerbates the problem. In the Pentecostal world, a diploma from a Rhema Bible College correspondence course is enough to set a man up as a "pastor" and "teacher". Often, even that isn't required. This low bar allows too many charlatans, bullies, ignoramuses and heretics into influentia positions of authority especially the ones on Nairaland to quote and unquote all aspects of the bible as if they invented the human Encarta and willing have the guts and authority to put down other forms of worship because according to them, their eyes have seen and it is only them that the lord gave the power to see beyond we lesser spiritual mortals. From the look of things, because they are so righteous and all knowledgable about the defining aspects of the bible, they should be the ones that should take us to the promised paradise. Am suprised you haven't actually revealed your self that your the second saviour we have all being waiting for for thousands of years .

Another problem is that the easy belief system makes a person naively credulous about things which are demonstrably false. There has never been a single proven miracle healing or fulfilled prophecy in a Pentecostal church, yet its hundreds of millions of adherents believe that individuals like Benny Hinn or Kim Clement are healing millions of people, predicting the future and even raising the dead. The fact that those two, as well as many other proven charlatans, have not been tarred and feathered and driven from organized religion is a powerful testimony that the Pentecostal belief system requires the abdication of the mind. I can't imagine that Jesus, who abjured us to be as shrewd as serpents (Mt 10:16) really wants that. Since you asked specifically about faith healing, think about what I just said for a moment. In the 100 years that Pentecostalism has been in existence, there has_never_been even one proven miracle healing in a Pentecostal church. All the tales are either unsubstantiated assertions or stories heard from a friend of a friend of a friend. By "proven", I mean that we would have the testimony of an impartial doctor who would show us medical records proving that a certain organic medical condition (i.e. cancer rather than a headache) had suddenly disappeared from a person after the actions of the faith healer. That kind of testimony does not exist, to my knowledge, and I've questioned several self-proclaimed miracle workers. I do believe miracles happen today but only through the work of God-not TBN or the christian network showmen- and I believe they happen relatively rarely. But the thing to remember is that we are not promised health in this world. We should certainly pray for it, but as Jesus said in the Garden of Gethsemane when He prayed to be spared the crucifixion, "Yet not as I will, but as you will."

@lawyer,

I was keeping my fingers crossed that you'd call your team together for a fine discourse and try to defend even ONE of the issues we've been asking about Catholicism. But predictably, none of your brethren whom you've let down with your fallacies could help you out; and the only thing left was to again substitute rascality for reason.

I don't mind you calling me all sorts - it's often the sign of desperate fellows who display their self-defeat and frustrations at having nothing to intelligently present for their illusions. Glad to know my post worked the miracle of making you stay up all night until nearly daybreak just so you could again exhibit your poorly rehearsed drama.

lawyer:

Tough and daft talk from a professed child of God! Since your already preparing ascerbic words and statements that can rock the bottomless pits of hell and you still have the guts to tell me you are here to save me; well zealot, sorry i mean pilgrim, i can't be listening to an angel and a witch doctor at the same time. Since this is going to be my greatest mistake then, there is no point listening to a self proclaimed christian who has seen the light and has a history of making people "nurse their bruises". If that's what your own bible or church professes then, the next time i come in contact with any of your threads, i better be armed with band aids. One more thing, am shaking in my boots O wise and intelligent saviour wannabe

I assume that the Bible Catholics "wrote" encourages them to describe others as 'witch doctors' and 'self proclaimed christians', while sobbing on being cautioned about addressing people with your frantic idiosyncrasies? No wahala - I'm used to such stage-frights from your camp. . I'm only just laughing at how desperate you could be, lawyer.

lawyer:

Of course, once again your right. I guess am the only one on the planet that has heard of an overblown title of the " our leaders" maybe am the only one that has heard of a Dr reverend bishop Idahosa or a pastor being refered to as the owner and founder of a certain church and when the person dies, the lovely wife or favourite son of the "Our leader" takes over. The annoying thing is that most of them are low lifers who havent seen the 4 walls of an ivory tower, come out and dramatise on t.v that you refer to as "our leaders". I guess the next time i meet one, i'll simply address him or her or it or whatever you people wake up sunday morning to go and watch to entertain you as our leader and tell the pope to bow down to him. Have you ever heard of the pope saying he founded the catholic church. JESUS is the only founder of the christian faith and any other person ascribing himself as a church founder is a charlatan. So even if i didnt have a choice on who to believe, it boils down to "the leader and founder of so so so church" and the pope who owns no church but traces it to the rock of christ as his foundation of carrying on that tradition, zealot men, this would be a no brainner any day!

Even more desperation. You're making wild guesses to find out if I belong to Church of God Mission, and just for that drama you'd go on to calumniate Idahosa. This is why I'd just keep laughing at you chaps - keep making guesses at taking blind shots at others: I knew you'd been grovelling to slobber non-Catholics all this while.

However, the Pope may not tell you he founded the Catholic Church. No, desperate men are too crafty to tell you the simply truth that would expose them. Making noise about Jesus having founded the Catholic Church does not say anything about Mariolatry and the PAPACY system being Biblical. In simple terms, open your Bible and show us where Jesus Christ asked any one of His disciples to pray TO Mary, or to bow down to molten images of Mary or the Pope. You've tried to deny this initially; but liver fail you to own up to the fact that you can't trace Catholicism to Jesus Christ.

lawyer:

Adios? C'mon am just getting warmed up for you and your apologists. Now to my original post if you hadn't replied such rubbish!

This is why I keep saying that pilgrim.1 dey her own jeje and you guys will not let her be. Whenever I'm done with this thread, you guys add panic measures to your rehearsals and continue to enetertain your readers where you've colossally failed to provide answers to straightforward questions.

lawyer:

The real issue isn't what church a person belongs to, but whether the person individually has Jesus Christ living inside of him or her, if they really have a personal relationship with God.

I'm glad you could recognize that - even so, why are Catholics endlessly asking me about what church or denomination I belong to?

Talking about the relationship one has with Christ brings us back to the matter of keeping His WORD as revealed in the Bible. One cannot be walking contrary to God's WORD and still claim to be having a healthy relationship with Christ. "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46).

lawyer:

In the Gospel of John, we are told, "to all who received him [referring to Jesus], to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."1 Why do we have to become children of God? Because until then, God is distant. We may know he's there. We may know we are supposed to worship him. We may even know that in times of need, he's the one to pray to. But there is a distance we are aware of, and it is because of our sin.

It was the same John who wrote:

[list]"This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (1 John 1:5 & 6).[/list]

Christians who profess to be having a relationship with Christ are supposed to be keeping His WORD and not mixing in just about anything that promotes their traditions in blind disobedience to what God has said. This is the simple message of the apostle John.

@lawyer,

lawyer:

Now, as long as we live and breathe, guess what, we're going to sin. We're going to do things our way instead of God's way. But our sin need not remain a barrier between us and God.

[list]"My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. . . " (1 John 2:1)

"Stand in awe, and sin not: commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still. Selah." (Psalm 4:4)

"Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." (John 5:14)

"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" (Romans 6:1 & 2)

"Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame." (1 Cor. 15:34)
[/list]

lawyer:

The claim to privileged knowledge is the besetting evil of the protestant churches and it's ever knowing and one track minded spokesmen or should i say women. This has contributed to their lack of credibility and their speechlessness in dealing with outsiders -- who are in the majority. Anyone who refers here to SELECTED PARTS OF THE BIBLE TO PROVE A POINT is simply doing what the present-day sects also practise.

"Their lack of credibility and speechlessness in dealing with outsiders" - very apt description of Catholics, actually. It is on record that Catholics are always speechless and have not demonstrated the credibility of the things they boast about as being "Biblical" - and you've only managed to sing your own song.

lawyer:

I am forced to conclude that the Protestant Faith is based on faulty and selective Biblical interpretation as well as erroneous reasoning. While Protestants can of course be good Christians, at its heart Protestantism is religious anarchy which will lead many devout souls to perdition. Jesus prayed that we may "all be one"(JN 17:21) and that there may be "one flock, one shepherd" (JN 10:16). I believe that He established a Church against which "the gates of Hell shall not prevail" (MT 16:18). I don't believe Jesus intended for Christianity to be an eternal debating club

Again, another apt description of Catholicism. Here's a simple multiple test to ascertain how Catholicism is the very system that is opposed to Christ:

[list][li]Which other church than the Catholic Church takes people to hell under the excuse of "purgatory"?[/li][/list]

[list][li]Which other church than Catholic Church is crying for "unity" and yet condemning other Churches as not being Christian simply because they refuse to be ruled by the PAPACY?[/li][/list]

[list][li]Which other church than Catholicism is known in history to have persecuted souls to their death for refusing Catholicism and seeking the simple truth of Jesus Christ in the Bible?[/li][/list]

[list][li]Which other church than Catholic Church is known to have been on record with its leader (the Pope) as "no longer holding to the Bible"?[/li][/list]

[list][li]Which other Church than Catholicism has put people to death for having the Bible in their possession?[/li][/list]

[list][li]Which other church than the Catholic Church has taught things about Mary which they can't find in the Bible?[/li][/list]

You can ask for more, and we'll be glad to offer them. Just be honest in picking your choice answers from the multiple test above to reflect on which system Christ actually promised to safegaurd against the gates of hades.

lawyer:

Why is Pentecostalism a danger for Christianity? Well, mainly because I think its distinctives are only tangentially Christian. I think the New Age faith has entered into the church (and by extension society) through Pentecostalism. One could take dozens of individual issues in which Pentecostalism has perverted the Gospel, from Word-Faith to the Prosperity Gospel to the ever crowded national stadium crusades and Blessing to tongues to phony signs and wonders to cultish behavior, but I think the main negative characteristic that covers all the errors is the elevation of the emotions and subjective experience over the mind and over legitimate authority. Historical Christianity, whether Catholic or Protestant, promised man a glorious afterlife if he would have faith in what he couldn't see and live according to God's commandments. Pentecostalism, with its promises of health, wealth, worldly prosperity, miracles and a direct, exciting experience with God Himself, appeals to something very carnal in mankind, which probably explains its incredible growth.

Again, another wild guess, lol. You might have assumed I belong to the stream of 'Pentecostalism' and 'Prosperity Gospel' with the Word-Faith movement. Sorry, you missed it yet by a million miles! Keep guessing until you've exhausted yourself; but not in one instance would you find me defending the extremes of any group whose practices are not taught in Scripture. Not one.

lawyer:

The whole process starts with the method of Pentecostal worship, which emphasizes excitement above all, with loud, emotionally manipulative music and loud, emotionally manipulative preachers combining to agitate the listener into a state of emotional frenzy. In such a state, with the added peer pressure of pastor and fellow believers, it is a short step for the baby Pentecostal's mind to click into neutral and to begin "speaking in tongues", a mental process exactly like that engaged in by ancient pagans (very popular at Corinth), modern day spiritualists, voodoo witch doctors and other practitioners of ecstatic religion. From glossolalia, which undoubtedly makes a person feel good, the individual is compelled, like a drug addict, to seek greater and greater subjective religious "experiences" from Slaying in the Spirit, to trances, visions, divination and other mind-altering, emotional experiences which have their parallels in pagan and New Age practices and which can be explained by the mind's proven ability to convince itself of anything.

So, all that up there is what has been giving you sleepness nights? Hehe. . all just to make a wild guess to see where pilgrim.1 belongs? Bros, I no fit laugh this morning!

BTW, I applaud the line in your "research" of the mind's proven ability to convince itself of "anything" - probably explains basically how Catholic minds work on their traditions which cannot be found in God's WORD! And we can now applaud you guys for your ability to convince yourselves of "anything" that comes from the Vatican - even if it openly contradicts the Bible!

@lawyer,

lawyer:

The culmination of such an escalation would seem to be the Vineyard Revivals, typified by the popular pentecostal church along the ibadan express road, in which a whole megachurch congregation were seen rolling around on the floor, screaming, laughing uncontrollably and imitating barnyard animals, and blaming it all on God. I would highly recommend smoking weed to really understand the hypnotic basis of those kinds of manifestations that self proclaimed defenders of the protestant churches would gladly defend.

Unfortunately, you travelled far to seek out where exactly I belong! If either of us could find those things mentioned in your quote in Scripture, then we could have a basis for discussion towards that end. But so far, you haven't said anything from Scripture that defends the Catholic system in a sane manner. You want to talk of extreme behaviour, we know how many were committed under the Catholic badge. What I'd hoped to find (after your staying up late until this morning) was something from the Bible to show how your convictions are revealed in the WORD. Some Catholics have made far more serious attempts than the dramatized hilarity you're presenting.

lawyer:

Another problem with such emotional subjectivism is that it makes a person spiritually arrogant and immune to any argument or correction.

That's apt - in so far as Catholics are the ones refusing to take correction from God's WORD. Go through the thread and others on Catholicism and see how many Catholics are emotionally "convinced" of a system they can't validate from the Bible. Talk of arrogant immunity against correction. . you guys are ace on that!

lawyer:

It is the common belief that once one "receives the Holy Spirit", it is the third Person of the Trinity who is behind every thought, feeling, opinion, prejudice and inclination in the individual's head. It is a common refrain in Pentecostal circles that "God told me" and obviously there is nothing you can say to such a person that will convince them otherwise.

Did you ever take the time to check the official statements of your Popes? Who was speaking to them? Did they claim to speak for someone other than God? When they release their 'bull', how many Catholics can say anything to convince them otherwise that what the Pope says defies the Word of God?

lawyer:

This presumption extends so far that the individual's "feeling" trumps even the Bible's authority.

Talk to your Popes - they're the very ones trumping Bible authority and spoon-feeding it to Catholics.

lawyer:

I remember asking a Pentecostal pastor how he could justify a service I had attended where he and his church violated every single one of the rules St. Paul laid down for speaking in tongues. (1 Cor 13:22-36) He simply responded that "the Holy Spirit" was guiding them. Obviously, if you haven't had the same "experiences" that they've had, then you're at a lower spiritual level than they are and have no right to question the Holy Spirit's instructions to them. When you're receiving instructions straight from the Holy Spirit, you're your own ultimate authority and have no need for anyone else, let alone [b]the teachers that Jesus left us to ensure we would not be swept away by false doctrines[/b]. (Eph 4:11-14)

We're so grateful that Christ raised teachers who could boldly teach His WORD against the false doctrines of Catholicism. If the tenets you guys hold unto are convincingly from the Bible, how come it is taking you forever to point out the text for all to see? We never travel far into the discussion - just a few issues yet, and still no answers? Wey your best apologists?

lawyer:

Pentecostalism has little or no time for doctrine or truth. It's all about experience. The low educational and intellectual level of so many, if not most, Pentecostal pastors only exacerbates the problem. In the Pentecostal world, a diploma from a Rhema Bible College correspondence course is enough to set a man up as a "pastor" and "teacher". Often, even that isn't required. This low bar allows too many charlatans, bullies, ignoramuses and heretics into influentia positions of authority especially the ones on Nairaland to quote and unquote all aspects of the bible as if they invented the human Encarta and willing have the guts and authority to put down other forms of worship because according to them, their eyes have seen and it is only them that the lord gave the power to see beyond we lesser spiritual mortals. From the look of things, because they are so righteous and all knowledgable about the defining aspects of the bible, they should be the ones that should take us to the promised paradise. Am suprised you haven't actually revealed your self that your the second saviour we have all being waiting for for thousands of years .

Hehe. . . all that bloviate just to prove that Catholicism does not stand up to Biblical integrity, abi? Applause. Ovation!!

For the record, it is true that many Pentecostals do not have time for doctrine or Biblical truth - but is it not equally true that Catholics on the Forum have actully demonstrated so convincingly that they have no time for God's WORD and are more interested in the 'bull' from the Vatican? If you chaps had time for truth, have you demonstrated it at all on the Forum other than whimper about your misery of some human Encarta?

It doesn't cost that much - just a disciplined heart to prayerfully read God's WORD will enrich your soul.

lawyer:

Another problem is that the easy belief system makes a person naively credulous about things which are demonstrably false. There has never been a single proven miracle healing or fulfilled prophecy in a Pentecostal church, yet its hundreds of millions of adherents believe that individuals like Benny Hinn or Kim Clement are healing millions of people, predicting the future and even raising the dead. The fact that those two, as well as many other proven charlatans, have not been tarred and feathered and driven from organized religion is a powerful testimony that the Pentecostal belief system requires the abdication of the mind. I can't imagine that Jesus, who abjured us to be as shrewd as serpents (Mt 10:16) really wants that. Since you asked specifically about faith healing, think about what I just said for a moment. In the 100 years that Pentecostalism has been in existence, there has_never_been even one proven miracle healing in a Pentecostal church.

How you come to that conclusion is only typical of Catholics who fear their own duplicity more than the simple Biblical truth being pointed out against the morass of Catholicism.

lawyer:

All the tales are either unsubstantiated assertions or stories heard from a friend of a friend of a friend. By "proven", I mean that we would have the testimony of an impartial doctor who would show us medical records proving that a certain organic medical condition (i.e. cancer rather than a headache) had suddenly disappeared from a person after the actions of the faith healer.

Have Catholics applied the same rule of investigation for their acclaimed miracles?

lawyer:

That kind of testimony does not exist, to my knowledge, and I've questioned several self-proclaimed miracle workers. I do believe miracles happen today but only through the work of God-not TBN or the christian network showmen- and I believe they happen relatively rarely. But the thing to remember is that we are not promised health in this world. We should certainly pray for it, but as Jesus said in the Garden of Gethsemane when He prayed to be spared the crucifixion, "Yet not as I will, but as you will."

You see how you create problems for yourself wey nobody send you? How can we pray for something that you are not promised? It is just as praying for salvation but excusing it on the chant that we are not promised that in this world as well! You make me laugh.

Just so that you can have time again for another long night assignment, read up the following:

[list]
[li]"Wherefore I pray you to take some meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not an hair fall from the head of any of you." (Acts 27:34)

"Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth." (3 John 1:2)[/li][/list]

Have you ever wondered that the apostles would be wishing others what they were not sure would be granted? No wahala. . . prolly that's why some Catholics never come round to having assurance of salvation while on earth; and they have to carry the burden of going to purgatory first before proceeding to heaven with a visa granted by Mary. E no go happen! And the earlier you chaps wake up to that reality, the better for your future!

Thunder! Clash of the gods; lawyer vs pilgrim.

On a more srious note, lawyer, your appraoch would be taken as an escapist style when you tend to use a question to avoid a question. Slandering petecostalism on a thread which says Re: Roman Catholic Is Not A Church, But A Modernised Way Of Idolatry? aint the best set of responses.

It will be highly appreciated if you can start your grouse with pentecostalism on another thread where we shall be waiting to engage you in a full blown discussion. In the interim, you will need to face boldly, "the accusation levied against you" by "pentencostals" concerning your doctrines as a catholic including but not limited to what i have summarised here:

1)Who decreed that Mary to be worshipped by the Catholics
2) Was it pope's ingenuity that inserted for her to be called a mediator thereby rendering the cross of Christ of no effect?
3) Who instructed the church authority to include do these things when they are obviously in defiance to what the Holy bible teaches.
4) "Pugratory", is it scriptural ? I havenot seen it in any of the 66 books of the bible. Probably there are other books in the exclusive preserve of the catholics which corroborates that doc trine. If suitable answers cannot be proferred, it would suffice that most practices in the catholic church are man-made. Q.E.D

Pleas lets take this discourse intelliectually and refrain from derogs.

@locoman and to u all who still sit to criticise other denominations,have u ever stopped to ask urself what ur life actually depicts,does it depict Christ himself cos the Christ i know did not criticise but rather came for the sinners.if u assume u do the right thing as the christian u claim to be.listen well Catholicism means oneness,for those who do not understand,Virgin Marz gave birth to your own Personal LORD and SAVIOUR whom Christ himself handed u over wen he said and i quote son behold thy mother,mother behold thy son.read ur bible well and dont be blinded by whom is doing rite or wrong cos u r not in any position to judge but do those things that Christ asked u to which were contained in the ten commandments.this ten commandments was summarrised by Christ into two which ,love ur neighbour as urself and love GOD with all ur heart,mind and soul.be amore concerned about this than criticism.remember Christ told peter onto this rock i build my church not rocks or rockses.catholicism dates as far as saint peter himself that same practice has transcende from then till now.nothing has changed and talking about images if its not to be done,why did GOD ask moses to make a serpeent and hang it in a stick whoever that looks at it will not be bitten by the snake or if bitten,will be healed.that same stick saved u and i cos the old testament prepared us for the new testament.that same stickChrist died on.do u c the semblance or not.i m born into catholicism we preach the risenChrist and not concern ourselves with who goes to what church or not.read ur bible more and do as Christ has directed u.lots of love to you all.

@ viee,
Well, have you read the somewhere in the gospel where Jesus told a parable about wheat and chaff, and that on the day of the harvest, there will be seperation;the wheat for the barn, and the chaff for the fire?
I attend the catholic church because of my parents, and i don't suscribe to certain practices that i will not be able to expantiate on now.However, i believe that most churches either orthodox or protestant, have various forms of idolatry.
The key to liberation is to follow what the Bible says and your convictions.

abbeyboy:

I attend the catholic church because of my parents, and i don't suscribe to certain practices that i will not be able to expantiate on now.

There. I've often said that I know it's not all Catholics (or those who attend the Catholic Church) that subscribe to everything Catholicism teaches. Thanks for being honest.

abbeyboy:

The key to liberation is to follow what the Bible says and your convictions.

Praise God. Fine summary to the whole issue - follow what the Bible says: Catholic, una hear?

seskee:

@locoman and to u all who still sit to criticise other denominations,have u ever stopped to ask yourself what your life actually depicts,does it depict Christ himself because the Christ i know did not criticise but rather came for the sinners.

Lol, you need to know Christ some more. Let me show you the Christ I know when He encountered those peddling false teaching. You may not call it "criticizing", but label it anyhow it helps you understand the scenario:

[list]
Matthew 23:14 -- "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation."

Matthew 23:16 -- "Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!"

Luke 11:43 -- "Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets."

Luke 11:46 -- "And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers."

Mark 7:6-7 -- "He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."[/list]

Do you want to now adjust you understanding about the Christ you know?

Why is it that when the Vatican castigates other Christians, Catholics said nothing and made no outcries? But the moment non-Catholics want to engage Catholics on any topic, it suddenly becomes a matter of "criticizing"?

Yea abbeyboy ,

you ar being open and honest. How long hav u being in the catholic church? Which particular practices are you not comfortable with? Just be open and let us engage in an intellectual convrsation. We would weigh them together against the scriptre. Meanwhile, also point out those things you think some protestants do that are idolatary in nature.

Love you with the Lov of Christ.

@Oby1,

I wanted to bring the discussion over from the other thread, which is why I'm replying here; so that we could help tidy it up and let Catholics enjoy a thread reserved for them (afterall, it's supposed to be: "For Catholic Faithfuls". I hope you don't mind much.

Oby1:

All I ask from God is to continue to open your eyes one by one to see what you people are missing.

We've been asking Catholics to make us see what indeed we've been missing - by simple discussing the questions we ask about Catholicism fro the Bible, if they are in the WORD.

Oby1:

We have the supreme one - The Father, Son and Holy Spirit
The Mother of Jesus - Mary the Virgin Mother of God (Who intercedes for us)

Can you please show us from Scripture where it is taught that Mary intercedes for anyone?

Oby1:

We have the Saints in Heaven and all the Angels (Who intercedes for us)

Again, where does the Bible teach that saints in heaven and angels are interceding for anyone? Infact, it makes one wonder again if it is not true that Catholics pray to the "saints" (not to my knowledge do they pray to angels, though) before even thinking of whether they intercede for Catholics on earth.

Oby1:

So no matter the castigation, all our Aims is to make heaven.

No one is castigating Catholics, at least I speak for myself. I don't think we should always be reacting to say that people are castigating Catholics for querying what they teach which no one can find in the Bible.

Oby1:

If the Catholic church is blind, then i'm suppose to still be swimming in the ocean of my sin, but it was in this same catholic church i met Jesus (despite all my wrong doings during the past) I could still find peace in him. The peace i have never felt before. Before i do anything i seek his face, and he hears me. And i go to the Mass, hear the gospel and get refreshed each and every day with his words. So i don't know what you guys are saying.

What I'm concerned about is expressed in just one line of Jesus' commandment:

[list]John 14:15
If ye love me, keep my commandments.[/list]

That's just the bottomline of my discussing these issues with Catholics. If Catholics talk about loving God and making heaven and there are hundreds of millions who carry the burden of facing purgatory before proceeding to heaven, then something is direly wrong somewhere. Anyone can claim they have peace in their souls - we all make that claim. But what is real peace if there's no assurance of obeying God's WORD and instead following traditions that contravene Scripture? The peace that He gives is predicated on obedience to His WORD.

Oby1:

If that same God that is in the protestant church is the God of peace, i tell you brethren that, that same God of peace is everywhere that he is invited.

You sound like you question which God is in the Protestant Church. No wahala. The only thing to note is that He manifests Himself to those who have a heart to obey what He has revealed in His WORD:

[list]
John 14:23
"Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words:
and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."[/list]

Oby1:

He opened my eyes to make me realise that i am heading for destruction and all this happened in the Catholic church. I was born a Catholic, but i was still swimming in Sin, but not until one day everything changed in my life. I didn't go to any other church to be converted. I was converted in the Catholic church.

Conversion can happen just about any place - on the Damascus road, in a molue bus, on the streets of Ajegunle, or in the center of Jerusalem. Being converted in any church is not the same thing as knowing that one is in a healthy relationship with God.

Oby1:

Look let me tell you church cannot save you, your level of annointing cannot save, how much you know about the word of God cannot save you, but the fruit the word of God bears in your life.

Even "fruit" one bears in his or her life cannot save anyone. Only faith in Jesus Christ saves (Acts 4:12). To add something that one cannot defend from God's WORD and make that the criteria of saving faith, is the reason why many people have no assurance of salvation - and they're ripe enough to be misled by a system which was reputed to have been selling indulgences to helpless seekers.

Oby1:

So lets stop all this argument about Catholic church being this or that, but encourage each other as a Christain.

We've been trying to encourage Catholics to go read the WORD of God for themselves instead of building their hopes on the shaky grounds of the Catholic Church.

Oby1:

I state categorically that there is nothing at all wrong with the teachings of the Catholic church.

No wahala - we've been waiting endlessly for Catholics to show us reasonable answers from the Bible to show that there's nothing wrong with Catholicism. Wey your answers to my questions about "honouring" Mary?

Oby1:

You can't tell me that all Muslim will go to hell or even all Pagan will go to hell.

That's the delusion that the PAPACY is using as cosmetic to lead many more to an uncertain future. Ask yourself why Mother Theresa was smiling outwardly like all was well, while a war of doubts was raging in her heart. How did Catholicism help solve that problem for her?

Oby1:

God's judgement is different from Men's judgement.

That's true - which is why the pronouncements of the Pope and his bishops are simply meaningless before God.

Cheers.

Brought forward from the other thread:

cgift:

Still waiting dear pilgrim,

Just two of the ones I found on the net:


Does the Catholic Church Pray to Saints?

YES, they do. Here's an excerpt taken from a Catholic website (Ask A Catholic) confirming the fact:

[list]The road to sainthood begins at the grass-roots. Ordinary Christians, perhaps in a parish or a religious community, recognize that someone of extraordinary holiness has lived among them. The memory of that person inspires them. The story of his or her life is told, perhaps in a book. People pray to the person, asking intercession for some favor, and their prayers may be answered. Extraordinary signs, perhaps a cure from sickness, occur. A local group may be formed which seeks to make this person's life and gifts more widely known.[/list]


Has The Popes Taught Catholics to Put Their Trust in Mary?

Yes, they have. It is evidently so from the Encyclical Supremi Apostolatus Officio promulgated by Pope Leo XIII on 1 September 1883 (2nd paragraph); which Pope John II was attributed to have called 'a document of great worth' (2nd paragraph also). Here is what Pope Leo XIII stated in that document:

[list]"It has always been the habit of Catholics in danger and in troublous times to fly for refuge to Mary, and to seek for peace in her maternal goodness; showing that the Catholic Church has always, and with justice, put all her hope and trust in the Mother of God."[/list]

---

What does the Bible recommend on PRAYER?

[list]Php. 4:6
"Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God."[/list]

*we are not asked to pray or supplicate or direct our requests to MARY!

i appreciate this a lot thanks. Will comment on this later.

I read your response after I came back from work and Gosh, you were the most hilarious thing that has happened to me today . I am grateful to you for providing that much need humour. You firstly ascribed that I took all night to reply your post. Very funny  , don't flatter yourself unduly. For those of us that go to work early in the morning, we do have time to check our mails and probably visit our favourite sites before jetting out to work. Your reply took me less than 15 minutes to address and I blame my self for taking that long. Your not worth that long in my life! Honestly that part cracked me up! Your good! A future whoopi Goldberg in the making

Secondly, after reading your reply, I actually for once decided to see who was behind the mask posting such odious and pungent statements on this forum, and it struck me that I have been the one that has been wrong all the while. The screen name Pilgrim, actually settles it all. You’re a journey man or let’s say woman or whatever you represent and your still on your quest to find out what your heart really desires. I finally found out that the reason you jump from religion to religion to defend various faiths is because your not stable. It is the hallmark of a pilgrim on his pilgrimage to search. Maybe your on the look out for the holygrail and right now your bustop is to become a anti catholic. Am sure by the time you have spent your whole life journeying through various faiths, I expect you to return back to where you originally came from.

So am no longer going to disturb myself trading barbs with someone that could do a full 360 tomorrow and tell me the gains of being an apostle of the confusion faith. I’ll rather feel safer in the hands of long term practicing protestants, that are interested in constructive debates where we can learn from each other and probably move closer to God. Debates are not meant to provoke or stir up violence or anger just because you are so dogmatic in your beliefs. The title of the supposedly “well thought of  thread of yours”, is enough for well renowed intellectuals to deviate for a moment and engage in rough talk and forget to put things in the right perspective. A reasonable debate is not about losing an argument or winning it. It’s meant for a reflective soul searching later on to balance both sides.

All along, you have accused me of not providing substantial answers as it regards your questions as it relates to Mariolatory beliefs and bowing to statutes, hence your submission that we are idolators and your constant reference to the word of faith from the bible.

1. Let’s get to the heart of the matter. You are assuming that the Bible is the sole rule and guide of faith, and that God has revealed nothing outside the Bible that is necessary for our salvation.  This is wrong.  How do you know what books belong in the Bible?  How do you know what is divinely inspired, using the Bible alone?  You don't, because the Bible does not include an inspired table of contents.  Yet you would agree that knowing what books are inspired can only come from God, and knowing what books are inspired is necessary for our salvation.  But since the Bible does not say what books belong in the Bible, this forces you to look outside the Bible to learn how the canon of Scripture was selected.  This determination was made by the Catholic Church at her various councils in 382, 393 and 397 A.D. You can read your Bible from cover to cover and not find a single passage that asserts" that the Bible is the only authority for the Christian. Yet, this is Pilgrim’s premise throughout this thread. This is the real issue, Pilgrim. If you cannot demonstrate that the Bible is the only source of God’s word, then none of your conclusions about Catholic teaching are trustworthy, since the conclusions are based on a false premise.

This is a truth that you Protestants simply cannot refute.  Therefore, start becoming familiar with history, and abandon your private judgment, non-biblical "Bible-only" fallacy and listen to the Catholic Church, which is the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). This dialogue is over until you can effectively address this issue - but you can't unless you become Catholic.  That, of course, will require you to empty yourself and seek the truth.

Which brings us to an important point? There is a central authority in Catholicism, and that is the Catholic Church (from which Pilgrim rarely quotes but relies on pictures or hearsay statements). Pilgrim has no such authority in her world other than her own private interpretation of Scripture. You will pretend that Scripture is perspicuous and self-attesting, yet there are about 30,000 different “Bible" churches that all teach different doctrines regarding the Christian faith, most of which have cropped up in the last 50 years. I could find a dozen anti-Catholics who all hold different opinions about justification, baptism and a host of other issues to demonstrate how arbitrary and erroneous and extremely unstable Protestantism is. This is the main reason why thousands of Protestant pastors have come home to the Catholic Church in recent years.

For example, I could find one Protestant catholic basher who would disagree with Pilgrims understanding of baptism. Pilgrim would accuse the Protestant apologist of not having a “biblical" view. The Protestant catholic basher would accuse Pilgrim of the same. Even though baptism is one of the most basic tenets of the Christian faith, these two Christians would be in disagreement. Unfortunately for them, there is no method in Protestantism of resolving their disagreement. Yet they both claim that the Bible is their only authority. But if the Bible can’t resolve their disagreement, then how can it be their only authority? Help us with this, Pilgrim.

The bible that you are eloquently quoting was actually put together by the Catholic Church early fathers, so if you call it "bull", then what ever your quoting is also bull . Was it you or your pastor that gathered all the relevant and inspirational parts of the bible that your quoting wth so much discipline as you stated earlier? Did Jesus write the bible and hand it over to you personally? Did your protestant mentors like Calvin and Luther Martin chose the required WORD OF FAITH scriptures that your quoting today? All the chosen books, verses and chapters in the bible where carefully selected by the catholic church and i assume this is your own defination of "bull"

If you want to wow me, go and search for the other books written by other prophets and apostles and tell us Catholics what we are missing. Bottom line, your catholic more than you imagine because it’s the basic tenets of the catholic church that was chosen to be in the bible. You might argue all day long that it’s not my bible and I use the King James version all you like. Once again bottom line, the edited remaining parts were still chosen for you to reflect on. So the argument would have been more subtle, if you were in another religion and we were comparing notes. Too bad. I understand your pains for the Catholic church overshadowing your thinking. You can’t help it. Better still, write your own version devoid of Catholic input that is devoid of "bull" but  again, since it's the same thing, i wonder who the real "bull" in human form is?


2. You talked about Catholics taking Mary as an Intercessor or mediator and challenged me to address the matter.

As i have already stated, Jesus Christ is the one mediator between God and man. But that does not preclude Jesus from applying His role as mediator anyway He sees fit. In fact, right before Paul says that "Jesus is the one mediator" (1 Tim 2:5), Paul appeals for mediation from others besides Christ, by urging that "supplications, prayers, intercessions and thanksgivings be made for all men" (1 Tim 2:1). How can Paul appeal to mediation from others if Jesus is our only mediator? Because, as St. Paul answers, "this is good, and is acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim 2:3-4). Therefore, although Jesus is our one mediator, He has charged us to be intercessors, or subordinate mediators with Him. We are able to do this by virtue of our baptism into the lord.

This is why Paul can say "I complete in my body what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ for the sake of His Body, the Church (Col 1:24). Was anything lacking in Christ's sufferings? Of course not. Paul is teaching us that God invites us to participate in the work of Jesus Christ, whether it be through intercession, suffering, works of charity and so forth. God is not threatened by the great glory and responsibility He gives His children. Indeed, the God that is worshiped in the Catholic Church is a loving Father who is intimately involved with His children and who invites their participation, just as earthly fathers do for their children.

Also Elizabeth calls Mary "the mother of God" when she says: "How can the mother of my Lord come to me?" (Lk 1:43). Is Pilgrim criticizing the words that Elizabeth chose when she greeted Mary? This is troubling indeed, since both Elizabeth's declaration and Luke's recording of same were inspired by the Holy Ghost. Also, where, pilgrim does the Catholic Church teach that "no one can enter the blessed kingdom without passing through her [Mary]?"   You site no document but base your criticisms on pure hatred of the catholic faith.

Also when anti-Catholics make such sweeping statements about the teachings of the Church, we must take them to task. Tell us, Pilgrim, where the Catholic Church teaches that "Jesus, as judge, is too harsh, but that Mary will not refuse anyone"? Can you refer me to a specific papal or conciliar teaching? A paragraph in the catechism perhaps? Or any book at all with a Catholic papal statement? The Catholic Church teaches no such thing. But Pilgrim has demonstrated that she really doesn't know, or perhaps doesn't even care, what the Church really teaches. She is a girl on a mission, and that is to denigrate the Church that Jesus Christ has built upon the rock of Peter (Mt 16:18-19), the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Just because the Father gave "all power" to Jesus, this does not mean that Jesus cannot share it with others. The Scriptures clearly teach that Jesus does share it with others. He confers upon His apostles the authority to forgive and retain sins (John 20:23); He gives Peter the keys of authority over the Church and the power to bind and loose (Mt 16:18-19); He also gives the other apostles the authority to bind and loose (Mt. 18:18); He gives the priests of the Church the authority to anoint the sick and forgive their sins (Jm 5:14-15); He gives baptized Christians the authority to suffer redemptively (Col 1:24); He gives the apostles the power to confect the Eucharist (Mt 26:26-28); He gives Christians the power to intercede for others (all kinds of examples in the writings of Paul, James and John). Again, Pilgrim, if God is not threatened by the power He gives His children, you shouldn't be either.

Catholics world wide, accept that Mary is not our Saviour. Jesus Christ is our Saviour. I don't know how long Pilgrim "Bible Christian" sect has been around, but the Catholic Church, for 2,000 years, has been worshiping Jesus Christ as its only Lord and Saviour. The only "error" that this critique has demonstrated is the error of Miss. Pilgrim’s ( i assume your not yet married) approach to Sacred Scripture. If the Catholic Church actually taught what Pilgrim believes she teaches (that we worship Mary), then such teaching would be blasphemous indeed. But as we have seen, the only thing that is blasphemous in this dialogue is Pilgrim’s unfounded and unsubstantiated allegation that we worship Mary as God. This is the product of Pilgrim’s fallacious hermeneutic, faulty biblical exegesis and unfamiliarity with the early Church fathers, not to mention his evident prejudice against the Catholic Church. When people try to interpret the Scriptures outside of the living Tradition of the Church who gave us them, they end up "twisting the Scriptures to their own destruction" (2 Pet 3:16).

The issue of Mary being a mediator is really quite a simple issue with which there should be no disagreement. Jesus is indeed our “one mediator." But when we ask others to pray for us, are we not asking them to “mediate" on our behalf? When someone prays to God for us, is Pilgrim suggesting that they are not a mediator? If not, what are they? Right before Paul calls Jesus the “one mediator," he appeals to all of us to offer “supplications, prayers, intercessions and thanksgivings" to God (1 Tim. 2:5). In other words, he asks for mediation from others besides Jesus, all the while acknowledging that Jesus is the one mediator.

Is Paul’s teaching inconsistent? Of course  not. Paul is teaching us that, although Jesus is our one mediator, we can join our prayers and sacrifices with His. Jesus shares His mediation with us. This is why Paul says we can “make up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ for the sake of His body" (Col. 1:24). Unlike what Pilgrim is suggesting, nothing in Scripture precludes us from sharing in Jesus’ role as the one mediator before the Father. To the contrary, Scripture repeatedly tells us to offer our prayers for the benefit of others. By virtue of the Holy Spirit, we share in the divine sonship of Jesus Christ and, with Christ, are able to cry out “Abba, Father" (Rom. 8:14-15; Gal. 4:6; 3:26-27).

Pilgrim narrow exegesis actually gives Christ less glory than the Catholic view. As Catholics, we know that even though Jesus is our one mediator and does not need any help from us, He shares His mediation with us, just as He shares with us His holiness and glory. This is what a loving Father does for His children. This concept of God sharing His gifts with His children is an overriding theme of the Catholic faith.

Mary is a channel of grace but not the  source of grace. Jesus Christ is the only source of grace. Mary is a channel, or an instrument of God’s grace, in a most profound way.

If Pilgrim is living a life of Christian virtue, I hope that she too thinks of himself as a channel of grace. God works in and through us by the power of His Spirit. Thus, we are all “channels" of that grace, bearing witness to Christ and bringing people to the truth. This is why Paul calls us “God’s co-workers" (1 Cor. 3:9). As channels of grace, work together with God in building up His kingdom.

Same thing with calling Mary “advocate" and “mediator or intercessor in some quarters." Mary is a “co-worker" of God in her role as advocate and intercessor because she prays for us and our well-being, as do the rest of the saints. She does this in a subordinate way to Jesus’ advocacy and mediation. The Scriptures are full of examples of saintly mediation. Since Mary had a unique role in God’s plan of salvation by bringing the Word of God into the world, she can also be called the “ladder of paradise," and the “gate of heaven." She is not the source of paradise or heaven; she is the means by which God made heaven accessible to us through Christ our Lord. It is very common for saints, particularly those in the Middle Ages, to use such loving and flowery language to describe the Blessed Mother.

Here is the point: The Catholic Church never, ever elevates Mary to the level of deity, and Pilgrim knows this. There is an infinite distance between the power of Jesus and the power of Mary. Jesus is the Creator, and Mary is the creature. Without Jesus’ power, Mary would have no power. But Protestants want to treat Mary as nothing more than a disposable vessel. How sad.

Catholics, on the other hand, recognize the incredible gifts that God has given to Mary and the rest of us. We participate in the work of Christ in furthering His kingdom, and Mary, as the mother of God’s Son, does this more intimately than any other creature. I guess when Mary prophesied “all generations will call me blessed" (Luke 1:48), she didn’t have Pilgrim in mind because you’re a unique being belonging to another generation I presume.

Perhaps Pilgrim can find just one quote from any of the fathers of the early centuries of the Catholic Church attempting to downgrade Mary the way Pilgrim  wants to do. She knows none exist, otherwise she would be presenting them to us.  In fact, Martin Luther, the man who ignited the Reformation, had a deep and loving devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, and believed in Mary’s Immaculate Conception and her role as mediator. Luther would be disgusted with Pilgrim attempts to denigrate Mary as a mere Jewish lady who gave birth to Jesus

Pilgrim, can we be mediators “in a limited sense" if Jesus Christ is the one and only mediator? As I have demonstrated in my earlier rebuttal, Scripture teaches we can be subordinate mediators or intercessors in Christ because this is what God invites us to be. Paul says our mediation is “good and acceptable" to God (1 Tim 2:3) We, along with Mary, are only mediators because of the one mediatorial role of Jesus Christ.

Thus, our mediation is “limited" to the mediation of Christ. We cannot act as mediators independently of Christ, nor will God grant our petitions if they are inconsistent with the will of Christ. As I stated before, theology is about making the proper distinctions. Pilgrim is bent on elevating Mary’s mediatorial role to equal or even above Jesus, but she knows quite well that the Church teaches no such thing. Let’s try to be honest in this argument.


2. Issues relating to Idolatory and bowing to statutes 

According to anti catholics, the Roman Catholic Doctrine states that, the statue of Mary is supposed to bow down to by all catholics and you use pictures to illustrate your belief. What you are referring to here - even if it was accurately presented - would not be a "doctrine" (which means a belief which is taught) but rather a "devotion" (which means a pious custom or exercise).

For example, believing that *God created everything in the universe* - and therefore even the food that we eat and the air we breathe has God as its source (since He is our Creator) - this would be considered a "doctrine," or a belief, of the faith.

However, when I offer a prayer of thanksgiving to God prior to every meal in gratitude for the food He has provided to me (since God created everything in the universe, as per our doctrine), that would be a "devotional" practice or exercise since its purpose is to express our devotion to God.



And so, any sort of "bowing" before images, such as a statue, would be a "devotion" and not a "doctrine" since it is something we *do* and not something we *believe*.

Okay - as to your assertion that, according to the Catholic Church, we are "supposed" to (as if it is a requirement) bow down to statues of Mary, well, this is simply not the case.

Bowing before a statue of Mary (or any other statue of anyone else for that matter - including statues of Jesus) is not part of any liturgy (worship service) nor is it a requirement for any Catholic to bow before anything (other than the Eucharist - for example, when we kneel during Mass - but since we *know* that we are before the Real Presence of Christ this is hardly the same thing as kneeling before a statue).

In all my years of being a Catholic I have never once been told that I am required to bow before a statue. Nor has any priest or Pope told me to bow down to any statute . So, it is not true that we are "supposed" to do this. If we are to continue this debate, I respectfully ask that you get your authorities straight and quote once where the catholic church ordered so

Now - all that being said, it is true that many Catholics do, in fact, bow before statues as a *devotional* practice - but not as a matter of doctrine. ( besides your pictures that you posted were doctored. With photoshop anything is possible, but i wouldnt be so childish to extract pictures of miracle crusades or phony protestants to support my argument. Am a lawyer and i only present admissible evidence, not hearsay or pictures from the internet that are unsubstantiated)

And - when any sort of bowing before a statue is done, it is done so out of *respect* for Mary (as a created human being who was blessed by God for a special role) - not out of *submission* as if we consider her to be some sort of divine goddess (as you imply here).

In fact, the mere thought of considering any created being, even Mary, worthy of worship as if he/she is God or divine is repulsive, sickening, and condemned in the strongest possible manner. Heaven forbid!

And - yes - since she is the mother of Jesus we do feel that some measure of respect is due to her. After all, the Bible itself quotes Mary as having said, "All generations shall call me blessed" (Luke 1:48) and so we are mindful of the respect that is due to her (I realize that you think we go overboard - but - I have to wonder if some Protestants don't go overboard the other way - I am often shocked by the lack of respect shown to Mary by many Protestants - possibly because they are afraid of being "too Catholic" if they think of Mary as being special in any way).

And so a more accurate way to state your original premise would be:

According to Catholic devotional practice [not doctrine], it is customary [not a requirement] for Catholics to bow before a statue of Mary out of respect [not submission] for her having been the mother of Jesus.


You also say the Bible teaches that we should not bow down to statue, nor serve them in any way because it is the worship of devils.

Is it only the worship of devils that bothers you? I bet not. I will go one step further than you did and say that the worship of ANYTHING other than God is EVIL and WRONG.

And so, for example, if we worship trees that face eastward, or big-screen TV sets, or a shoe, or a celebrity of sort, or any other created (or imaginary) thing, then such a practice is EVIL - even if a TV set is only a TV set and not a devil in disguise. Agreed? That being said, I will agree with you that idolatry and devil worship is especially evil.

And so, what this boils down to is that we are not to "worship" ANYTHING or ANYONE other than God. Period.

And THAT is what you are objecting to here, right? It is your position that Catholics are "worshipping or praying to" either Mary and/or her statue rather than worship God alone. Right? Please get a life and point to modern catholic church doctrines and not some cheesy article on a website or hearsay gist.

Well, if that is your position then please allow me to clarify for you what we really believe since the worship of Mary (or anyone other than God) is surely NOT what we believe or practice.

Protestants, anti-catholics in general, and Fundamentalist Evangelicals in particular, tend to think that "spiritual" is good (in the godly spiritual sense of course - I am not speaking of evil spirits), and that "matter" is evil (which is why Calvinists, for example, always emphasize our "depraved" nature and that our works are as filthy rags, etc, ). This is also one reason why Fundamentalist non-denominational churches are frequently stark and bare. Nearly all reminders of earthly "things" are removed so as to focus (or so goes the theory) on spiritual matters. Additionally these churches obviously favor faith (a spiritual gift) over and above works (a physical gift) - even those gracious works done by God working within a person (as per Ephesians 2:10).

But the Biblical and historically Christian way of looking at it is that "matter" is part of God's creation too (creation consists of matter AND spirit) and that since God said of His creation "It is good" we must recognize that matter - if it is not used for evil purposes - is a "good" created by God to be used for sacred and holy purposes.

That is why Christ used *created things* in His ministry: He used *mud* to heal a blind man, He baptized with *water*, He anointed with *oil*, He chose *bread and wine* to be the elements used when we "remember" Him during Holy Communion.

And just as all creation "groaned" at the fall of mankind, so too, all of creation will be restored and elevated to a higher plane of existence when Christ comes again in Glory.

God delights in His physical creation and we are not to profane that which He created - nor are we to disparage physical matter as if it is naturally "evil" compared to the "good" within the spiritual realm. It is not an either/or. Both spirit and matter can be "good" and both can be used for holy purposes.

We can see this principle most profoundly in the Incarnation and the Atonement on the Cross.  We can most certainly see it in the Bodily Resurrection itself.

Why?



Because God chose to Redeem us through taking on FLESH (matter) and asks us to participate in our redemption (by coming to a faith formed in hope and charity and walking - a physical thing - in works created by Him - Ephesians 2:10).

Furthermore, He chose to Atone for our sins by subjecting His *human* body to death on the Cross (that was precisely why He was able to Atone for us - if He was only divine and not ALSO fully human, then His sacrifice on the Cross would not have Redeemed us - after all, what was His purpose in taking on human flesh in the first place if not to redeem us with it?).

Additionally, the Redemption was completed by His *Bodily Resurrection* which consisted of His real human body and was a physical manifestation of "mission accomplished."

Thomas put his fingers in the wounds to affirm for all of us "Doubting Thomases" that it was His real flesh - and not solely spirit - that arose.

And we can see that the Church is nothing more than an extension of the Incarnation in that it is called to continue His earthly ministry during His absence. Notice that the Church is called by a very physical word: Body. It is the "Body of Christ" - it is not called the "Spirit of Christ".

Therefore, created things are not of and by themselves evil unless they are used for evil purposes (which is exactly what the devil does to humans who fall under his influence - we use our bodies, and things like idols in whatever form, to sin when the devil has his way).

Remember that we were put on this earth in bodily form, but we were created for heaven - and even in heaven we will not throw away our bodies but will receive back our bodies in a Glorified way.

Truly, just because something is created matter (and therefore not necessarily spiritual) that does not make it evil of and by itself.

And so with ALL THAT being said we must now turn to the first Biblical passage which most anti catholics would cite and I’ll finish the whole verse for you instead of taking it piece-meal:

1 And God spoke all these words, saying, 2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3 "You shall have no other gods before me. 4 "You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.   Exodus 20:1-6

And so we see a few things here.  To put a fine point on it, though, we can summarize that we are not to:   1. have other gods, 2. make images of these false gods, and 3. worship these false gods or their images.

That does accurately summarize the intent of this Bible passage, doesn't it? Equally important (at least for the sake of this discussion) is the question: is this what us Catholics do when we bow to statues?

And so this brings us to a number of interesting questions.



For example, does this mean that ALL “images” of a religious nature are banned, or is it only those images association with other gods (or, more accurately, false gods considered by the individual to be true gods) that are condemned? Also, is "bowing" - of and by itself considered evil, or is it only bowing before false gods (considered by the individual to be true gods) that is condemned?

To answer these questions we must see if there are any places within the Bible whereby God has allowed for images and/or bowing WITHOUT either being considered "evil" or condemned. For if these practices are allowed in certain situations and condemned in others then we must honestly examine in which *contexts* are they permissible and which they are not.

And here we find many interesting things in Scripture because we can easily find instances in BOTH of these cases: images and bowing. And in some of  *these cases* God has NOT condemned them - in fact in some cases He even *commanded* them.

Regarding images:

If God condemned ALL images (as per the common Pilgrim’s assertion) then one must explain why Moses was *commanded by God* to specifically *make images for use in worshipping* Him (Exodus 25:18-22 and 36:3-35)!



Additionally, in Numbers 21:8-9 Moses is commanded by God to make an *image* of a bronze serpent (an Egyptian god) in order to heal those who had been bitten by poisonous serpents. And here is a real kicker: a person who had been bitten had to *physically* look at the image of the serpent in order to be healed.

Centuries later, in 1 Kings 6:23-29 and 7:23-26, God once again *commanded* the making of graven images when Solomon built the temple.

And so this underscores the reality that when images are used in the worship of the True God - the Only God - then this is acceptable.

Why?



Because those offering worship recognize that the image is just that: a created image that only carries significance insofar as worship of God Himself is concerned and they have NO special divine powers of and by themselves, nor are they being used in the worship of any phony false gods. For otherwise - if the Bible forbade images in ANY or ALL contexts (as Protestants frequently assert) then that would make God disobedient to his own commandment. And God is not untrue to His Nature.

Interestingly enough, most Protestants DO utilize images to aid them in their faith walk. For example, it is common to see a "cross" (which is a graven image) either on a wall, on a necklace, on a tattoo, or even on a car's bumper sticker. Children have Bible Story books (which are images of Biblical people and events), and many Protestants even have statues  in the form of Christmas scenes.



Now, are the Protestants who own these images worshipping the story book, or the nativity scene, as if the images are themselves divine and worthy of worship - or - are these "things" - these "graven images" - merely reminders that point us to Christ?  Is this an example of God's created matter being used for "good" and "holy" purposes?

It's a fair question.



I am trying to convey to you the Catholic appreciation of Jesus' Incarnation as a REALITY and how this applies overall to images.   



He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation…   Colossians 1:15



Icons (religious images depicting various events or people) are directly connected to this.  If Jesus is the visible image of the Father, this addresses the very purpose behind the OT Commandment against graven images. 



In three places in John, Jesus compares Himself to the Bronze Serpent fashioned by Moses and elevated on a pole (for example John 3:14 reads: “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up…”).  That too, the serpent on a pole, was a God-given image.



Since Christ IS “the image” of God we believe that if we deny the use of images in the Church we would be indirectly denying the reality of the Incarnation itself, which was certainly a visible image.  It was, in fact,  the most profound visual image of all. 



For it is by this Incarnated “image” which God gave us a face that we could SEE and LOVE.   



All else flows from that. 



In the Incarnated Jesus Christ, the God of Israel is no longer "hidden from view," as He was prior to the Incarnation, but is reflected in the face of Jesus:



Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied." Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father'?   John 14:8-9



Now…since all the saints (both in heaven and on earth) are truly one-Flesh in Christ (by virtue of grace and the Promise of the Covenant), it therefore follows that Jesus, in turn, is reflected within them. 



And so the glory of God dwells in our very midst and is, like the Light of the World (compare John 8:12 and Matt 5:14), refracted into a million different places, all of which shine with the same glory of the One God.   



This is why venerating any image provided by the Church can never be idolatry PROVIDED, of course, that the image is of one who is “in Christ” and the object of the veneration is solely and exclusively for the glorification and worship of God alone. 


Regarding bowing:

Is bowing of and by itself an evil thing - or is the Bible only condemning it when one is bowing to an idol of a false god?

Well,

"Let peoples serve you, and nations BOW down to you. Be lord over your brothers, and may your mother's sons BOW down to you. Cursed be every one who curses you, and blessed be every one who blesses you!"   Genesis 27:29

Simply stated, the Bible is filled with MANY more examples of Biblical personages bowing to each other out of respect. Therefore, according the Bible, as long as one does not consider the object itself that one is bowing to (such as another person) to be a god or an object worthy of worship, then bowing is NOT worshipping and hence is acceptable to God.

When Japanese people bow to each other are they offering "worship"? No.

But, why would anybody want to bow or show a measure of respect for a created object in the first place? That is a good question.



Let me ask you this in response: why do people salute a flag? Do they worship the flag? Do they worship the thing that the flag represents? Do they consider the flag to be divine? Does God condemn someone saluting a flag - or bowing to something that reminds one of something or someone precious?At least i know in your lifetime, you have actually saluted a flag or said the national anthem of your country in front of a flag. Should i now presuppose that also in your lifetime, you have bowed down or saluted an image before? If yes, then we are both idolators according to you and you have no right to critize catholics. Whether its a flag or a statute, it's still an image and you cannot weave your self from this arguement. But i want to also believe that your a rational person and you are not worshipping it, and considering it a god. So it applies to catholics too.



Many people, including myself, will look at old family photos and might kiss the picture of a deceased loved one and might even talk to the photo as if the person were sitting in the room with them.

And it is in THAT sense that Catholics will gaze at a statue of Mary and bow to it *out of respect* for the woman being represented in the statue - the mother of our Saviour. Mary herself is NOT considered to be divine or a goddess worthy of worship. And THAT makes all the difference in the world.

And so, getting back to my earlier comments about the importance of BOTH matter and spirit, one MUST keep in mind that just as God took on flesh for our Redemption, and just as His Church is meant to physically continue His ministry on earth, and just as we are called to walk in His works (Eph 2:10), so too physical objects can serve a higher purpose by reminding us of people and events that point to the saving work of Christ.

We are called to imitate those who went before us (such as Paul for example who plainly called his readers to imitate his example – 2 Thessalonians 3:7-9; Hebrews 13:7) and so statues, just like precious family photos, evoke special memories and inspire special devotion to those have already successfully run the race ahead of us.

And this is done through using God's created matter for SACRED and GOOD PURPOSES (by reminding us of how Mary stood for that which is worthy of imitation: she ALWAYS pointed to Jesus and said to, “…do whatever He tells you.” - John 2:5) while steadfastly rejecting ALL false gods and false idols that are the handiwork of the devil who causes us to worship big-screen TVs and all sorts of modern day idols that stumble us.

I really hope that you pray on this Pilgrim, because, if nothing else, you MUST recognize that Catholics do not worship or PRAY to Mary even if we do offer respectful body language much as we would to an old and precious family photo. To continue to accuse us of worshipping Mary in this regard would be akin to bearing false witness against your Christian brethren. Please understand that, while I honour, respect, and love Mary - I do not "worship" her. Worship is reserved for God alone. Period.


On a final note, I implore you to furnish your arguments with standard authorities from the catholic council, pope, bishops or who ever you think is directly connected with the catholic faith and has been duly accepted by the catholic council as an authority and not some obscure statement written by a 13th century bishop or cardinal that has been discredited by the catholic church and refrain from taking pot shot that you think ought to be and is not what it is. ( you want a proper understanding of the catholic church, learn to read first and scout for the catholic canons and get back to me)

One more thing pilgrim, Since your an expert on pointing out the flaws of the catholic church, wont you be kind enough to tell us where you supposedly worship? I doubt your pastor will be happy with you if you don't tell us where terrible worshippers of the devil as you would like to call us deep down could come to fellowship and change our evil ways! Please don't be a coward. Am not ashamed to be a catholic and hide under the disguise of only the word of God. Please follow suit and tell the whole world who you really are or at least tell us your still on your holy pilgrimage to search for the best faith or denomination and we would understand and clear up this confusion.

P:s  Cgift, i have refrained from saying any thing to you because i have discovered you are Pilgrim's puppy without a mind of your own. When your ready to support your little shallow arguments with concrete evidence, give me a shout out. At least take a cue from your mentor pilgrim and do some damning research and not be her yes man.

yeepa! Longest post on nairaland award!

_{pilgrim oya forward march , me i don run}

ricadelide:

yeepa! Longest post on nairaland award!

_{pilgrim oya forward march , me i don run}

Where you dey go? Abeg sidon look drama - even if na for sidelines. I go take my time to loosen up this solicitor, no be small!

pilgrim.1:

Where you dey go? Abeg sidon look drama - even if na for sidelines. I go take my time to loosen up this solicitor, no be small!

OK, sidelines here i come

@lawyer,

You make a good comedian for Catholics, and your epistemological "bull" might've taken you less than 5 minutes to churn out. In which case, I'll just reduce your bloviates to a decent summary and leave you the chaff to take home.

lawyer:

Secondly, after reading your reply, I actually for once decided to see who was behind the mask posting such odious and pungent statements on this forum, and it struck me that I have been the one that has been wrong all the while. The screen name Pilgrim, actually settles it all. You’re a journey man or let’s say woman or whatever you represent and your still on your quest to find out what your heart really desires. I finally found out that the reason you jump from religion to religion to defend various faiths is because your not stable. It is the hallmark of a pilgrim on his pilgrimage to search. Maybe your on the look out for the holygrail and right now your bustop is to become a anti catholic. Am sure by the time you have spent your whole life journeying through various faiths, I expect you to return back to where you originally came from.

You don't need to sob so hard, as your ignorance only plays out that you don't read your Bible. As I've noted elsewhere, the verse that inspired my username was penned by the same man (apostle Peter) whom the Catholic Church calls 'the first Pope':

[list]1 Pet. 2:11
'Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul'[/list]

It is no wonder then that Catholics are quite in a hurry to damn souls.

lawyer:

So am no longer going to disturb myself trading barbs with someone that could do a full 360 tomorrow and tell me the gains of being an apostle of the confusion faith. I’ll rather feel safer in the hands of long term practicing protestants, that are interested in constructive debates where we can learn from each other and probably move closer to God.

Yada-yada! How much have Catholics ever tried to learn from Protestants, after the Pope affirmed that non-Catholics are not Christians? This doublespeak is age old with Catholics, my dear lawyer.

lawyer:

Debates are not meant to provoke or stir up violence or anger just because you are so dogmatic in your beliefs.

No, but you'd rather employ the tools of the trade while waving a tattered white flag of a peace that Catholicism doesn't have; let alone offer to no one. Do you want a joggle of memory as to the violence of Catholicism in the earlier centuries?

lawyer:

The title of the supposedly “well thought of thread of yours”, is enough for well renowed intellectuals to deviate for a moment and engage in rough talk and forget to put things in the right perspective. A reasonable debate is not about losing an argument or winning it. It’s meant for a reflective soul searching later on to balance both sides.

You should've used your brains and put your own advice to work, rather than rant initially and make your readers wonder about your IQ.

lawyer:

All along, you have accused me of not providing substantial answers as it regards your questions as it relates to Mariolatory beliefs and bowing to statutes, hence your submission that we are idolators and your constant reference to the word of faith from the bible.

If you care to be honest, I quoted no other source than the Bible. If you can't deal with issues from that same Book, what's the point spuing your caterwauls in the first place?

lawyer:

1. Let’s get to the heart of the matter. You are assuming that the Bible is the sole rule and guide of faith, and that God has revealed nothing outside the Bible that is necessary for our salvation. This is wrong. How do you know what books belong in the Bible? How do you know what is divinely inspired, using the Bible alone? You don't, because the Bible does not include an inspired table of contents. Yet you would agree that knowing what books are inspired can only come from God, and knowing what books are inspired is necessary for our salvation. But since the Bible does not say what books belong in the Bible, this forces you to look outside the Bible to learn how the canon of Scripture was selected. This determination was made by the Catholic Church at her various councils in 382, 393 and 397 A.D. You can read your Bible from cover to cover and not find a single passage that asserts" that the Bible is the only authority for the Christian. Yet, this is Pilgrim’s premise throughout this thread. This is the real issue, Pilgrim. If you cannot demonstrate that the Bible is the only source of God’s word, then none of your conclusions about Catholic teaching are trustworthy, since the conclusions are based on a false premise.

Are you not rather defeating your own logic? If the Catholic Church held various councils to bring about a canon of Scripture called the Bible, all we're asking them to do is adhere to the same Bible they canonized. The councils would have been a waste of time to have convened to canonize the Bible and then fail to uphold its tenets in their practices. That failure only presupposes that you'd have to reject the same Bible and then look outside its pages for the same issues that Catholics cannot defend in the Bible.

lawyer:

This is a truth that you Protestants simply cannot refute. Therefore, start becoming familiar with history, and abandon your private judgment, non-biblical "Bible-only" fallacy and listen to the Catholic Church, which is the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). This dialogue is over until you can effectively address this issue - but you can't unless you become Catholic. That, of course, will require you to empty yourself and seek the truth.

In the first place, we're familiar with the shady history of Catholicism. Second, the Bible does not call 'the Catholic Church' the pillar and foundation of the truth - go back and read 1 Tim. 3:15 that you quoted. Third, none of the apostles was a Roman Catholic bowing down to molten images in order to preach the truth of God's WORD, which Catholics need to carefully consider before prospecting redundant excuses.

lawyer:

Which brings us to an important point? There is a central authority in Catholicism, and that is the Catholic Church (from which Pilgrim rarely quotes but relies on pictures or hearsay statements). Pilgrim has no such authority in her world other than her own private interpretation of Scripture. You will pretend that Scripture is perspicuous and self-attesting, yet there are about 30,000 different “Bible" churches that all teach different doctrines regarding the Christian faith, most of which have cropped up in the last 50 years. I could find a dozen anti-Catholics who all hold different opinions about justification, baptism and a host of other issues to demonstrate how arbitrary and erroneous and extremely unstable Protestantism is. This is the main reason why thousands of Protestant pastors have come home to the Catholic Church in recent years.

First, we know the Catholic Church is facing an enormous decline situation; not to mention the fact that some Catholics leave the Catholic Church and become Protestants - and this is not a recent phenomenon.

According to a study conducted by the Catholic Church itself, it is reported that: "8,000 Latin Americans leave the Catholic Church every day to become evangelical Protestants."

If anyone needs to worry about Protestant pastors in the 'thousands', you need to be reminded of a small statistical figure of decline in the Catholic Church: "In 1965 there were 338 annulments, in 2002 there were 50,000" - where did the applicants go? If even the Catholic Church itself knows that she's facing such a huge slide. You cannot come here and trump up a typically Catholic flash post to deceive the public on this.

Second, I don't see any reason to quote the fallacies of the Catholic Church, as I don't pander the "bull" of the Vatican and pretend that as "truth"; whereas, the Vatican itself is a total stranger to the truth of God's WORD.

Third, even casually going through related threads on this Forum, is it not obvious that Catholics themselves are the ones who have no clue what they try to defend? They are ever so desperate in their frustrations as to not reading the same Bible you boast about, and therefore absolutely clueless of their tenets! You really need to sit down and grow up with your folks before worrying over Protestants.

@lawyer,

lawyer:

For example, I could find one Protestant catholic basher who would disagree with Pilgrims understanding of baptism. Pilgrim would accuse the Protestant apologist of not having a “biblical" view. The Protestant catholic basher would accuse Pilgrim of the same. Even though baptism is one of the most basic tenets of the Christian faith, these two Christians would be in disagreement. Unfortunately for them, there is no method in Protestantism of resolving their disagreement. Yet they both claim that the Bible is their only authority. But if the Bible can’t resolve their disagreement, then how can it be their only authority? Help us with this, Pilgrim.

People have disagreed among themselves over a whole lot of issues - doctrinal (Acts 15:2, 7 & 22),  personal (Acts 15:37-41) or methodical (1 Cor. 1:11-13).

Even Catholics continue to disagree among themselves on a number of issues, whether on --

[list]
. . . Vatican's views on sex or with regards to issues about sex charges, on women ordination;

. . . or  on ordination of married bishops/priests - which led to the ex-communication of Milingo, the African Archbishop;

or about marriage;

. . . or administrative matters between Catholic bishops;

. . . or yet a Bishop acknowledging that 'most Catholics disagree with church teaching';

. . . or another Bishop openly criticizing the Pope and the teachings of Vatican II;

. . . or even the fact that Catholics disagree on what age a Catholic child should be to receive Confirmation.[/list]

Your problem hinges on trying to slur Protestants as an alternative to treating simple questions on Catholicism which, I repeat, Catholics cannot defend from the Bible. If you had answers, we would read them. It is not surprising that you had to litter the thread with noise, since you have nothing to show for a Biblical integrity of Catholic misfortunes. It's even more hilarious that upon every single allegation you try to whip up against Protestants, there are more than ten times over the same worries in the Catholic Church.

lawyer:

The bible that you are eloquently quoting was actually put together by the Catholic Church early fathers, so if you call it "bull", then what ever your quoting is also bull . Was it you or your pastor that gathered all the relevant and inspirational parts of the bible that your quoting wth so much discipline as you stated earlier? Did Jesus write the bible and hand it over to you personally? Did your protestant mentors like Calvin and Luther Martin chose the required WORD OF FAITH scriptures that your quoting today? All the chosen books, verses and chapters in the bible where carefully selected by the catholic church and i assume this is your own defination of "bull"

Noise yet again. I see you're so desperate to hide behind this caterwaul and scoot away from the questions on Catholic tenets.

In the first instance, we know that the "bull" of the Vatican is not the same thing as the Bible - and nowhere did I 'call the Bible a "bull". For me, it is not surprising that the Vatican would choose the appellation of "bull" for a document on religious matters; afterall, Catholicism is predicated on the same molten "calf" principle of Exodus 32. If I'm wrong, then you need to save your whimpers and simply address the issue of multiplied statues that Catholics bow down to and address in prayer.

lawyer:

If you want to wow me, go and search for the other books written by other prophets and apostles and tell us Catholics what we are missing. Bottom line, your catholic more than you imagine because it’s the basic tenets of the catholic church that was chosen to be in the bible. You might argue all day long that it’s not my bible and I use the King James version all you like. Once again bottom line, the edited remaining parts were still chosen for you to reflect on. So the argument would have been more subtle, if you were in another religion and we were comparing notes. Too bad. I understand your pains for the Catholic church overshadowing your thinking. You can’t help it.

If there's anyone in pains, it shows from your empty bloviates. If the basis tenets of the Catholic Church were chosen to be in the Bible, why is it taking you guys forever to soothe your pains by simply demonstrating where in the same Bible we find anyone PRAYING TO MARY, or anyone praying to dead saints, or anyone bowing to statues of Mary or any of the saints? You guys are comedians! Open your own edited Bible and show us where God asked you to make molten statues of Mary and the Pope and bow down to them! QED.

lawyer:

Better still, write your own version devoid of Catholic input that is devoid of "bull" but  again, since it's the same thing,

Shed your ignorance for simple truth - the Vatican Bull is not the same thing as the Bible. Period.

lawyer:

i wonder who the real "bull" in human form is?

You don't need to wonder any more - behold the man:



Are you still wondering, lawyer?

@lawyer,

lawyer:

2.   You talked about Catholics taking Mary as an Intercessor or mediator and challenged me to address the matter.

As i have already stated, Jesus Christ is the one mediator between God and man. But that does not preclude Jesus from applying His role as mediator anyway He sees fit. In fact, right before Paul says that "Jesus is the one mediator" (1 Tim 2:5), Paul appeals for mediation from others besides Christ, by urging that "supplications, prayers, intercessions and thanksgivings be made for all men" (1 Tim 2:1). How can Paul appeal to mediation from others if Jesus is our only mediator? Because, as St. Paul answers, "this is good, and is acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim 2:3-4). Therefore, although Jesus is our one mediator, He has charged us to be intercessors, or subordinate mediators with Him. We are able to do this by virtue of our baptism into the lord.

You see how you knot yourself, lawyer? Where have you "already stated" anything you have claimed above? Why you dey steal articles from websites and adjust them as your own, lawyer?

  @lawyer, Are you now Salza?


Nonetheless, here's something to school you up:

Having first affirmed that Jesus Christ is the one mediator between God and men, Catholics will always look for "others besides" the One! If Paul recognized the only one mediator (Christ Jesus) between God and men, he only asked Christians to pray for others - he did not charge them to become "sub-mediators". By introducing this fraud of 'surbordinate mediators' with Christ, Salza nullified his own initial statement of "one mediator". Second, Salza would also be saying that a widow who supplicates and prays for her needs is a 'sub-mediator' (1 Tim. 5:5 - who's she mediating for?). In just the same way as Paul urged us to pray for others (1 Tim. 2:8), so James asked that we "pray one for another" (James 5:16) - does that make us 'sub-mediators'? Where has Mary or any other saint "confessed" their sins to you or prayed to any Catholic member?

Besides, if praying to Mary makes her a sub-mediator (or, 'co-redemtrix') with Christ, then by his own argument all other saints whom Salza considered as 'subordinate mediators' will also be regarded as "co-redemtrix" as the Catholic Church assigns to Mary! Neither Salza, nor you lawyer, nor the Vatican can pretend to twist Paul's clear statement and apply Christ's mediatory ministry to anyone else! Your arguments for Mary being a mediator falls flat on its face, because rather than attend to the question, you're making every other Christian a "sub-mediator" with Christ - which means that Mary has been sacked from her role!   Do you have any new tricks to your games?

lawyer:

This is why Paul can say "I complete in my body what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ for the sake of His Body, the Church (Col 1:24). Was anything lacking in Christ's sufferings? Of course not. Paul is teaching us that God invites us to participate in the work of Jesus Christ, whether it be through intercession, suffering, works of charity and so forth. God is not threatened by the great glory and responsibility He gives His children. Indeed, the God that is worshiped in the Catholic Church is a loving Father who is intimately involved with His children and who invites their participation, just as earthly fathers do for their children.

Also Elizabeth calls Mary "the mother of God" when she says: "How can the mother of my Lord come to me?" (Lk 1:43). Is Pilgrim criticizing the words that Elizabeth chose when she greeted Mary? This is troubling indeed, since both Elizabeth's declaration and Luke's recording of same were inspired by the Holy Ghost. Also, where, pilgrim does the Catholic Church teach that "no one can enter the blessed kingdom without passing through her [Mary]?"   You site no document but base your criticisms on pure hatred of the catholic faith.

You're just being intellectually lazy. The same irrational and illiterate arguments that have become weathered from overuse is what you're appealing to with a few adjustments. You should have posted the whole page from wherever you plucked them, including these sites:

CAI - (http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/dialogs/marysaints/marysalza.htm)

Salza and Blackaby - (http://allanturner.com/magazine/archives/rm1205/Blackaby005.html)

You're so intellectually challenged that it's no surprise to see you'ae nothing of your own to present. I offered you to gather your best Catholic apologists and bring them to this Forum - that doesn't sound like asking you to plagiarise weathered material from the net and present them with a few adjustments - as if they were yours! E don tay wey una dey do exam malpractice!! Unfortunately, Catholics have a well-known reputation for duplicity. Do something smarter next time!

lawyer:

Catholics world wide, accept that Mary is not our Saviour. Jesus Christ is our Saviour. I don't know how long Pilgrim "Bible Christian" sect has been around, but the Catholic Church, for 2,000 years, has been worshiping Jesus Christ as its only Lord and Saviour.

Rubbish! Leaving the fantastic plagiarism aside, it was your own Pope Leo XIII on 1 September 1883 in his "Encyclical Supremi Apostolatus Officio" who let us know that the Catholic Church has always put ALL her hope and trust in MARY rather than in GOD! Here again:

[list]"It has always been the habit of Catholics in danger and in troublous times to fly for refuge to Mary, and to seek for peace in her maternal goodness; showing that the Catholic Church has always, and with justice,  put  all  her hope and trust in the Mother of God."[/list]

You can try to deceive the public with your duplicity; but don't wave it in my face!

lawyer:

Pilgrim narrow exegesis actually gives Christ less glory than the Catholic view. As Catholics, we know that even though Jesus is our one mediator and does not need any help from us, He shares His mediation with us, just as He shares with us His holiness and glory. This is what a loving Father does for His children. This concept of God sharing His gifts with His children is an overriding theme of the Catholic faith.

Another fantastic plagiarism with a melodramatic adjustment from Salza who said: "Mr. Blackaby’s narrow exegesis actually gives Christ less glory than the Catholic view. As Catholics, we know that even though Jesus is our one mediator. . ." blah-blah-blah!   

Any more duplicities or two-faced harrumph from your camp?

@lawyer,

You're now dazed, shébi? Why you dey log off? I thought you'd remain online to show me how you quickly responded to my previous post in less than 15 minutes? Your Catholic magic don fail? Abi you wan go refuel?

Oh gosh. . . please lawyer, stop being so ridiculous! You cheapened yourself so badly and made things so easy for me, I can hardly believe! Before I decided to come back to this thread, you should have known that I've read every Catholic so-called apologetics on the net!! And John Salza is a well known figure for illogical bloviates! That's how you gave yourself away by plagiarizing his articles and making them yours (with the same Ojuelegba adjustments!)

Come back and make us laugh some more, lawyer! Kai. . you've made me laugh soooo hard today!

Some more coming up (meanwhile, from your invisible offline position, make a quick call to Salza. . he might send you his pamphlet on Catholic panic measures!)

@lawyer,

lawyer:

Now - all that being said, it is true that many Catholics do, in fact, bow before statues as a *devotional* practice - but not as a matter of doctrine. ( besides your pictures that you posted were doctored. With photoshop anything is possible, but i wouldnt be so childish to extract pictures of miracle crusades or phony protestants to support my argument. Am a lawyer and i only present admissible evidence, not hearsay or pictures from the internet that are unsubstantiated)

You make a poor solicitor in your advocacy. On the one hand, you admit that "it is true" that many Catholics bow down to statues; and then you come back blaming the FACT of that Catholic practice on "photoshop"! Is this how you argue your case?

lawyer:

And - when any sort of bowing before a statue is done, it is done so out of *respect* for Mary (as a created human being who was blessed by God for a special role) - not out of *submission* as if we consider her to be some sort of divine goddess (as you imply here).

Sorry, I'm not the one presenting her as 'some sort of divine goddess'. It's your Pope (Leo XIII) who reminds you Catholics to "fly for refuge" and put ALL your hope and trust in Mary - as has ALWAYS been your Catholic habit! If that is not *submission*, what legal term do you apply for "bowing down" to a statue with such veneration?

lawyer:

In fact, the mere thought of considering any created being, even Mary, worthy of worship as if he/she is God or divine is repulsive, sickening, and condemned in the strongest possible manner. Heaven forbid!

Be honest - it doesn't cost a dime! If considering any created being, even Mary, worthy of worship is "repulsive, sickening, and condemned in the strongest possible manner", then you guys ought to have abandoned the heresy of PRAYING TO Mary ages ago!

lawyer:

According to Catholic devotional practice [not doctrine], it is customary [not a requirement] for Catholics to bow before a statue of Mary out of respect [not submission] for her having been the mother of Jesus.

[list]
Exodus 20:23
'Ye shall not make with ME gods of silver, neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold.'

Deuteronomy 4:16
'Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of MALE or FEMALE'

Deuteronomy 4:23
'Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget the covenant of the LORD your God, which he made with you, and make you a graven image, or the likeness of any thing, which the LORD thy God hath FORBIDDEN thee.'[/list]

Are those verses also "photoshop" texts as well?

lawyer:

Mary is a channel of grace but not the  source of grace. . .

If Pilgrim is living a life of Christian virtue, I hope that she too thinks of himself as a channel of grace. God works in and through us by the power of His Spirit. Thus, we are all “channels" of that grace, bearing witness to Christ and bringing people to the truth. This is why Paul calls us “God’s co-workers" (1 Cor. 3:9). As channels of grace, work together with God in building up His kingdom.

How do you explain your tenses between '("she" too thinks of ("himself"'?!? It's just simply another fantastic plagiarism from Salza :

[list]"If Mr. Blackaby is living a life of Christian virtue, I hope that he too thinks of himself as a channel of grace. God works in and through us by the power of His Spirit. Thus, we are all “channels" of that grace, bearing witness to Christ and bringing people to the truth. This is why Paul calls us “God’s co-workers" (1 Cor. 3:9). The word for “co-workers" (Greek, sunergoi) literally means “synergists." This means we, as channels of grace, work together with God in building up His kingdom[/list]

If Salza, for honesty sake, really believes in his interpretation of 1 Co. 3:9, he would be hard pressed to find where Paul asked any Christian to PRAY TO him or to Mary, or even to another saint. Salza asserts that 'we are all “channels" of that grace'; but he fails to apply that logic to making himself equal to Mary - since he had earlier said that 'Mary is a "channel" of grace!'

Besides, rather than slave upon Salva's apprenticed and half-baked logic, I would've expected you to put your brains to work, lawyer. We're used to Catholic duplicity, which you have displayed all through by copping out another's material and pretending to make it your own.

@lawyer,

lawyer:

For example, does this mean that ALL “images” of a religious nature are banned, or is it only those images association with other gods (or, more accurately, false gods considered by the individual to be true gods) that are condemned? Also, is "bowing" - of and by itself considered evil, or is it only bowing before false gods (considered by the individual to be true gods) that is condemned?

To answer these questions we must see if there are any places within the Bible whereby God has allowed for images and/or bowing WITHOUT either being considered "evil" or condemned. For if these practices are allowed in certain situations and condemned in others then we must honestly examine in which *contexts* are they permissible and which they are not.

[list]
Exodus 20:23 - "Ye shall not make with ME gods of silver, neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold." (KJV)[/list]

Interestingly enough, the Douay-Rheims Bible (the English translation favoured by most Catholics) drops the "with ME" in that verse and reads as:

[list]"You shall not make gods of silver, nor shall you make to yourselves gods of gold"[/list]

. . . an attempt to dribble round this important subject and excuse the fact that God forbids bowing down to molten mages.

lawyer:

And here we find many interesting things in Scripture because we can easily find instances in BOTH of these cases: images and bowing. And in some of *these cases* God has NOT condemned them - in fact in some cases He even *commanded* them.

Could you please show us WHERE God commanded the Catholic Church to make molten images and "bow down" to them? WHERE did God "command" you to do so?

lawyer:

Regarding images:

If God condemned ALL images (as per the common Pilgrim’s assertion) then one must explain why Moses was *commanded by God* to specifically *make images for use in worshipping* Him (Exodus 25:18-22 and 36:3-35)!

I've treated this matter before: (https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-74061.384.html#msg1465195)
(https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-74061.384.html#msg1465200)

The bottomline is that you've basically acknowledged that it is true Catholics bow down to statues - thus expressly disobeying God's direct command forbidding such things (Exo. 20:23; Deut. 4:16 & 23). You've presented nothing of your own to defend those Catholic practices, other than the caterwauls with which you littered the thread.

There are still tomes of Catholic issues left unattended, unanswered, unconsidered, dribbled round, fraudulently ignored, and rascally scooted away from; besides attempts by several Catholics to DENY some of them initially.

@lawyer,

lawyer:

I really hope that you pray on this Pilgrim, because, if nothing else, you MUST recognize that Catholics do not worship or PRAY to Mary even if we do offer respectful body language much as we would to an old and precious family photo. To continue to accuse us of worshipping Mary in this regard would be akin to bearing false witness against your Christian brethren. Please understand that, while I honour, respect, and love Mary - I do not "worship" her. Worship is reserved for God alone. Period.

First, there's no correlation between family photos and bowing down to statues of Mary - so nothing said there.

Second, do you mind refraining from making assertive denials against the clear evidence that Catholics PRAY TO Mary? How many times have we been through that and given evidence from Catholics themselves who actually PRAY TO Mary? It was your own Pope who asserted that Catholics have ALWAYS put all their hope and trust in Mary (scroll up and see, incase you missed it). Then again, what do your own Catholic apologists mean by "people pray to that person" as prerequites for sainthood?

Third, I know you've tried to disavow the matter of Catholics praying to any creature. Let me remind you of what you said:

[list]"In fact, the mere thought of considering any created being, even Mary, worthy of worship as if he/she is God or divine is repulsive, sickening, and condemned in the strongest possible manner. Heaven forbid"[/list]

You would sing a different tune if you were standing before the Pope who has offered tomes of prayers directly to "even Mary" in unmistakable language that considered her "divine". Please don't take a heart attack - but there are tomes of Roman Catholic evidence to the FACT that Catholics PRAY TO Mary, and even to a few others besides her. Let me remind you of a few from Pope John Paul II prayers (just incase you're playing ignorant here):

[list]
1. In the "Prayers by Pope John Paul II", among other things he offered in his prayers to Mary are the following (emphasis mine):

Mother, I commend and entrust TO YOU all that goes to make up earthly progress,
asking that it should not be one-sided, but that it should create conditions for
the full spiritual advancement of individuals, families, communities, and nations.

I commend to you the poor, the suffering, the sick and the handicapped, the aging,
and the dying. I ask you to reconcile those in sin, to heal those in pain, and to uplift
those who have lost their hope and joy. Show to those who struggle in doubt the light of
Christ your Son. Amen.


2. On the same webpage are also found these other prayers of Pope John Paul II --

'Obtain for us the grace to be continually renewed through all
the beauty of witness given to the cross and resurrection of your Son.
Amen.'


3. A few others gathered from various pages:

A
'O Mary, bright dawn of the new world,
Mother of the living,
to you do we entrust the cause of life'
-- (Pope John Paul II, March 25, 1995 )


B
'TO YOU, O Lady of Guadalupe, Mother of Jesus and our Mother,
belong ALL the love, honour, glory and endless praise
of your American sons and daughters!'


C
Prayer of Pope John Paul II on June 28, 2003 titled:
"Prayer to Mary, Mother of Hope"
(http://campus.udayton.edu/mary//prayerJune2003.htm)
[list]

Hehe. . . I never finish. Shé you sabi deny Catholicism? Let's play a bit with you. Just to show you how Catholics commit their souls to Mary rather than to God, take a look at the next prayer by Pope Leo XIII >>

[list]
As a little child, I loved you like a mother.
Now that I am old, my love for you has grown.

Receive me in heaven as one of the blessed,
and I will proclaim that I have obtained
such a great prize through your patronage.

Amen.
[/list]

All the above stand to fact that Catholics PRAY TO Mary, and there's no denying the FACT! How you dare assertively deny the FACT is only too well known of the duplicity coming from your camp. I implore you: don't let anyone deceive you with empty words under the guise of sounding 'intelligent' and yet presenting falsehood.

- - - -

If you have anything intelligent at all to present with Biblical integrity for the defence of Catholicism, please do so. If nothing at all, save the fraud and illiterate logic you've plagiarized from others and dressed as yours (unless you can convincingly "prove" that you're the same person as    John Salza! ).


Do have a sob-free weekend!