Banderas== Jesus had spoken and it most come to pass. "I will build my church and the gate of hell shall not prevail against it"

The Catholic did not write the Bible point of correction, they simply translated it to roman language and did not allow it to be written in any other languages. The Roman Catholic literally kill people and set them ablaze having a copy of the Bible in their possession just to eradicate the truth of salvation, but the word of God must prevail that is why Martin Luther stumbled on a script that says salvation was free from God and not bought with money from the papacy.

Banderas:

Pilgrim, maybe I should say Anglicans translated the current bible. But it was catholic Edit: monks scholars that initially wrote it. All them dead sea scrolls were hidden in caves when monasteries were sacked.

Lol. . . Banderas dear. . . I didn't read that monks initially "wrote" the Bible - unless you and I have a way of describing Paul and the other apostles as "monks".

@Banderers
We all know that the Head of the Church is Jesus, but here on earth we have visible Head of the Church. Was Peter not the visible of the Church on earth? I'm talking of hierarchy to keep orderliness in Christ Church on earth.

@ Thiefofheart
You have started insult, you can back-off quietly if you are here to use abusive languages. I cannot discuss this thread with you if you continue this way. Nobody has used that word “madness or whatever here. @Topic: You mean you have not seen Protestants drawing Christ Pictures on Banners or Books like Watch Tower printed by Jehovah Witness. Those drawings or pictures are images and when you compare Christ or God with animals (Lion of Judah or Lamb of God, even birds like dove as Holy Spirit – you are talking of Imageries because they are orally expressions. Should you do that as a Christian hence you condemn Images and Imageries? Again,.

pilgrim.1:

Lol. . . Banderas dear. . . I didn't read that monks initially "wrote" the Bible - unless you and I have a way of describing Paul and the other apostles as "monks".

Oookay, you're right. When i say wrote, I didn't mean the original compositions, far from it. But Paul and the other apostles wrote letters, and books. How were they then compiled into a bible?

When I say monks, I was talking about the bible in it's present day form, the preservation, and the reproduction by hand of the many scrolls that existed.

I guess the word copy should be used instead of wrote (though surely you must agree that when you copy a manuscript with a pen or quill, and paper or parchment, you are indeed "writing".

I hope I made myself clear?

ebos, you dont tell me what to do. If you have a problem with my words, then ignore me je je

Im just not gonna watch you make a generalized comment about people and claim it as a fact.

Btw I also have a problem with jehovah Witnesses but I must say that even then on their Watch Tower books I've never seen "pictures of Jesus" and again you are still making up lies. Who says every home has images of "doves" and "lions"?

Not everyone believes in that garbage.

Pilgrim - Ephesians 2 - written by Paul (who never did meet Jesus, and technically isn't one of the apostles). To be honest, in recent times I have begun to question a lot of Paul's messages. The majority are excellent, but there are some that appear to me to be excerpts of jewish traditions that existed at that time.



Loco - who told you the romans didn't let anyone read the bible? And regarding roman catholics setting people ablaze, that also happened in protestant christianity in the US. Misinterpretation of the message is not restricted to only one part of christianity. And as far as they were concerned, they weren't trying to stop salvation, they thought they were ensuring that people didn't spread a message they thought was sinful (reminds me of some christian university in nigeria forcing students to take HIV tests because they want to ensure high moral standards).

Banderas:

I hope I made myself clear?

Yes, you did (at least to me) - thank you.

Banderas:

But Paul and the other apostles wrote letters, and books. How were they then compiled into a bible?

I certainly don't have ALL the answers. However, that they were compiled after a series of consultations for the purpose cannot be denied.

Yet, the committee that compiled the volume which we now have as the Bible with 66 books had a standard for doing so. Foremost among the criteria was that the documents themselves bear testimony to the historical foundation of the Christian faith known in the days of the prophets in the OT and the apostles in the NT.

@ Thiefofheart
That is what I’m saying. You didn’t even understand my statement. I did not say some homes have Images of Doves and Lions. What I said was – by saying the Holy Spirit descended on the Apostles like a Dove, it then means you have formed Imageries in your mind or oral expression. From Imageries which is oral expression Images appear which is drawing or moulding or pictures. Image is a bit different from Imageries. When I talk of Imageries I’m talking of Figure of Speech. So, you can get me right now and stop abusive languages. I know, tomorrow I will scan a Watch Tower Magazine of Jehovah Witness that has Jesus Christ Pictures on it. It will be pasted here to prove you wrong. Jesus is the Lion of Judah – Imageries and not Image. It is a figure of Speech (Metaphor). So, why are you addressing Christ as animal since God said you should not compare or liken Him with anything?

Banderas:

Pilgrim - Ephesians 2 - written by Paul (who never did meet Jesus, and technically isn't one of the apostles). To be honest, in recent times I have begun to question a lot of Paul's messages. The majority are excellent, but there are some that appear to me to be excerpts of jewish traditions that existed at that time.

It is true that apostle Paul probably never met Jesus in person as did the other apostles who accompanied Him (Acts 1:21). However, he did have an unforgettable encounter with the Risen Christ that led to his radical conversion (Acts 9:1-9). He even uses that as an excellent point of reference in his defence before the Corinthians who questioned his apostleship (1 Cor. 9:1 - "Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?". In other words, if he was not an apostle, then he would not have been used of the Lord so successfully among the Corinthians (Acts 18:8-11).

One more thing: how could anyone hold that a majority of Paul's epistles are excellent - and at the same time question his other epistles? If that is the case, it would not be long before they started doubting the other epistles they regard as "excellent". That is exactly what led to such groups emerging as the Jesus Seminar who now question every single document of the NT, but actually have no solid testimony for the persuasions they hold.

Cheers.

Again ebos, Im not even gonna get into that arguement with you, (by the way you dont see people bowing down to doves)  but I digress

My problem is with you assuming that all people have such images in their houses. Do you need me to quote your comment for you?

also even if some others that arent Catholic have images here and there, they are known for going overboard to the point of even having shrines.

speaking of which, anyone care to tell me about the history of the rosary.

pilgrim.1:

Yes, you did (at least to me) - thank you.

I certainly don't have ALL the answers. However, that they were compiled after a series of consultations for the purpose cannot be denied.

Yet, the committee that compiled the volume which we now have as the Bible with 66 books had a standard for doing so. Foremost among the criteria was that the documents themselves bear testimony to the historical foundation of the Christian faith known in the days of the prophets in the OT and the apostles in the NT.

Pilgrim, this is excellent. The key word here is "committee". And therein lies my concern. There have been soo many committees interpreting the bible over th years, and a lot of the christianity we currently practice is from committees. I just find it scary that my entire premise of living my life the way i do is down to a compilation from committees,

Nice point pilgrim, this brings us back to the argument I've been making, why do we say other religions are not right, not Godly, when they as well have so many good points? There are LOADS of people who have claimed to have seen Jesus Christ - a lot of catholic saints claim to have done just that, or at least seen the virgin. So one one hand we laud Paul for his experience with the risen christ, and on the other hand we bash catholics for their experiences?

I'm not trying to demean christianity in anyway - I was brought up in this faith, and I follow it. I however NEED to know what the truth is, as different from some other christian on this site who has professed a desire to be brainwashed for christ.

The bible has been added to and taken out of over the ages - the current new testament is not the same one that Jesus read in the synagogue, and some of the stories in the bible we currently have exist in other religions that are much older.

@ThiefOfHearts

Rosary is a part of their Idol worshiping style in the Roman Catholics and has nothing to back it up from the scripture. They bow down to pictures and flowers decorated in white cloth and it looks exactly like ORHUNMILA shrine.

@locoman
I think u're just here to make trouble. . .if what ur church teaches u is 2 go out and condemn other sects instead of spreading the gospel, then u've all missed the mark.

@ locoman

which church u dey go?

@pterygott

I am not in any way trying to instigate trouble here, am only trying to bring to your awareness that if you are a Marianist you should seek God in truth and in spirit and stop bowing down to those sculptures you call replicant of the heavenly body. Without apology it is Idolatry and not Christianity. Jesus is the only true way to get to God and not through Mary of chaplet.

@k_francise

Hello dear am a Bible believing Christian and not a church ideologist like the Roman Catholic fraternity.

So much confussion and madness, why is it that all the religious sects just can not agree on one single issue? there are about a billion catholics in the world who some people here will like to believe are being lead astry(personally i believe a billion people can not all be wrong), there are the white garment and other garment wearing churches, the jehovar witness,the mormans,the protestants, the anglicans and all other people out there trying to prove that their own way is the true way and all the others are lost, how can all the christian denominations all say they are christians and yet refuse to agree on a single thing, some believe in trinity some don't,some believe in rendering songs of priases while dancing and shouting in the churches while others don't. some believe in honoring/worshipping mary some don't, some believe in faith and nothing more while some believe in holiness and nothing else. why all the confusion , lack of direction ,sense of understanding and belief in a single thing? yet they all cliam that they get their inspiration and gudience from the bible. some sect laugh at other sects while some see the other sects as children of the devil who are lost and are headed for eternal ruin. yet the claim that god is not the author of confusion when all the christians are CONFUSED about what to believe and what not to believe due to soo much confusion they seem not to be able t agree on a single thing.

pterygott:

@locoman
I think u're just here to make trouble. . .if what your church teaches u is 2 go out and condemn other sects instead of spreading the gospel, then u've all missed the mark.

@pterygott,

Wait, I think you need to understand locoman was responding to the Pope's pronouncements that Other Christians Are Not True Churches. Catholics themselves should really be concerned about such pronouncements, and not just react against people expressing their reaction to such statements from the Pope. It seems the Pope merely voiced out publicly the very same thing that most Catholics hold dearly as part of their convictions (I know a lot of Catholics who have said similar things to me even before the Pope made that came public with it).

@Banderas,

Thank you for sharing - I deeply value the concerns you presented; and please forgive my delayed response (I was quite occupied yesterday). Anyway, here:

Banderas:

Pilgrim, this is excellent. The key word here is "committee". And therein lies my concern. There have been soo many committees interpreting the bible over th years, and a lot of the christianity we currently practice is from committees. I just find it scary that my entire premise of living my life the way i do is down to a compilation from committees,

Well, it ought not be so. Perhaps, if you look a bit more closely, you'd have to agree with me that your faith is not in the committee or the result of their efforts in the compilation of the canon of the Bible. Rather, at the end of the day, when the noise ceases in the busy corridors of debates and discussions, you will find your faith simply in the One who loves us - Jesus Christ Himself.

I believe that is the one issue in the minds of the Committee(s) and councils who have met at various points in history to deliberate on matters of the Christian faith. They had this one goal: to present the Lord Jesus Christ in His glory for the salvation of mankind and the glory of God.

Yes, we'd have to admit that some committees seem to rather made a poor job of this; but at the end of the day, no generation is more blessed than ours. Why? Today, we have the Bible presented to us, declaring the Lordship of Jesus Christ and revealing the glory of God in His redemptive purpose. More than that, we have study tools to verify precisely the contextual meanings of subjects which some translation committees might have misrepresented.

So, I'd say simply that, God has blessed us tremendously in revealing His WORD to us. We deeply value every effort of every committee and council through the history of the Church that convened to present that WORD to us as revealed by God Himself. At the end of the day, our faith is in the Lord Himself, rather than in the servants (1 Cor. 2:5 and 2 Cor. 4:6-7).

@Banderas,

Banderas:

Nice point pilgrim, this brings us back to the argument I've been making, why do we say other religions are not right, not Godly, when they as well have so many good points?

It all depends on what we mean by "right" and "wrong". The moment one begins to speak in these terms, then certainly we're talking of 'standards' by which we determine or evaluate what's right or wrong. You'd be surprised to know how many religions out there have made an enterprise of trying to "prove" that 'Christianity is wrong'. For them, they don't see any difference between Catholics or Protestants; any expression of Christianity for these people is simply "wrong". One would not have reached that conclusion UNLESS they had certain standards by which they try to determine the value of Christianity.

As to the question of why "we" as Christians say other religions are not "right", personally I don't subscribe to such exercises (1 Tim. 2:23), unless there's something to share that may be of mutual benefit to others. However, when we do so, we're also speaking of standards and values by which we determine those religions. Basically, everyone wants to "prove" how wrong the other person is by the prism of their own interpretation of a given set of values. Speaking for myself, I knew something was "wrong" in my former faith (Islam); and the 'something' that was lacking launched in me a very deep thirst to investigate the 'religion' I had once derided - Christianity! For me, it didn't matter if Christianity was divided into hundreds of sects and further split into numerous denominations - afterall, we had (and still have) over 70 denominations and sects in Islam.

Bottomline: for me to say that some religions are "right" or "wrong"; I'd have to be speaking in terms of what they make of the revelation that God has given of Himself in the Bible. I've no problem with anyone getting along in their convictions in other religions. But the moment people begin to over-reach themselves by misrepresenting the Bible to "prove" that Christianity is wrong, that is whem I'm most likely to weight in on the discussion to help them see that it is not so. Perhaps, they need to look a bit closer inwards before launching out against Christians.

Banderas:

There are LOADS of people who have claimed to have seen Jesus Christ - a lot of catholic saints claim to have done just that, or at least seen the virgin. So one one hand we laud Paul for his experience with the risen christ, and on the other hand we bash catholics for their experiences?

No, I don't think the crux of the concern in this regard is on spiritual experiences of individuals. Some Muslims have also "seen" Jesus - in dreams, visions, etc - and these experiences have led to their deep conversions as well.

Perhaps, when we look a bit closer, we find that what many Protestants worry about is the age-old, unpronounced (until recently) convictions of Catholics that Protestants are NOT Christians! More likely than anything else, that is what really gets many Protestants debating Catholics - and as I hinted, they asking Catholics to look a bit closer home among themselves.

Banderas:

I'm not trying to demean christianity in anyway

I don't think you were.

Banderas:

- I was brought up in this faith, and I follow it. I however NEED to know what the truth is, as different from some other christian on this site who has professed a desire to be brainwashed for christ.

Well, it all depends on what question there is to be examine. If the question, for instance, is about the Deity of Jesus Christ, we know that the Biblical "truth" is that He is God (John 1:1). Then in its application, that "truth" leads us to respond to Him as Lord over our lives.

Taking that as an example in the NEED to know the "truth", the moment you begin to discuss that, you will find a whole lot of debates and counter arguments coming your way! Why is that so? Because if you believe that the "truth" is that Jesus is deity, those in opposition will take a stand to DENY the very "truth" you stand for! In its application, they saying one thing: I do NOT want to respond to Jesus Christ as "LORD" over my life!

What I've just tried to illustrate is that every point of reference about what you stand for, will be hotly debated - not for the mere love of arguments as to who is "brainwahsed" or "braindead" - but more than anything else, for the mere fact that the argument leads logically to one thing: APPLICATION!

What's the point engaging in any debate if not that people involved in that debate are making a profound statement about the "application" of their cherished persuasions?

Banderas:

The bible has been added to and taken out of over the ages - the current new testament is not the same one that Jesus read in the synagogue, and some of the stories in the bible we currently have exist in other religions that are much older.

Well, I'm not one of those who take this view. For me, the Bible has never been "added to" - and that was the one thing feeding my previous angst against Christians and Christianity; because Muslims believe that Christians are guilty of "adding" to God's WORD!

Anyhow, look again at your persuasions, and you'll see why I don't believe what you pointed out: Jesus read from the Old Testament, not from the New Testament! Take for example, Luke 4:15-20. There we read that Jesus read from the Book of the prophet Isaiah (an OT book), precisely from Isa. 61:1-3.

As for some of the 'stories' in the Bible, they may exist in other religions - and that's true, as we find the Biblical narratives in the Qur'an as well. The question, however, is what really constitutes a coherent revelation of God's redemption for man? Until these "religions" settle the question sin and the remedy in Christ, there simply is NO hope at all in them before the living God!
Cheers.

@pilgrim.1

My sister am quite impressed with your contributions you really did inspired me. If pope as the head of that cult they call a church can pass that general judgment to other living churches and his followers did not see anything bad in that, don't you see that all the billion catholics members including the pope himself needs deliverance from hypnotism?

I am recommending this book if you can see it in the UK i have search for it throughout Holland i have not find it yet except in the states. ( AMERICA IN PROPHECY ) the book exposed all the atrocity the papacy and his associate committed.

It is very interesting to see the effort believers put up to defend their cherished beliefs while at the same time pointing out percieved flaws in the convictions of others. The quest for the Truth is a continum and the continuous experiencing of each believer shapes his or her convictions at that point in time. What a believer attacks today, he will come to believe tomorrow and may yet attack in years to come etc. Some serious moslems have converted to christianity and some born again christains became serious moslem etc. It is probaly comical when people attack their previous convictions because when they held those former convictions, they were convinced at that time that they have the truth. It will be interesting to see wheather or not the present convictions of the contributors to this thread remain the same in 20 years time, during death and after death. What an interesting world!

@m_nwankwo

What is your point?

The point is that what you believe is a consequence of your own experiences. If those experiences change, your convictions will also change.

m_nwankwo:

It is very interesting to see the effort believers put up to defend their cherished beliefs while at the same time pointing out percieved flaws in the convictions of others. The quest for the Truth is a continum and the continuous experiencing of each believer shapes his or her convictions at that point in time. What a believer attacks today, he will come to believe tomorrow and may yet attack in years to come etc. Some serious moslems have converted to christianity and some born again christains became serious moslem etc. It is probaly comical when people attack their previous convictions because when they held those former convictions, they were convinced at that time that they have the truth. It will be interesting to see wheather or not the present convictions of the contributors to this thread remain the same in 20 years time, during death and after death. What an interesting world!

Gentleman,

Let me say this once: I'm not like the episcopal priestess who had no real experience with the Risen Lord Jesus Christ. So, it is understandable if after over two decades, she runs from pillar to post and still wants to remain a Muslim and a deaconess at the same time.

Second, 20 years is quite a small frame of time period to measure how I would fare in my convictions about Christ. I know Him soundly in my heart - and that was the one thing I never experienced before my conversion, because we had been told such things were "Christian lies". It was not until I lay down the Qur'an and prayerfully asked God to reveal His Son to me, that I found the assurance in a real expereince that only God gives.

Third, I've deliberately stayed away from the Grail thread just so that you guys can have breathing space from this troublesome lady pilgrim.1. It doesn't mean that I haven't seen the tomes of inconsistencies in that thread; nor does it mean that Abd-ru-Shin himself was such a saint that he never did attacked other people's convictions. Don't get me started yet again - it would only be a matter of minutes for me to outline it all out for your pleasurable consideration. But I forebear.

If it suits you to sit on the fence, fine. But the one reason why people engage in dialogue is to understand issues better. I've come a long way to understanding that it is best to dialogue with people, rather than start out castigating their convictions. I started from the wrong end of the stick as a Muslim, living my faith only in terms of deriding Christianity - quite oblivious to the fact that a true Christian LOVES people rather than to see people dead.

Today and every single day, I know that love in a real way - and that is why even though I may not agree with Catholicism, I still find many Catholics precious and dearly beloved. That is the way forward - to love them, and LET THEM KNOW that we do!!

Cheers.

locoman,

locoman:

@pilgrim.1

My sister am quite impressed with your contributions you really did inspired me. If pope as the head of that cult they call a church can pass that general judgment to other living churches and his followers did not see anything bad in that, don't you see that all the billion catholics members including the pope himself needs deliverance from hypnotism?

Well, first. , if we show them that we LOVE them more than anything they do, perhaps they will be more interested in listening, being friends, and then see the pointb we desire to share with them.

I'm ashamed to say this, but it is true that that some Evangelical groups are far worse in their cultic practices than we may allege against the Catholic Church. It is something many of us don't like to read or hear - but it is true.

Even so, that does not make Christianity in itself a huge problem. The point is that, at the end of the day, we all want to understand the Lord Jesus better - and love one another more deeply in His love.

locoman:

I am recommending this book if you can see it in the UK i have search for it throughout Holland i have not find it yet except in the states. ( AMERICA IN PROPHECY ) the book exposed all the atrocity the papacy and his associate committed.

I've seen the book (infact, it's lying down here in my drawer in the office, lol).

However, pilgrim.1 is searcing her own heart; and her style in seeking truth is not so much as to point ut other people's blotches (unless I'm pushed to the wall). Rather, I ask prayerfully that God would use me to tell the truth - even if it hurts me deeply - and in doing so, to bless others more than myself.

That said, we should not forget indeed that there are serious problems among Protestants. I am ashamed to list them, but some of the stuff we as "Evangelicals" have done only makes us want to weep in deep reflection. May God have mercy on us all.

Yet, in loving the people I come in contact with, may God fill my heart with grace that they may see less of me, but so much more of Him. That, for me, is often my starting point; and my goal is not so much to win a POINT - but to persuade a PERSON and encourage him or her to see the love of God revealed in Christ.

Many hugs and more blessings.

m_nwankwo:

The point is that what you believe is a consequence of your own experiences. If those experiences change, your convictions will also change.

Well, while I respect your persuasion, for me it's a different thing altogether. My convictions do not fluctuate on my feelings - because people's feelings change every single day!

If someone gave you £1,000 pounds today, sure you'd be happy - at least you mood will change; and as you walk down the street, every so often, you'd deep your hands into your pocket and "feel" the notes - just to make sure some rascals haven't outsmarted you and picked your pocket!

But then, what happens if you got home and found that you'd lost £900 - and didn't even know it?!? Surely, your mood and "feelings" would change instantly!

Would that change your convictions as well about your beliefs, about money, and about gifts?

Here: for me, I don't set out each day to lose money or anything precious. But I take the attitude of the prophet Habakuk, that no matter how things turn out, I will still rejoice in the God who loves me - because His love is unchangeable:

Hab. 3:17 -- "Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls."

@m_nwankwo

You are absolutely wrong, this is something far from mere believe and then change your confession. This is God and His word we are talking about and not just science or any other theory invented by man.

If the Bible says do not make any image of any likeness of any thing in Heaven, Earth, Sea Nor beneath the Earth nor bow down to them and worship them. And the catholics are doing just the contrary.

consider the following things my brother

1. Jesus is no longer on the cross====== But the catholics are still hanging his image on the cross and bowing down to it

2. The last supper was served with bread and wine======== Catholics used coin like thing (i wonder what that represents)

3. Non of the apostles used chaplets to pray======= catholics cant pray without chaplets

4. Mary gave birth to Jesus as a virgin and thereafter had other children with Joseph naturally ===========but the catholics still refers to her as a virgin.

There are too many biblical malpractices going on there, and the so call members can not see it and deliver themselves from it because they do not read the Bible. So we are taking this pain to encourage them to read the Bible.

Pilgrim,
I do not sit on the fence. Rather it is the knowlege that that such discussions are pointless because they participants are so sure of their belief. My knowlege that every person who seeks God will find him at some point without any contribution from fellow human beings makes me to keep quite. But ofcourse others like you who want to discuss should continue. I have no problem with that. Best wishes!

@pilgrim.1

You are right pilgrim.1 i am not saying that the protestant or the other denominations are perfect no, not at all they all have their short comings, you must have the bad ones. Like you know that Christianity is more of personal than belonging to a specific group.

I would like to have that book, how possible is it?

m_nwankwo:

Pilgrim,
I do not sit on the fence. Rather it is the knowlege that that such discussions are pointless because they participants are so sure of their belief. My knowlege that every person who seeks God will find him at some point without any contribution from fellow human beings makes me to keep quite. But ofcourse others like you who want to discuss should continue. I have no problem with that. Best wishes!

This is exactly why I sometimes let people alone to their persuasions. But m_nwankwo, you'd have to agree with me that Abd-ru-Shin's works are many times advertized as a "CONTRIBUTION" to help people "find" God based on an understanding of Creation! So, if that was a maxim you trie to offer, we might as well have had to ask Abd-ru-Shin not to have bothered giving the "lectures" which were collated to form his books!

Anyhow, warmest regards.