Oh, meanwhile, my crybaby and another of my crybabies said if it was at their "catechism" they would have reported to Police lol lol

italo: @ mods,

Can you pls make anti-Catholics allow us to discuss our faith in peace without their anti-Catholic input.

There are many anti-Catholic threads on nairaland. Even one of you Obadiah is the OP of one of them. Why are these not enough for them. What is it about the Catholic perfume that attracts these organisms so much that they even go eavesdropping on our threads. These are threads that are specifically FOR CATHOLIC TO SHARE THEIR FAITH.

Acidiosis and Holypower have been heckling us on https://www.nairaland.com/1525319/born-catholic-raised-catholic-die

And Enigma has been disturbing us on https://www.nairaland.com/1464338/thread-catholics/23

Many of their kind have condemned us to hell already. All we ask you and them is to let us go to 'hell' IN PEACE.

@ Mods

And I say once again please do not delete any of my posts on that thread. I also bring the following to your attention.

1. Until yesterday, I had never posted on that thread.
2. Yesterday one of the Roman Catholics brought up my name on the thread
3. The fellow who brought up my name and others then started raining insults on me ---- cowardly because it was behind my back
4. My posts on the thread in response to that development have been on topic
5. In fact, I am qualified to be on the thread: the title of the thread says it is for "Catholics"; I am a catholic Christian.
6, Roman Catholics post on the Christian Chat thread and nobody drives them away.
7. Finally, the complainant here is just whining and proving himself to be a crybaby because the pain of the truths exposing the lies of the idolatrous Roman Catholic Church is getting too much for him. Please note that this is fact or opinion and not insult. What is more, the cretinous crybaby himself just insulted others by calling them "organisms".

woky: hmmmmm... Issue of Pope Boniface VIII and king Philp IV

I would have love to clear you but.. Doing it will cause another long argument which i dont lyk..

Longtime

You nooooo fit! You just dey yarn dust.

Lol, the pain of two of my crybabies is so bad they are thinking of going to Police.

It is not good to be wedded to lies and fraud; when the light of truth is shone on lies and fraud, this is what happens - it tends to cause pain to children of darkness.

Ubenedictus: Wow, so you say u are not a catholic, what them are you doing in a catholic only thread?

You know something? I deliberately held back on one or two posts yesterday because I wanted to see your (further) reaction to a couple of posts. Now, that I've done it and that you have done as I expected it is now confirmed that you are a hypocrite.

On other threads, you ask me to be civil and not be sarcastic towards you Roman Catholics. Then you come here to start a conversation about me; you and your fellows then start raining insults on me behind my back. Not only did you fail to caution your cowardly compatriots, you also joined in. Since my initial posts in this thread about that, other Roman Catholics including my other crybaby (who is increasingly proving to be cretinous) have rained further abuse on me. You keep quiet.

Final straw, having brought my name up here and abused me with your compatriots, you now complain what I'm doing on a "Catholic" thread! Incredible hypocrisy.

Well I am here now. Let me see you and especially my cretinous crybaby push me off the thread.

^^^ The Roman Catholic Bible does not even correspond to The Septuagint anyway .........

Oh, and for the fun of it generally here is something interesting from the Roman Catholic organisation's own encyclopaedia http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2711.htm (and all the Roman Catholics run to double-check, lol )

"38. But it should be known that there are also other books which our fathers call not "Canonical" but "Ecclesiastical:" that is to say, Wisdom, called the Wisdom of Solomon, and another Wisdom, called the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach, which last-mentioned the Latins called by the general title Ecclesiasticus, designating not the author of the book, but the character of the writing. To the same class belong the Book of Tobit, and the Book of Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees. In the New Testament the little book which is called the Book of the Pastor of Hermas, [and that] which is called The Two Ways, or the Judgment of Peter; all of which they would have read in the Churches, but not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. The other writings they have named "Apocrypha." These they would not have read in the Churches.

These are the traditions which the Fathers have handed down to us, which, as I said, I have thought it opportune to set forth in this place, for the instruction of those who are being taught the first elements of the Church and of the Faith, that they may know from what fountains of the Word of God their draughts must be taken."

The Roman Catholic Bible of 25 for, 15 against and 16 abstained is even contrary to tradition.

Looku andi laughu!

The Roman Catholic canon was only done in Trent in AD 1546 --- 16th century.

The Roman Catholics did not canonise anything at Hippo or Carthage! This is why for example "pope" Gregory I even 100 years after Carthage said that the Apocrypha is not part of the canon.

Athanasius who essentially belongs to the Orthodox produced a canon list in AD 367 --- well before anything that the Roman Catholics can claim, even fraudulently.

Syncan:

Hmm, proves me right again. Permit me to ignore you again.

Crybaby kawai!

OK, since I'm here

It is a LIE to claim that the Roman Catholics canonised the Bible in AD 382. Those making that claim on this thread are liars.

The claim is based on a forged document as we have shown on other threads.

Oh, if the Roman Catholics canonised the Bible in AD 382, why then were they still supposedly still doing it again in AD 393, between 397 and 419, in 1442 and certainly in 1546?

Why did Jerome not know about it and he said the Apocrypha was not part of the canon?

Why did "pope" Gregory I not know about it and he said the Apocrypha was not part of the canon?

Even on the eve of Trent why did "Cardinal" Cajetan not know about it and he said that the Apocrypha was not part of the canon?

Ubenedictus: E newest catholic in our midst welcome.

Thank you, but you need to be clear on that! I am not part of the Roman Catholic Church ---- only the catholic i.e. universal Church.

Ubenedictus: i actually brought it up becos ur methods seem insincere at best and i really need a charitable way to deal with your monologues with half truths.

You and your friends are dishonest and in any event historically Roman Catholic arguments have always been based on lies and fraud.

The problem of you and your friend is that in me you run into someone more than capable of both exposing and debunking Roman Catholic fraud and falsehoods!

Ubenedictus: Do u wish to discuss honorius? And to what end?

I do not wish to discuss anything. I post whatever I feel necessary whereever and whenever.

@ Moderators

NOTICE

I expect some Roman Catholics to report two posts of mine on the Roman Catholic thread including this one https://www.nairaland.com/1464338/thread-catholics/24#19675089

I request that you please look at any such report carefully; I had never posted on that thread until some of them brought my name up on the thread today. Specifically, I request that you kindly leave all the posts and not delete them.

Thanks.

Syncan:

Dearest, the boy is just incorrigible, He quotes from a biased historian who is out to paint the church black no matter what. His manner of speech is appalling and he cares not about christian charity in his speech. I simply ignore him as he copies and pastes along. The only Input he makes in his posts seem to be the insulting contents. His posts are filled with twisted half truths, while he keeps shouting obscenities against Catholics. How do you deal with someone who has so much "info", and still remains an Anglican...with its infamous origin. It simply tells you the person is not honest, so Ignore. Or if you care, refute without caring about his comments.

OK my crybaby takes the invitation of Ubenedictus to insult me (behind my back) in their enclave. Well I am not afraid of coming to the Roman Catholic enclave.

Meanwhile this is the same mumu dunce of a crybaby that I thoroughly schooled on his ignorance about his own Roman Catholic organisation's rubbish doctrine of papal "infallibility" ---- even with documents that the mumu supplied!

@Ubenedictus

I have deliberately stayed out of this thread out of respect -- to allow Roman Catholics to have their space.

You are now inviting insults to my person --- and thus you are inviting me to the thread.

Anyway, let me first give you a bonus: Honorius was condemned as a heretic by a Council and by other "popes". What is more, successive popes for several years had to declare in their 'Profession of Faith' that Honorius was a heretic before they could take office.

Roman Catholic Church

the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church is well- known; and also that those who are obstinate toward the authority and definitions of the same Church, and who persistently separate themselves from the unity of the Church, and from the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, to whom ‘the guardianship of the vine has been entrusted by the Savior,’ cannot obtain eternal salvation

compared to

Apostle Paul

"If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

Another one:

Roman catholic Church

"No man of the wayfarers outside the faith of this Church, and outside the obedience of the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved"

versus

Jesus Christ

"Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep."

Anyway, for the benefit of those whom it will benefit:

Roman Catholic Church: "For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved ...."

versus

Jesus Christ: "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved ..."

Just a quick question, how many people (especially those arguing in favour of tithing) support the following statement?

"Regular payment of tithe and offering is obligatory because it is God's command. It is God's way of providing for the ministers in the Church. The ministers and other church employees are paid their food, allowance through tithe.

The offering is used to cater for the needy in the Church.

Tithe and Offering must be paid on every income e.g. salary, profit from business transaction .....

The tithe is exclusively for the minister's welfare."

DrummaBoy:

I can understand that.

Pls can you make out time to visit this thread, some may need your insight there. Thanks: https://www.nairaland.com/1524447/inviting-tithers-non-tithers-one-go

Thanks, I will try and visit the thread.

Gombs:


Your post reeks of utter defeat. Enigma is really giving you a hard time. ....

You will have to forgive me for not heeding your advice (at least for this post) but I call some of them my crybabies. In fact one of them has just made a dig at me two or three posts or so above.

@ Drummaboy

Roman Catholics like to denigrate Luther in particular. But while Luther like all men was not perfect, thank God for what he did and his triggering of the Reformation.

Interestingly, some major Roman Catholics who were more faithful to Bible lessons and even "tradition" agreed with Luther on a number of things.

Roman Catholic Church

“We declare, state, define and pronounce that it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff. (‘Pope’ Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam; statement made ex cathedra, thus ‘infallibly’!)

Versus

Jesus Christ

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)

^^^ And that refers to the Roman Catholic Church?

And people say don't ridicule erm laugh!

And the "church" of course does not include the Anglican Church, the Baptist Church, the Methodist Church etc!

Yeah, right!

Like Clinton, it depends on the definition of "is". lol

Oh, by the way, these questions remain of course.

1. Is the Anglican Church --- a Church?
2. Is the Methodist Church --- a Church?
3. Is the Baptist Church --- a Church?

Ubenedictus: the neccesity of the church didn't start from florence, cyprian, augustine, Jesus and paul are just a few who taught that the church was necessary for salvation. I taught you knew that from your readings of the church father or did you simply pass over it wen reading?

And people say one should not ridicule Roman Catholics --- when they are talking ridiculous nonsense.

So, Jesus Christ said that the Roman Catholic Church is "necessary for salvation"!

Sheer rubbish!

Ubenedictus: Since you want to go there many 'churches' truly are business for some pastors, you may want to deny it but it is true. And there are some pastors who want to really, sincerely and honestly teach people the "word of God" at least as they understand it. Even so i can say i have never refered to anyones worshipping community as a shop, even if i may have good reasons to do so. Your generalising doesn't work well.

If I call fraud now, you will start shouting again. You know well the question(s) I have asked you in the past; for the avoidance of doubt I repeat:

1. Is the Anglican Church --- a Church?
2. Is the Methodist Church --- a Church?
3. Is the Baptist Church --- a Church?

Follow up to my last post:

One of them raised the "Council of Florence" with me recently. For all their modern talk of "separated brethren", here is something from the Council of Florence.

"It firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church's sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church."

Tell me that is not to be disparaged and ridiculed!

@Gombs

All of them Roman Catholics cannot deny when I was begging them that we should avoid fight --- even when they were raining very bad insults at me.

Moreover, Roman Catholic doctrine is such that it is difficult to discuss without disparaging their claims. Look at just two of their starting positions:

1. No one can be saved unless he submits to the authority of the Roman Catholic "pope".
2. Those who reject the "primacy" and "infallibility" of the Roman Catholic "pope" are heretics and are anathema!

With that starting position, how can one argue with them without disparaging their claims? And it is made worse when we know that Roman Catholic claims are not only based on lies but also on deliberately forged documents that they use to try and support the lies.

These are facts --- not even insults or disparagement even though I don't deny that I now present these facts in both sarcastic and disparaging ways.

Let me show you a sign of some the progress that the vigorous challenge approach has made: some of them here are now careful about calling other people's assemblies as "shops"; until very recently they effectively did it on a daily basis!

^^^ Look, "move forward" in whatever way you like. When I see you constantly telling your fellow Roman Catholics to stop calling people heretics, bastards and saying their "assemblies" are not "church" etc etc etc, I might just take you seriously.

As for my posts, you don't tell me what to do. I will post whatever and in what manner will make my points effective for the intended audience.

When your fellow Roman Catholics have been "in fighting mood" (which is very frequently), where were you?

Abeg, make I hear word!

Ubenedictus: my dear, your blend of sacasm doesn't make for a discussion it makes for a mudslingling parade, a free for all fight. I abstain frm such. If you wish to make a discussion kindly and politely do so, if you can only use sacasm and well conceal insults then weldn.

No be by force! You can choose to ignore my posts; afterall some of the Roman Catholics here claim they don't read my posts!

But of course when the Roman Catholic posters are calling people heretics, bastards etc and throwing all manner of insults and telling blatant LIES you don't see any of that.

Meanwhile on the claim about "tradition" and "majority", I am reminded of a quote attributed to "pope" Pius IX,

"The Tradition is I"!

Oh and because I choose to be extra generous on this one occasion, those who want "links" can search here https://archive.org/stream/historydogma04speigoog/historydogma04speigoog_djvu.txt