please read up more on Judas Macabees one of the greatest biblical figures in jewish history.The macabees family presided over palestine from 146BCE till the fall of jerusamem to the romans in 63BCE under the authourity of pompey.

Judah Maccabee (or Judas Maccabeus, also spelled Machabeus, or Maccabaeus, Hebrew: יהודה המכבי, Y'hudhah HamMakabi) was a Kohen and a son of the Jewish priest Mattathias. He led the Maccabean revolt against the Seleucid Empire (167–160 BCE) and is acclaimed as one of the greatest warriors in Jewish history alongside Joshua, Gideon and David.

The Jewish feast of Hanukkah ("Dedication" commemorates the restoration of Jewish worship at the temple in Jerusalem in 165 BCE, after Judah Maccabee removed the Hellenistic statuary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judas_Maccabeus

naijadeyhia:


What did the so called catholic church approve? They approved already existing scripture. The scriptures were far older than them and existed long before them. They only gathered them together. Because God had to preserve His word in line with scripture he made sure the right scripture that wouldnt bring confusion was what was accepted. The other books were now attempted to be added over 1000 years later. Who is fooling who?

yes some of these scriptuires existed before the catholic church so also are non canon ical scrioptures like Enoch,nathan,Jahar and the several gospels which are not in the bible today.The fact remains that the catholic church determined the books that got into the bible.

[b]If the Bible is a Catholic book,

1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).
6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9).
9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?[/b]

READ UP BOY!

[/quote]The other books were now attempted to be added over 1000 years later. Who is fooling who?[quote]

it seems like you have comprehension issues,how many times would i tel you that these 7 books were among the original canons approved by the catholic church in the late third and fourth centuries

naijadeyhia: [b]If the Bible is a Catholic book,

1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).
6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9).
9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?[/b]

READ UP BOY!

oga wetin be all this one we u de yarn above.Abeg dont digress and let us finish this matter

For more on Judas macabees read up on the history of the hasmonean dynasty which ruled Jerusalem for almost one hundred years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasmonean_dynasty

Even the dead sea scrolls dated long before the advent of xtianity also contained the so-called apocryphals.Asure prove that these books were been used by the early jewish people before the advent of xtianity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls

[i][/i]

chukwudi44: Even the dead sea scrolls dated long before the advent of xtianity also contained the so-called apocryphals.Asure prove that these books were been used by the early jewish people before the advent of xtianity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls

[b]Baptism: The Catholic Church Changed from immersion to sprinkling in 1311 AD.

A. Jesus was immersed not sprinkled by John the Baptist.

In those days Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. Immediately coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens opening, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon Him; Mark 1:9-10

B. Bible baptism is immersion:

The word baptism in the original Greek means immersion! Our English word "baptism" is from the Greek word "baptisma" and means "immersion, submersion and emergence" "to dip, immerse, submerge"
And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; and the eunuch no longer saw him, but went on his way rejoicing. Acts 8:38-39

C. Bible Baptism is a burial:

Only immersion fulfills the meaning of a burial, spinkling makes the idea of baptism being a burial nonsense:
"having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead." Colossians 2:12
"Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life." Romans 6:3-4

The Orthodox church never changed and immerses to this day!

C. The Roman Catholic church admits baptism by immersion was practiced till 1311 AD:

"Baptism took place by immersion in ancient times."
"Catholics admit that immersion brings out more fully the meaning of the sacrament, and that for twelve centuries it was the common practice."

"Baptism used to be given by placing the person to be baptized completely in the water: it was done in this way in the Catholic Church for 1200 years." (Adult Catechism, pp. 56-57).

"The church at one time practiced immersion. This was up to the thirteenth century. The Council of Ravenna, in 1311, changed the form from immersion to pouring."

C. Today the Roman Catholic baptizes by sprinkling and admits the change:


Sprinkling is Un-biblical

Not even The Pope can make right, an infant baptism by sprinkling, that is wrong according to the Bible![/b]

naijadeyhia: [i][/i]


[b]Baptism: The Catholic Church Changed from immersion to sprinkling in 1311 AD.

A. Jesus was immersed not sprinkled by John the Baptist.

In those days Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. Immediately coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens opening, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon Him; Mark 1:9-10

B. Bible baptism is immersion:

The word baptism in the original Greek means immersion! Our English word "baptism" is from the Greek word "baptisma" and means "immersion, submersion and emergence" "to dip, immerse, submerge"
And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; and the eunuch no longer saw him, but went on his way rejoicing. Acts 8:38-39

C. Bible Baptism is a burial:

Only immersion fulfills the meaning of a burial, spinkling makes the idea of baptism being a burial nonsense:
"having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead." Colossians 2:12
"Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life." Romans 6:3-4

The Orthodox church never changed and immerses to this day!

C. The Roman Catholic church admits baptism by immersion was practiced till 1311 AD:

"Baptism took place by immersion in ancient times."
"Catholics admit that immersion brings out more fully the meaning of the sacrament, and that for twelve centuries it was the common practice."

"Baptism used to be given by placing the person to be baptized completely in the water: it was done in this way in the Catholic Church for 1200 years." (Adult Catechism, pp. 56-57).

"The church at one time practiced immersion. This was up to the thirteenth century. The Council of Ravenna, in 1311, changed the form from immersion to pouring."

C. Today the Roman Catholic baptizes by sprinkling and admits the change:


Sprinkling is Un-biblical

Not even The Pope can make right, an infant baptism by sprinkling, that is wrong according to the Bible![/b]

madm please even in copying and paste do take into recognition the context unto which you paste.The stuff you just opasted have got nothing to do with my quote which you just attached

[b]Prohibition against church leaders marrying is a satanic doctrine:

By ignoring what scripture says about one of the purposes of marriage being to alleviate sexual lust, the Pope has done damage to the institution of marriage. Remember, it wasn't until about 1070 AD that Catholic priests were first officially forbidden to be married. That's 1000 years too late to be part of Bible Christianity.

In fact the Holy Spirit prophesied this apostasy: "But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. " 1 Timothy 4:1-3
In fact the Bible specifically commands that Bishops/Elders be married:

"It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do. An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?), and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil. And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church, so that he will not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. " 1 Timothy 3:1-7

Sexual abuse scandals

Most of the sexual abuse problems within the Catholic church could have been prevented if they had not adopted the false doctrine that church leaders cannot be married. Orthodox leaders have always been allowed to be married and the statistical facts speak for themselves: Sex abuse scandals are dramatically reduced when church leaders are permitted to marry.
[/b]

i see you have deviated from arguing the points i raised to general copying and pasting of anti catholic write ups some of which are so ridiculous that i do not even know how to respond.Catholic baptism of sprinlin begai only in 1311AD.You dont even bother verify their claims before doing copy and paste.I tire for youoo

[/quote]Prohibition against church leaders marrying is a satanic doctrine[quote]

Matthew 19:10-12 wrote:

The disciples said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” But He said to them, “Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept.


“I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs – how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world – how he can please his wife – and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs. Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world – how she can please her husband” (1 Corinthians 7: 32-34)

“He who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry he does even better (1 Corinthians 7: 38

no be me talkooo.Na bible i quoteooo

Baptism: Immersion Only?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Share on twitterShare on emailShare on printShare on gmailShare on stumbleuponMore Sharing Services







Although Latin-rite Catholics are usually baptized by infusion (pouring), they know that immersion (dunking) and sprinkling are also valid ways to baptize. Fundamentalists, however, regard only baptism by immersion as true baptism, concluding that most Catholics are not validly baptized at all.

Although the New Testament contains no explicit instructions on how physically to administer the water of baptism, Fundamentalists argue that the Greek word baptizo found in the New Testament means "to immerse." They also maintain that only immersion reflects the symbolic significance of being "buried" and "raised" with Christ (see Romans 6:3-4).

It is true that baptizo often means immersion. For example, the Greek version of the Old Testament tells us that Naaman, at Elisha’s direction, "went down and dipped himself [the Greek word here is baptizo] seven times in the Jordan" (2 Kgs. 5:14, Septuagint, emphasis added).

But immersion is not the only meaning of baptizo. Sometimes it just means washing up. Thus Luke 11:38 reports that, when Jesus ate at a Pharisee’s house, "[t]he Pharisee was astonished to see that he did not first wash [baptizo] before dinner." They did not practice immersion before dinner, but, according to Mark, the Pharisees "do not eat unless they wash [nipto] their hands, observing the tradition of the elders; and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they wash themselves [baptizo]" (Mark 7:3–4a, emphasis added). So baptizo can mean cleansing or ritual washing as well as immersion.

A similar range of meanings can be seen when baptizo is used metaphorically. Sometimes a figurative "baptism" is a sort of "immersion"; but not always. For example, speaking of his future suffering and death, Jesus said, "I have a baptism [baptisma] to be baptized [baptizo] with; and how I am constrained until it is accomplished!" (Luke 12:50) This might suggest that Christ would be "immersed" in suffering. On the other hand, consider the case of being "baptized with the Holy Spirit."

In Acts 1:4–5 Jesus charged his disciples "not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, ‘you heard from me, for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’" Did this mean they would be "immersed" in the Spirit? No: three times Acts 2 states that the Holy Spirit was poured out on them when Pentecost came (2:17, 18, 33, emphasis added). Later Peter referred to the Spirit falling upon them, and also on others after Pentecost, explicitly identifying these events with the promise of being "baptized with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 11:15–17). These passages demonstrate that the meaning of baptizo is broad enough to include "pouring."



Christian Baptism



The Fundamentalist contention that baptizo always means immersion is an oversimplification. This is especially true because in Christian usage the word had a highly particular meaning distinct from the term’s ordinary, everyday usage.

The same principle can be seen with other special Christian terms, such as "Trinity" and "agape" (divine love), that were originally ordinary Greek words with no special religious significance. The earliest evidence of anyone referring to God as a "Trinity" is a letter by Theophilus of Antioch (Ad Autolycum [A.D. 181]). Before the Christian usage, a "trinity" (triad in Greek) was simply any group of three things.

However, as Christians made theological use of the term, it quickly gained a new, technical sense, referring specifically to the three persons of the Godhead. When Christians professed that God is a "Triad," they did not mean a group of three gods, but one God in three persons. Here, an everyday word was being used in a special, theological sense.

The same is true of agape, originally a general term for any sort of "love" very much like the English word. But it quickly became used in Christian circles as the name of a common fellowship (love) meal among Christians (cf. Jude 12).

In the same way, baptizo acquired a specialized Christian usage distinct from its original meaning. In fact, it already had a complex history of specifically religious usages even before Christians adopted it. Long before Jesus’ day, Gentile converts to Judaism were "baptized" as well as circumcised. Then John the Baptist performed a "baptism of repentance" for Jews as a dramatic prophetic gesture indicating that they were as much in need of conversion as pagans. Through these usages baptizo acquired associations of initiation, conversion, and repentance.

Given this history, it was natural for Jesus and his followers to use the same word for Christian baptism, though it was not identical either to the Jewish baptism or to that of John. But it is completely misguided to try to determine the meaning of the word in its Christian sense merely on the basis of ordinary secular usage. It would be like thinking that the doctrine of the Trinity is polytheism or that the New Testament exhortation to "love one another" means only to be fond of each other. To understand what Christian baptism entailed, we must examine not what the word meant in other contexts, but what it meant and how it was practiced in a Christian context.



Inner and Outer Baptism



One important.aspect of Christian baptism in the New Testament is the clear relationship between being baptized with water and being "baptized with the Holy Spirit", or "born again." This tract is primarily concerned with the mode of baptism, not its effects [Footnote: For more on the relationship between baptism and rebirth, see John 3:5; Acts 2:38, 19:2–3, 22:16; Romans 6:3-4; Colossians 2:11–12; Titus 3:5; and 1 Peter 3:21; and also the Catholic Answers tract Baptismal Grace.]; but even non-Catholic Christians must admit that the New Testament clearly associates water baptism with Spirit baptism and rebirth (even if they do not interpret this relationship as cause and effect).

Right from the beginning, as soon as the Holy Spirit was given on Pentecost, water and Spirit went hand in hand: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38).

In Acts 10:44, the first Gentiles to whom Peter preached received the Holy Spirit even before their water baptism. This is always possible, for God is free to operate outside the sacraments as well as within them. In this case it was fitting for the Spirit to be given before baptism, in order to show God’s acceptance of believing Gentiles. Even under these circumstances, however, the connection to water baptism is still evident from Peter’s response: "Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (Acts 10:47).

Still later in Acts, when Paul found people who did not have the Spirit, he immediately questioned whether they had received Christian water baptism. Upon learning that they had not, he baptized them and laid hands on them, and they received the Spirit (Acts 19:1–6).

These passages illustrate the connection between water and Spirit first made by Jesus himself: "Unless a man is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John 3:5).

Earlier we saw that the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" was depicted as "pouring." But these passages show that the "baptism" or "pouring" of the Spirit is itself closely related to water baptism.

This provides some balance to the Fundamentalist argument that only baptism by immersion adequately symbolizes death and resurrection with Jesus. It is true that immersion bestrepresents death and resurrection, bringing out more fully the meaning of the sacrament than pouring or sprinkling (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church 1239). (Immersion is actually the usual mode of baptizing in the Catholic Church’s Eastern rites.) On the other hand, pouring best represents the infusion of the Holy Spirit also associated with water baptism. And all three modes adequately suggest the sense of cleansing signified by baptism. No one mode has exclusive symbolical validity over the others.



Physical Difficulties



After Peter’s first sermon, three thousand people were baptized in Jerusalem (Acts 2:41). Archaeologists have demonstrated there was no sufficient water supply for so many to have been immersed. Even if there had been, the natives of Jerusalem would scarcely have let their city’s water supply be polluted by three thousand unwashed bodies plunging into it. These people must have been baptized by pouring or sprinkling.

Even today practical difficulties can render immersion nearly or entirely impossible for some individuals: for example, people with certain medical conditions—the bedridden; quadriplegics; individuals with tracheotomies (an opening into the airway in the throat) or in negative pressure ventilators (iron lungs). Again, those who have recently undergone certain procedures (such as open-heart surgery) cannot be immersed, and may not wish to defer baptism until their recovery (for example, if they are to undergo further procedures).

Other difficulties arise in certain environments. For example, immersion may be nearly or entirely impossible for desert nomads or Eskimos. Or consider those in prison—not in America, where religious freedom gives prisoners the right to be immersed if they desire—but in a more hostile setting, such as a Muslim regime, where baptisms must be done in secret, without adequate water for immersion.

What are we to do in these and similar cases? Shall we deny people the sacrament because immersion is impractical or impossible for them? Ironically, the Fundamentalist, who acknowledges that baptism is commanded but thinks it isn’t essential for salvation, may make it impossible for many people to be baptized at all in obedience to God’s command. The Catholic, who believes baptism confers grace and is normatively necessary for salvation, maintains that God wouldn’t require a form of baptism that, for some people, is impossible.



Baptism in the Early Church



That the early Church permitted pouring instead of immersion is demonstrated by the Didache, a Syrian liturgical manual that was widely circulated among the churches in the first few centuries of Christianity, perhaps the earliest Christian writing outside the New Testament.

The Didache was written around A.D. 70 and, though not inspired, is a strong witness to the sacramental practice of Christians in the apostolic age. In its seventh chapter, the Didache reads, "Concerning baptism, baptize in this manner: Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water [that is, in running water, as in a river]. If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." These instructions were composed either while some of the apostles and disciples were still alive or during the next generation of Christians, and they represent an already established custom.

The testimony of the Didache is seconded by other early Christian writings. Hippolytus of Rome said, "If water is scarce, whether as a constant condition or on occasion, then use whatever water is available" (The Apostolic Tradition, 21 [A.D. 215]). Pope Cornelius I wrote that as Novatian was about to die, "he received baptism in the bed where he lay, by pouring" (Letter to Fabius of Antioch [A.D. 251]; cited in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6:4311).

Cyprian advised that no one should be "disturbed because the sick are poured upon or sprinkled when they receive the Lord’s grace" (Letter to a Certain Magnus 69:12 [A.D. 255]). Tertullian described baptism by saying that it is done "with so great simplicity, without pomp, without any considerable novelty of preparation, and finally, without cost, a man is baptized in water, and amid the utterance of some few words, is sprinkled, and then rises again, not much (or not at all) the cleaner" (On Baptism, 2 [A.D. 203]). Obviously, Tertullian did not consider baptism by immersion the only valid form, since he says one is only sprinkled and thus comes up from the water "not much (or not at all) the cleaner."



Ancient Christian Mosaics Show Pouring



Then there is the artistic evidence. Much of the earliest Christian artwork depicts baptism—but not baptism by immersion! If the recipient of the sacrament is in a river, he is shown standing in the river while water is poured over his head from a cup or shell. Tile mosaics in ancient churches and paintings in the catacombs depict baptism by pouring. Baptisteries in early cemeteries are clear witnesses to baptisms by infusion. The entire record of the early Church—as shown in the New Testament, in other writings, and in monumental evidence—indicates the mode of baptism was not restricted to immersion.

Other archaeological evidence confirms the same thing. An early Christian baptistery was found in a church in Jesus’ hometown of Nazareth, yet this baptistery, which dates from the second century, was too small and narrow in which to immerse a person

naijadeyhia: FACT: Catholics are taught to call their priest, "Father", as a religious title of respect. Christians in the first century never called their leaders, "father". This first happened hundreds of years later.

"Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Matthew 23:9

at leat we do not call daddy and mummy hope say u no de call your popy father

Chukwudi leave this guy. He's just deceiving himself. Instead of completing his deliberation with you, he is deviating to a new topic. The guy just won't admit the truth to himself.
Honor to the Blessed Virgin who has given you the grace to put her enemies into confusion.

Kaycee7: Chukwudi leave this guy. He's just deceiving himself. Instead of completing his deliberation with you, he is deviating to a new topic. The guy just won't admit the truth to himself.
Honor to the Blessed Virgin who has given you the grace to put her enemies into confusion.

tanx Jare make i leave am.I think i got better thingz to do with my time

[b]FACT: Although Roman Catholics are permitted to eat the bread (body) of the Lord's Supper, they are generally not allowed to drink the wine (blood) of the Lord's Supper, as any Catholic knows from his own experience from attending Mass. (Except on rare special occasions.) The laity (the people in the pews) are withheld the cup of the Lord and it is usually reserved for church leaders only. Yes there are denominations within the Roman Catholic "communion" where some RC sects actually offer the juice, but most Mass attending Catholics know they rarely drink the cup of wine.


Did Christ and the apostle Paul command that every Christian should drink of the communion cup?

To the whole church in Corinth: "in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup." 1 Corinthians 11:28

"While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins." Matthew 26:26-28

"For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes. Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup." 1 Corinthians 11:23-28[/b]

[b]FACT: The Pope says only very special dead Catholic people qualify to be called "saints". For example, Pope John Paul II could not make Mother Teresa a saint (official canonization) until after she was dead. The average Catholic in the pew is never called a "saint" dead or alive! In fact if a pew dwelling Catholic started calling himself a "saint", he would be rebuked by the parish priest!


"To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours" 1 Corinthians 1:2

"Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are at Ephesus and who are faithful in Christ Jesus" Ephesians 1:1

"Paul and Timothy, bond-servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers and deacons" Philippians 1:1


"to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." Romans 1:7[/b]

[b]FACT: The Pope decided to reserve the title of "priest" to worn by church leaders only. The average pew dwelling Catholic never refer to themselves as "priests". In fact if a lay Catholic started calling himself a "priest", he would be rebuked by "the parish Priest"!


"you (all Christians) also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. " 1 Peter 2:5

"But you (all Christians) are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; " 1 Peter 2:9

"Jesus has made us (all Christians) to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father—to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen." Revelation 1:6

"You have made them (all Christians) to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth." Revelation 5:10[/b]

[b]FACT: In 1079 AD celibacy was first enforced for priests and bishops by Pope Gregory VII. Before this time, they were permitted to marry.


"A bishop, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?)" 1 Timothy 3:2-5


"But the Holy Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth." 1 Timothy 4:1-3[/b]

naijadeyhia: CATHOLIC BELIEFS!!! BUNDLE OF CONTRADICTIONS!! I WOULD GO ON ONLY IF REQUEST IS MADE FOR THAT

Please go on