Ubenedictus:
actually the Catholic Church has solid biblical support for teaching that giving alms and charity covers a multitude of sin...the Bible supports that and the Catholic Church still teach it. albeit in the Catholic Church giving alms to the Church as reparations for sins isn't emphasized much but the teaching is correct.

This would open another round of discussions. You might be coming from the angle of "love covers a multitude of sins", but that was a case of twisting the scriptures to meet the desires of a greedy few in the days of Martin Luther.

You may correct me if I am wrong though. Who were these indulgences paid to...the poor or to the church leadership? (i.e. in Martin Luther's days)

Cheers

OkaiCorne:

Okay, I'll end it here. It's well.

Okay, boss.

OkaiCorne:


I must admit, this is a very valid point you raised here...and that's even worse than giving nothing to God and man...

At the end of the day, every man shall give account to God for their actions though.

May God help us all. It's well.

Amen!!!.We just pray for the Grace to be d perfect being that Christ wants us to be.

D1official:

Amen!!!.We just pray for the Grace to be d perfect being that Christ wants us to be.

Amen my brother.

OkaiCorne:


This would open another round of discussions. You might be coming from the angle of "love covers a multitude of sins", but that was a case of twisting the scriptures to meet the desires of a greedy few in the days of Martin Luther.

You may correct me if I am wrong though. Who were these indulgences paid to...the poor or to the church leadership? (i.e. in Martin Luther's days)

Cheers

according to scripture it was the job of the Church leader to collect and to distribute alms collected


act 4 … 34 There were no needy ones among them, because
those who owned lands or houses would sell their
property, bring the proceeds from the sales, 35 and
lay them at the apostles’ feet for distribution to
anyone as he had need.
… 36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the
apostles called Barnabas (meaning Son of
Encouragement), 37 sold a field he owned, brought
the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.

the alms collected in those days range from donations to the upkeep of the Church and her ministers and those for the poor. Martin Luther never challenged the right of the Church to collect such donations instead he was angry that they were over emphasized, that those who give are not reminded to confess their sins, then finally the challenged the power of the Church to teach and declare that punishment due to sins are remitted to those who give. He never said the Church shouldn't collect the alms instead he said the Church shouldn't tell people their alms covered their sins.

there were some abuses of process at that time and the Church corrected them but Luther never said the Church shouldn't collect alms.

LUTHER, MARTIN; August 27, 1525
HOW CHRISTIANS SHOULD REGARD MOSES he spoke on tithing and he completely rejected tithing. jesus, john, peter, paul , james, early church never taught or collected tithe. roman catholic introduced tithing to church in 777AD by order of emperior. tithing was stopped in rome and uk due to revolt/ rioting by congregation as it was making people impoverished taken from the poor and making clergy fat and rich.

Ubenedictus:
according to scripture it was the job of the Church leader to collect and to distribute alms collected


act 4 … 34 There were no needy ones among them, because
those who owned lands or houses would sell their
property, bring the proceeds from the sales, 35 and
lay them at the apostles’ feet for distribution to
anyone as he had need.
… 36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the
apostles called Barnabas (meaning Son of
Encouragement), 37 sold a field he owned, brought
the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.

the alms collected in those days range from donations to the upkeep of the Church and her ministers and those for the poor. Martin Luther never challenged the right of the Church to collect such donations instead he was angry that they were over emphasized, that those who give are not reminded to confess their sins, then finally the challenged the power of the Church to teach and declare that punishment due to sins are remitted to those who give. He never said the Church shouldn't collect the alms instead he said the Church shouldn't tell people their alms covered their sins.

there were some abuses of process at that time and the Church corrected them but Luther never said the Church shouldn't collect alms.

Dear Sir,

I believe you are misguided by your conclusions. I can also tell from your tone and sense of religious reasoning that you are one of those people who esteem your "G.O.'s" words above the actual word of God. Consequently, you and your kind do not even actually have a personal relationship with God, but you depend on whatever your G.O. or pastor tells you God said. Many highly esteemed church pastors and G.O.s have risen up against Daddy Freeze, raining all sorts of curses (causeless curses, and they cannot stand) on him because he called pastors out with scripture and asked for them to simply defend their positions with scripture. This has therefore guided your judgmental views and sentencing of the innocent man called "Daddy Freeze".

I was talking to an MFM member recently, and she told me Daniel Olukoya (their G.O.) spoke on the tithing issue during service and he surprised everybody. He acknowledged that tithing wasn't actually New Testament compliant, and doesn't determine your eternal fate. He also acknowledged that the New Testament is about giving willfully and not a law to forcefully tithe and give specifically into a church purse. Many of MFM members like you have previously joined in the sentencing of Daddy Freeze, but now, with their G.O.s opinion on the matter, they now look like fools. Did they have to wait for their G.O. to speak on the matter before they went into the scriptures and researched critically and objectively on the subject of tithing and giving? I am very sure, if Enoch Adeboye were to have spoken objectively on the matter, RCCG members would also change their views. Isn't that pathetic?

To summarize your post, you have ruled Daddy Freeze out as unfit to speak, you asked "Who called daddy freeze into these teachings?" You then answered yourself rightly (but ignorantly) by quoting John 15:16 "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you". I know you were referring to the likes of your G.O. as the chosen ones, but sorry to burst the bubble, Daddy Freeze is included. 1 Peter 2:16 confirms that saying "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people". I bet you don't even believe that you have the right standing with God to speak with authority on the things of God. If you read the whole of that 1 Peter 2:16-24, it talks about how we are to submit ourselves to the government and work place authorities. No place did Peter refer to himself as one "G.O." to be feared and revered, nor Paul or any of the disciples. No place did he name the apostles as one of the people to be submitted to, but referred to them as equals. Apostle Paul referred to the Christians as "Saints in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 6:18; Philippians 1:1); he referred to Tychicus as "a beloved brother" (Ephesians 6:21).

In conclusion, 2 Timothy 2:15 says "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." Daddy Freeze did that and called you out. Instead of you people to do the same and either acknowledge that he is right, or prove to him that he is wrong with scriptures you are busy making "profane and vain babblings which has only increased unto more ungodliness" (2 Timothy 2:16). My final advice, 1 Peter 2:1-2 says "Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings, As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby". Leave Daddy Freeze alone, pray for him, dig deep into the word, desire the sincere milk of the word so that you can grow.

God bless you.

nicemuyoo:
LUTHER, MARTIN; August 27, 1525
HOW CHRISTIANS SHOULD REGARD MOSES he spoke on tithing and he completely rejected tithing. jesus, john, peter, paul , james, early church never taught or collected tithe. roman catholic introduced tithing to church in 777AD by order of emperior. tithing was stopped in rome and uk due to revolt/ rioting by congregation as it was making people impoverished taken from the poor and making clergy fat and rich.

hmm, the tithe wasn't introduced by an emperor, The first recorded legislation is found in a letter of the Bishops assembled at Tours, France m 567 and the canons of the Council of Macon in 585, they were conciliar decisions....
apart from that you are correct that Martin Luther was against tithe... but I never claimed he taught tithe.


I said he never claimed the Church didn't have the right to collect and distribute alms.


I never mentioned tithes in my post, you are arguing with yourself.

The roman emperor gave permission for churches to collect tithe. The church council initiated it but the emperor has to sanction it.

Ubenedictus:
hmm, the tithe wasn't introduced by an emperor, The first recorded legislation is found in a letter of the Bishops assembled at Tours, France m 567 and the canons of the Council of Macon in 585, they were conciliar decisions....
apart from that you are correct that Martin Luther was against tithe... but I never claimed he taught tithe.


I said he never claimed the Church didn't have the right to collect and distribute alms.


I never mentioned tithes in my post, you are arguing with yourself.

nicemuyoo:
The roman emperor gave permission for churches to collect tithe. The church council initiated it but the emperor has to sanction it.

the emperor didn't have to sanction it, the church is competent to initiate and implement its own laws within the Church.

The supremacy of the Roman bishop (the papacy) was created with the support of the Roman emperors. With the city of Rome being the center of government for the Roman Empire, and with the Roman emperors living in Rome, the city of Rome rose to prominence in all facets of life. Constantine (AD 272–337) and his successors gave their support to the bishop of Rome as the supreme ruler of the church. Of course, it is best for the unity of the Roman Empire that the government and state religion be centralized. While most other bishops (and Christians) resisted the idea of the Roman bishop being supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy, due to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. When the Western half of the Roman Empire collapsed in 476, the popes took on the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors—Pontifex Maximus. Pope Gregory I, ruling from 590–604, is usually considered the first bishop to truly wield papal authority.

If you have not paid your tithe who consficates your property ? It is the church under the authority of Rome empire using roman soldier to execute judgement. the Roman emperor has sanction catholism as the religion of the empire over night a demonic move by antichrist when persecution could not defeat the congregation of believers

Ubenedictus:
the emperor didn't have to sanction it, the church is competent to initiate and implement its own laws within the Church.

nicemuyoo:
The supremacy of the Roman bishop (the papacy) was created with the support of the Roman emperors. With the city of Rome being the center of government for the Roman Empire, and with the Roman emperors living in Rome, the city of Rome rose to prominence in all facets of life. Constantine (AD 272–337) and his successors gave their support to the bishop of Rome as the supreme ruler of the church. Of course, it is best for the unity of the Roman Empire that the government and state religion be centralized. While most other bishops (and Christians) resisted the idea of the Roman bishop being supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy, due to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. When the Western half of the Roman Empire collapsed in 476, the popes took on the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors—Pontifex Maximus. Pope Gregory I, ruling from 590–604, is usually considered the first bishop to truly wield papal authority.

If you have not paid your tithe who consficates your property ? It is the church under the authority of Rome empire using roman soldier to execute judgement. the Roman emperor has sanction catholism as the religion of the empire over night a demonic move by antichrist when persecution could not defeat the congregation of believers

the primacy of the Roman bishops existed long before the emperors recognized Christianity as a religion. and in fact Rome wasn't the capital city during most of that time. Constantine move the capital to Constantinople and the Bishop of Constantinople was empowered by the emperors not the bishop of Rome.


Rome had the primacy because that is where the apostles Peter and Paul died and the primacy was always exercised since the apostolic times.

when the tithe was instituted in France it was a Church law not a secular law, the Christians willingly gave tithe and nothing was confiscated if one is unable to pay.

The capital of roman empire was Rome. Exercising you faith in yahshua was an illegal practice punishable under roman authority( by imprisonment or death)
Then Constantine came with the vision of the cross, pronounced Christianity a legal faith in the whole empire. This christianity was a merger of pagan practice and the true faith.
Everyone became Christians overnight . The nobles, the pagan priest, the politicians, the general etc. This move arched by Satan was so effective that true Christianity spreading like wildfire under persecution quickly when on downward spiral.
It was after the birth of pagan Catholic church that the capital was moved to Constantinople.
“With the adoption of Christianity, the Roman emperors took it on themselves to issue decrees on matters regarding the Christian Church. Unlike the Pontifex Maximus, they did not themselves function as priests, but they acted practically as head of the official religion, a tradition that continued with the Byzantine emperors. In line with the theory of Moscow as the Third Rome, the Russian Tsars exercised supreme authority over the Russian Orthodox Church.”
The queen is the head of the CHURCH OF ENGLAND. They coped this from ancient time. State and church are not separated until recent times.
Now the remnant believers where stamped out over the years by pagan Rome of which a past pope issued an official public apology for. ( drunk with the blood of the saints)

Ubenedictus:


the primacy of the Roman bishops existed long before the emperors recognized Christianity as a religion. and in fact Rome wasn't the capital city during most of that time. Constantine move the capital to Constantinople and the Bishop of Constantinople was empowered by the emperors not the bishop of Rome.


Rome had the primacy because that is where the apostles Peter and Paul died and the primacy was always exercised since the apostolic times.

when the tithe was instituted in France it was a Church law not a secular law, the Christians willingly gave tithe and nothing was confiscated if one is unable to pay.

When you say bishop of Rome before Christianity ( Catholicism) became official religion which religion was the bishop of rome under

Ubenedictus:


the primacy of the Roman bishops existed long before the emperors recognized Christianity as a religion. and in fact Rome wasn't the capital city during most of that time. Constantine move the capital to Constantinople and the Bishop of Constantinople was empowered by the emperors not the bishop of Rome.


Rome had the primacy because that is where the apostles Peter and Paul died and the primacy was always exercised since the apostolic times.

when the tithe was instituted in France it was a Church law not a secular law, the Christians willingly gave tithe and nothing was confiscated if one is unable to pay.

OK

Read ••• [color=#990000]Daily Powerful Prayer Points For Miracles With Bible Verses[/color

nicemuyoo:
When you say bishop of Rome before Christianity ( Catholicism) became official religion which religion was the bishop of rome under

before Christianity became an official religion there were Bishops of Rome many of whom were killed especially when Christianity was persecuted.

the early Christian named the bishops of Rome

Rome and Christianity

Citation: C N Trueman "Rome And Christianity"
historylearningsite.co.uk. The History Learning Site, 16 Mar 2015. 29 Dec 2017.

Religion was very important to the Romans. Within the Roman Empire, Christianity was banned and Christians were punished for many years. Feeding Christians to the lions was seen as entertainment in Ancient Rome.

A Roman mosaic which is said to be the head of Christ

The message of Christianity was spread around the Roman Empire by St. Paul who founded Christian churches in Asia Minor and Greece. Eventually, he took his teachings to Rome itself.

The early converts to Christianity in Ancient Rome faced many difficulties. The first converts were usually the poor and slaves as they had a great deal to gain from the Christians being successful. If they were caught, they faced death for failing to worship the emperor. It was not uncommon for emperors to turn the people against the Christians when Rome was faced with difficulties. In AD 64, part of Rome was burned down. The Emperor Nero blamed the Christians and the people turned on them. Arrests and executions followed.

“Nero punished a race of men who were hated for their evil practices. These men were called Christians. He got a number of people to confess. On their evidence a number of Christians were convicted and put to death with dreadful cruelty. Some were covered with the skins of wild beasts and left to be eaten by dogs. Others were nailed to the cross. Many were burned alive and set on fire to serve as torches at night.”Tacitus

The dangers faced by the Christians in Rome meant that they had to meet in secret. They usually used underground tombs as these were literally out of sight. Rome had a large number of poor people within its population and Christianity continued to grow. In AD 313, the Emperor Constantine made Christianity legal and for the first time, they were allowed to openly worship. Churches were quickly built not just in Rome but throughout the empire. In AD 391, the worship of other gods was made illegal.
This bishops were Christian leaders along with elders that help coordinate they where not paid salaries or living in luxury. There was no laity/ clergy division.
Until Christianity was merged with mithrism and other religions

Ubenedictus:
before Christianity became an official religion there were Bishops of Rome many of whom were killed especially when Christianity was persecuted.

the early Christian named the bishops of Rome

nicemuyoo:
The capital of roman empire was Rome. Exercising you faith in yahshua was an illegal practice punishable under roman authority( by imprisonment or death)
Then Constantine came with the vision of the cross, pronounced Christianity a legal faith in the whole empire. This christianity was a merger of pagan practice and the true faith.
Everyone became Christians overnight . The nobles, the pagan priest, the politicians, the general etc. This move arched by Satan was so effective that true Christianity spreading like wildfire under persecution quickly when on downward spiral.
It was after the birth of pagan Catholic church that the capital was moved to Constantinople.
“With the adoption of Christianity, the Roman emperors took it on themselves to issue decrees on matters regarding the Christian Church. Unlike the Pontifex Maximus, they did not themselves function as priests, but they acted practically as head of the official religion, a tradition that continued with the Byzantine emperors. In line with the theory of Moscow as the Third Rome, the Russian Tsars exercised supreme authority over the Russian Orthodox Church.”
The queen is the head of the CHURCH OF ENGLAND. They coped this from ancient time. State and church are not separated until recent times.
Now the remnant believers where stamped out over the years by pagan Rome of which a past pope issued an official public apology for. ( drunk with the blood of the saints)

1. the capital of the empire was Rome until about 330 ad when Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople.
2. Constantine made it legal to practice Christian without fear, but nowhere at that time was Christianity mixed with paganism... in fact the opposite is true, the Church of that period was very watchful about any form of paganism or any new inventions and were very quick to condemn any such thing.

the idea that the Church was mixed in paganism is not based on fact, if you read the writing of Christian of that period you'll see how they took care to maintain the faith they have received and reject every new invention and heresy.

it is clear you haven't read the writing of the early Christians you are working on hearsay.

3. Constantine didn't make anyone convert over night in fact during the time of Constantine the pagans were still pagan and worshipped in their temples while the Christian worshipped in their homes, the catacombs and sometimes built a place dedicated for worship.

4. I see you are quoting Wikipedia, you should have continued reading. the title pontifex maximus was already part of the title for emperors when Constantine made Christianity legal so he held the title but he never exercised any priestly ministry in the Church since the Church didn't allow it, but it was still his job to maintain laws that ensure Christians can freely practice their religion, hence he declared the day Christian worshipped to be a public holiday... etc. when Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople Gratian was responsible for the west, he was a Christian and since he knew the emperors can't function as priest he relinquished the title and the bishop of Rome as the primates over the Church used the title.



so Constantinople continued with the emperors and England with kings and Russia with tsars but Rome the Bishop of Rome is the highest religious authority not an emperor and this authority Rome exercised over the entire Church even when persecuted later by emperors who wanted to interfere with the Church.

nicemuyoo:

Rome and Christianity

Citation: C N Trueman "Rome And Christianity"
historylearningsite.co.uk. The History Learning Site, 16 Mar 2015. 29 Dec 2017.

Religion was very important to the Romans. Within the Roman Empire, Christianity was banned and Christians were punished for many years. Feeding Christians to the lions was seen as entertainment in Ancient Rome.

A Roman mosaic which is said to be the head of Christ

The message of Christianity was spread around the Roman Empire by St. Paul who founded Christian churches in Asia Minor and Greece. Eventually, he took his teachings to Rome itself.

The early converts to Christianity in Ancient Rome faced many difficulties. The first converts were usually the poor and slaves as they had a great deal to gain from the Christians being successful. If they were caught, they faced death for failing to worship the emperor. It was not uncommon for emperors to turn the people against the Christians when Rome was faced with difficulties. In AD 64, part of Rome was burned down. The Emperor Nero blamed the Christians and the people turned on them. Arrests and executions followed.

“Nero punished a race of men who were hated for their evil practices. These men were called Christians. He got a number of people to confess. On their evidence a number of Christians were convicted and put to death with dreadful cruelty. Some were covered with the skins of wild beasts and left to be eaten by dogs. Others were nailed to the cross. Many were burned alive and set on fire to serve as torches at night.”Tacitus

The dangers faced by the Christians in Rome meant that they had to meet in secret. They usually used underground tombs as these were literally out of sight. Rome had a large number of poor people within its population and Christianity continued to grow. In AD 313, the Emperor Constantine made Christianity legal and for the first time, they were allowed to openly worship. Churches were quickly built not just in Rome but throughout the empire. In AD 391, the worship of other gods was made illegal.
This bishops were Christian leaders along with elders that help coordinate they where not paid salaries or living in luxury. There was no laity/ clergy division.
Until Christianity was merged with mithrism and other religions

bishops were Christian leaders who together with the presbyter led the Church, they weren't paid fixed salaries but as st Paul taught he who works on the altar may it there and even till today many bishops don't live in luxury.

the was always a minister distinct from the laity and these ministers were called bishops, presbyter and deacons.

No salaries. What they enjoy is honour and where held in high esteem don't try to monetise their service to Yahweh. People can donate to the when ever they wish no salaries this people were hiding in caves tunnels secretly holding meetings just to fellowship together and you are talking about someone demanding for salary. When people are been fed to lions for being a Christian.
People's blood is been spilt for the sake of the gospel and you are talking of bishop collecting salaries.
Why are you trying to rewrite history when we know that bishop being paid salary only started in the era of pagan roman Catholic Christian era!!
So all out to defend monetise gospel/salvation system that the protesting Catholic churchs of today inherited from pagan Catholicism

Ubenedictus:


bishops were Christian leaders who together with the presbyter led the Church, they weren't paid fixed salaries but as st Paul taught he who works on the altar may it there and even till today many bishops don't live in luxury.

the was always a minister distinct from the laity and these ministers were called bishops, presbyter and deacons.

Christian practice were Not open practice, it was secretive . If cut you are either imprisoned or killed.
That was a collection of true believers
When Christianity was legalised as a state religion. Everyone governors, elites, generals, pagan worshippers of Rome became christians. In fact if you want to make it career wise, political field you have to be a Christian.
This new Christianity was not a true one it was Catholicism- a cocktail of pagan worship and Christian faith.
Now what the devil could not achieve by persecuting and killings he achieved by legalizing Christianity and promoting a lukewarm attitude and introducing paganism into the faith.
This strategy was used by balek/ Ballam when it was impossible to curse Isreal. They simple made friends with them, infiltrated them and led them into sin hence the curse and judgement of sin broke out on Isreal.

Ubenedictus:


bishops were Christian leaders who together with the presbyter led the Church, they weren't paid fixed salaries but as st Paul taught he who works on the altar may it there and even till today many bishops don't live in luxury.

the was always a minister distinct from the laity and these ministers were called bishops, presbyter and deacons.

nicemuyoo:
No salaries. What they enjoy is honour and where held in high esteem don't try to monetise their service to Yahweh. People can donate to the when ever they wish no salaries this people were hiding in caves tunnels secretly holding meetings just to fellowship together and you are talking about someone demanding for salary. When people are been fed to lions for being a Christian.
People's blood is been spilt for the sake of the gospel and you are talking of bishop collecting salaries.
Why are you trying to rewrite history when we know that bishop being paid salary only started in the era of pagan roman Catholic Christian era!!
So all out to defend monetise gospel/salvation system that the protesting Catholic churchs of today inherited from pagan Catholicism

please where did I say they were paid salaries?

I said they had I right to eat from the offerings made by the congregation and that is biblical. the Church is to fund their expense. funny enough many priest in the Catholic Church still don't get salaries... their expense is approximated and given as stipend.

nicemuyoo:
Christian practice were Not open practice, it was secretive . If cut you are either imprisoned or killed.
That was a collection of true believers
When Christianity was legalised as a state religion. Everyone governors, elites, generals, pagan worshippers of Rome became christians. In fact if you want to make it career wise, political field you have to be a Christian.
This new Christianity was not a true one it was Catholicism- a cocktail of pagan worship and Christian faith.
Now what the devil could not achieve by persecuting and killings he achieved by legalizing Christianity and promoting a lukewarm attitude and introducing paganism into the faith.
This strategy was used by balek/ Ballam when it was impossible to curse Isreal. They simple made friends with them, infiltrated them and led them into sin hence the curse and judgement of sin broke out on Isreal.

so if there are false converts in your Church that automatically means the Church is pagan.


sorry that is just a stupid argument.

if the practices and belief of the Church continue, it still is the Church. in fact Jesus was clear that the kingdom of God on earth will have both wheat and tares, bad people does not make a Church pagan.

abeg find a reasonable argument to make