Nodogragra4me:



This is how that pope almost ruined Christianity by re writing the bible to accommodate Satan's agenda .... .

lol.

no pope rewrote the Bible to accommodate Satan instead the was a revision of the Vulgate done by pope sixtus with several mistranslations, the mistake were found by the Church scholars and he never published.

Nodogragra4me:



What exactly were they protesting against and when they 'later organise their own thing' were they left alone or persecuted?

against Christ's Church...

they formed violent protests that is why they are called Protestants, the state clamped down such, while in places they had support of the rulers they persecuted all who weren't subscribers of their heresy

Nodogragra4me:
In Acts of the apostles, the Christians searched the scripture daily. Are you saying that after they were converted that there was no scripture of Matthew, mark, luke and John telling about the Jesus they have accepted as their saviour? That the scripture they searched daily were ' Jewish old testaments'. Even the letters of Paul to ephesians, corinthians, galatians etc were not actual scripture but became so through your church...is it your church that wrote those letters also or they were initially old Jewish testament until your church decided otherwise?

You confine yourself to what you were thought in the seminary. No attempt to enrich yourself... I thought philosophy was supposed to make people think beyond the ordinary, I did it in my 1 year, or una own na stating that jacket philosophy.


If all the scripture of the old testament are Jewish and not Christian testament then Jesus Christ came for the Jews and not everyone because the prophecies concerning his coming were recorded in three old Jewish testament

oga your ignorance won't help you... the scriptures in those days in acts was the old testament, where do you think new converts will get Paul's letters from when they hadn't even been written then, that is why Paul told Timothy about the scriptures he knew from childhood that is the old testament.

you seem to be ignorant of the fact the the old testament was adopted by the Church from the Jewish scriptures.

Ubenedictus:
oga your ignorance won't help you... the scriptures in those days in acts was the old testament, where do you think new converts will get Paul's letters from when they hadn't even been written then, that is why Paul told Timothy about the scriptures he knew from childhood that is the old testament.

you seem to be ignorant of the fact the the old testament was adopted by the Church from the Jewish scriptures.

In order words, Pauls letter to the galatians that he actually included the fact the he wrote it himself wasn't true. Your church did the writing. A man who wrote 3/4 of the new testament didn't remember to put down anything about the Christ he was preaching to the gentiles about.

His letter to the ephesians, corinthians, philippians, colossians and the rest wasn't in circulation even to the elders of the church to which they were sent to until your church edited and put them together.

Ubenedictus:
against Christ's Church...

they formed violent protests that is why they are called Protestants, the state clamped down such, while in places they had support of the rulers they persecuted all who weren't subscribers of their heresy

What did the church do wrong that they were protesting against or they just woke up and felt like running a protest carnival

Ubenedictus:


I don't need to hold on to KJV, I already pasted over 10 translation that translated stigmata as Mark... the Catholic versions below say.


Douay-Rheims Bible
From henceforth let no man be troublesome to me;
for I bear the marks of the Lord Jesus in my body.

NJB, Galatians 6:17: "17 After this, let no one trouble me; I carry branded on my body the marks of Jesus."



GNT, Galatians 6:17: "17 To conclude: let no one give me any more trouble, because the scars I have on my body show that I am the slave of Jesus."



among those 3, 2 of them translate it as mark, only good news says scar.

So your church was wrong to have omitted Paul as the first person to have been afflicted by the devil. You need to go to Rome and educate your Pope

Ubenedictus:
nah, you just enjoy making your false accusation like the accuser of the brethren, you have jumped to rash judgement over a case you know nothing about and go about accusing someone you do not know of demonic possession simply because you are ignorant of their own experiences and you have done all this without bothering to investigate the particular case. you are simply a computer warrior sitted behind his keyboard and typing obscenities about people you don't know.


for me I am skeptical, I don't know what it is yet and until I do investigate or hear the findings of a reputable sources, I am not a party to demonizing someone I don't know nor am I jumping into any positive conclusion.

You are speaking from both sides of your mouth. In one breath, you are alleging that Paul suffered the same fate and in another you are not supporting but waiting for a reliable source to confirm the state of the woman.

If we go by your own conclusion of who a stigmata is then the woman is obviously afflicted for what you define stigmata as is Mark. And marks are nothing by scare and not injuries. What the woman has is fresh blood oozing out of her eyes or eyelid.

Ubenedictus:


lol.

no pope rewrote the Bible to accommodate Satan instead the was a revision of the Vulgate done by pope sixtus with several mistranslations, the mistake were found by the Church scholars and he never published.

You need to borrow that copy in Oxford to find out if it was a published material or a preview copy as you a have alleged. My source says if was a published Bible and one of the persons employed to rewrite the Bible was actually a fugitive from Roman having had his own books banned by the same Pope......I know that at a time the Bible was also banned by your church.


This is what I found about the Bible you claimed was not published. Your church takes time and spends resources hiding every facts of history not agreeable to it

Is it possible to buy back what was never sold?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgata_Sixtina

Nodogragra4me:



You are speaking from both sides of your mouth. In one breath, you are alleging that Paul suffered the same fate and in another you are not supporting but waiting for a reliable source to confirm the state of the woman.

If we go by your own conclusion of who a stigmata is then the woman is obviously afflicted for what you define stigmata as is Mark. And marks are nothing by scare and not injuries. What the woman has is fresh blood oozing out of her eyes or eyelid.

a mark may be a scar or an injury, ever heard of Brand marks? it isn't specific.

I never claim that the woman had the stigmata... I simply replied people who were keen to demonize her before investigating... so I do not speak from both sides of the mouth.

lastly I never said Paul suffered the same fate, I simply presented a Bible verse with the word stigmata for those who claimed such word isn't in the Bible, I didn't bother to make any such claim

Nodogragra4me:



So your church was wrong to have omitted Paul as the first person to have been afflicted by the devil. You need to go to Rome and educate your Pope

sorry Paul himself is the guy who tells us he was afflicted, the Church didn't need to repeat it.
2 cor 12:7


And by reason of the exceeding greatness of the
revelations--wherefore, that I should not be exalted
overmuch, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh,
a messenger of Satan to buffet me, that I should not
be exalted overmuch.

Nodogragra4me:


What did the church do wrong that they were protesting against or they just woke up and felt like running a protest carnival

yes, according to Luther, he woke up every day knowing his unworthiness so he got his Bible and reread Romans, he found the passage that says the righteous shall live by FAITH, from there he decided that a Christian doesn't need work, so far he has Faith, in fact he added faith alone to his translation... since then he began looking for an excuse to spread his heresy...

that is how it began simply because 1 man had a guilty conscience

Ubenedictus:
sorry Paul himself is the guy who tells us he was afflicted, the Church didn't need to repeat it.
2 cor 12:7


And by reason of the exceeding greatness of the
revelations--wherefore, that I should not be exalted
overmuch, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh,
a messenger of Satan to buffet me, that I should not
be exalted overmuch.

Is your church wrong about the first stigmata. Yes or no?

Ubenedictus:
yes, according to Luther, he woke up every day knowing his unworthiness so he got his Bible and reread Romans, he found the passage that says the righteous shall live by FAITH, from there he decided that a Christian doesn't need work, so far he has Faith, in fact he added faith alone to his translation... since then he began looking for an excuse to spread his heresy...

that is how it began simply because 1 man had a guilty conscience

A priest ordained by your church 'woke up everyday day knowing his unworthines'


What kind of work did your church recommend? The work of defrauding the poor in the name if paying for indulgence and helping their family members get out purgatory.


Between his teaching of faith alone and the one that recommends paying for indulgences which is better?

Nodogragra4me:


A priest ordained by your church 'woke up everyday day knowing his unworthines'


What kind of work did your church recommend? The work of defrauding the poor in the name if paying for indulgence and helping their family members get out purgatory.


Between his teaching of faith alone and the one that recommends paying for indulgences which is better?

he had scruples, you can Google what that means, he was told God loves him and Grace was sufficient but he felt he wasn't alright so he manufactured sola fide to sooth himself.

nobody asked him to preach indulgence... that wasn't his job, but of course he chose that as the excuse to spread his heresy.

indulgence is much better than faith alone, indulgence encourage the forgiven sinner to do good works, under faith alone Luther taught his disciples to sin boldly because even if they commit 100 adultery everyday it won't affect their salvation.

that is a damnable heresy encouraging people to sin.

Nodogragra4me:




Is your church wrong about the first stigmata. Yes or no?

did my Church tell you it kept record of every stigmata for all times?

Nodogragra4me:


You need to borrow that copy in Oxford to find out if it was a published material or a preview copy as you a have alleged. My source says if was a published Bible and one of the persons employed to rewrite the Bible was actually a fugitive from Roman having had his own books banned by the same Pope......I know that at a time the Bible was also banned by your church.


This is what I found about the Bible you claimed was not published. Your church takes time and spends resources hiding every facts of history not agreeable to it

Is it possible to buy back what was never sold?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgata_Sixtina

from your own source


Sixtus death before
Vulgata Sixtina was taken into use is considered by
apologists as an example of papal infallibility.



the sixtus Bible never came into use, after pope sixtus had finished his work he was made aware of certain errors in the text. he began correcting them but died before it was finished.

cardinal Bellarmine took over the work, all the erroneous copies were recalled and destroyed just as any other mistranslated Bible was destroyed, Bellarmine completed the task during the time of Pope Clement.

so clearly what you have there is a preliminary copy that hadn't been put into use.