catholic doctrine, tradition, dogma . . . what is the meaning of all three? Which of them is "rooted in scripture"?  You seem confused by bogus names

Catholic doctrine, laws of the Church derived from the commandments.
Catholic tradition, pratices of the church handed down by the apostles
Catholic dogma, the unchangeable, for example, the Trinity, the Assumption of Mary. Those are unchangable, we do not hold th epower to cahnge them. There will always be a Trinity and Mary will always be in heaven.

Seriously Dave, I would have more respect for you if you would actually take your time to know what it is the church teaches rather than speaking ignorantly.

It was contrary to the strongly held belief system of the old testament jews. If you paid any attention to the bible at all you'D notice Christ had trouble SOLELY with the religious leaders of His time - pharisees, saducees and the temple priesthood . . . nowhere are we told of Pilate of Herod trying to kill Him.

Actually Herod did try to kill him, remember the slaughter of all first borns when the three wise men informed Herod of the King? Remember that Mary and Joseph had to flee to Egypt to avoid Herod?

The presence of embassies, papal consuls, visa requirements . . . is a strong indication that the catholic church sees itself as a political entity. Neither Christ nor the apostles had any of these

And society today is not the same as the society of then. There were greedy leaders of countries that wanted to be the head of Christ's Church, to avoid that the Church needed to become its own entity, Henry VIII had to be avoided.

Does that mean God is hateful? I mean i didnt put that into Revelations 2 . . .

So you are now the self appointed man of God.
The Book of Revelations does not speak of the Catholic Church.
If you don't know how to properly interpret the Bible then please stop being blasphemous.

The Catholic Church is not the LovePeddler of Babylon, it has stood of 2000 years God wouldn't have allowed it to stand without confusion and without division.
The only Church that does not stand divided is the Catholic Church.

There other churches well, when pastor says something they don't like they decide to pack up and move to another church, looking for the pastor that will tell them what to hear.
It reminds me of the disciples that abandoned Jesus when he told that "unless they eat of his flesh and drink of his blood they won't have eternal life"
When you don't hear something that you want, you condemn the Church, you hear things you don't understand and you condemn the Church.
The Pharisees too knew scripture just as you do, yet they misunderstood Christ. The very one they were waiting for they didn't recognise.
As they are blind so are a lot of Christians, because it doesn't make sense to you, then it must have been from the devil.

You know I thought of nairaland and you david and the others when I was reading a particular passage in scripture having to do with human beings forgiving, and I will share it here with you:
Matthew 9:2-8

2 And there people brought to him a pralytic lying on a stretcher. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Courage, child, your sins are forgiven."
3 At that, some of the scribes said to themselve, "This man is blaspheming."
4 Jesus knew what they were thinking, and said, "Why do you harbor evil thoughts?
5 Which is easier, to say, 'Your sins are forgiven' or to say 'Rise and walk'"
6 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" - he then said to the paralytic, "Rise, pick up your stretcher and go home."
7 He rose and went home
8 When the crowds saw this they were struck with awe and glorified God who had given such authority to human beings.

I always wonder if some of you ever ask yourself questions as "why did God have to become man to be our salvation?" he had the power he could have done it any other way, why did he have to be in the flesh to do it?
When Jesus spoke in this pasage why did he say the Son of Man, why not the Son of God, afterall these people knew he was calling himself the Son of God.
What does Son of Man mean? Why is he even the Son of Man when no man is his father.
Why did he have to perform certain things in the person of man. WHy come to earth at all?

Please no cliche answers such as he came to save us from sins or he loves us, we could have been saved other ways, this is God, he could have done it in many other ways. Why become human? What's the significance of becoming human? What's the importance of becoming human?

Why did he give authority to man? After so many centuries the authority wasn't there but all of a sudden we have authority? Why? And what is that authority?

If he said "just as the Father sent me so I send you" then wouldn't that mean that we can do as he did?
After all we do have the ability to do it, but well you all deny that we have the ability to do certain things.
See some of them you easily accept because it will make you sleep better at night, but there is one particular one which is so very clear, but because you don't understand or don't accept you don't see the dignity that God has given to man.
There are many more things you don't accept.
And it's okay, many are called but few are chosen.

I seriously think if some of you start answering these questions or at least start thinking of these questions you will begin to understand the teaching of the Catholic church.

Anyway, I don't even want to get into any squabble until you all are ready and willing to answer questions.

It would be nice for you to interpret certain scripture that has been put your way. Since we Catholics don't know the Bible and don't understand it. We're still waiting for you all to tell us the proper meanings of these scriptures.

I have asked questions about what New Testament was used by the apostles or Jesus himself to teach, since all of you believe in Bible only.
I haven't received a response. David attempted by providing colossians unfortunately he missed a part of it. Now the passage in colossians says that the Church there should share that letter written by Paul with the Laodiceans, and the letter to the laodiceans was to be shared with the colossians, now the question remains, if Paul was writing his letters to be scripture where is the letter to the laodiceans and why do you not hold it scripture? if the letter of laodiceans were to be shown today would you hold it to be scripture, if so wouldn't that ridicule the argument of sola scriptura since the books in the Bible are the only ones held to be scripture? or if you don't think that Paul's writing were written to be scripture, why do you hold them to be scriptre today?

I am strictly speaking on the letters of Paul, because colossians was written by Paul.


I and several others Catholics and non catholics alike would appreciate it if those of you who so wish to say the Catholic church does not go by scripture wuld kindly interpret several scripture that you have conveniently dodged and answer questions put at you.

You have put us catholics under the microscope and you seriously feel we do not know scriputure then by all means can you all please provide us with the correct interpretation.

1) Did Jesus give the Keys to the Kingdom of heaven to Peter or not?
2) What are the keys to the kingdom of heaven?
3) Did Jesus give the keys to the kingdom of heaven to anyone other than Peter? If not, why not?
4) When Jesus asked Peter to feed his sheep three times? Was he reinstating Peter as the leader of the apostles or not?
5) Was Peter's name Peter before Jesus called him Peter when he gave him the keys to the kingdom of heaven? If not, why then did Jesus call him Peter, what does it mean?
6) Why is it that they had to lay hands on the apostles before they were sent out? What's the significance on that and why is it that no random person could feel the Spirit and then start a church somewhere else as is done today?
7) Why is it that the apostles warned that the Church stay true to what they heard from the apostles or what has been handed down (tradition)?
Can God have anything to do with the sinful?
9) If Mary was sinful when she conceived Jesus, how then can Jesus dwell in her, isn't he God? Once agains can God have anything to do with the sinful?
10) What does full of grace mean?
11) Was Jesus divinity ever separate from his humanity?
12) To make 11 clearer was Jesus' divinity ever separate from his humanity, ever?
13) If Jesus divinity was never separate from his humanity and Jesus is God, how then can Mary not be the Mother of God?
14) If you are still on the argument that Mary is not the Mother of God? Did your mother give you your soul? If not why then call her your mother?
15) If you still do not understand and are going to give the argument that Mary is not the same as your mother, then did Mary push Jesus out of her mouth or her vagina like your mother?
16) Now there are those of you who will make the argument that Mary had nothing to do with the forming of Jesus, which really won't make any sense, because that would only raise the question of why did Jesus have a mother then?
17) Why didn't God just drop him on the face of the earth as a full grown man or why wasn't he made into flesh as Adam was made into flesh, after all he is the New Adam?
18) Why did he have to come from the womb of a woman?
19) Do you even know what the womb of a woman is?
20) Why did Elizabeth call Mary the Mother of My Lord?
21) Who is the Lord she was talking about? Why did she even use the word "Lord" and what "Lord" was this? Was it the regular lord as you may use for a king or for landlord or is it "Lord" as in "Adonai"?
22) If Elizabeth called Mary the Mother of "Adonai" wouldn't it mean that she was calling Mary the Mother of God, or was "Adonai" used to call other lords?
23) If infact Mary is the Mother of ADONAI as Elizabeth called her (unless you will claim that that pasage is lying) then isn't she worthy of honour or praise?

Well those are just a few questions, more will be asked of you all. A K O, DAVID, AND CO. PLEASE TRUTHFULLY ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.
Since we don't know the Bible, well we're trying to learn and understand from those of you who do, so answer our questions. If you don't you won't be doing your rightful duty as a Christian in spreading the true word of God.

~Lady~:

Well those are just a few questions, more will be asked of you all. A K O, DAVID, AND CO. PLEASE TRUTHFULLY ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.
Since we don't know the Bible, well we're trying to learn and understand from those of you who do, so answer our questions. If you don't you won't be doing your rightful duty as a Christian in spreading the true word of God.

You must have missed my post:

A_K_O:

David and co.

It is quite obvious that the Catholic Church does not take the Bible as the word of God.

Or maybe it is the word of God but it is fallibe and not complete.

They see it as their compilation of historical events that Martin Luther deleted seven books out of.

It is the piece of Literature they compiled that we are now defiantly referring to on every occassion.

That's why I stopped getting involved in all these kind of arguments.

Referring them to scripture does not achieve much.

Peace and love to everyone anyways.

I might chip in from time to time. But I've retired from lengthy posts, like replying your 20+ questions.
Cheers Lady.

The Return of the Spammer Dogma Queen lol.

Anyways, the Bible makes no mention of the "keys to the kingdom" but if you guys gave it to Peter, I sure as hell hope Judas wasn't keeping the spare!

Like i said before David pointed out to me that you are the plague of NL, your ideas are baseless or at best, based on DOGMA and not on scripture. Did you at all read anything posted in your absence from the thread? In all respect, you are really ruining the image of RCC. Leave the debate to the likes of omenuko

carmelily:

The Return of the Spammer Dogma Queen lol.

Anyways, the Bible makes no mention of the "keys to the kingdom" but if you guys gave it to Peter, I sure as hell hope Judas wasn't keeping the spare!

Like i said before David pointed out to me that

you are the plague of NL

, your ideas are baseless or at best, based on DOGMA and not on scripture. Did you at all read anything posted in your absence from the thread? In all respect, you are really ruining the image of RCC. Leave the debate to the likes of omenuko

plagues and viruseeeeeeees indeed. you make me laugh girl. good morning. hope i laugh like this all week

JJYOU:

plagues and viruseeeeeeees indeed. you make me laugh girl. good morning. hope i laugh like this all week

Good morning, dear. laughter's the best medicine, bro. i never go anywhere without it!

My problem with people like you is that you have so much confidence in your church until YOU ARE READY TO FORGET THE SCRIPTURES.
May be the word of the POPE makes you feel secure and HEAVEN BOUND!

I do have confidence in Christ's Church because he said:

Mathew 16

16: Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
17: And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
18: And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.
19: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

And just because we have a Pope doesn't mean we believe in the doctrine of 'once saved always saved'. If you didn't know it or not, we don't believe that the Catholic Church is our savior. Not everyone who calls out 'Lord Lord' will be saved. The function of the Pope (and all priests for that matter) is to guard, preach, and propagate the faith; baptizing believers in the name of the 'Father', 'Son, and 'Holy Spirit. That same faith which was passed down to us by the apostles.

Hope you've not forgotten you told me to 'rie nsi'. Thanks but don't forget that 'udiri nsi a atokazi'

No I have not forgotten. I hope you have not forgotten about me asking you to come back with facts and scripture to buttress you claims. Just throwing down scripture without interpreting it does nothing for no one.

Kedu ihe 'udiri nsi a atokazi' putara. Aghotaghi m ihe i dere. O kwa i buru onye igbo? O'u kwa mu na gi bu nwanne. If thats the case. . . .bros, ndeewoooo!

@carmelily

Anyways, the Bible makes no mention of the "keys to the kingdom" but if you guys gave it to Peter, I sure as hell hope Judas wasn't keeping the spare!

Read my previous post. Jesus gave Peter the 'Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven', Mathew 16:19. Furthermore, there are other references to keys in the Bible. Using the Bible one may be able to come to the understanding that 'keys' symbolize authority.

Like i said before David pointed out to me that you are the plague of NL, your ideas are baseless or at best, based on DOGMA and not on scripture. Did you at all read anything posted in your absence from the thread? In all respect, you are really ruining the image of RCC. Leave the debate to the likes of omenuko

Cut ~Lady~ a break. I think she is doing a good job. Instead of jeering at her, why not answer her questions. We've been answering yours.

@Davidylan*: « #626 on: October 11, 2008, 12:36 AM »

I've read those of Paul, Peter, James, John, Luke. The early church christians of the bible. I know what messages they preached, i know how they lived and worshipped. I know what sacrifices they went through. I've read their examples and exhortations. Who else am i supposed to read on?

Christ's message never changes pre or post apostolic age . . . Its the same thing He preached that Paul and company preached and is the same thing i hold unto. Your catholic fathers preach a different sermon. no thanks, i have not even finished reading the bible.

Please tell us where Jesus preached Trinity and prayed in his own name. Please tell us if there are verses in the New Testament, where Jesus have deferred ownership of absolute Power to God, whom he called (Eloi) which sounds more like Allah, in a different accent/tongue, and not Aba, or Jehovah or Yahweh.

And the person who asked that the catholic should point out what they believe in from the Bible, I will like you to at the same time tell us where TRINITY is written in the BIBLE!

I asked myself this morning; if the Children of Israel, who are known for being stubborn as they were in the Old Testament, in a general sense followed Moses, after he has shown them mighty miracles, then it would have been expected that they followed Jesus, as the Christian claims that the Children of Israel were knowledgeable about Trinity, beforehand.

Afterall Jesus showed them plenty and unique miracles. If it is true that they expected God to have a son and or a partner, it would have been feasible that a good portion of these nations, if not all would have accepted his statement, but not concorted a plan to kill him off. Afterall, Jesus would have been a shoe in for them not to waste of their livestocks in trying to get redemptions. As the christian says, it is a wholesale blood sacrifice, that Jesus made.


And we all know how frugal Children of Israel are, even now, they would have gladly accepted somebody dying for them while they also save their livestocks from any future sacrifices. The fact of the matter is that the Children of Israel knew better! What could have been a better proposal is what Islam have presented for mankind; No more blood sacrifices. All you have to do is to make sincere repentance!

@ omenuko

I don't mean to be rude to ~Lady~ but her tone sucks. And her logic sucks. Just like: "people thought Jesus was wrong, didn't understand Him and thought He was the devil's cohort. Since people think  the same of RCC today, therefore they must be the Body of Christ".  By the same reasoning, satanists are the Body of Christ!

You say i should answer her questions?
Read her questions. She makes an assertion then asks us to say why it's so when she was the one who made the assertion. She has NO debating skills and it makes everything boring _{or fun i should say} . Besides, her questions are just so, so, so baseless to me. Can't speak for anyone else. I never said most of the things she addresses in her 21 questions. Most of the questions have already been addressed several times over on this same thread. Her questions are phrased as if they should be posed to backsliding/doubting Catholics! Really.

And by the way, anyi agaghi ese okwu maka thread .

@carmelily,

And by the way, anyi agaghi ese okwu maka thread

I mana ndi ebe anyi na si, ndidi ka mma.  Nwere ndidi na-ekwere okwu ~Lady~.  Nsogbu adiro, enwere m ule (exam) taa. . . .mgbe m mesie ya anyi kwesiri kparita okwu ozo.  Chukwu gozie gi.

You know that our people say, patience is best.  Have patience when speaking with ~Lady~.  No problem, I have an exam today. . . .so when I finish with it we should talk more.  God bless you.

nsogbu adiro. All the best. ka o mesia.

I might chip in from time to time. But I've retired from lengthy posts, like replying your 20+ questions.
Cheers Lady.

No, I didn't miss it, but because of your claim that we do not know the Bible I asked questions for you to answer. I am only trying to learn from those who know the Bible.

I would really appreciate it if you would chip in this time. Chipping in to say "the catholics don't follow the Bible" does no good at all. It would be best if you educate us on the Bible as you have claimed that you've tried but we won't get it. Well I am trying to get it. And as one would normally ask questions when they don't get something, I am asking questions so that I can get it.

Or is this your way of saying you don't know the answers or are unwilling to answer or unwilling to engage in a reasonable discussion but to drop statements that insults others.


For people who know the Bible, why is it so hard to get you all to anwer questions?

Anyways, the Bible makes no mention of the "keys to the kingdom" but if you guys gave it to Peter, I sure as hell hope Judas wasn't keeping the spare!

Then what is this?

Matthew 16:18-19

18: And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.
19: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

DID THAT ONE JUST MYSTERIOUSLY APPEAR IN THE BIBLE? OR IS IT NOT IN YOUR BIBLE?

Like i said before David pointed out to me that you are the plague of NL, your ideas are baseless or at best, based on DOGMA and not on scripture. Did you at all read anything posted in your absence from the thread? In all respect, you are really ruining the image of RCC. Leave the debate to the likes of omenuko

Yet, I am the one who've been answering all yor questions from scriptures. Nne if you seriously do not kow the answer then say so, instead of letting pride cloud your judgment.

Seriously, If you regard me to be so little then prove me to be so little. Answer the questions.

Omenuko, they won't answer the question. Because if they do, they will be inclined to become Catholics and no one wants to be wrong.

Let me give you a run down of how it will go. They will ignore the questions and jump to assertions, and then quote passages from the Bible that have absolutely nothing to do with the questions.

And then make assertions that we Catholics refuse to base our belief on scripture. They've made their point we have all heard and listened, and now I am asking them to tell us what scripture really says, but no they won't do that.

You say i should answer her questions?
Read her questions. She makes an assertion then asks us to say why it's so when she was the one who made the assertion. She has NO debating skills and it makes everything boring or fun i should say . Besides, her questions are just so, so, so baseless to me. Can't speak for anyone else. I never said most of the things she addresses in her 21 questions. Most of the questions have already been addressed several times over on this same thread. Her questions are phrased as if they should be posed to backsliding/doubting Catholics! Really.

Then why don't you do the honourable thing and educate me. Answer the quesions.

Miss Lady, speaking of answering questions, you may have also missed this post before you came up with 20+ questions asking for answers:

No2Atheism:

great saints (e.g., St. Augustine, St. Ignatius, St. Thomas, etc.),

Wow, mere men confereing empty mere titles on men who most probably,

First and foremost.

1. Peter is not and was not the first Pope.
2. Catholic church started years after Peter and co have already been crucified for the sake of Christ.
3. Even the apostles did not call confer the title of Saints on themselves.
4[b]. Where in the bible is Mary to be worshipped or honoured by men.
5. Where in the bible is the establishment of a position of Pope.
6. Where in the bible is Rosary mentioned.
7. Where in the bible is Purgatory mentioned.
8. How can a man be saved according to the bible, then compare this with how a man is saved accord to catholism.
9. Did Jesus Christ appoint any man to his representative on earth.
10. Did Jesus Christ say that we should pray to a particular Saint or Man or Woman.
11. Is any man infallible.
12. Is the Pope a Man or a Spirit.
13. Is the Pope of God or the Devil.
14. Is the Pope fallible or not.
15. How do u know whether or not St. Augustine, St. Ignatius, St. Thomas are in Heaven or not,
16. Did Jesus Christ ask us to pray to those "Men or Angels " in heaven, or, did Jesus Christ ask us to pray to "Our Father who art in Heaven" [/b]

There are so many questiosn that a dogmatic followers catholism ought to ask themselves just as Islaamists need to ask themselves similar questions about their life after death.

Its rather sad that each passing day brings us closer to the coming of Christ, (who i pray and hope that i'll reign with despite my inadequacies as a Born Christian).

Cheers.

@Lady u asked that

18) Why did he have to come from the womb of a woman?

Well Jesus was born of a woman simply because:

1. God ALWAYS keeps His Word,
2. God has already called and given HIS WORD Eve the mother of all living, (so technically Jesus Christ had to born into the World, for Him to exist in our physical realm)
3. God has already declared and given HIS WORD that a woman was going to give birth to the Messiah that's going to trample upon the head of the serpent (Check the book of Genesis just after the fall of man.)
3. So Jesus did not just drop from heaven or materialise out of nothing simply because , HIS BIRTH VIA THE WOMAN (MARY IN THIS CASE) IS A FUFILLMENT OF PROPHESY/WORD, that God has already declared in Genesis.


@Lady, nawa , I pray God would save ur soul before u get to the point of no return in terms of catholism, abeg before u go too far in the belly of the beast, pls remember that its written that :

Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. )

A K O you know very well that those questions have been asked many times, and we have answered them, but because you all don't see our answers as being authentic, we're asking questions of you.

You can't ask us questions, we give answers, you tell us that even after the answers we have it wrong, then we ask you questions so that you that have the right answer wil educate us on it and you refer us to the same questions that you asked that we gave you answers to that you've deemed untrue.

We have attempted all those questions, but we know the outcome of it, you all will go on a catholic basing spree and completely "ignore" our questions.

How about you go ahead and answer our questions for a change.

Well Jesus was born of a woman simply because:

1. God ALWAYS keeps His Word,
2. God has already called and given HIS WORD Eve the mother of all living, (so technically Jesus Christ had to born into the World, for Him to exist in our physical realm)
3. God has already declared and given HIS WORD that a woman was going to give birth to the Messiah that's going to trample upon the head of the serpent (Check the book of Genesis just after the fall of man.)
3. So Jesus did not just drop from heaven or materialise out of nothing simply because , HIS BIRTH VIA THE WOMAN (MARY IN THIS CASE) IS A FUFILLMENT OF PROPHESY/WORD, that God has already declared in Genesis.

Ok that's all fine and dandy but why did he have prophecies of His Son being born of a woman. Why a woman? We know he'll keep his word, but why is his word that Christ would be born of a woman?
Why wasn't his word that he will create from dirt the New ADAM as he created the Old Adam, that would have accomplished the same goal.
Eve was the mother of the living, well ADAM was a living being but Eve wasn't his mother, so if God is to have a New Adam why not have him come to the world as the Old Adam?

@Lady, nawa , I pray God would save ur soul before u get to the point of no return in terms of catholism, abeg before u go too far in the belly of the beast, please remember that its written that :

Well thank you very much, but I have certainly taken my time to study the word, while I am still learning I do know the Catholic Church to speak the truth.

Thank you for attempting to answer the questions, would you mind continuing and answering the other ones too?

Ok that's all fine and dandy but why did he have prophecies of His Son being born of a woman. Why a woman? We know he'll keep his word, but why is his word that Christ would be born of a woman?
Why wasn't his word that he will create from dirt the New ADAM as he created the Old Adam, that would have accomplished the same goal.
Eve was the mother of the living, well ADAM was a living being but Eve wasn't his mother, so if God is to have a New Adam why not have him come to the world as the Old Adam?

Wooow,

Ur statements and questions are both sad and jaw dropping , simply because the kind of question u are asking , is similar to you asking the question "why did God create Eve, " "Why didn't God not create Eve so that Eve would not give Adam the forbidden fruit".

God does not need to tell us everything, God only tells us what we need to know, "He Himself said He would supply our needs (material, knowledge and everyother thing)" according to HIS RICHES in GLORY IN CHRIST JESUS.

So to be frank the kind of question u are asking is completely irrelevant, it just smells and sounds like u are simply looking for evidence for the worship of Mary, WHERE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.

Am sorry to say that the sadness surrounding the kind of question u are asking in response to my post is simply obvious if u take the time to please please please go through this bible verse below:


Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.


On a serious note , please please i beg u @Lady, allow God to minister to your heart, do not take the words of men (Catholic church et al) over the Word of God (Bible) ,

The Word of God is ALWAYS True no matter the reputation or number of people who say otherwise.

From experience its is not always easy going against popular opinion or establishment, as such i understand that it can be disconcerting and difficult for you to comprehend the fact that the Catholic church is doing things which clearly go against the bible.

For example:
Abraham was instructed to sacrifise covenant SON ISAAC, (every logic of man would have told Abraham not to obey God , simply because such an instruction did not make sense if one considers the TRADITION OF MEN).

So please Lady, i am sincerely begging you in the name of Jesus Christ, please take time out to pray and ask God to save you and open your eyes , so that you'll know who's lying, It is written that we should be as Bereans Christians , in that we should search the scriptures to make sure what we hear or are told is true and in agreement with the Bible.

Also for example:

The bible clearly says that God created "the Universe as we know it" in SIX LITERAL DAYS, yet the Catholic church says they believe in "Evolution", ( ),

@Lady -

First and foremost , congratulations, cus i can see that u are already married.

U can get across to me via No2Atheism@gmail.com in case u have questions (on strictly Spiritual Christian Issues) to ask about, but which u don't want to ask on nairaland due to privacy.

Wooow,      

Ur statements and questions are both sad and jaw dropping , simply because the kind of question u are asking , is similar to you asking the question "why did God create Eve, " "Why didn't God not create Eve so that Eve  would not give Adam the forbidden fruit

Is this your way of saying that you can't answer the question?

We know that Eve was created to be a mate for Adam and Adam to be a friend to God, while Adam and Eve sinned God needed to redeem the human race, so the questin remains why did the Saviour of the World have to come from a woman. God didn't need a woman to create man, so why did he have a woman give birth to the saviour?

No my questions are not to show the worship of MARY, as it is widely known that the worship of Mary as God is HIGHLY condemned by the church, even though the rest of you want us to say we do something we do not do.

I attend the Catholic Church sir, you do not, I believe I actually know what it is I am doing in there. Those who have experienced are better suited to speak than those who only have arguments.

The experienced one does not answer to the one with only an argument.

Maybe you haven't noticed, I CONVERTED TO the Catholic Church, after spending most of my life as a protestant and a pentecostal at that.

Sweetheart, simply making statements over and over again won't make your statements true. Just answer the questions. It won't hurt.

After all I am Catholic, and according to you all I don't know the Bible, so now I am asking you questions so that you can educate me. IGNORING my questions and saying "WOW" you can't ask questions like that doesn't cut it.

You've been making claims about the Church and very boldly, since you are not Catholic you must now boldly educate us on the Bible.

It's only fair that you answer the questions. It's not up to you to determine which questions are relevant or irrelevant, we didn't have that option sir, so you don't either.

AND YES GOD TELLS US EVERYTHING.
He does things a certain way for a certain reason. For example Jesus had to be a priest so that he can offer up sacrifice, only a priest can offer up sacrifice. Jesus had to be a King because HE has a kingdom. I mean there's so much more, so God doesn't just do things for the heck of it, he does it for a reason.

So the question remains why did he give his word that the saviour was to be born of a woman. We know that God created Adam from the dirt and that it is not beyond him to do so again, so why not just create the New ADAM as he created the Old ADAM, after all the Old Adam was created without sin and it was after his creation that he chose disobedience. SO this New ADAM too could have been created the same way without sin, and then just choose not to disobey.

So why not just have him come as the Old Adam did, it would lead to the same result.

This is much more about Jesus than it is about Mary and if only you would recognise that everything about Mary is about Jesus.
Everything about a mother is about the child, just ask a mother.

Now if you feel my questions are too confusing then say so, and I would start going one by one. I'll ask one, you give an answer, and then I'll ask another one from your answer or just move on to another one.

@Lady -

First and foremost , congratulations, cus i can see that u are already married

Lol, I am not married.
That is a rosary ring that I use as my chastity ring. It is my reminder to be chaste and true to God.

And no I DON'T think I have any private questions to ask you. But thanks for the offer, If I change my mind I'll hit u up. Or maybe just to say wassup.

The bible clearly says that God created "the Universe as we know it" in SIX LITERAL DAYS, yet the Catholic church says they believe in "Evolution", ( ),

First of all the Bible says no such thing that is your interpretation of it. You also forget that the writing styles of that day is different than today. The way in which I would narrate a story to you would be different than the way they would narrate the story.
Second the story had been passed down from generation to generation which actually gives support to the Catholic Chruch's stand of sacred tradition because the BIBLE itself is sacred tradition.
Third I really hope you are not one of those people who would say that all scientists want to condemn the Bible's teachings. There are pletny of scientists that study evolution that are christians and I'm not talking about Catholics here and I know a lot of them who became Christians because they saw that the steps of evolution is more aligned with creation in the Bible.
Fourth the Church has not officially stated that we believe in evolution. We have only stated that we are not condemning it because science is improving everyday. We do not believe it because it is not full proof, and it is only a theory and not an ideology, so it is not taught.
Fifth, on evolution, the body may come in that way but that doesn't account for the soul, God still is there, he is the one who gives us a soul.
If it turns out to be that evolution is full proof, then the soul is still from God.
Sixth, too many people associate evolution to atheism incorrectly. Evolution does not disprove the existence of God, just becuase atheists want to hijack it and claim it disproves God doesn't mean it does. It only shows their lack of understanding of the Bible.

So dear don't be fooled by atheists into thinking that evolution means there is no God. It doesn't

if only you would recognise that everything about Mary is about Jesus.
Everything about a mother is about the child, just ask a mother.

, Mother, Child,

Typical example of using the "wisdom of man and tradition of man" to try to justify ur belief, even though its not biblical.

Let me remind you that it doesn't matter what the Catholic church "SAY" about Mary, what matters is what is what they are doing about Mary, just like it what mattered to God was that the Isrealites worshipped GRAVEN IMAGE (just like catholics worship, pray to and honours images/statue of things they call Mary, Jesus et al. )

God made it clear that should not WORSHIP OR PRAY TO NOBODY ELSE EXCEPT GOD, (even Jesus Christ Himself INTSTRUCTED US to pray that Our Father Who art in Heaven, )so whether or not the catholic church tell the truth about the worship of Mary and others things or not is irrelevant, simply because ACTIONS SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORDS.

Another point to make is that Chastity ring is not necessary for u to keep urself till marriage for whoever your husband is going to be. Its not the works of righteousness that matter, its the intent and purpose of the heart that matter, u can abstain from sex without need for chastity ring.
Chastity ring is just another example of SYMBOLISM (which in itself is not biblical).

At this point i must say that i rest my case , cus its not my duty to argue or dilly dally about issues, my duty is to spread the Gospel, (which God sees me that i have tried to do as concerns you.)

The tradition of men is WORTHLESS, so whether or not catholic church has been doing something for thousands of years does not matter , what is wrong is still wrong,
thousands of years going in the wrong direction still does not matter it right, infact the further u go in the wrong direction, the more difficult it becomes to come to the starting point or the right direction.

By the way am not asking u to be protestant or pentecostal, denomination is irrelevant, in the big scheme of things, what matters is the following and more:

1. Are u born again (just like Jesus told Nicodemus).
2. Do you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour.
3. Do you pray to ONLY GOD.
4. Do you believe Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to GOD.


As the yoruba's say , "Aja to bama sonu, ko kin gbo fere Olodee, ", So am sorry to say that i rest my case , as concerns you.

I sincerely pray that ABOVE ALL THINGS, GOD WOULD BRING YOU TO THE FULLNESS OF HIS GRACE AND MERCY SO THAT YOU'LL SEE THE ERRORS IN YOUR WAYS AND BELIEVE , AND COME BACK TO CHRIST.

God bless.

Can somebody tell me if we glorify God with all these arguments? From the ongoing, nobody seem to be interested in any other person's line of reasoning. Everybody holds firm to his believe and nobody is willing to shift grounds.

Typical example of using the "wisdom of man and tradition of man" to try to justify ur belief, even though its not biblical.

It was the wisdom and tradition of these men that were able to tell them which of the books in the Bible were in line with the teachings of the apostles, and you seriously think they misinterpreted it?

The Church was not founded for the Bible, the Bible was compiled for the Church. So it's what the Church believes that is contained in the Bible. Why don't you hold the other writings of Paul and the other apostles to be scripture.
To deny the authority of the Church is also to deny the Bible, it was on the Church's authority and infallibility that the Bible was able to be accepted, if the Church is infallible then so is the Bible.

The Books of the New Testament were not written to be scripture the Church defined it to be scripture. If it was written to be scripture then why don't you all hold the other writings of the apostles especially Paul to be scripture?

It's really funny how people scream don't go by the traditions of man, when the only traditions that there are are of man, including those in the Bible and Christ did ask us to continue to do one particular thing in memory of him and that is eat of his body and drink of his boold often. I would say that counts for tradition, but not just that St. Paul and St. John and St. Peter in their writings chosen for scripture tell us to stay true to that which we are taught. Well the didn't teach out of the New Testament there was no New Testament they taught out of tradition, of how it was shown to them by Jesus.

What realy amazes me is how most of you really think that your arguments are authentic and new and unique to yourself. It is not, they have been used for centuries so in essence you too are staying true to the traditions of men.

Let me remind you that it doesn't matter what the Catholic church "SAY" about Mary, what matters is what is what they are doing about Mary, just like it what mattered to God was that the Isrealites worshipped GRAVEN IMAGE (just like catholics worship, pray to and honours images/statue of things they call Mary, Jesus et al. )

On the contrary it does matter what the Catholic Church says about Mary, you don't pick and choose which of the definitions of the Catholic Church to uphold. You all uphold the Trinity, yet that was defined and called the Trinity by the Catholic Church. The word Trinity is not found in the Bible, but the concept is, just as the concept of the other teachings of the Church are found in the Bible, even though the words used to define them are not.

You may actually want to know what the practices of the Catholic Church is and not go off of what you heard or think you see.
It really amazes me that the ones who claim to know it all about the Church are the ones who stand on the outside looking in.
Those who have actualy been to the Church have come out saying they don't do anything contrary to the Bible.
So you might want to try going to a Church first before you start making claims.

While the Isrealites had graven images they were also asked to look up to the bronze serpent also an mage. Or is there a difference between gold and bronze images, did God specify that if you look up to the gold image it is wrong but if you look up to the bronze image it is right?
Wasn't Jesus also in the image of man? And wasn't he worshipped? Why isn't man worshipped also? DId Jesus have separate image or is man deformed in image? You have two contrasts, one is the image of man, one man is worshipped the other isn't, yet they are both images, the other is of metals one is gold that was condemned and the other is bronze that was not condemned but commanded to be worshipped (according to your definition of worship), they are both images yet one was condemned and the other was not. What's the difference in both situations?
Jesus himself is God and he too is an image, why is he worshipped?

You will do well to actually find out what worship is.

Like I stated before I know what I do when I go to church, I experience it and experience holds more weight than your argument. I live it so I know better than you do on it.

God made it clear that should not WORSHIP OR PRAY TO NOBODY ELSE EXCEPT GOD, (even Jesus Christ Himself INTSTRUCTED US to pray that Our Father Who art in Heaven, )so whether or not the catholic church tell the truth about the worship of Mary and others things or not is irrelevant, simply because ACTIONS SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORDS.

Oga seriously find out what the meaning of prayer is and does this phrase ring a bell: "I pray thee" it is used many times in addressing humans and not God, why because the meaning of prayer is to petition. Now there are forms of prayer and that is not to be confused with the meaning of prayer. You have prayer in worsip in praise in adoration in meditation. But the literal meaning of prayer is petition.
Petitioning is to ask for something.
Now I know that you have asked someone to do something for you, which would then mean that you too have prayed to someone. So according to your thinking you have also prayed to others, other than God alone.

Second point, we are asked to interceed for each other, I know you want to ignore the passage that speaks on it because you can't explain it, and it is contrary to your view.
Third there is also the point that we ask those who are dead to interceed for us, well they're not dead, at least not according to Christ. If we die in Christ we also live in him. Last I checked we are all striving for eternal life. Well if they are dead then wouldn't mean that God isn't true on his promise.
On that same point, a human is made of the soul and the body, although the body dies the soul does not, so in essence the person is living, only to be joined to the body at the resurrection. No they do not need a body to be in heaven, heaven is not physical.
Continuing on the point, if we are told that we are body of Christ and the body of Christ is united and is not separated, do we now say that those who die are no longer in the body of Christ? Did Christ cut them off? How can this be when they are no longer walking on the earth and sinning, when we know the only thing that can separate us from the body of Christ is sin itself.
If those who are gone from the earth are no longer sinning and they have died in Christ, how can they now be cut off.
To make even more simple, if they die as Christians and we normally ask other Christians to pray for us, do they stop being Christians in their death?

As to the point of worship, the word as it is used today is not applied to Mary. And is not practiced by Catholics and it shouldn't. However the term worship literally has more than one meaning, superior and inferior meanings, the superior applying to God and God alone and the inferior referring to any one deserving of honour, such as magistrates and mayors as is the case in England and elsewhere.
Are now to say that the English are idolworshippers because they worship their magistrates and mayors, no absolutely not. Those who lack the meaning of the term worship are the ones who would view them as idolaters.

Another point to make is that Chastity ring is not necessary for u to keep yourself till marriage for whoever your husband is going to be. Its not the works of righteousness that matter, its the intent and purpose of the heart that matter, u can abstain from sex without need for chastity ring.
Chastity ring is just another example of SYMBOLISM (which in itself is not biblical).

And where is it stated that chastity ring is necessary for me to keep myself until marriage? About symbolism, maybe you don't know the Bible but it is full of symbolism and a book that is very much filled with it is Revelations. Daniel is also full of symbolism. So how can the books of the Bible be full of symbolism yet symbolism is unbiblical.
In Revelations we are also told that there are thoe with the sign of God on their foreheads.
So dear symbolism is everywhere in the Bible.

At this point i must say that i rest my case , cus its not my duty to argue or dilly dally about issues, my duty is to spread the Gospel, (which God sees me that i have tried to do as concerns you.)

Please don't rest your case. You didn't rest your case when you were asking us questions, now that you are being asked questions you shouldn't rest your case. You should have the same zeal that you have to expose the Catholic church to spread the gospel.
Well you are being given a chance to spread the gospel as that is your duty, so please answer the questions.

The tradition of men is WORTHLESS, so whether or not catholic church has been doing something for thousands of years does not matter , what is wrong is still wrong,
thousands of years going in the wrong direction still does not matter it right, infact the further u go in the wrong direction, the more difficult it becomes to come to the starting point or the right direction

Well in that case Jesus was wrong and so were the apostles. Exactly what was done by them are being done now, if only you actually open your eyes to see it.
Don't forget all the actions and sayings of Jesus and the apsotles are not written down and the only way that you will know fully what Jesus and the apsotle says is through the Church. We have the history till today. You can deny it all you want, it is the way it is.
By the way the Tradition of the Church is not regular, random tradition, it is sacred tradition. So please call it what it is. To deny sacred tradition is to also deny the Bible.

By the way am not asking u to be protestant or pentecostal, denomination is irrelevant, in the big scheme of things, what matters is the following and more:

That's why the Catholic church is not a denomination, it is the only non-denominational Church. It is the only one that was founded by Christ, it is the only one Christ gave authority to.

I sincerely pray that ABOVE ALL THINGS, GOD WOULD BRING YOU TO THE FULLNESS OF HIS GRACE AND MERCY SO THAT YOU'LL SEE THE ERRORS IN YOUR WAYS AND BELIEVE , AND COME BACK TO CHRIST

AHH YOU KNOW WHAT HE DID, WHEN I JOINED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WHERE CHRIST IS FULLY PRESENT, I WAS SO GLAD TO BE HOME!!!

The door to home is always open for you too.

Lady, I must say that I appreciate the way you do justice to most of the issues raised so far. It simply proves that you are living the faith.

Please keep it up.

Neither can you factually tell us that Peter was celibate simply because the bible does not record who he travelled with.
I am merely posting statements of fact . . . i'm no longer interested in emotional but largely vacuous arguments. You either take it or leave it

Ok so I finally went back to read your response to my question only to find that you don't have an answer to your own assertion.

You stated that it is factual that Peter was not celibate, I asked you about it and all you do is turn it around on me?

Sir seriously when will you start answering questions.

I am only asking you about your own statement, but you can't provide proof.

@~Lady~
Peter celibate?  his wife na decoration abi?

Someone can't be celibate because they're married? Do you even know what celibacy means?
Did Peter travel with his wife? When he was traveling with Christ was his wife there?
When all the apostles were traveling with Christ did they all log their wives with them?

Peter means "owner of the keys to the kingdom"??   So when Jesus said "on this ROCK" you guys jumped to the conclusion that Peter meant Rock/gatekeeper? Gee! Catholics and their dogma and fairy tales lol. Really can't stop laughing.

Please don't twist my words. I never stated that Peter means "owner of the keys to the kingdom of heaven". I stated that Peter means Rock and on that Rock (Peter) Christ built his Church.
Christ then continued on to give Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven or did he not do so? That doesn't mean that Peter owns it. God gives us the power to trample over scorpion are we now the owner of power?

And John the Apostle wrote the Book of Revelation?? Don't tell me that you do not know it was a different John. In fact Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did not even write the Gospels. Hence the "according to" preceding the titles of the books and the absence of the 1st person narrative. John the Apostle didn't write any book of the Bible.
You don't see a book written by the author with "according to" preceding his name: *OLIVER TWIST according to Charles Dickens

Madam please it is called The Gospel accordig to Matthew because Matthew is giving his own witness to it, just as Luke's is called according to Luke. And it begins by saying that he too decided to compile the events of Jesus' life. The Gospel according to John ends by saying that "It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true" John 21:24

The according to refers to the writers. Mark wasn't one of the original disciples, but his book is attributed to him as according to him who wrote it.

Madam there are not more than one Oliver twists, but there are four gospels.

By the way, what denomination was the Early Church again? The one you say you guys "preserved". so funny

They were not a denomination just as the Catholic Church is not a denomination. Ctholic simply means universal, it is one of the descriptions of the Church, just as the Church is described to be One, Holy, and Apostolic. So you might as well say the ONE CHURCH, or the HOLY CHURCH, or the APOSTOLIC CHURCH.

There was never such a thing as denomination until the protestant reformation. They have denominations we don't.

The only remotely sensible post came from Omenuko. Your responses are full of chaff programmed into you guys by the RCC, no independent reasoning. Just baseless, rote replies from every catholic you talk to. The Vatican not political? Gee, you guys  USE YOUR BRAINS!!!!!!!!!

Thank you, now please answer the questions.

I think the point ~Lady~ is trying to make is that celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom of God is not a bad thing. The Church does not make it mandatory for people to be celibate to serve God. What is required is celibacy for the priesthood and no one is forced to become a priest. St. Paul teaches us that celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom is good.

Thanks for understanding my point. The only Priests that are required to be celibates are those that join the priesthood without marrying. There are priests that were married and then joined the priesthood. I know this because there are several former protestant pastors who converted to catholicism and they wanted to become priests, they were permitted to do so even while being married.

But if their wives were to die before them they cannot remarry in keeping with scriptures.

Also my point was to show that you don't have to be a priest to be celibate. You also don't have to be a nun to be celibate. There are plenty of people who have given up marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and they live just as you and I live.

I am actually considering doing so.

If i judge correctly, carmelilly's question (and I) is where is that requirement stated in your bible? We have clearly defined requirements for the office of bishops, priests, pastors in the bible . . . where did you find the requirement for celibacy?

Just as you have requirements to a university you also have requirements to the priesthood, one of them being that if you are unmarried before joining the priesthood you are to remain that way.
Now the thing here is it is a choice for the individual to make.
If you do not want to be celibate then do not become a priest.

The priesthood was there before the Bible dear. The Church was there before the Bible.

the "rock" here refered to Peter's revelation of Jesus Christ not on Peter the individual (the same man Christ said Satan had sought to sieve like chaff).

the verses are clear that Jesus, after acknowledging Peter’s receipt of divine revelation, turns the whole discourse to the person of Peter:  Blessed are “you” Simon, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to “you,” and I tell “you,” “you” are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church. I will give “you” the keys to the kingdom, and whatever “you” bind and loose on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. Jesus’ whole discourse relates to the person of Peter, not his confession of faith.

This is another oft propagated falsehood. The early church wasnt catholic at all. Men like Peter, Timothy and co were married. Paul advocated that those who felt like it shld get married. When the bible talks of Bishops, it describes then as HUSBANDS OF ONE WIFE!

Oga the Church had to be catholic because it wasn't located in one place. Catholic is not a denomination it is a description. The Church was in Antioch, in Rome, in Ephesus, in Phillipines, in Corinth, and more so it had to be catholic.

no one said anything of the sort . . . that was brought up to counter ~Lady~'s penchant for half-truths when she made this false claim -

It wasn't a false claim, it would be a false claim if I was actually aware of the other embassies you brought to my knowledge, and then deliberatly try to ignore them when stating my post.
Or are you unaware of what a false claim is and isn't.

Dave, I HAVE NO REASON TO LIE. If I do not know something at a particular time, I answer a post to the best of my ability according to my knowledge of whatever subject.
You however have twisted the truth and flat out ignored a lot and told a lot of false truths.
So please don't confuse yourself.

Your take here on celibacy appears balanced; but I'D doubt this is the "mainstream" opinion within the Catholic Church; several others appear to understand differently.

It is the only opinion within the Catholic Church.
Please understand we are not divided on our beliefs.
It is not Omenuko's take or my take, it is actually the doctrine.

Lady, I must say that I appreciate the way you do justice to most of the issues raised so far. It simply proves that you are living the faith.

Please keep it up.

Thanks, but you know they regard me as someone irrational and someone who doesn't use her brains. So now that I have asked them questions they won't give me an answer, how is my brain supposed to be used now. If when I seek knowledge from those who have it, I don't get it.

I am really hoping someone will actually answer the question.

The problem is that some people argue just for the mere fact that they want to argue not because they possess superior knowledge. However, issues bothering on the Catholic Church can "never" be explained any better to some people because they already have a mindset. For such people no amount of explanation will make them change their minds about their opinions.

~Lady~

How bodi?

Thanks, but you know they regard me as someone irrational and someone who doesn't use her brains. So now that I have asked them questions they won't give me an answer, how is my brain supposed to be used now. If when I seek knowledge from those who have it, I don't get it.

I am really hoping someone will actually answer the question.

~Lady~ don't mind them. . . .I think you're doing a good job. I just now viewed your profile and realize who you are. . . . This is Onyeka Obodoako.

~Lady~

How bodi?

~Lady~ don't mind them. . . .I think you're doing a good job.  I just now viewed your profile and realize who you are. . . . This is Onyeka Obodoako.

AH WASSUP!!!

bodi dey inside cloth. Nna kedu, it nice to know it's you.

How bodi?

The problem is that some people argue just for the mere fact that they want to argue not because they possess superior knowledge. However, issues bothering on the Catholic Church can "never" be explained any better to some people because they already have a mindset. For such people no amount of explanation will make them change their minds about their opinions.

'Tis true.

No2Atheism:

Wooow,
Ur statements and questions are both sad and jaw dropping , simply because the kind of question u are asking , is similar to you asking the question "why did God create Eve, " "Why didn't God not create Eve so that Eve would not give Adam the forbidden fruit".

My point exactly.