₦airaland Forum

I hope she has already secured his will.

But where is electric power?

I know say na Igbo boys she dey talk about. They sabi spend money on voluptuous women wey get ukwu!

delishpot:
I wonder why you are massaging his pride sef. Thanking him for indulging you in his warped ideology? That a romantic relationship between two men or women is good? Are you sure you are catholic at all? Did Jesus massage satans ego on the mountain after his fast? Would paul have thanked a sinner for arguing why sin was right and tjose who say otherwise are wrong? Pick up your banner. People gave up their lives to stand for the word of God.

He's done me no offense or harm. He thanked me for engaging in a civil manner and I did same. His ideology is not personal to me, don't make it personal. Maybe your argument with him hasn't been courteous, I'm yet to experience that.

MuttleyLaff:
Thank you 9inches,
you seem more level headed than delishpot, who resorts to calling me all sort of ill-informed adjectives under the sun she could think of

I thank you too for indulging me in this effort to thrash out what the Truth is. You can never go wrong with Catholic teachings. Let me digress a little: "The Church" wrote the bible (New Testament), so we understand the underlying principles and backup teachings of the bible but which are not contained in the bible. Limiting your knowledge of Christianity (Christian teachings) to the bible alone is problematic when it comes to some topics. That's why the study of logic, philosophy and theology is relevant; you need them to be able to clearly explain the difficult parts of the Christian teaching. The Catholic church also boasts of numerous go-to sources like those of the Church Fathers (Early Church Fathers, Christian Fathers, or Fathers of the Church) who are ancient and influential Christian theologians and writers. These scholars set the theological and scholarly foundations of Christianity. For example, Ignatius of Antioch (also known as Theophorus, c. 35–110) who was the 3rd bishop or Patriarch of Antioch and a student of the Apostle John. Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 69 - c. 155) was a Christian bishop of Smyrna (now İzmir in Turkey) who had been a disciple of John.

9inches though you too have misconstrued Romans 1:26–27, same with delishpot
nonetheless

Please don't hesitate to tell me how I misconstrued the verses.

have a stab yourself at the bit below about Leviticus 20:10-16
We will later deal and talk about 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 in depth, extensively and properly

Leviticus 20:10-16, shows a variety of sexual sins or sexual immorality
and each is punishable by death

Adultery is in there. Incest is in there. Bestiality is in there
BUT why delishpot,
what makes or made Leviticus 20:13 stand or stick out like a sore thumb, to be an ONLY one, flagged as committing abomination

What's the knowledge, fact, truth and wisdom
behind why, in this context, adultery, incest or bestiality, isnt considered being committing abomination?

Don't break your head over the word "abomination", it's an English translation. Some translations also use detestable, disgusting, repulsive instead of abomination. These descriptions don't necessarily make them sins OBJECTIVELY. What made them sins is the underlying thing they all have in common - Sexual Immorality!

MuttleyLaff:
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman,
both of them have committed an abomination:
they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
- Leviticus 20:13

cc 9inches

While the Old Testament’s ceremonial requirements are no longer binding, its moral requirements are. God may issue different ceremonies for use in different times and cultures, but his moral requirements are eternal and are binding on all cultures.

Example of this fact is the New Testament’s forceful rejection of homosexual behavior as well. In Romans 1:26–27, Paul attributes the homosexual desires including other sins to a refusal to acknowledge and worship God:
"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. Likewise, the men abandoned natural relations with women and burned with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."

In 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Paul again warns that homosexual behavior is one of the sins that will deprive one of heaven:
"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor verbal abusers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God."

All of Scripture teaches the unacceptability of homosexual behavior. But the rejection of this behavior is not an arbitrary prohibition. Like other moral imperatives, it is rooted in natural law - the design that God has built into human nature.

MuttleyLaff:
If it makes you feel better, we can use the alternative or substitute verb "accept" in place of condone
Mind you, it wouldnt and doesnt make an iota of difference.

Big difference. They don't mean the same thing.

1/ What exactly, is the act of homosexuality, that you've openly declared saying you condemn?
2/ Why do you condemn, whatever it is, you deem, to be the act of homosexuality?
3/ In a thoroughly and detailed manner, leaving no stone unturned, tell, what is homosexuality?
4/ Would you assist couple in a same sex relationship, who come to you, because of being in dire need of immediate help?

1. A homosexual act is an act intended to arouse or stimulate a sexual response regarding a person of the same sex.
2. I condemn it because such act is always a violation of divine and natural law.
3. The definition i gave in (1) is enough, it doesn't need much detail. However, let me use this opportunity to explain this: Homosexual desires are not in themselves sinful. People are subject to a wide variety of sinful desires over which they have little direct control, but these do not become sinful until a person acts upon them, either by acting out the desire or by encouraging the desire and deliberately engaging in fantasies about acting it out. People tempted by homosexual desires, like people tempted by improper heterosexual desires, are not sinning until they act upon those desires in some manner.
4. I assist anyone depending on what they seek, as long as it does not violate my convictions.

You know, thats why you've done a tongue in cheek
Instead of doing opinion(s),
rather do JUST fact(s) and truth(s) formulated due to a reliance and/or faith on the recognised objective source

You essentially asked for my opinion, didn't you? A few scrolls would've reminded you of that. Having said that, my opinions are based on truth, absolute truth.

It's not like the church isn't organic anyway

It evolves but within certain confines. The manner of propagation may evolve but the core message will always remain the same.

Let whoever is forcing out, hold on to the buildings then

Gbam! The Church is for everybody (sinners) to obtain salvation. No man should be left out. That does not mean the Church accepts or approves of sin.

MuttleyLaff:
I would never dream of doing such thing

No one said he was the source of moral law.

Posing question at one person at a time 9inches.
Since as for now, it's Ubenedictus, who is faced,
does he, Ubenedictus, condone or condemn consenting adults honest, lasting and loyal same sex relationship?

9inches, you raised your head above the parapet, so I'll extend the question to you too,
do you condone or condemn consenting adults honest, lasting and loyal same sex relationship?
Or you neither condone nor condemn consenting adults honest, lasting and loyal same sex relationship?

Although my subjective opinion matters not on this issue, I'm going to answer nonetheless.

Going by the definition of the word "condone", you seem to be saying the behavior is morally wrong. Therefore, to condone a morally wrong behavior would, in itself, be morally wrong. Perhaps that's why you did not use the word "accept", which I'm going to use anyway.

I accept same sex relationship regardless of age, consent, honesty, sustainability and loyalty of the people involved as long as it does not involve the act of homosexuality which I condemn.

Disclaimer : This is an opinion formulated due to my reliance/faith on an objective source. I sincerely do not know what my real opinion would be if separated from this source.

As per main topic, no sinner should be forced out of the Church. Salvation is for everyone. In fact, salvation is for sinners only.


Bible Ref:

Mark 2:16-17
When the scribes who were Pharisees saw Jesus eating with these people, they asked His disciples, “Why does He eat with tax collectors and sinners?” On hearing this, Jesus told them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure--who can understand it?

Matthew 9:12
On hearing this, Jesus said, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick.

Matthew 9:13
But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Luke 5:31
Jesus answered, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick.

Luke 5:32
I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance."

1 Timothy 1:15
This is a trustworthy saying, worthy of full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the worst.

MuttleyLaff:
Cards face up, on the table, do you condone or condemn consenting adults honest, lasting and loyal same sex relationship?

You're trying to devolve the argument from it's source; he's not the source of moral law. The question you should ask is does God "condone or condemn consenting adults honest, lasting and loyal same sex relationship?"

I don't tell lies at all.

Abeg free the guy. Desperate times

OLAADEGBU:
You are the one shifting the goal post. You are yet to point out to me where in the NT church do we have Priests, Monks, Nuns or Popes in the church set up.

*The doctrine of the papal infallibility was proclaimed in 1864

There are tons of argument like that we can delve into and the argument would get no where. Like, bowing to statues, praying to Mary, celibacy, confession, Papacy, priests, doctrines, dogmas, disciplines, etc.

So, let's start from the root and find our way up in a more structured manner. Let's start by determining what the church instituted by Christ is, who the members are and the roles of the members. Then, authority of the church (if there's anything like that). Then we can go to salvation and justification, all according to the Scripture. As we move on, we will cover every question you have including the ones you mentioned above.
ALL EMBEDDED IN THE BIBLE.

Are you down?

North Korea next.

nnatom:
Pls OLA answer those questions 9INCHES and stop jumping like frog cos I've been following to see ur answers to those questions but I keep seeing cartoons.Pls am here to learn answer those three questions from 9INCHES

1. What do you understand by Apostolic succession and how does it contradict the bible?
2. Explain to me how you could have gotten the bible without the Apostolic succession.
3. Do you believe in the Church as the pillar and foundation of truth?

9inches pls don't allow him to run away from this questions.

I can't force him to answer. His conscience probably will keep nudging him for those answers, as much as he might try to suppress it.

OLAADEGBU:
What are the Bible references for these practices?

You are trying to divert the argument. You seem not to know your biblical arguments anymore. Christianity isn't random and constant posting of articles everywhere on the forum. Study your bible and study the history of christianity. Then come back and engage.

OLAADEGBU:
Do you have the word 'Godhead' in your Bible, if yes, what does it mean?

You are answering my question with question. You are a bible only "christian." Did the bible ask you to use that word Trinity?

OLAADEGBU:
I can show you where the Bible mentions the word 'Godhead' which is the same as the Trinity.

Why can't you show me the word Trinity? Did the bible ask us to use that word?

OLAADEGBU:
You should know by now that I am not a member of the RCC neither do I understand your catechism unless you are telling me that they are one and the same as the body of Christ and the God-breathed Word of God respectively.

I didn't quote the catechism for you. You could see bible references. Why don't you accept you don't understand the Christianity you claim to profess? Throw me your own argument. Don't being afraid.

CassieV:
When I first listened to it yesterday I heard Yanny, later on I heard Laurel.
This morning I heard Yanny, right now I'm hearing Laurel again.

Reminds me of The dress, do you remember that dress? What color do you see?

Same here, I initially heard Yanny and some moments later I heard Laurel, and it continues to be laurel.

I remember this dress too. I saw and still see it as blue and gold.

Laurel

Na Laurel I hear o, but all 5 people I'm with say they hear Yanny

OLAADEGBU:
I hear you.

Where does the Bible mention popes, nuns, monks and priests in the running of the church especially in the NT?

Where does the bible ask us to use the word "trinity?" Is the word "trinity" unbiblical?

OLAADEGBU:
Are you saying that the confessional has any basis in the Bible that you 'produced?'

I'm saying you don't believe in the bible, so no need arguing what the bible says with you. Until I see good evidence that you are a member of the Body of Christ, which is the Church (Col 1:18), I have no reason to make sense out of your comments. Now I ask you, are you a part of the the Church according to Corinthians 12:27 or are you independent (outside) of the Church like Martin Luther?

JUHABACH:
my biggest problem with the decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem isn't the move itself but rather the fact that such a monumental diplomatic victory was given to Isreal for free without exacting at least a commitment to the two state solution or a cessation of settlement expansions that violate international law.
smh.

Israel wasn't "given" Jerusalem, this is only a recognition of an already existing reality. Jerusalem has always been the seat and capital of Israel. Don't get it twisted.


"The nation is like a mighty lion;
When it is sleeping, no one dares wake it.
Whoever blesses Israel will be blessed,
And whoever curses Israel will be cursed.” (Numbers 24:9)


"I will bless those who bless you,
But I will curse those who curse you.
And through you I will bless all the nations.” (Genesis 12:3)

"Judah, your brothers shall praise you;
Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies;
Your father's sons shall bow down to you.
Judah is a lion's whelp;
From the prey, my son, you have gone up.
He couches, he lies down as a lion,
And as a lion, who dares rouse him up?" (Genesis 49:8-9)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oegd7TLXVvk

OLAADEGBU:
Are Roman Catholic Christians? The Confessional is not found in the word of God (the Bible) it is one of the works of man.

Your argument has no basis because you don't believe in the bible. You adopt a man-made doctrine of martin luther which against the teaching of the bible You need to wake up and see the lies you've been sold to from luther down to your pastors.

OLAADEGBU:
Are Roman Catholic Christians?

Who does the Bible instruct believers to go to when they sin?

You diverting from the point of discuss here.

OLAADEGBU:
Apostolic succession is unbiblical. It is nowhere found in the Scriptures. You can find out what it means in the suggested link below:

https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-succession.html

Answer: The doctrine of apostolic succession is the belief that the 12 apostles passed on their authority to successors, who then passed the apostolic authority on to their successors, continuing throughout the centuries, even unto today.

Well put!

- However, nowhere in Scripture did Jesus, the apostles, or any other New Testament writer set forth the idea of “apostolic succession.”
- Even if apostolic succession could be demonstrated from Scripture, which it cannot...
- Nowhere in the New Testament are any of the twelve apostles recorded as passing on their apostolic authority to successors. Nowhere do any of the apostles predict that they will pass on their apostolic authority.
- Jesus ordained the apostles to build the foundation of the church (Ephesians 2:20). What is the foundation of the church that the apostles built? The New Testament – the record of the deeds and teachings of the apostles.
- The church does not need apostolic successors. The church needs the teachings of the apostles accurately recorded and preserved.

9inches:
^

@blue colored; this is the most ludicrous and heretic interpretation yet! Point of correction for both you and gotquestions.org ministries. According to Ephesians 2:20, the foundation of the church is not the New Testament, rather it's the apostles and prophets that are the foundation (ref. Rev 21:14).

The Church
We the Gentiles who are now fellow citizens with the holy ones (Israelites, God's special people [Deut 7:6, Deut 14:2, Rom 9:4])
and members of the household of God (angels [Hebrews 12:22-23])
are the different members of the Body of Christ - the Church [Col 1:24, 1 Cor 12:27-28, Rom 12:4-5];
the Apostles and the prophets are the foundation (Rev 21:14);
Christ is the Head, or Cornerstone (or foundation stone or keystone) [Isaiah 28:16].

Key Points
(Ephesians 23-32) The church is Christ's bride.
(Ephesians 4:15) "Rather, living the truth in love, we should grow in every way into him who is the head (of the church), Christ, from whom the whole body (the church), joined and held together by every supporting ligament (different gifts and functions), with the proper functioning of each part, brings about the body’s (church's) growth and builds itself up in love.

@green colored; False! The church does not need any record or preservation of any record. Just so you understand it easier, the church already existed before the New Testament, not the other way round. The church through the apostles produced the NT scripture as part of her role in evangelization. The protestant mantra is to take the product of the church (NT) while disregarding and discrediting the church whose product they use. If the church as the author rightly acknowledege is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15), how then can someone or group of people exist outside the church and still claim to teach the truth? How absurd!

I counted at least 6 times where the author mentioned "Supreme" as the authority of Peter. This is just one example out of many where anti Catholics create straw man inorder to help their own argument.

1. "Supremacy" and "primacy" are not the same.

2. Christ assigned a like power to all the apostles, but he founded a single chair (cathedra), and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. So, the others were also what Peter was (apostles), but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So in essence, all the apostles are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord.

Apostolic succession is not about Peter's role, position among his fellow apostles, it is about the role and position of the Church (which the apostles are part of) in the propagation of faith, teaching of the Word of God and formulation of doctrines in line with the Word of God (scripture + oral teachings of the apostles).

OLAADEGBU:
The earlier you knew what constitutes a Church the better you will get to unravelling the conundrum.

Truth does not change even if you disagree with it. You're supposed to be a bible-only christian. You are falling short of convincing people here you even believe in the bible with your weak counter argument. Copy and paste won't save you because you do not know the authenticity of what you are copying. I already discredited one of your go-to place, gotquestions.org here:

9inches:
click ^ here

solite3:
you didn't back up your claims, you claimed angels and old testament saints are part the church it shows your deficient knowledge in scriptural truth.

The church are simply those that bought by the blood of Christ and are bornagain.

Question: "What is the church?"

Answer: Many people today understand the church as a building. This is not a biblical understanding of the church. The word “church” comes from the Greek word ekklesia which is defined as “an assembly” or “called-out ones.” The root meaning of “church” is not that of a building, but of people. It is ironic that when you ask people what church they attend, they usually identify a building. Romans 16:5 says “… greet the church that is in their house.” Paul refers to the church in their house—not a church building, but a body of believers.

The church is the body of Christ, of which He is the head. Ephesians 1:22-23 says, “And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.” The body of Christ is made up of all believers in Jesus Christ from the day of Pentecost (Acts chapter 2) until Christ’s return. The body of Christ is comprised of two aspects:

1) The universal church consists of all those who have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. “For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink” (1 Corinthians 12:13). This verse says that anyone who believes is part of the body of Christ and has received the Spirit of Christ as evidence. The universal church of God is all those who have received salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

2) The local church is described in Galatians 1:1-2: “Paul, an apostle … and all the brothers with me, to the churches in Galatia.” Here we see that in the province of Galatia there were many churches—what we call local churches. The universal church is comprised of those who belong to Christ and who have trusted Him for salvation. These members of the universal church should seek fellowship and edification in a local church.

In summary, the church is not a building or a denomination. According to the Bible, the church is the body of Christ—all those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation (John 3:16; 1 Corinthians 12:13). Local churches are gatherings of members of the universal church. The local church is where the members of the universal church can fully apply the “body” principles of 1 Corinthians chapter 12: encouraging, teaching, and building one another up in the knowledge and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Good copy and paste from gotquestions.org. I thought you knew what you were talking about. The site and its owners has no enough credibility to interpret the bible or take on the questions on such a massive scale. They mislead people with their heretic interpretations.

I addressed this topic from gotquestions here: https://www.nairaland.com/3720100/how-witness-loved-ones-roman/8#66972590

you are not paying enough attention

The church was not teaching oral traditions, oral tradition is not a teaching.

Before the church was even established the scripture was already in existence. The church is a product of scripture.

You're the one not paying enough attention. Modern scholars[who?] have concluded that the Canonical Gospels went through four stages in their formation:

- The first stage of gospel dissemination was oral, and included various stories about Jesus such as healing the sick, or debating with opponents, as well as parables and teachings.
- In the second stage, the oral traditions began to be written down in collections (collections of miracles, collections of sayings, etc.), while the oral traditions continued to circulate
- In the third stage, early Christians began combining the written collections and oral traditions into what might be called "proto-gospels" – hence Luke's reference to the existence of "many" earlier narratives about Jesus
- In the fourth stage, the authors of our four Gospels drew on these proto-gospels, collections, and still-circulating oral traditions to produce the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

You don't know how you got your bible, I guess because as a bible-only christian, your bible did not ask you to check how you got it. Why did you then trust the people who included some apostolic texts and discarded the others?
There is the Old Testament Scripture which Christ himself read, and there is the New Testament which is about Jesus Christ and his disciples (the Good News). The OT scripture was already in full form before Jesus (that's why Jews including Jesus read from it) while the OT scripture was not completed until about 6 decades after the death of Christ (Epistles of John).

I can see you want to turn it around, I m not talking about the new testament but the old testament which existed before the church and was the highest authority that even the teachings of Paul were scrutinized. Don't pretend only the new testament is scripture. The old testament set the template how the new testament should be viewed. The old testament and new testament has same authority

Who gave you the new testament scripture God or the church?

@bolded, cute straw man there! I wonder how you made that up.

@red colored, Easy answer - God through His Church. Christ and the Church are inseparable because you can't separate the Head from the Body. This fact means there is no salvation outside the Church because everything Christ does for us is through His Church. And don't forget the Church is One (1 Cor 12:12).

I get your confusion, you think what the apostles teach are more than what they wrote down,
Nope, how did I know

2 Corinthians 10:11 Let such an one think this, that, such as we are in word by letters when we are absent, such will we be also in deed when we are present.

What does this mean?
It mean their letter has the same authority as when they are present
Their letters completely describes everything about them.

1 Corinthians 4:6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

The apostle himself warn Christians not to go beyond scripture do you agree with him?

The verse and your explanation did not say anything about how much of the apostles' oral preaching was written down. It only affirms the authority and credibility of the bible. How do I know? John 21:25 clearly tells us that not everything that Jesus did was "written down". Note the emphasis on "written down", it did not say those thing weren't relevant. It says the reason they were not written was because "even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written".

which men represent God? The bible is God's inspired words and will even judge those men you call earthly authority

Those men you rightly called are earthly authority but the scripture is heavenly authority which is higher and which do you thinks we should obey?
Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.


God is no respecter of persons

Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

10:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

God has no favourite

Matthew 10:40, Matthew 16:19, Matthew 18:18, John 13:20, John 20:23 all tell us Christ have representatives on earth. He gave certain people in His Church authority that he did not give every church member. The apostles transferred their authority to people after them, this succession continues till this day. Only they have the trust to accurately interpret the gospel.

consider them as how? Yes I appreciate their effort but God's hand was in it that was why men couldn't corrupt it.
I have the same Spirit Jesus, peter and all the other apostles have so I have their knowledge.

Apostles has no successors, anyone claim that is a liar. Can you claim more accurate knowledge than God's Spirit?

Another circular and illogical argument you are making. 33,000 different churches claim they all have the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is does not distort information. Also, the Holy Spirit was promised to the One Church. There is no Holy Spirit outside the Body of Christ.

The apostles clearly have successors, it will only take a study of history to know that. Don't remain ignorant, read and grow your knowledge so you don't repeat this blunder elsewhere.

Have you heard about Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, who was a student of Polycarp? And Polycarp himself who was made bishop of Smyrna by Apostle John? Have you heard anything they taught or wrote? Do you know any of the early christians apart from the apostles, and what they believed, taught or wrote? Have you studied the church history from the time of Christ as recorded in the bible to present day? Or did you just pick the bible without giving a good thought where it came from and how it came to you? These are the questions you should answer to yourself; don't look to me or your pastor or the pope to give you the answer. You are an adult, don't be afraid to challenge your believe with these vital questions. You have nothing to lose by researching them, but everything to gain in terms of knowledge that might even help you beat Catholic arguments and convert them easily. Right?

are you Christ to say he doesn't recognise those churches.

You claim your church is the universal body of Christ? Are you serious? This is an unholy joke you need God's mercy.
The church are those that are born again not a denomination like catholism.
Is your church following the teachings of Christ? Christ is not the foundation of catholic church.
Roman catholic church is the devils church.

All denial without credible substance. Facts do not care about your opinions. Truth does not change just because you disagree with it. I very well laid it out clearly and you should read it again.

9inches:
click ^ here

"Christ himself is the truth, and that Christ being the foundation stone (cornerstone, keystone) of the church (Ephesians 2:20), that makes the church the foundation of truth (1 Tim 1:15). It essentially means you can't find truth outside the church. Now, do you still wonder why there are over 33,000 denominations who are struggling with truth. Can you unabashedly say Christ recognizes these 33,000 churches? Can you say they are all one church, one Body with Christ as the Head? Think!

Again, the foundation of the church is the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone (foundation stone).

The cornerstone (or foundation stone or setting stone) is the first stone set in the construction of a masonry foundation, important since all other stones will be set in reference to this stone, thus determining the position of the entire structure - Wikipedia.

John 6:61 - "Does this shock you": https://www.catholic.com/index.php/magazine/print-edition/the-pillar-of-truth"

you yourself has said it all old testament predates the church
Whether old or new Scripture is Scripture, they have same authority and the church is under it.

Still you have not proved from scriptures that there is a mother church. Paste verse in ful

You're still fatally wrong. The church predates the New Testament Scripture. If the Church had removed for example the gospel of Matthew, you would not be reading it now in the bible. So it's the Church that has the authority to say categorically what the truth is because Christ is the Head of the Church, and Christ is the Truth.

And I gave you the verses that supported the claim of the Mother Church.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and[b] hold the traditions which ye have been taught[/b], whether by word, or by epistle
@ coloured, epistle was used in singular meaning Paul was relating what he taught them by words or by that single epistle not all the epistles. Obviously, a single epistle do not contain the whole teaching.

It is easy to twist a single verse
What are those traditions? They are the teachings of the apostles and since
and since the apostle said we shouldn't go beyond scripture it means those tradition are written down.

The bible itself contains these traditions.

@bolded, that is a ludicrously heretic. No where the bible says Christians shouldn't go beyond what is in the scripture. Emphasis on "scripture" because the people the apostles were preaching to did not have the bible; they only know the old testament scripture (Jews) and initially the oral teachings of the gospel of Christ from the apostle. Later on, some of them (the churches in different cities and nations) received different letters from the apostles. Just because you have everything collected, compiled and authenticated for you does not mean the christians at the time of the apostles shared their letters across their churches. The Corinthians did not receive letters written for Thessalonians; same way the Galatians (Turkey) did not receive letters written for Philippians (Greece). Same thing goes for the private letters Paul wrote to Philemon, Timothy and Titus. They are not circulated to be read like your today's bible (they never had a bible). The gospel was spread orally because each apostle knows almost exactly what the other knows, so the different churches still got the same complete teaching although they got different letters addressing different topics.

As U.S. Trade Representative Robert E. Lighthizer, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and other officials head to Beijing this week for high-stakes trade talks with Chinese counterparts, they seek to correct an economic relationship with China that has become increasingly unbalanced — and, over the long term, dangerous — for the United States and other nations. U.S. lawmakers will support them.

Since joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, China has offered an economic grand bargain with two contradictory faces.

One face outwardly offers soaring and seductive promises of an emerging global economic order that will become more open and equitable as nations increase trade and commerce with China. Witness Chinese President Xi Jinping, who at the 2017 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, gushed at how “mankind has become a close-knit community of shared future” while assuring that “China is committed to a fundamental policy of opening-up and pursues a win-win opening-up strategy.”

The other face speaks inwardly to China’s ultimate geopolitical intentions. As the 13th National People’s Congress met this February to install Xi as effectively president for life, Xi vowed “to fight the bloody battle against our enemies” — including any nation that obstructs the “Chinese dream of national rejuvenation” — “with a strong determination to take our place in the world.”

Far too many countries, including the United States, have ignored the contradictions of China’s grand bargain on the assumption that China would liberalize economically and politically.

Unfortunately, this starry-eyed assumption has proved false. Benefiting enormously from a more open global economy to drive its own industries, the Chinese government and Communist Party have only tightened their grip on power, brutally suppressing dissent at home and pursuing policies abroad that are a far cry from the responsible global stakeholder that Xi describes.

The American people can see China’s malevolent economic behavior most clearly in its theft of our intellectual property. Chinese theft of American IP alone costs the United States nearly $600 billion annually, eclipsing the combined profits of the top 50 companies on last year’s Fortune 500 list.

Stealing American IP, in turn, advances Beijing’s “Made in China 2025” initiative to eventually dominate global exports in 10 critical sectors — namely, artificial intelligence and next-generation information technology, robotics, new-energy vehicles, biotechnology, energy and power generation, aerospace, high-tech shipping, advanced railway, new materials, and agricultural machinery. These targets reveal China’s goal for the near-total displacement of advanced U.S. manufacturing.

The United States can no longer afford to blindly accept the Chinese economic grand bargain.

President Trump has gone further than any previous commander in chief to create an opportunity to rebalance our economic relationship with China. His administration has rightly pushed the boundaries available under current law by invoking Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose penalties on Chinese theft of American IP.

As the U.S. delegation negotiates with China over trade, Congress should further strengthen America’s position by making China’s unwillingness to deal on issues of substance as painful as possible.

That’s why next week I will introduce the Fair Trade With China Enforcement Act to guard the American people against China’s nefarious influence on national and economic security, directly targeting China’s tools of economic aggression.

The legislation would ban the sale of all sensitive technology or intellectual property to Chinese entities and impose a shareholding cap on Chinese investors in American corporations to prevent undue influence in corporate governance. This includes an earlier bill that Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and I introduced to prohibit the federal government from purchasing or leasing telecommunications products from the Chinese firms Huawei and ZTE, given growing U.S. scrutiny about the dangers these companies pose to our critical information networks.

In addition, the legislation will propose to amend the 1984 income tax treaty with China to impose a withholding tax on Chinese entities earning investment and dividend income in the United States. The goal is to discourage Chinese behavior seeking to devalue currencies, price out American exports and drive capital imbalances that make our economy weaker and less stable.

The legislation would also impose duties on Chinese capital goods in the sectors targeted by the “Made in China 2025” plan — and encourage our allies to do the same — to ensure that American buyers do not inadvertently finance China’s long-term efforts to displace our manufacturing.

Finally, it will use tools created by the new tax reform law to raise taxes on the foreign income of multinational corporations if they enter into vulnerable “joint ventures” with Chinese firms.

The details of our ultimate deal with China matter greatly. The Chinese government and Communist Party are playing the long game, and we should, too.

We must protect American workers from China’s economic attacks and be willing to impose costs if Beijing refuses to restore balance to our trade relations. Strong and coordinated action by the United States and its allies can outlast China’s two-faced global mercantilism.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qeqdh7VEd0w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ObHFjeu2ts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2siMFvMpfPg

Reminds me of the Perikoma song.

brocab:
Allow yourself to open up your heart to Jesus, go unto your room and pray to the Father in secret-pray for your salvation, pray the Lord will call you into His Kingdom.
Pray repent, that your Pope-Priest can not save you, pray repent. for the Catholic Church can not save you-pray repent, that tradition will never save you-pray repent, bowing to images of Mary, the saints they can't save you-pray repent, the rosaries can not save you, pray repent that your Mammon can not save you-pray repent you can not save yourself.
So take on this great opportunity, become One with Christ-allowing Christ to be One with you.
Pray repent-and stand beside me, and allow us to pray for your salvation, and for you to become a Holy Spirit filled born again Christian, as the scriptures tells us to do.
9 inches are you willing to follow Christ 100%, the answer to that is "Never" "And you would rather prefer to harden your heart even deeper and worship the goddess Mary, Dianna or Isis, denying Catholicism was built to only lead you to believe a man made tradition.
Most Catholic's would call this a pot of Gold-in your case-I call it a pot of fools-Good luck with that-you have no hope to be with Christ, and if you are expecting Mary to be waiting for you at the pearly gates-you will be waiting for eternity in hell.
Good bye....

Thanks mr spiritual.

brocab:
If you will just allow yourself to allow Christ to come to you, you too will understand-why the Spirit teaches us the Word of God.

Mr. spiritual.