₦airaland Forum

lacum: since u know dat jesus tot everytin wat are u doing here?

lacum: wat are u doing now, is it not teaching? smh

was it not a question you asked?
Have you not answered your question?

Or do u still want an answer?

lacum: mathew 28:19-20
the church was given the authority to teach not d bible. n d pope has d authority as d head of d church

To teach what exactly?

Things Christ did not teach?

italo: Amen. I believe the Holy Spirit. I also believe Jesus and Holy Spirit when they say the Church is built on Peter. Sadly, you seemingly disagree with them there. You pick and choose where to believe the Holy Spirit.

I also believe Jesus and Holy Spirit when they say the Church is built on Peter not Francis.

I do not disagree with them on that.

....and Jesus also said our God is God of the living....and you affirmed that 'Saints never die'....

If this is true as you implied, Apostle Peter is not dead and still 'oversees' the Church just as Christ does....then the pope Francis is of no use.
(I'm dancing to your beat)

Syncan: @Adsonstone, the issue here is what does God actually forbids. You say He forbids making of any graven Image. Yet you support "Decorative images/carvings which Kings used for thrones". On the other hand, you do not agree that they should be "used for or assist worship", yet this is not what you claim, you claim that it should not be made at all. see your 2nd commandment. That's why it is difficult to explain, for you need to be clear what we agree on and what we don't. I had earlier called for such clarity. If the thread will move on, this is actually needed.

I hope this will clarify it.

God forbids graven images generally see exodus 20, leviticus 26:1.

Though, God commanded images to be made in some instances eg the bronze serpent, the ark of covenant.

However, people made images (though not for worship but for decoration) and God was silent about it (as far as the bible records) also does not justify graven images.

italo: Peter is the rock on which Christ built the Church. Jesus affirmed that.

Christ is the cornerstone on which the Church is built....and He is the head of the church (if you disagree, it doesnt change the fact).

The Holy Spirit affirmed it, Church Fathers eg Jerome knew this.

italo: If we can first agree that Jesus said those to Peter, then we can talk about the rest. Pope Francis is Peter's successor. Jesus still has sheep on earth and Peter is no more on earth. It would be foolish to think Jesus only wanted to feed the sheep of Peter's generation. Peter has been succeeded by men to whom he has passed on that commission.

As for your 'daddy.' I never heard Pope Francis had a son.

I hope you know you are derailing this thread..

the thread is not being derailed....its part of the topic.

My 'daddy' is Peter not Francis' son.
....and He feeds me.

italo: I'm not sure all these words answer my simple question which would only take a phrase to answer.Are you saying God permits the making of images or he prohibits them?

His law forbids them, so, they are prohibited.

italo: Ah! Good for you. I'd rather copy from the internet that type a bible passage out. There are many things to be done with limited time.

I'm actually using a Nokia 2690 to do all these.
There are so many things I cant do eg, copy items on a webpage, take screenshots etc.

italo: I'm not sure. Maybe if you showed me. At least in the passages there is nothing to suggest that making images were forbidden when they were ordered by God. The people weren't hesitant.  Also there are other passages why images were kept without God commanding so. Images are permitted;  idols are prohibited.Yes. Except you want to show me where God abolished the use of images.Again, images are permitted; making images into idols to be adored as God is prohibited.

lets clarify something then we move on.

Are you suggesting that when humans do what God forbids in His law and God is silent about it, then the action becomes right, justified and not prohibited?

italo: 1.     I, the Lord, am your God. You shall not have other gods besides me.
2.     You shall not take the name of the Lord God in vain
3.     Remember to keep holy the Lord's Day
4.     Honor your father and your mother5.     You shall not kill
6.     You shall not commit adultery
7.     You shall not steal
8.     You shall not bear false witness
9.     You shall not covet your neighbor's wife
10.You shall not covet your neighbor's goods

I'll also like to know the 10 commandments according to adsonstone.

adsonstone has no such commandment of His own....but for God?
Here..


1. You shall not have other gods besides me.
2. You shall not make any graven image for yourself.
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord God in vain
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5. Honour your father and your mother
6. You shall not kill
7. You shall not commit adultery
8. You shall not steal
9. You shall not bear false witness
10.You shall not covet anything that belong to your neighbour.

italo: Okay. So Jesus, 11 Apostles and all other Christians are the rocks one which the Church is built. Only Peter is not the rock on which the Church is built. I hear you but I no gree!

"You are Peter and uoon this rock I will build my Church."--Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ, the Conerstone on which the church is built-
Jesus is the Head of the Church (not Peter)

You have affirmed that.

italo: Well, Jesus didn't say these to you and your daddy. He said them to Peter.

neither did He say that to papa 'pope' Francis

....and is my 'daddy' not Peter

italo: Are you saying now that God permits making of images?..the making of things with likeness to things in heaven, under earth and in sea?

Were you not the one that implied that God supports images for worship?
'I'm dancing to your beat'

Perhaps, you still do not understand me.

Lemme give another one that will clarify my position....it also explains exodus 20.

Leviticus 26:1
"Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image , neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your God."

can you see that it also includes 'graven images' and not necessarily only 'image idols'

and can you see the 'specs' of the images prohibited by God?
....and carefully compare it to the ones the RCC make....

God has never contradicted Himself....study the types of 'images/cherubs/serpent' he ordered Moses to make.

italo: 1. Tell me what is wrong with copying and pasting from a Catholic website that airs my view. You forget that your original question was copy and paste from Exodus 20:4, 5.

2. If they were ordered by the law, then God didnt forbid it.

for the first one, there's nothing wrong with 'copying and pasting' and you should know that that exodus 20:4:5 wasnt copied....I actually typed it.

For the second....
Thats the most interesting part.
...but something has to be clear.

Are you saying God doesnt forbid somethings He commands though forbidden in His law?

italo: If they were destroyed only when they were used as idols, then it shows that they are only prohibited when used as idols. Still, you will have to prove to me that all the images were used as idols and then destroyed.

all were not 'idolized' (permit that term).....however the ones God commanded to be made were destroyed which are
the bronze serpent and was destroyed in 2 Kings 18:4 and I guess we both know the story of the destruction of the temple of Solomon and of course, the ark was in it....though the bible did not specify that it was destroyed....though an apocryphal book says it was 'carried away'...and I dont rely on apocryphal books anyway

italo: It is simply. God never abolished the use of images. He only condemns the misuse (adoration) of images.

are you sure about this?
....and He supports the use of images in the church right?

italo: You will have to prove this.

so, do you think Apostle Paul was joking/supporting images when he was talking about humans 'changing the God's glory into that of an image'?

italo: I should state the 10 commandments?

What the heck is this?

You state the book of Malachi!

that was a request. Pls, Just state them according to the RCC.

By the way, what should I state in the book of malachi?

italo: Christ still is.

Awesome!

You have said the absolute truth.
Then Christ is the Rock on which the Church is built.

italo: Have the apostles stopped being the foundation of the Church? Yes or no.

Is the Church no more built on the rock - Peter? Yes or no.

No, Peter himself is built on Christ-the Rock.

The Apostles and all christians (the Church in general) are rocks/foundation which upholds the truth.

If you are familiar with the Pauline epistles (esp Ephesians), you will know this.

italo: Has Peter stopped feeding Jesus sheep? Yes or no.

Does Peter still have the keys to the kingdom? Yes or no.

Does Peter still confirm his brethren in the faith? Yes or no.

Yes, just as my 'Daddy' does all these.

....and worthy of note, all christians have the authority to 'bind' on earth and it will be bound in heaven.

Simple!

italo: Christ made his apostles the foundation of the Church, especially building his Church on Peter

Question:

so, has Christ stopped being the Church's foundation? Yes or No.

In other words:
Is Christ the foundation of the Church? Yes or no.

italo: Exodus 20: 3 "you shall have no other gods before me. 4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them;"

It is of course obvious that the emphasis of this law is in the first and last clauses — "no strange gods", "thou shalt not worship them".

There are many proofs that the commandment was never understood as an absolute and universal prohibition of any kind of image. Throughout the Old Testament there are instances of representations of living things, not in any way worshipped, but used lawfully, even ordered by the law as ornaments of the tabernacle and temple. I am not taking of the cases where the Prophets denounced the idolatry of the people but the cases where statues were made and used with the full approval of the authorities which show that the words, "Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image", were not understood absolutely and literally. It may be that the Hebrew translated "graven image" had a technical sense that meant more than a statue, and included the idea of "idol"; though this does not explain the difficulty of the next phrase. In any case it is certain that there were "likenesses of that which is in the sky above and on earth below and in the waters" in the orthodox Jewish cult. Whatever one may understand the mysterious ephod and theraphim to have been, there was the brazen serpent (Numbers 21:9), not destroyed till Ezechias did so (2 Kings 18:4), there were carved and moulded garlands of fruit and flowers and trees (Numbers 8:4; 1 Kings 6:18; 7:36); the king's throne rested on carved lions (1 Kings 10:19-20), Iions and bulls supported the basins in the temple (1 Kings 7:25, 29). Especially there are the cherubim, great carved figures of beasts (Ezekiel 1:5; 10:20, where they are called beasts), that stood over the ark of the covenant (Exodus 25:18-22; 1 Kings 6:23-8; 8:6-7, etc.). But, except for the human heads of the cherubim (Ezekiel 41:19, Exodus 25:20, the references to them when combined seem to point irresistibly to some such figures as the Assyrian winged bulls with human heads), we read nothing of statues of men in the lawful cult of the Old Testament. In this point at least the Jew seems to have understood the commandment to forbid the making of such statues, though even this is not clear in the earlier periods. The ephod was certainly once a statue of human form (Judges 8:27; 17:5; 1 Samuel 19:13, etc.), and what were the theraphim (Judges 17:5)? Both were used in orthodox worship.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07664a.htm

Decorative images/carvings which Kings used for thrones were not in any way used for or assist worship.

Other images you mentioned in your 'copied and pasted' article above were 'ordered by the law' (see the coloured) or ordered by God Himself.

Even those images 'ordered by God were subsequently destroyed at a point or another' because the same images were being used as idols.

Where did the RCC get its own 'order from God' to make images to aid worship?

.... its also good to know too that the Apostles disregarded/condemned images.

...and if I may ask:

Pls, state the 10 Commandments in that passage in exodus 20.

'

adsonstone: yes, God did.....

....and if you think He did not, (you're saying the verses I cited refers to non-religious use of images only....so, speak up and lets address that.

adsonstone: is Francis the only 'infallible' one in the RCC?....

.....how abt other Priests, Catechists, Monks, Nuns and even Italo himself....are they fallible or infallible.?

...and Italo, if you cant answer for others, just answer for yourself.

Now, I begin to wonder why these questions are left unanswered....

Mz_®ae'®ae:
Hello.....Uhm am Rae'Rae but u guys can call me Rae....quite happy dat u cld atleast recognize our presence 'ere....Am 16 nd ama juner|June14.Am new on here xo am lookin forward to knowin u Guys.....Love Y'all mach mach..Muah¡!

welcome to 'the place' Rae.

Enjoy yourself!!

italo: I know one person who claims to be infallible and he is not the Pope. He is not even Catholic.

His moniker on nairaland is "adsonstone."

What do you think about this?

is Francis the only 'infallible' one in the RCC?....

.....how abt other Priests, Catechists, Monks, Nuns and even Italo himself....are they fallible or infallible.?

...and Italo, if you cant answer for others, just answer for yourself.

woky: stil yet to answ my question

pls answer so that we can proceed

yes, God did.....

....and if you think He did not, (you're saying the verses I cited refers to non-religious use of images only....so, speak up and lets address that.

.

italo: And the only people who decided not to misunderstand and misuse the truth are adsonstone and anyone who teaches exactly what adsonstone teaches?...

That is your infallible belief?

Is this a qstn I'm supposed to answer?

italo: Because you havent shown me how to prove things to be true. Not long ago, you made me believe all you teach is truth and the only proof you gave is "I am guided by the Spirit." Why then, don't you accept my proof. "We are guided by the Spirit, so all we teach is truth."

If you want another kind of proof, lead by example.

after I said that, you failed to bring out any doctrine/practise I believe in that's contrary to what the Holy Spirit has taught you.

.....but I did after you declared yours, and hitherto, you are unable to prove it to be right/inspired.

Lemme help you.
Cite scripture references from the bible to affirm your claim (as I showed Woky one that affirms mine) or just bring reliable links that shows that Jesus/the Apostles used images they used in worship.

italo: I haven't said categorically that you have misconceptions. Please wait yill I do.

so, what did you mean when you said this?

italo: *not talking about your misconception of what we teach though*

or were you just joking?

woky: jst one question pls.


Did God forbid the 'religious' use of statues??

Let's consider this passage to answer that question.

Exodus 20:4-5

4. Thou shalt not make any graven image , or any likeness of anything that is in Heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them .....

Was God referring to only non-religious use when He said 'any graven image'?

italo: The Holy Spirit guides us so everything we teach is true.

*not talking about your misconception of what we teach though*

Abi does the Holy Spirit only teach truth to you and make only you always right...but teach us lies and make us wrong?

The Holy Spirit teaches all Christians the same truth....though many have choosen to misunderstand/misuse it.

By the way, you have still not proven the 'image use/concept' to be true/inspired.

....and regarding the bold, clarify the misconception I have about the RCC teachings.

I'm a fan of both and I'd say they're quite different.

Boxers 'fight'.
Wrestlers 'entertain'.

If they are put against each other to 'fight'....wrestlers should do better (in my opinion)
just imagine Ryback against Vitali Klistchko

italo: You forget that 1.5billion Muslims believe like you that it is wrong.

About 1.7 billion Spirit-filled Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans etc have been taught that it is right by the Holy Spirit. Thats about 80% of Christians.

We are right! The Holy Spirit guides us.

are you referring to the same 1.5billion muslims that an ex-pope declared they were on a way that leads to God?

Are they now all wrong for not using images and perhaps no longer on the way to God?

Or is the pope now wrong to hav said they are on a way that leads to God?


N.B: You have not proved the 'image concept' to be right/inspired. (I'm still waiting for that)

italo: It was inspired by the Holy Spirit that guides us. So it is right. We are always right!

can you prove it to be right (and inspired)?.....

....because every other spirit-filled christian believes it to be wrong though Rcc suppose it to be right (and of course, Inspired as you just declared)....also, hindus, taoism, zoroastranism also believe it to be right.

italo: Seriously, what are you still trying to achieve. Shey you said you are always right because you are guided by the Holy Spirit.

We are always right because we are guided by the Holy Spirit...so everything we say is true.

Removing my hand from this now. I think this is now settled.

That just had to be settled to continue.

Why not let us face the topic of the thread by throwing in something practiced by the RCC and you defend it....honestly and politely....I pledge to do my part too.

The concept of making images in/for the church.
Why is this done.?

1. Chris Tomlin
2. Phillips, Craig and Dean (the group)
3. Don Moen
4. Michael W Smith
5. Frank Edwards

POPE II: what a blatant lie , are you that shameless? Even after what chukwudi posted? , I feel sad for you. Okay at least educate yourself on the Roman empire

what's our topic....
...what is this one saying?

italo: When I say "Catholic Church," I mean just that.

when you mean RCC, state it in full.
catholic (universal) Church is simply not the Roman Catholic church.

italo: I didnt say those men preached submission to Peter. I said you preach submission to Peter if you say those men (if they continued their preaching of compulsory circumcision) were out of Christ's Church. Because it was Peter that declared that their teaching was wrong.

their message was wrong even before Peter declared it wrong.
Circumcision became unnecessary after Christ's death simply because Christ died for all--circumcised and uncircumcised.

italo: That's what the Catholic Church - Jesus preached in Matt 16:

18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

lets put it simply.... Did Jesus preach 'submission to Peter for salvation in that passage'?

Just as those men in Acts 15 were going about preaching an unnecessary (which was even wrong), likewise the rcc preach 'submit to Francis to be saved'

italo: Aha! See your earlier statement:


You are contradicting yourself. Abi does it only become wrong when the Catholic Church holds a belief but when Adsonstone holds the same belief it becomes right?

no, I declared in my first statement that which I was sure of....found in Acts 4:12, and the subsequent one which I dont know says 'God may save them' in ways known to God only and not me. That doesnt contradict.

Unlike the RCC that declares that there's salvation outside Christ and condemnation for those who know the Rcc to be true and ignore it which you cited the rcc write-ups/tradition as a reference for that.

Even an ex-pope of the Rcc declared that muslims were on their way to God after kissing muhammad's book (quran)....that shows that Islam is 'another way to God outside Christ'.

italo: I think you believed the Church was wrong about that until I showed you Romans 2, then you suddenly changed you position. Am I wrong?

do you think you possibly knew what was on my mind?
Well, you are wrong.

By the way, I knew that part of the epistle before you brought it up here.

italo:
And everything the Catholic Church teaches is true...because we are Guided by the Holy Spirit.

na u sabi that one ooo.

italo: When I say "Catholic Church," I mean just that.

I didnt say those men preached submission to Peter. I said you preach submission to Peter if you say those men (if they continued their preaching of compulsory circumcision) were out of Christ's Church. Because it was Peter that declared that their teaching was wrong.

That's what the Catholic Church - Jesus preached in Matt 16:

18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”


Aha! See your earlier statement:


You are contradicting yourself. Abi does it only become wrong when the Catholic Church holds a belief but when Adsonstone holds the same belief it becomes right?

I think you believed the Church was wrong about that until I showed you Romans 2, then you suddenly changed you position. Am I wrong?


And everything the Catholic Church teaches is true...because we are Guided by the Holy Spirit.

omg!!
What happened to my post?
I was wondering why I got no reply.

chukwudi44: bros even JWS Claim to be 6000 years old,the church of christ also makes a similar claim.The fact is that here is no historical evidence to back it up.Can you adduce any historical evidence to prove the existence of the orthodox church before the east-west schism?

All I've said is that the orthodox existed as part of the catholic church (so as the Roman Catholic)....(Before the east-west schism)

chukwudi44: bros even JWS Claim to be 6000 years old,the church of christ also makes a similar claim.The fact is that here is no historical evidence to back it up.Can you adduce any historical evidence to prove the existence of the orthodox church before the east-west schism?

All I've said is that the orthodox existed as part of the catholic church (so as the Roman Catholic)....

italo: If you claim to be always correct because you have the Holy Spirit,

What are you doing trying to prove Catholic doctrine?

The Church has the Holy Spirit too so it is always right.

That is the big FAIL in your effort to disprove Catholic doctrine. My work is done.

EXCEPT you also claim to be the sole custodian of the Holy Spirit in the world?

That's no problem at all.

I'm not claiming to be the sole custodian of the Holy Spirit....you seem to be the one doing that saying the Holy Spirit is given to the church (leadership) as if it wasn't given to individuals.

italo: All these "churches" were not one then. They simply didnt exist. The One Church was and is still ONE.

E.g before the Schism, there was only The Catholic Church, nothing like "Orthodox Church." "The Orthodox Church" was created at the Schism.

Before Luther broke off, there was nothing like "Lutheran Church." It was created at the "Reformation."

Before King Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn... ...lets not even go there.

It was just The Catholic Church under the authority of the Pope that made the Canon.

italo: Also, let us compare the case of those early Judizers with that of these "churches" you mentioned. If Peter would have relied upon the Scriptures, he would have concluded that Gentiles had to be circumcised, since all the Patriarchs and prophets were, the apostles were, and even Jesus was. But Peter, by virtue of his authority, decides the issue as the chief shepherd of the Church (and the decision was not based on the Scriptures). If the Judaizers were to go on preaching their opinion, claiming it was scriptural, it would still be heresy. "Peter has spoken, it is finished!"

So, do you mean that Peter nullified the circumcision of the law of Moses?

There you fail.

Peter did not nullify it.
By virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, circumcision became 'irrelevant'.

This the Apostles understood including Peter so they declared it because that was the truth.

Peter did not nullify circumcision by his own opinion.....Circumcision became nullified by virtue of Christ's death and Resurrection which Peter and other Apostles declared.

italo: ...being written by one of the leaders of the Universal Church to the Church of the Thessalonians. Wouldn't Paul have also taught them the Acts 15 Church council declaration by Peter, the head of the Church? Of course he would.

The beginning of that letter goes: 1 - "Paul, and Sylvanus, and Timothy, to the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ."

If you insist that "us" and our means "Apostles" but not "Church," show me where Sylvanus and Timothy were referred to as Apostles.

So, do Paul, Timothy and Sylvanus make up the church?

That should be answered first.

italo: if we take the verse to mean "Apostles"...

...Do you not know that apostleship is an office that needs and has successors? That is why Judas had to be replaced. That is why we have apostolic succession to this day. That is why Archbishop Adewale Martins, in union with the Pope and the Bishops is the one who transmits this Church/Apostolic tradition to us in Lagos today.

Then what happens to the Orthodox bishops and other bishops who claim to be successors?

italo: Neither does it say that we should not follow Catholic tradition, according to you.

And it doesn't say anything it doesn't contain should not be a doctrine.

Also, it is you who believes the Bible must state everything that Christians should do. I believe the interpretation tradition gives the Bible: that the Bible supports adherence to Catholic Tradition.

Still you have nothing to refute my position.

....and my position is no way invalid too.

italo: Understand what is taught by the Church leadership (including by tradition); not "interpret" for yourself what you want the scripture to say.


Jesus said that to the Church leadership. Not every individual.

The Judaizers read scriptures and understood...but the Pope - Peter was right.

So, do you mean the Holy Spirit is only available to Church Leaders....and not every member of the church?

.....and the rcc is right when it says men should submit to Francis to be saved....is that what you mean?