₦airaland Forum

@ Mad_Max

how are you sure the fallen Angels are "unregenerately" evil. is this unquenchable hate recorded in the Bible?

Yes it is recorded in several sections of the bible.

"Your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour." 1 Peter 5:8.

"Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time." Revelation 12:12

When a person becomes unrepentant, either resentment, or anger takes over. When the mind becomes filed with hatred and pride, then what follows is pure evil. Satan cannot go back to a state of righteousness. His allotted time to repent has been far spent, and even he knows that.

That is why he's trying to garner as many souls to side with him, but not because he likes them, but because he wants no one to inherit what he once had - the joy that comes from God's love for His creation. Remember he knew what heaven was like.

You see we are aware that abortion is wrong when its done for the wrong reasons. If performing an abortion will save the mother's life, then by all means perform it.

The world and its issues in which we live has grown to be so complex. It isn't always easy to talk of matters in black and white, but anyone with a sense of decency and common sense should know that when the doctors say that a nine-year-old girl will die if she doesn't abort, then work with the program.

If the RC church is so concerned about the life of fetuses, then what about the life of the child of nine? What would be the point of bringing 2 infants into the world without their mother, and having to face a father who brought them into the world through an act of rape. The world is already infested with unwanted children who are suffering enough.

Given the fact that everything about God's Word was specifically inspired by its Author, it is appropriate that this important phrase, "the first day of the week," occurs exactly eight times in the Bible. The first six of these (Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2,9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1,19) all stress the fact that it was on this day that the greatest event in history (since the creation) had taken place.

So why wasn't there a command to honour the event of which you speak? The creation sabbath was given to do exactly that, that is to commemorate the act of creation, and to distinguish the ONE who created all things. You cannot extrapolate Sunday to be a day of importance because certain events happened to have occurred on it. If God didn't initiate its importance then who are we to assume such a prerogative?

The creation of the universe had taken place on the first day of the week, and now its Creator had conquered sin and death itself on that day. In the Bible, of course, the number "seven" represents completeness, so "eight" represents a new beginning--a new creation, a resurrection.

All that sounds fanciful, but there is no evidence from scripture to back it up. God's word is the final arbiter on truth and doctrine, and not yours. John in Revelation warns about adding or taking away from God's words.

The last two references tell us just how the early Christians remembered this day. Our text verse tells us this was a day on which the disciples assembled together, had a preaching service, and then "broke bread." This was not a special assembly called just for Paul, for he had already been waiting there six days (see previous verse). This was about 25 years after the resurrection itself and the Jewish believers were evidently still observing the seventh day as a rest day, but then they also observed the first day of the week as the time to commemorate the Lord's death in "breaking of bread" to celebrate His resurrection, and especially to hear the preaching of His Word.

That argument doesn't make any sense. Nowhere in that reference does Paul suggest that a new day was now appointed. The meeting was an overnight one that had already started on the sabbath. If you knew anything about how the Jews reckoned a day, you'd have known that what we call Saturday night would be called the first day of the week for them. Sunset brought on a new day for the Jews, and rightly so based on the order that God had established. St. Paul made sure to extend his departure speech which went into the night portion of the new day, which we call Sunday.

My good friend I urge you not to read into scriptures what isn't there.

The final reference tells us one other vital thing they did: "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him" (I Corinthians 16:2). The first day of the week should always be a time of remembering Him in these joyful ways, for He is our living Lord and Saviour. HMM

Lay by him in store according to the original Greek manuscript means storing up at home. Check any french bible and note how that phrase is written.

Que chacun de vous, le premier jour de la semaine, mette à part chez lui ce qu`il pourra, selon sa prospérité, afin qu`on n`attende pas mon arrivée pour recueillir les dons.

Chez lui in french means at home.

This was no church gathering as you're suggesting. This was a letter sent by Paul asking the brethren to gather alms and stuff for the poor in Jerusalem. Rather than waste time in gathering the stuff when he arrived, he suggested that the gathering should be done at home to make things that much easier.

Lucifer was a fallen angel who also took fallen angels with him as well, right??

Correct.

So do Angels still have freewill? Can An angel tell God he doesn't want to follow his orders??

Yes they still have free will, but they wouldn't be that foolish to make the same mistake Lucifer and his angels committed. Would you use crack knowing what it can do to you, even though you are free to use it?

OR, Can a angel who used to roll with Satan ask God for forgiveness and move back to heaven?? (Since Satan is destined to Lose anyway)

It is already too late. God in His mercy did offer them a chance to return to the path of safety, but Lucifer and his rebel angels eventually hardened their hearts. Remember that God is love, and there can be no doubt that He pleaded with Lucifer and his sympathizers.

Recall what St. Peter said that ", God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance, "

God loves all of His creatures and He provided free will for all of them. He made them with intelligent minds to reason. The problem is that we are not sure how sin manifested in Lucifer because according to the bible He was made perfect. That is called the mystery of iniquity.

If Angel Gabriel says fu to God, can you come back crawling for forgiveness or do we mortals have special status in the eyes of God? Is it to late for the fallen angels to repent before Armageddon?

Each person on planet earth is given a probationary time period. Everything we think and do is recorded in the books of heaven. You see before the church reaches heaven each member has to be judged. If you have Jesus as your advocate you will be safe, but if you follow Satan's ways and your probation runs out on you, then you will be lost.

We cannot tell when our probation will end. It could be tomorrow for anyone of us, we don't know. A person's probation can run out before he or she dies, in which case he or she becomes a reprobate. Such are open targets for Satan's service.

@ Babs87

He is not God and claimed that God is greater than him.

John 14:

28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I

29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

30 I and my Father are one

That is what you call role play. Remember He placed aside His equality and divinity that He shared with His Father which He possessed before taking on humanity. Hence, the above-mentioned statements are simply confirming such.

In John 17:5 Jesus refers to that glory that was shared between them before His incarnation.

On the other hand Christ still holds the title God. If that were not so then why would Thomas make the statement "My Lord and my God", and why didn't Christ rebuke him if that were not the case?

@ chukwudi44

boobyaff is back, you re a bloody hypocrite name your church you wont yet you keep bashing the catholics as if u re any better

I am never one to bash Catholics since their teachings and actions have already done that. I am only revealing the obvious contradictions and erroneous teachings emanating from your friars, prelates, cardinals, and finally himself the pope.

Mark Finley is a well-known evangelist indeed. I am familiar with his ministry.

As a man thinketh so is he, right?

To think as a Christian is not enough. One must act as one.

Technically, the answer is no if one defines Christianity as believing on Christ as the only way, truth and life. Catholics do not believe that Christ is the only way to salvation, otherwise they wouldn't have included Mary as Co-Redemtrix, an act in and of itself that is an affront to God Himself.

@ DeReloaded

Anyway this isnt about Islam, it's about how the Catholic Church is a fraud Angry

where's Lady to tell us why the Nazican is right

Probably after they celebrate lent you might have her or them try to defend this atrocity. Excommunication is an old catholic stance against those who refused to pay homage. It hasn't changed at all, and mark my words carefully, she will once again develop so much power, that she will use the state to persecute those who doesn't go in line with her dogmas.

@ MrCrackles

So Catholics are in trouble with God? Shocked

Fortunately, God still has His people in the organization, including priests and members. The honest ones have been leaving the organization over a period of time. Generally speaking the leadership is man-controlled. God is certainly not its head. Its one big fat cultic movement where the power brokers called cardinals run things, although it is largely believed that the real power broker is the Jesuit head called the black pope.

I actually started a similar thread but anyway I hope this one gets the attention it deserves. Issues like these should never go unnoticed. The RCC would rather play politics with a child's life than disfellowship the sinner who committed the evil.

Its only a pity that members of the church are so blind to the hypocracy and deceit of their organization.

The bible says ignorance is no bliss,

The Roman Catholic church in Brazil according to the news excommunicated the parents for allowing their 9 year-old daughter for having an abortion.

The Doctors concluded that the 9 year-old pregnant child who was raped by her step father was at severe risk of losing her life, and the twin pregnancy.

The Arch bishop said that God's law was supreme to other laws in his justification of such a move by the church, and that the parents and doctors were wrong in allowing such an abortion.

Let me ask you this question. If your child at age 9 was raped, would you allow her to carry her twin pregnancy to term? Let me have your take on the issue.

Chewing gum is a sin too, What is wrong about smoking?

You know its wrong to blar your horn so that is a sin too.

Its wrong to rush for bus that means people rushing for buses are sinners.

Its wrong to owe people, Owe NEPA, rent and bills so anyone who owes is a sinners too.

All catholic priests who smoke are sinners and would go to Hell? Preach on Pastor Bobby

No shifting of goalpost here

Be they simple or great acts of wrong they are sinful acts just the same. If you borrow and don't return that is a sinful act. Blowing one's car horn loudly could have different motives, so it depends on the circumstances, wouldn't it? If I am trying to avoid hitting you fine,

I cannot account for the rushing of buses,

@ Image123

@Bobbyaf who are you impressing with your study of greek and hebrew interlinears?

So why couldn't you see it as informing you rather than impressing you?

Anyway,I'm not here to show scholarship.

That is largely why there is so much error floating freely. Surface reading is what some are interested in, and are not prepared to dig deep.

One of the problems that you seem to have is your over reliance on commentaries,dictionaries and so on.

Over reliance?  

They sure have their place and I must say i have my fair share,but nothing tells us more about God than God Himself.

I have reasons to doubt you.

Whether there is or there is no 'unknown' in that verse(s) what does that matter?

You'd be stupid to think it doesn't matter. There is a vast difference in meaning between "unknown tongues" and "tongues" in that 1 Cor. 14:2

The unknown put is correct and it is for better intepretation and understanding.

And how would you know since you barely believe in biblical scholarship! A case in point is the thief on the cross who accepted Christ, and who was mistakenly believed to have gone to paradise the same day largely due to a punctuational error in scriptures.

And since you have very little knowledge about biblical scholarship, I guess you wouldn't know that the NT Coine Greek originally had no punctuation marks. They were put there by modern translators. I am also sure that people who think intelligently should know what punctuation marks can do to the meaning of sentences.

I think the goal of intepretation is to make the message clear and to be true to the text.

Come on Image who are you trying to fool?

The 2goals work together,not in isolation.I told someone before,if you can do a better job of translation,go for it,lets see.At least,the manuscripts are available.Lets see your action instead of your complaints about inaccuracy.

Go do your own research! "Study to show thyself approved, "

Notice this 2verses. 1Corinth 14:22  Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not:

I am glad you quoted that text, because that text has absolutely nothing to do with the kind of mumbo jumbo that occurs today in certain assemblies. Non-believers if they are sensible, and believe me some are, could not in their rightful minds come to Christ in such confusion, yet your hypocracy stinks, because you people speak unintelligible sounds in the presence of your visitors almost every time in your assemblies. Yet you have the audacity to misquote the scriptures.

1Corinth 14:23  If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

And this is something that you are guilty of, madness.  

v22 says its a sign,a proof,a miracle to unbelievers.v23 implies that unbelievers will look down on tongues.How?Because there are DIFFERENT types of tongues.

That is your typical private interpretation of scriptures. At Pentecost where the gift was first manifested, the people to whom the messages were intended heard their language spoken by the disciples. Peter who was unlearned was able to speak to the Diasporic Jews in their mother tongue. These Jews lived outside of Jerusalem and only came there in order to have celebrated the feast of the passover which coincided with the feast of Pentecost. Never in their lives had they experienced anything of this nature, and were led to accept Christ as a result.

16 different countries from which those Jews came, were represented there, and all heard the apostles in the language in which they were born. That is what Paul is talking about.

Sin is knowing the right and failing to do it. Hence the smoking of cigarettes is a sinful act. There is no going around it.

If Jesus was really made man, then by all means he could sin.

But then he wasnt human at all (if what the bible has said about him is true). No human can go 40 days and 40 nights without food or water, no human can walk on water, no human can fly without any aid (ascencion).

If Jesus was human, then he must have felt pain, shown/felt emotion, fell in love, had wet-dreams, masturbated, reached puberty, hunger, sadness, depression, happiness, e.t.c then there is no way he wouldnt have sinned even once.

Not all humans, despite being humans, are bound to some of the devices mentioned by you. Secondly, not all humans are subject to the same types of temptations.

It all depends on one's early outlook on life. There are some people who became successful because of their early positioning in life. They determined from early not to allow certain trappings to distract them, and all those were only accomplished through the power of God.

Likewise Jesus being human allowed His Father to take full control from very early. He realized His mission from early. Please don't attribute bad things to all humans, in your attempt to define human nature.

Jesus is God in Human flesh and the only thing that distinguish us from Jesus is that
we can fall into sin as human being b/cos of the power of the flesh but Christ cannot fall
into sin b/cos every other power are subject to him and sin is the only thing that bring seperation between man and
God so i don't see any reason why Jesus would sin.

If only you could learn to think. The apostles through whom God's Spirit spoke, could not have made the claim that Jesus came in the flesh, if what you're asserting is true. If you had any idea of the justice of God, you'd be more inclined to ask God to enlighten your mind for better responses.

Jesus Christ divested Himself of divinity so as to truly and completely take on human flesh. His passions and feelings were no different than ours. Didn't you see my reference to Hebrews 4:15?

The fact that Jesus was even tempted makes it obvious that if He so desired He could have yielded to temptations, but at His own peril and doom. Yes, I repeat His own peril and doom. And don't believe for one minute that He was only tempted in the wilderness for 40 days and nights. He was tempted through His entire sojourn on earth. He was in all points tempted as Hebrews 4:15 says.

With submission and a consistent prayerful life Jesus gained the victory. He wasn't programmed not to fail, otherwise His life and ministry would have been a farce, and God the Father's claim of justice and truth would also have been placed under suspicion. That is what the whole plan of salvation is all about.

Part of that plan was to prove that Satan's claim that God's system of government cannot be trusted was itself a lie. But, in His wisdom God allowed Lucifer to live so as to dispel doubts about His love and justice, and the rest is history.

So when Adam and Eve fell because of Lucifer's deception, Christ in the garden explained to them about God's plan to redeem Adam's fallen race. The only way that humans could be saved was through the shedding of the blood of God's Only Son, since changing His holy precepts was out of the question, who would one day divest Himself of everything heavenly and glorious to become a human so that he could identify with us. He too had to subject Himself to what we were subjected to for thousands of years.

Thank God that Jesus maintained the connection with His Father, and became victorious. If He had failed then all that God stood for would have come to naught, and Lucifer would have been proven true, but the risk was worth it.

I once heard a member of the RCC who said one of the reasons he stopped going to church services was because the priest smokes. Do you think that pastors, priests, and others leading out in church services should smoke? Do you think that it is ok for a Christian to smoke?

In answer to the question Christ could have sinned. If He couldn't then what kind of example of a life of obedience would He have set for us knowing He couldn't sin, and we could. The whole purpose behind the mission of Christ was to obey His Father's will, and to prove that His Father's will could be kept by us as humans.

Satan's mission and job is to deceive us into thinking that God's will and instructions cannot be obeyed.

The question that comes up and has been wrestled with through the centuries is if Jesus could not sin how could he be truly human? On the other side if Jesus could have sinned, how could he be truly God.

Remember Christ became human. He could not have existed as God and human while He was here on earth. Most Christians stumble over this idea. Don't get me wrong. Christ gave up His divinity while being human and while being tested as the second Adam. In other words in terms of the role He played. He temporarily divested Himself of divinity until He was able to pass the test.

This is why 1 Tim. 3:16 states, "Great is the mystery of Godliness, God was manifested in the flesh." Since Jesus did not come through the normal means of conception he had no sin nature.

First and foremost His unusual conception had nothing to do with His nature. His nature became our sinful nature. He too possessed the propensity to disobey His Father. That is why it was said of Him, "15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."

It would be a farce for Christ be tempted without the possibility of ever sinning.

I have often seen on EWTN how the priests conduct the eucharist, and have noticed that after everyone is served the wafer, and wine that the priests drink all of the wine. What I want to hear from a honest catholic member if the wine is fermented or not.

There have been reports of recovery efforts for Catholic priests, and the statistics is growing.

If your friends had said to you that the church is more then the bible they are so sucked, they are nothing but set of whipped asses that needs cover and if you had believed them its not your fault its because you are not seeing the truth, and he who say the church is a deceiver is a fool who pray for darkness than light because he has forgotten that JESUS told SAINT PETER That On upon you the rock i shall build my church, dont bother asking further questions cus they suck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you for your contribution.

@ Image123

maybe should just read through the whole book,or the whole new testament before we can understand .
1 Cor 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries

Were you aware that the word "unknown" in the above verse is not apart of the original Greek manuscript? Its a word that was placed there by translators. Do you ever check an Greek interlinear before you seek to fully understand anything in the NT writings, or do you take for granted that all translations are 100% accurate. Part of biblical scholarship is being able to discuss the nuances of translations.

Even a passerby understands that grammar at a glance.

The difference in approach between you ad I, would be the way in which we'd instruct passersby toward a proper understanding of scripture. Wasn't it Paul who said that passersby would have been confused by the manner of tongue-speaking that was wrongly manifested in his time? Can you imagine what Paul would be saying if he were to visit one of those charismatic churches that has literally built a belief system on tongues?

It becomes twisted when you begin to add meanings that are not.Who says angel's language cannot be intepreted.

Can you quote me as having said that angels' tongues cannot be interpreted? Have you ever heard an angel address humans in an unfamiliar language before? Angels speak intelligible languages, and hence when Paul refers to tongues of angels, rather than assume he's talking about some private means of talking to God, why not take the logical route of assumption, and assume it means persuasive speech, as angels are known to accomplish.

Intepretation is for edification of people around.It comes because there's a message for them,not because the language spoken is easier to intepret or because there no human philologist available

.

So what is it that can be said in mumbo jumbo that cannot be said in the language of the assembly? Following Paul's instructions how many persons do you know of who after having spoken something, gets up and interprets, or have someone interprets for them? I am told that bus preachers, some of whom are Pentecostals, tend to utter sounds unintelligible, but have never yet once interpreted their sounds. How come?

Paul said it several times,how we tried to use plain speech to speak to this people.He wasn'tr writing mysteries or word puzzles.He tried to be as clear as he could.If you need scriptures on that,you can ask.

Can someone interpret this garbled speech for me?

I see that our catholic apologists have grown dead silent. Such a pity because I was hoping that they'd have hung around for the long haul.

@ Ogaga4luv

Are you a Satanist?

@ AHigherlvl

Greetings everyone.

This is a study based on scriptures. If you are not going to use scriptures or If you do not have questions based on the Bible, it defeats the purpose of what I am doing here.

Thanks for participating, and feel free to start a new forum topic if you wish to debate along some other line of reasoning.

Respectfully yours
Ahigherlvl

That is like asking a donkey to talk, These guys are conditioned to debate, albeit without purpose sometimes.

Let me repeat this question once more so that our Catholic friends can hear it. Does the wine that the priests administer in what is called the holy communion contain alcohol, or not?

@ Image123

Bobbyaf,you agree with that?Thats threading on a thin line.A line of unbelief.

Paul in 1 Cor. 13 wasn't talking about a real experience. He spoke hypothetically. Have you ever given your body to be burned? Have you ever removed mountains?  

Tongues of angels used there doesn't mean a heavenly, or private language between you and God. That is your private interpretation Image. This is what I understand Paul to be saying, and I am not necessarily imposing this on anyone. I believe he is using the expression to connote persuasive speakers. In other words they are speakers who are good at convincing others, or persuading others. They are just as convincing as angels are, but who may lack love.

Let me ask you this question. If a person speaks in tongues it would connote that God's Spirit is talking through him or her based on your understanding of tongues, correct? Can God's Spirit use a person that lacks love? If you lack the practical aspects of love in your life, do you think that God's Spirit would choose to manifest His presence in your life unless you truly are converted?

1 Co 14:2  For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Why is it impossible for man to speak to God in tongues of angels. Has man not eaten angels' food?.That verse says he is not speaking to men,not all tongues are for men.Not all tongues are for prohesy,some are prayer to God bringing personal edification.Why is that too hard to believe,its in that verse.Why will ttalk believe that what he emboldened in 1Corinth 13 are unbelievable,while the other actions are possible/believable.And then ttalks went further to say this

That verse is not saying what you think it is saying, until you read the entire chapter. As a matter of fact until you read through chapters 12 - 14. What you are doing is to insert what you have been taught by your pastor into the scriptures. If you had read through the chapters in their entirety, you'd not have walked away saying things about the gift of tongues the way you usually do.

My constant argument has always been that we need to read whatever Paul says particularly in context. The Pauline writings are not always easy to understand.

1 Cor. 14:2 must not be isolated from verses

verse 9 "So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air."

verse 11 "11Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me."

Now Paul addresses something here that most Christians seem to ignore, "13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret." What is Paul saying here? He's saying that you had better be prepared to interpret any unknown language that you speak in the congregation, before you speak it.

Most persons say to me that not even they realize what they are saying.   How can that be? Let me repeat what Paul said, "9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air."

Now some persons use verse 14 "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful."  to affirm their belief that it doesn't matter if you don't understand what you're saying while speaking in an unknown tongue. Is that true with Paul? Listen, "15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also."

So this argument about having a private prayer using tongues as a means isn't biblical.  You see tongues as an utterance wasn't unique to Christians. The pagans had their version of tongues.

Listen Image there is far more to Paul's writings than meets the eyes. The tendency is to not pay close attention to the phrases being used in his letters.  The church at Corinth was bombarded with pagan influences that found their way into the church. A lot of things were blended in with the normal worship, and Paul had to constantly remind Corinthian Christians to be careful.

It is not as simple as you're making it out to be.

Based on what is happening now anything is possible, and there is a feeling of anxiety almost everywhere, but I am not keen on paying Nostradamus any attention though. For people of the bible, who take time to study and understand the prophecies, it is clear that something is in the air.

Who is calling us to reflect? And why should we be reminded just when Ash Wednesday comes around? True born again Christians need no such reminder! And what is good about Friday? Care to explain why Friday is a good day?

Does the wine that the priests administer in what is called the holy communion contain alcohol, or not?

Most of what you're asking has been addressed in the thread. As to whether or not Catholics will take heed is another story. Let us pray they will.