₦airaland Forum

otr1:
Neither Paul, nor Peter founded the Roman Church. I wonder where you get your evidence, while even the Bible states otherwise. If you read your Bible very well you'll see that there were believers in Rome before the apostles made a visit. And there is no evidence that Peter stayed long or ever became a Bishop in Rome. It's one of the lies from the Roman pit.
And if you'd agree with me, evident in the Bible itseif, Rome was never a prominent Christian center, at least, not until after the last chapter of the Bible was written.
And I asked again, was Jesus referring to different branches of Catholic Churchtthehis message to the seven churches in the book of revelation? Please note that all the churches mentioned were in Asia minor.

I’ll give you an analogy (although no analogy is perfect).

If I were to pull Nigeria’s 1963 constitution, you’ll find the basis of running the country – parliamentary system etc. What you won’t find in there is the entire history of Nigeria or any future developments. You won’t even find most of the current names of states in there.

If someone were to come in from outside Nigeria and point out that the states we have can’t be part of Nigeria because they aren’t listed in the 1963 Constitution, won’t you find that absurd?!!


There is rich Christian history that was recorded outside of the books of the bible. The bible is not a historical document that recorded everything that happened in early Christianity. Try studying the early church fathers to get more knowledge.

You won't find where all 12 apostles went to within scripture , you only find this within the tradition of the church.

Sola scriptura was never taught in early Christianity and is a relatively new invention after the protestant reformation.

otr1:
There is little point in claiming that a certain church or doctrine came down from the days of the Apostles. Sin came down from the days of the Apostles, and the devil also was active at that time and before. It's not so much what came down from the days of the Apostles, as what came down from the Apostles. Even in his days, apostle Paul wrote : 'The iniquity doth already work.'
The present can never be properly understood without correct information concerning the past. Those who have been taught falsified history or who have had their minds filled with twisted interpretations of events gone by, stagger like the blind with a darkened mind.
No, the evidence is very clear that, during the first century and the first half of the second, the two main Christian centers were Antioch, in Syria (between the Syrian population centers around Damascus and the Cilician province), and Alexandria. Later claims that Rome or Jerusalem ( founding-place of Christianity) were important early centers of Christianity, are later interpolations.
The Roman Church grew out of the orthodox Christian movement. A rigid hierarchy was built, with the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, at the top, controlling doctrine. It grew into a vast juggernaut, however, and as is the nature of large bloated bureaucracies that outlast their usefulness, the Church grew cotruly ( this was due to the romance of the church with the Roman state power. We all know that Pope inherited the powers of Roman emperors together with their titles)
In the 11th century, the entire eastern Church broke away from Rome.
The Armenia church have been alone all along. So whenever someone is telling you that the Catholic Church is the first and the only church before the reformation, you know what to tell them.

At what point would you say the catholic church grew 'cotruly'?
Re. Armenia church , they were in communion with Rome and Constantinople until after the council of calchedon in 451AD. They along with other oriental churches did not agree with the definition of the nature of Jesus. Most other doctrines are very similar to this day. Interestingly, part of the Armenian church came back into communion with the catholic church in the 18th century (Armenia catholic church (Eastern rite)

I do know that protestants do not believe in Armenian church doctrines either

SAVIOURJESUS:
go back and reread my post.
Protestanism was a major breakthrough from the tyranny of Rome.
.it is not a rule that all protestant must have one doctrine, it is better to be divided in truth than to be united in error.
As long as Satan is the ruler of the world there will always be errors and false religion. So the fact that roman catholism has been in existence 1500 years proves nothing. There was darkness on earth before God called forth light, Sin came before the saviour, Israel.was in bondage to Egypt 400 years
before Moses was sent.

The problem with your post is one of theology.you are basically implying that Jesus lied when he said the gates of hell will not prevail against the church he built(Matt 16:18). If that's the case, Jesus could never be the saviour and our God. (Massive problem there)

The rise of protestanism started with a catholic priest who decided to go against church authority (while it was necessary to reform the excesses in certain parts of the church, this did not require a breakaway from the church).
He wasn't even a bishop so how could he have valid apostolic succession within the Lutheran church he set up. I bet you do not even agree with half of Lutheranism doctrines - so your 'divided in truth' holds no water at all and is not a doctrine set forth by Jesus. it's just modern day protestants' way of trying to explain the divisions. The fact is -you all have differing views on the most important topics - baptism, holy Communion, Trinity, faith/works, justification, etc even with your sola scriptura practice!

The established church with orthodox teaching was well known from the early days.Issues were resolved in church councils which are well documented. Is there any record of the so called true church that you claim in any of these early councils ?

As seen in the scriptures, the church is the pillar and bulwark of truth but you had to know which church amongst the different groups was the true church. I think you'll find people didn't have to wait 1500 years until protestantism came along before knowing this church.

It's very convenient to assume things after all the persecutions, councils,wars, letters etc.

"To be deep in history is to cease to be protestant "- John Newman

It's worth studying christian history well , -please start with the church fathers who came after the apostles - Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Justin Martyr etc

otr1:
It's convenient for you to call Churches in the first century, Catholic (just same way Mohammed called all biblical prophets, Moslems) even when we both know there was no Catholic Church at that time. What we had was Roman Church which metamorphosise into the Catholic Church. Sorry to burst your bubble, all those churches ain't Roman or Catholic by any standard. They are as different as their name implies. It was during the reign of Constantine, through the marriage of the Catholic church and Roman state, that all other churches were being coerced to be a subject of the Roman church.

On your last point , I'll like you to read part of the letter written in AD 180 by Church father (Bishop of Lyon) Irenaeus . See link
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm

Please see excerpt:
Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally knownChurch founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.


He goes on to list the 12 Bishops of Rome(pope) to his time after Peter.

He also talked about Clement (pope ca 100AD) intervening in the Corinthian church .
So church of Rome didn't just gain preeminence after Constantine in the 4th Century. There are other examples as well.

Regarding your first point even Christianity wasn't named so at the very beginning, names change. We do know that Ignatius of Antioch refers to the genuine church as catholic ca 110AD to distinguish it from the heretical groups of the day.And one visible way to know this church was to look at the succession of bishops from the Apostles.

Try reading up on witnesses during the time , not all christian history is recorded in the bible.

SAVIOURJESUS:
the church was infiltrated after the death of the apostles.
Roman Catholicism ( cult of Mary) was created to counterfeit Christianity but it failed and will always fail.
There had always been the true church but they are scattered and few. The rise of protestanism was the hand work of God so that gentiles can see the light of christ.
Mr man seek Jesus, start reading the bible and learn to pray to God through Jesus alone. You will know the truth.

Let me get this right , you mean Jesus allowed this church to exist for 1500 years before bringing protestanism (which within a few years became different denominations with differing doctrines - now over 30,000 denominations ? )

Do you have the same beliefs as the Lutheran church(effectively the 1st protestant church? )- you practice their liturgy?
How about the Calvinists - you believe in their doctrine of double predestination?

UnchangeableGod:
OK sir. Let me believe you are sincere. The Church Christ established started with the twelve, then the seventy, then one hundred and twenty at the Upper Room when the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost. Then the sermon of Apostle Peter led to the addition of about three thousand souls. Then persecution broke out with Stephen being stoned to death and the disciples (the Church) was scattered and they went everywhere preaching the word as instructed by Christ. Then came the conversion of Saul of Tarsus who spearheaded the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles (though Peter was the first to reach out to Cornelius and some other Gentiles following the revelation he got from God). On and on until the gospel got to us. My point is that the Church of Christ did not have any denominational tag. It comprises of all who have encountered Christ's saving grace and have surrendered to His will alone and continue in His word. Today, we have members of the universal Church - all those whose names are in the Lamb's Book of Life and who are abiding in His word scattered across several denominations. But one common denominator among the real Christians who are members of the true Church (not a particular denomination) is complete allegiance to Christ and His word. Those who call Him "Lord, Lord" but do not obey His word as contained on the Scriptures are not members of His Church irrespective of their denominations (Luke 6:46). We were all born into sin by nature and have been sinners by choice but Christ came to save, deliver and rescue us from sin and it's consequences. If a sinner repents from sin and disobedience and turns to Christ as Saviour, such will be forgiven, cleansed and saved with his/her name written in the Book of life and automatically becomes a member of Christ's universal Church. Such a one will be hungry for the truth and thus will desire the sincere milk of the word so as to grow (1st Peter 2:1-3). Such a saved soul will not want to have anything with sin of any form, idol worship, syncretism, falsehood, hypocrisy or deception. Like begets like. The Spirit of truth in the such a Christian will draw him/her to only where the truth of Scriptures is taught and where the leaders and the majority are apparently living by the undiluted truth. As he/she learns the truth, he/she will be convicted of his sins/her and errors. He/she will not argue or debate with the word. He/she will simply repent of his/her ignorance and make immediate amends. This is what happened to me some 18 years ago. It is not for me to direct anyone where to go. Let the Spirit of God direct you. Thank you.

Thanks for your response although the development of early christianity  was not as simple as you've stated. Even when the apostles were available,  some groups were already teaching another other gospel.(see 2Peter 2). Heresy was always cropping up and it was very important that christians new which was the true church  (with true teaching) and the pedigree back to the Apostles.


We had docetism/ gnostics who had their own view of Jesus and thought that Jesus was not a real man but spirit. That his crucifixion was just an illusion.

We had Arianism that believed Jesus wasn't divine.

We had Nestorianism with their own view of Jesus as separate man and different from the Divine Son of God.
So many other heretic teachings

If you go back to the early church fathers like Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus etc, from the 1st and 2nd centuries, you'll find in their writings that they were pointing christians to the true church which had apostolic succession amongst all the heretical views of the day.  That church still exists today

freshboi88:
Truth is when we begin to engage these protestants and test their understanding of scripture, they will begin to foam in the mouth, but catholics let's not glorify them with replies....the catholic church is still at d centre of Christianity in d world today, no matter how the church is bashed, it will still remain one....not even modernization can change its sacred traditions.... That to me is wonderful

Most Def, people will also find that this same church that is hated so much is the main voice for pro life , main voice for standing by moral norms in the world, outside of any government it is the largest provider of schools, hospitals, social services etc.
If this isn't so called 'bible believing ', I don't know what is.

They'll pick of traditional christian beliefs(that have been agreed by the church as led by the holy spirit ) and term these with all sorts of names.

!!

Read through the responses and found no reference from those vilifying the Catholic church as to how christianity actually developed. All we got is people assuming things 2000 years later, forgetting the persecutions, councils, disagreements, hereses etc.
I wonder if they've read Acts 15 to find out how issues where resolved ( the issue of circumcision had no scripture backing for instance.) Did issues with Christian faith and doctrine suddenly end after Revelations was written?
The bible was not even resolved at that point .some churches probably had 1 or 2 NT books plus OT - so were they practising sola scriptura?


Prior the the 16th century, where is the expression bible believing church. What does that actually mean?

People let's read and do some research, you might be surprised at what you learn.

UnchangeableGod:
Sir, your request is a needless distraction. There have always been true and false Christians in every era. Knowing the names of the members of the true or fake Church is inconsequential.What matters is that the true ones obey the Lord only and they are the Church of Christ while the fake/backslidden ones follow their own devises/the doctrines of men. They are married to the world system. They engage in syncretism and other unscriptural practices. They may arrogate any title to themselves but "by their fruits ye shall know them" and "any anyone that mentions the name of the Lord must depart from iniquity" (Matthew 7:15-20; 2nd Timothy 2:19). You have a choice to repent, stop defending the falsehood in the apostate Roman Catholic Church and come out from among them for your eternal good. Thanks.

It's no distraction, we all want to learn where the church that Jesus establised is. Where are the true christians that you've referred ? I'm assuming these people must exist and can be traced to the apostles.

So if we come out of the Catholic Church, where exactly do we go ?

We need clear answers please

Greetings all.

An African woman has been preaching at Oxford circus for many years. Nothing new here.

Other races also preach there.

KunkAcid:
Whenever you encounter a SARS operative or a soldier and they have a reason to ask for your phone,

Tell them NO!

Struggle with them!

Tell them, you have a right and empty all the grammar you know.

I am sure you have started picturing what will become of you already.


This is Nigeria and not America!

A country where the president has little or no regard for the constitution.

You are simply confused and can't differentiate between what is in the book and what is practiced in reality.

So even in America what would have happened if Rosa Parks had continued getting up for whites in the bus or the blacks just sat accepting all the racism?

The system will never change until people stand up against it.
For how long are we going to hear 'this is Nigeria'.

I went through several similar experiences 10 to 20 years ago and things still haven't changed. Do we think the uniformed men will suddenly change their ways!
We need to wake up in this naija

topedopechef:
I was wonderin wich kind chch wey spirit no show dem durin d programme, not until i saw Catholic....benefit of atendin a prophetic ministry... I rep PRAYER CENTER CHURCH OF GOD,PROPHET SAMSON OLUWAMODEDE DIVINE SERVANT, oya keep slaying...

Suicide is a crime,stay away from it

And I assuming your life is absolutely perfect because you attend a so called prophetic church??!! Or anyone else who attends the church?

I think it's ignorance to link this unfortunate man's suicide to his attendance of a catholic programme. This has nothing to do with the catholic church at all - in any case it's the number one organisation when it comes to pro-life issues i.e. it expects life to be protected before birth right to the natural death of a human being. So your comment is really unnecessary and offensive.

Do you even know what the state of the man's mind was at the time of death? Smh

Please go to your church if you must but don't try to score a useless point based on a sad event.

oaroloye:
The way I see it, the Roman Catholic Church is no different from any Protestant Church.

Protestant churches were formed by those protesting against the authority of the established Catholic church.

Very easy to forget this fact 500 years later

DoctorAlien:
We will now compare the words of the catholic church with the words of the Bible:

"Can you learn to save your soul just by reading the Bible? No...because the Bible does not have everything God taught." (A Catechism for Adults, Q. 1, p. 52).

Paul told Timothy, "For from thy infancy thou hast known the Sacred Writings, which are able to instruct thee unto salvation by the faith which is in Christ Jesus." (2 Tim. 3:15).

Consequently, Paul says that the Scripture alone is sufficiently able to make one wise/equip one unto salvation. The catholic church says GOD taught other things which are not in the Bible.

2 Tim. 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproving, for correcting, for instruction in justice, that the man of God may be perfect, equipped for every good work."

Paul says that the Scripture contains sufficient to make the man of GOD PERFECT and equipped for every good work. Surely anything not contained in the Bible is not necessary for salvation.

Conveniently ignored the preceeding verse which referred to tradition!

v14 - But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it

Sacred tradition and scripture. you'll find no sola scriptura in the bible.
Also Paul did not list what books constituted scripture, this would come 300years later. In any case, Paul could only have been referring to the OT(Jews hadn't even closed the canon at that point) as profitable/ useful not all sufficient.

claremont:
I struggle to see how just because you were allegedly ignored by a few black people, you now conclude that the black race is ''mentally troubled''. Do black people have to smile and talk to every black person they meet overseas simply because they are black?

There are some Africans living overseas who live and work in environments where 99.9% of their colleagues are white, it's only natural for them to feel naturally attracted to white people. In addition, the average African immigrant is preoccupied with working as many hours as possible, they do not have the time to mingle with their fellow Africans beyond when it's absolutely necessary. It has nothing to do with 'slave mentality', everyone has the freewill to mix with whoever they choose to regardless of that person's skin colour.

Unfortunately, it's the attitude of not mingling (intellectually, business wise ) that is drawing us back. The Asians, Jews mingle with one other and drive themselves forward. You see results in the number of businesses owned by these groups while we Africans just work for others. Most of the shops selling African groceries and hair products are owned by Asians, I think that's saying something.
It's time we start working together to move ourselves forward, whatever we've been doing hasn't worked and will never work.

DoctorAlien:
The modern approach of the Catholic Church is to emphasize great love and respect for the Scriptures. Present day Catholics want people to believe that the Catholic Church has faith in the Bible, is the church of the Bible, and encourages its members to read and study the Bible. However, when Catholics try to disprove the Bible as the only authority in religion, their true attitude toward the Bible is revealed. The Catholic Church opposes the Bible as the sole guide and standard in religion and whenever it tries to
disprove it as such, its true attitude toward it is manifested. Accordingly, the Catholic Church makes the following accusations against the Bible:

Not intended to be written.

Not intended to be circulated.

Not intended to be gathered into one volume.

Not accessible to all.

Does not contain all truth.

Not understandable.

Not a safe method.

Is a dead letter.

Does more harm than good.

It's amazing how you guys come 2000 years after the event purporting to know better than those who know the truth and have the pedigree to back it up.

If I ask you to show me from scripture alone how Mark 16: 9-20 ended up been scripture, I wonder how you can.
You're probably not even aware that there have been controversies concerning these verses.

If I were to ask you how you know Mark is scripture from scripture alone, I wonder if you can.

If I were to ask you how the early Christians knew and practised their faith given than the books of the NT weren't written until decades after the event, I wonder ...

The fact is even the process that brought the bible into existence was based on sacred tradition and an authority to confirm that sacred tradition. So 2000years later OP comes up with his nairaland post and we're supposed to believe.

By the way your so called Catholic Church accusations against the bible are absolutely false.

I'll suggest you do more research bro.

bbbabes:
Rich men boarding economy class and that rag called Bobrisky wasting his prostitution cash on 1st class

Looks more like Business class rather than economy.

IsThisNickTaken:
I'm still trying to understand something tho...

No insults, just an explanation needed...a sensible one at that
An MD of a company...takes a sick leave and goes on medical treatment and hands over to whoever is next in charge. In his absence, is d company suppose to run to d ground or keep functioning??
In case there is an ongoing crisis in the company, who takes charge?? The MD who is on sick leave or d Assistant??



Nigerians and Misplaced Priorities...


Anyways correct me if I'm wrong...I will gladly like to see this from another angle...thank you

If that company is a reputable one, it'll have a sick leave policy for all employees including the MD. No policy will allow an unlimited sick leave with no consequences e.g. financial or even redundancy/ sacking . As the role of the MD is very crucial in terms of driving company Vision, if the company is serious about it's future profits it'll ensure there is clear direction at the top without distractions.
Usually, if the MD has the company success in mind and is unable to function over a long period he/she will resign their position to ensure the company can move on. All this regardless of a deputy acting on their behalf.

Le finit.

mrMeen:
pronounce "peter piper picked a peck of a pickle pepper a peck of a pickle pepper peter piper pick if peter piper picked a peck of a pickle pepper where is peck of a pickle pepper peter piper picked.

The 'sea shells' tongue twister is a lot harder than the Peter piper one,I think.

All49ja:
Lol, Allot of UK & US universities are just business centers. Few % of nationals in those country proceed for postgraduate study, so they rely on students from Africa, India and the likes. They want your money that's why admission for MSc in UK is easier than buying chocolate.

Those that go to UK low rank schools are either thief Politician pikin or those that want to show off.

Cos I can't fathom why leave your country and go to a UK university with low rank to pay huge fees of about 8m for a year doing MSc.

Please see list of UK universities and their ranking.I very much doubt you'll find business centres among them or any Nigerian uni being able to compete. Lots of Nigerians in London Met (2nd bottom) for instance and I'm sure they can testify about the good quality of research/education there. Obviously, not as good as Oxford or Cambridge - It's best to take UK/ US out of the conversation as they're on a different level. Let's stick with Africa as per OP.
https://www.ukuni.net/articles/uk-university-times-ranking-2017

Wishing you the peace, love and mercy of the risen Lord. Amen.
Happy Easter.

emmaitive:
Roman catholic is a force doctrine that indirectly lead people to worship satan without knowing...pls if u are dea come out nw, before it will be too late

Tell me,how does the Catholic Church lead people to worship satan?
by the way, where do you expect catholics to go after they leave the CC? I'm assuming it's your church - what's the name of your church?

[quote author=Joavid post=55523585]

Natural Family planning has failed countless times and more times than others. That's known fact.

and part of the reason why it fails is because it's frustrating with a lot of calculations, anxieties, restrictions, having to plan intercourse ahead of time just to prevent pregnancy; particularly given that many women are particularly interested in sex during ovulation. Doesn't that ruin the pleasures of it?

No doubt some people have struggled to use NFP usually because they're using it incorrectly, not patient or trying to circumvent the method . However, with a bit of learning, the method is fairly simple to practice with a very high % success rate comparable to other methods. In fact, no method has a 100% success rate.
As with everything, one gets used to habits and this also applies when you start off with nfp. Takes a lot of patience initially and it all pays off in the long run. Most people tend to give up in the first few weeks (that's the issue). We've used it 10 years with no problems.

Imagine the need to diligently plan sex amid a chaotic family life

The NFP process when used properly inherently helps reduce the chaos within families ( you're discussing all the time) and bring order/planning into most things. I get it that one cannot eliminate chaos totally.

I'll like to imagine that even within a chaotic family one has to plan to eat or bathe etc - same with sex.

I'm also uncomfortable with the fact that NFP requires women, who do the bulk of domestic and childrearing work in many marriages to shoulder yet another task in service to their family—monitoring their fertility; which can go berserk at times due to stress and a few other factors.

On the contrary, success with NFP requires cooperation & support from the husband and wife. NFP will rarely succeed if left to the female alone. It requires constant discussion between the couple. I understand my wife's body so well and this can only be a good thing. Yes, stress does tend to delay ovulation and this can be observed easily with NFP.

God created man, man used her abilities to create science & tech so we can have better and easier lives. I doubt God will be mad at that.
and I assume you use a phone, and computers...

I understand using science and technology to prevent bad things (like pains etc) or to create good things like phones, computers etc (and I use these) but babies are not a bad thing so why block the natural process by which they come into the world!! Are we saying that separating the life giving purpose of sex from the love giving purpose is a good thing? (I certainly don't know God's mind)

We can use science and tech to understand the natural design of our fertile and infertile periods. With the NFP knowledge currently , we only have to abstain from sex for about 7-9 days in a month if we choose not to have babies (more than 20 days left for as much love making as desired!). You only need to reverse this if you want conceive.

On a final note, I'm sorry if I was rude about your beliefs & doctrines. I will restrain myself next time.

No worries


NFP brings with it so many benefits such as:
No side effects
Closer bond between couples
much lower divorce rates of practitioners compared to other couples (http://chastityproject.com/qa/why-do-nfp-couples-have-such-low-divorce-rates/)
Sex is not taken for granted and it doesn't make women feel they have to be ready for sex every time.

redsun:
People have different mountains to climb depending on their abilities and endeavours in life. Yours maybe how to overcome socalled witches and hunger,while oyinbos just want to overcome boredom and self actualizing their fantasies.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs comes to mind.
Unfortunately, in Nigeria a lot of people are still trying to overcome basic needs. When basic needs are sorted people tend to have other motivators to overcome.

Joavid:
Dey there and be doing billings method.

Your mates in Catholic church are on reliable birth control methods from the clinic.

Abi Catholic church will come and take care of your growing family when your billings method fail.

The catholic church has laws just like any organisation and just because some members choose to ignore the laws or are naive about them doesn't make the laws wrong - especially where it pertains to divine/moral or doctrinal laws. Natural family planning respects the natural conjugal act (love giving between the couple and open no new life).

Natural family planning is just as reliable as any other methods where used correctly.It requires discipline, patience and cooperation between the couple but what is required in marriage afterall. It carries none of the side effects of the 'so called' reliable clinic methods.
Nfp works well for me.

DoctorAlien:
The book is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of Paul. It is not intelligent to imply that the book of Acts focuses on Paul. Since the book is named "Acts of the Apostles", it is only wise to believe that all the important acts of the apostles were recorded in it.

Luke the first class historian couldn't have failed to record it if Peter went to Rome.

The book was never called the 'Acts of the Apostles' by the author and you're assuming all the important events were recorded. (You're speaking 2000 years after the event - perhaps check out writings closer to the time)

As it's been mentioned by another poster, where are the activities of the remaining 7 or 8 apostles?

doyinbaby:
It takes the grace of God for a catholic to give his life to Christ ,.....those Catholics and their church doctrines and traditions hen.....
.with God all things are possible

It's sad how you're to validate OP's topic(a long time catholic basher) without the correct information.

My kids don't understand why I have to go to work everyday due to their lack of understanding/experience - it's the same case here where you've assumed catholics haven't given their lives to Christ or that their doctrines are erroneous (due to lack of understanding )

I'll urge you read up on catholic church beliefs before you make assumptions, please see a link to the cathechism of the Catholic Church to start off with:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

uzoclinton:
Back in those days i. UNN we slept in darkness, attended classes without bathing and we defecated in the bush on a regular.... and you are here complaining after just few days of suffering...

In every walk of life, there should be improvement not regression. A valid point has been raised about conditions at UI and this should be addressed.

How would we ever compete with other nations if we don't have the right learning environment regardless of what happened in the past at UNN?

No one has ever verifiably lived beyond 121 or so. Can't be true she's 134

Nigerian police need to be trained on how to deal with human beings.

Omudia11:
I am not telling you there has been some sinners in the catholic church. There are sinners in every sect. I'm saying that catholism itself has bad roots. Catholism as a state religion made killing the then "true followers of Christ" legal. Infact, anyone who opposed or had a different belief other than their was killed. They made it legal.

The difference here is that that was never the case with Pentecostalism. There are bad pastors/apostles too but Pentecostalism never condoned such inhumane acts.

The bolded is largely irrelevant. If the catholics didn't do those, God would have raised up other people to do them. So catholics shouldn't feel superior over other Christians because of those as they play no part in the heavenly race.

It's a shame that you feel the Catholic Church has bad roots and killed the true followers of Jesus!

So Jesus lied when he said the gates of hell shall not prevail against his church? Who are the true followers of Christ that were killed by the CC?

If you're referring to the 12th century, Heresy was a crime against the state ( much like terrorism these days) and this had to be dealt with. Granted, there were excesses on some occasions by sinners - this doesn't mean there wasnt one church and one faith.

If you're referring to the early christians, are you aware that it was members of the early church ( which was called Catholic ) that was persecuted by the Roman government?

So you believe in the bible that was canonised by this same church with bad roots?!!

You said the list of marvellous things done by the CC could have been by someone else. The fact is they were done by the CC - nothing else happened so no speculation is required.

The CC isn't saying it's superior, it goes without saying that only one church was established by Jesus. Every other church broke away from it.until this day that church still wields the authority it has always had.