₦airaland Forum

[quote author=honeric01]

So the Berom christians that always went home to compare and contrast Paul's teachings were doing wrong by studying the bible personally? hehehe, brother being spoonfed in Christianity is the lowest low in spiritual growth. this is why it's hard for you to actually discern the truth from the untruth.

Protestants/anti-catholics always use this point but fail to understand the context. Following your point, how come the Tessalonians did not agree with Paul’s teaching after going through the same scriptures in the preceding verses Acts 17:1-10 but tried to put Paul into trouble?? I’m assuming you know the New Testament books were not completed at this point, so the Bereans were looking through the Old Testament (Thus I assume you’re an Old Testament Only guy??) If as easy as this I wonder why the majority of Jews never accepted Jesus as Messiah after all they’ve been reading the Torah for Centuries.
Also, which one of the Sola Scriptura Churches now holds the truth?

When you say personal interpretation is wrong, then I shiver at your understanding of the word of God.. it's the spirit of God that gives understanding and there is a difference between carnal understanding and the one given by the Holy Spirit.

These were not my words but you can argue that with St Peter. You did not actually address the actual passage.

deeper truth comes when you study the word of God with the help of the holy spirit.

what exactly do you think the holy spirit is there for? those you line behind, where did their interpretation come from? was it not also through personal studies?

I can tell you you’re taking things for granted. Please tell me how the Holy Spirit allowed you discern which books make up the bible and after that please tell us why your interpretation does not match the Calvinists, Lutherans, JWs, x number of Pentecostals, Orthodox etc. Please be sincere in your response.
Please understand the church’s teaching – It was given the authority to go out and preach the word, baptising etc. The Lord gave the apostles the power to bind and loose – basically to let us know what the correct teaching, interpretations. He said the spirit would come among them to guide the disciples to all truth (John 16)

Bro, seek the truth so you shall know the truth.

And you really think I have not? Does the truth lie in your church. Please let me know.

Lastly, Jesus used woman multiple times to address Mary not because of Gen 3:15, he also used son of man multiple times for himself, was Jesus also son of man when SCRIPTURES says he came into Mary's womb via the holy spirit and not through any man.

Son of man – used multiple times in the Old Testament, Jesus uses it in the new what’s your point. That Mary is not man( human being) or what?
You’ll have to tell me why Jesus used ‘Woman’ to address Mary. Please realise the term was not used in the modern sense of the word.

The word of God should not be interpreted carnally bro, it has deeper meaning, make use of the holy spirit, ask and also read wide, not just within your catholic box, read outside your catholic box, you just might find out the deeper truth

.I thought you are an adherent of Sola Scriptura, where else would I need to go? Bros you do not realise that I do study but I won’t get into that. you might think you're being guided by the Holy spirit in your interpretations but you certainly have your protestant lenses on when doing the interpretation.

May God show you the light and understanding

He certainly has and will continue to do so. Please step into any Catholic Church someday and observe the celebration of mass, you might learn a thing or two.

Food for thought - Is it a coincidence that many Staunch protestants pastors (e.g. Ulf Ekman, Scott Hahn, Marcus Grodi, Deacon Alex Jones, Steve Ray, Tim Staples etc) have converted (others are converting - http://chnetwork.org/converts/) to the Catholic faith after reading widely and realising that they require an authority for what they are teaching others and also that the early church was not protestant. Your rebuttal would probably be “but catholics convert as well” – these tend to be the badly catechised ones. I’ll urge you do some studies into some of the people have mentioned to understand.

I know you’ve tried to downplay Mary’s role but please have a read of the Apostles Creed you might be surprised to find the Virgin Mary in there.

honeric01: So your church interpretation is that the woman in gen 3:15 is mary and the seed is Jesus? God have mercy, what about the quote that says "study yourself approved.... "? how do you grow in the world of God and faith if you rely solely on others to interpret the bible for you? are you still a baby Christian or what? do you do personal studies at all?

My good bros, this is not new teaching.this has been taught since the early days of Christianity. I gave you St Ireanaeus letter as an example -this whole concept is called the proto evangelium. Obviously some people don't believe it but it doesn't change its truth.
In fact Jesus called Mary 'woman' at Cana and Calvary which no Jewish child will call his mother.was Jesus revealing something here?

I do bible study in conjunction with the church's teaching as it is the pillar and foundation of truth. The personal interpretation of Scripture is guarded against (2peter1.20). What do you really think has happened with everyone thinking they can interpret the scriptures -DRUM ROLLLLLLL!!- A lot confusion and denominations not in communion.

Bros these issues have been debated for centuries and aren't knew.the CC teaching is clear all over the world, I need not reinvent the wheel. What church are you a member of?

honeric01: So what is your own interpretation? what interpretation did the holy spirit reveal to you or you just rely on other's interpretations?

I gave you mine even before including that of the quoted and other people within the 2 links provided.

.This does not require my personal interpretation(as guarded against by Peter - 2peter1:20), it causes confusion leading to countless denominations. the church has already done the hard work and I profess to believe in the Catholic Church's teaching.the church is the pillar and foundation of truth-1tim3:15.

honeric01: I have no personal grudge with Mary, i am only responding according to how you guys try to make her look. you have given her the stature of a god which is a disdain to me.

You talk about free-will, forgetting the case of Jonah, what happened to free-will in the case of Jonah?

As for Gen 3:15, go and do your own research on the meaning. it has more to do with the children of damnation and the saved.

http://biblehub.com/genesis/3-15.htm

https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_756.cfm

I repeat again, Mary did the job God wanted her to do just like every other people in the past and presence God uses to accomplish his will/mission.

Re. Gen 3.15 -Don Stewart's?? interpretation vs St Ireanaeus, st Augustine, pope Pius IX and centuries of Christian history.I know which I'll choose. Please read Ireanaeus' letter in the previous post well.this was from the 2nd century.

honeric01: Her role ends after giving birth to Jesus, with or without her, the ministry was never going to stop, having her name remembered as one of the notable persons in the bible is more than enough. God would have still used her even if she was not ready to yield. God chosen whoever he wants for his purpose.

And the quote from gen 3:15 is so way outta line, can you explain what significant that has with Mary being elevated almost higher than Jesus the saviour of the world by your likes?

some of you even believe without Mary, there wouldn't have been Jesus forgetting that Jesus was there when mary was being formed inthe first place.

I repeat again, Mary remains a tool just like most of the people God used/uses.

Mary is not worshiped or elevated higher than Jesus this has been mentioned too many times - why force something that isn’t true down our throats!!! Mary is venerated due to her special status as the one who gave birth to our saviour – She’s the Theotokus (Council of Ephesus 431 AD). Whatever happened to Free Will if you think “God would have still used her even if she was not ready to yield” These issues are more complicated than a Nairaland exchange - People have studied years of Theology to still not fully comprehend issues like this and you think your statement is accurate. I'll leave the issue with what we do know happened.

OK, if the Gen 3:15 quote is way outta line please tell us what the line is. I’ll take the CC teaching over yours as it teaches that the passagse is a foreshadowing of Mary and Jesus. Please check out St Ireanaeus in the 2nd century:

Christ completely renewed all things, both taking up the battle against our enemy and crushing him who at the beginning had led us captive in Adam, trampling on his head, as you find in Genesis that God said to the serpent, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and the seed of the woman. He will be on the watch for your head, and you will be on the watch for his heel.” From then on it was proclaimed that he who was to be born of a virgin, after the likeness of Adam, would be on the watch for the serpent’s head. This is the seed of which the apostle says in the letter to the Galatians, “The law of works was established until the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” He shows this still more clearly in the same epistle when he says, “But when the fullness of time was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman.” – Gal 4:4 The enemy would not have been justly conquered unless it had been a man made of woman who conquered him. For it was by a woman that he had power over man from the beginning, setting himself up in opposition to man. Because of this the Lord also declares himself to be the Son of Man, so renewing in himself that primal man from whom the formation of man by woman began, that as our race went down to death by a man who overcame, and as death won the palm of victory over us by a man, so we might by a man receive the palm of victory over death. AGAINST HERESIES 5.21.1.

To repeat, Mary is not worshipped, she is given honour due to her special status. Your responses as I've mentioned before show a sort of disdain for Mary rather than honour which she deserves.

honeric01: Bro, does all these change the fact that Mary played no 'superior part' in the ministry of Jesus Christ on earth? was she the only virgin in Israel then? infact if anything, she should be the one happy that she was used because God can use anything just like he used BAllam' s donkey to minister to him, stingy Raven to feed Elijah, The wicked judge (king) to answer the prayers of the windowed woman.

Like I said, Jesus did not give any special reference to Mary while on earth nor did the apostles do.

Mary was a vessel used just like any other vessels God uses.

Mary played her part, John the Baptist played her part, same with Judah Iscariot.

The tone of this response speaks more about the disdain you have for the Blesssed Virgin Mary. Unfortunately, because you so bent on sola scriptura you fail to see or acknowledge the wider picture. You reduce Mary to any other virgin!! Please remember that as a Virgin, BVM was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit (Just as the old Ark of the Covenant - AOC) to conceive our Lord Jesus. Please remember how this old AOC was treated throughout the old testament. Even Elizabeth exclaimed “Who am I that the Mother of my Lord comes to visit” Luke 1:43 – Just like David on seeing the AOC (2Samuel 6:9).

Also, I wonder who the woman was in Genesis 3:15 (And I will put enmity btw you and the woman, and btw your seed and her seed; he will crush>>> BVM might not have been one of the 12 disciples but her role was integral to the coming of our Lord into the world at all, and at a number of crucial points as pointed out in previous post. To simply dismiss her role as though you’re threatened and insinuate that she was a nonentity goes against the majority of Christian history. “All generations will call me blessed” she said, not even the disciples said this.

Syncan: Make I help you remember some...


from SalC's list...



From kamsified's list...



Antie Debbie is wishing all of una happy new month o.

I greet you, and wish you all God's blessings.

OLAADEGBU: How many times will I say that the universal Church is not the same as the Roman Catholic church? The difference is clear.

It's amazing how you mention the universal church!!! - where is this church and how does one get into it? So this is the Church Ireanaeus and Cyprian of Carthage were referring to - wow!!

OLAADEGBU: What gives you the impression that this is referring to the RCC?

It would be good if you could tell us what it was referring to. Did you actually read the document? I'll very much like to know what your gripe is with the CC.

honeric01: Stop running away from the truth and quit asking irrelevant questions

Everyone knew Mary of the earthly mother of Jesus, that's all about her.

Jesus made us know she was just that and nothing more. she was not even his disciples and held no known position in his ministry.

You that read your bible sideways, tell us what Jesus said about Mary.

How about the deeper point of requiring Mary's 'Yes' for Jesus to come into the world unlike Eve's 'Yes' to the serpent.i know this might seem trivial to you. How about Mary's role at Our Lord's 1st miracle?how about the parallel of the old ark of the covenant which carried God's word and the new which carried God's word made flesh?these things seem trivial to protestants who are centuries removed from the debates and formation of the Christian faith.

OLAADEGBU: Let's not derail this thread. Go to the suggested thread below for answers to your objections.

https://www.nairaland.com/1878872/what-origin-catholic-church

Definately not derailing.This is a cop-out from you, very weak . I've been to that link and no answers just further untruths. Please answer the question I posed, where is the church that Ireanaeus and Cyprian of Carthage were referring to?

Yes, pointing to a site that bashes the Catholic Church!! Sola Scriptura as you attest to was never a teaching of the church until the reformation of the 16th Century. How exactly do you think the Early Christians practiced their faith? Please do more study - even the great protestant debaters have to study Church history.

OLAADEGBU: Roman catholism is a product of the roman empire, when the empire falled the Roman Catholic took over. Constantine could be said to be the first pope that gave the early Christians some reprieve after they've been persecuted by the Roman emperors. The RCC soon reverted to type, persecuting true Christians who would not be subject to their traditions and dogmas.

Check out the history of the RCC on this thread: ==> https://www.nairaland.com/1878872/what-origin-catholic-church

I’m sure you’re better than this! This is anti- catholic rhetoric with absolutely no proof. Where is it recorded that Emperor Constantine was the 1st pope?!! Please don’t let the name ‘roman’ confuse you. The official name of the church is Catholic church also known as roman CC(long story). Have you read the Church Fathers’ letters from the 1st and 2nd centuries? Please let us know what happened to the church St Ireanaeus was referring to in Against Heresis III. Where is that church today? The early church had apostolic succession, so that church must exist. Please, also enlighten us on who the true Christians were that got persecuted.

I’ll throw in another Church Father – Bishop Cyprian of Carthage. What church was he referring to here in AD 253: "The Church is one, and as she is one, cannot be both within and without. For if she is with [the heretic] Novatian, she was not with [Pope] Cornelius. But if she was with Cornelius, who succeeded the bishop [of Rome], Fabian, by lawful ordination, and whom, beside the honor of the priesthood the Lord glorified also with martyrdom, Novatian is not in the Church; nor can he be reckoned as a bishop, who, succeeding to no one, and despising the evangelical and apostolic tradition, sprang from himself. For he who has not been ordained in the Church can neither have nor hold to the Church in any way" (Letters 69[75]:3).
So you will give me a link to an anti-catholic site for the origin of the Catholic Church??!! You can do better reseach than that

True talk!!

PastorKun: Was it also in 33AD that Mary worship began?

The Catholic Church does not worship Mary, this matter has been flogged a million times on this site. Please try to study the reverence given to the Blessed Virgin Mary and other saints by the Eastern Orthodox and Coptics once part of the Catholic Church. You might also learn that Martin Luther (Father of reformation) also had great reverence for our blessed mother. Also, if you could search for Sub Tuum Praesidium (oldest preserved hymn to Mary ca. 3rd Century) to understand why people have always given honour to Mary. I’m still awaiting a response to the question posed about the church St Ireanaeus was referring to and where that church is today.

OLAADEGBU: The catholic church you are confusing yourself with was used to mean the universal Church and not the Roman Catholic church. Don't get your facts mixed up.

You've come up with the claim and you'll have to substantiate it. The Catholic Church mentioned had an apostolic succession and surely must continue today?? So the question is where is that Church today? I’ll give you a little clue – Ignatius and Ireanaeus wrote letters in order to distinguish the heretics of the day from the true church. How will you know that church today?

PastorKun: The fact the a lot of RCC doctrines differ so much from the teachings handed down to us by Jesus and the Apostles is another evidence that the RCC cannot be the same as the early church established on sound apostolic doctrines.

I don't think this answers the question. It's like saying an adult is not the same person as their infant self because of differences! What CHURCH was St Ireanaeus referring to and where is that Church today?I'll disagree on the church's teaching differing from apostolic teaching but that's for another day.

PastorKun: The term "early church" refers to the first century church and not the rcc that was instituted in the fourth century.

St Ireanaeus writing in the 2nd century ( Against Heresis III), what church was he talking about here, because this succession must still continue today?
“The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles>>>>>>>>>”

OLAADEGBU: Question: "What was early Christianity like?"

Answer: Early Christianity began roughly 2,000 years ago, shortly after the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. Acts 11:26b says, “It was at Antioch that the believers were first called Christians.” “Christians” means “Christ’s people.” Early Christianity consisted of a group of loosely connected local bodies of believers who gathered together on a regular basis, usually in each other’s homes to fellowship and worship together (Acts 16:15; 18:7; 21:8; Romans 16:5; Colossians 4:15). These churches generally had the organization of pastors, elders, and deacons within each individual congregation.

This early New Testament church lived communally and often shared resources such as food and money (Acts 2:44-45 and Acts 4:32-36). Their services consisted mainly of preaching (during which time they might also read letters from missionaries such as Paul) and the singing of songs. They took offerings to support the journeys of their missionaries, and they performed baptisms. Also, they celebrated the Lord’s Supper each time they gathered together.

But, soon, early Christianity was challenged by Roman persecution. The majority of the persecution began with the great fire in Rome that destroyed much of the city and devastated the economy. In an attempt to absolve himself, the Roman Emperor Nero claimed it was the Christians who tried to destroy Rome and its pagan gods. From that point on, the Christians were blamed for many of the misfortunes befalling the Empire. Persecution and martyrdom was quick to follow. Because of this persecution, the Christians were forced to meet in the catacombs, which were long, dark galleries under the city of Rome. There they continued their meetings, baptisms, and even burials for their dead. As a result of the persecution, many of the early Christians were scattered throughout the Roman Empire, expediting the cause of evangelism and fulfilling the Lord’s commands to make disciples of all nations (Acts 8:1, 4-40; 11:19-26; Matthew 28:18-20).

Because the early church was not focused on the maintenance of a church building, endless programs, and technology, they were able to concentrate on the study of God’s Word, service and dedication to one another, hospitality, benevolence, and missions (Romans 1:8; 15:19; 1 Thessalonians 1:7-8; Acts 13:1-26:32). While programs and technology can make some of these things easier, the early church had a pure, simplistic approach. Compared to the structured organization of the church today, the early church looked more like the informal settings of one of our Bible studies or small groups.

Both early and modern Christianity have good and bad characteristics, and neither can be idealized. The positives which characterized the early church—a passion for Christ and His Word and a strong love for one another—are what we should strive to emulate in the modern church.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/early-Christianity.html#ixzz39cvK417G

In addition to the responses from others, Please take a look at the following link for the DIDACHE (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html) – a document accepted as being from the first century and contains the rudiments of the apostles teaching in practice. You’ll see notes about baptism, confession, Eucharist, bishops etc. I note that some of your assertions are certainly from extra biblical source, thus kills the whole concept of Sola Scriptura. I don’t think the maintenance of buildings, technology etc and sharing God's Word are not mutually exclusive events and the only way Christianity has survived is because of structure as Jesus established. Structured organisation is required for guidance - ensuring the right things are done and also required for influence & power; the only way Christianity has survived. Also, I’m sure you know that the New Testament potion of the bible was still being written and there were disputes as to which ones to read. Thus they needed the Guidance of the Church (Bishops etc).

[quote author=JMAN05]

Ok. The same applies to Protestants. They do not have one General Overseer or one head for all Protestants. I dont get the argument of you guys.

Is there any church eg, Church of Christ, Assemblies of God, Redeem etc, whose members teach a different thing from the overall teachings of there respective denomination? If there is, then you are talking. And if so, it will be good to talk about that denomination. Because if you call Prostestants and there contradictory doctrine, it will appear as if all protestants have one head coordinating there activities.

But what is the overall teaching of these churches? What you’ll find is that protestants likely fall into one of two camps (1) go entirely with what the Pastor teaches (2) Disagree with parts of pastor’s teaching and hop to another church that teaches what they like or in some cases form another church.

I dont think Deper Life accepts direction from Winners Chapell on what the church should believe in. Neither does Winners accept from Christ Embassy. So no point mentioning Protestants as if they are united in Headship and yet divided in doctrine. When churches come together in worship, they are engaging in interfaith, not that both churches agree.

Protestants are generally united in its protest against the Catholic Church. E.g. I’m sure you’ve read through the NL articles over the years to know that anything on the catholic faith usually gets attacked.

So my point is, anyone who engage in this interfaith is already sharing in another's punishment. If what they teach or that they aren't the truth, dont merge light with darkness.

CAN is an association quite alright, but it is a religious association. The word religion changes everything in that union. Association with false religion is often viewed as adultery by God. Unless if you dont view protestants as false xtians, as such, you wouldn't criticise it no matter what. They belong to World Coucil of Churches. Isn't that Council a good eg of a divided house?

The bible says 'get away from Babylon the great'. Who is that babylon the great? Assuming it is church A, why will church B interfaith with it, and think it will remain safe? What fellowship does light have with darkness?

This is JW teaching whose doctrines/interpretations are at odds with Catholic Church teaching. (I’m sure you know JW organisation did not exist for centuries after the early church)

Thats why I do group all of them together. The JW never join any of such groups nor do they interfaith with them.

All the best to JW

There are divisions in catholic. so you dont know? eg the progressives and conservatives.

more: www.we-are-church.org/forum/forum6engl.htm

Some scholars in catholic openly teach what is different from the official church teachings.

I think I made it clear in the previous post about the Church's teaching and dissenting members. There are always people who go against established laws even in the secular world. The link provided is for a group that questions Church's teachings - Any catholic scholar that blatantly practices/teaches in opposition to the church has automatically excommunicated himself.
BTW, your response was a bit convoluted and hard to follow what point you were trying to make.

JMAN05: It is true that not all may agree with a church teachings. but that's not where I was heading to. There are sects in Catholic just as there are sects in Protestantism. Their are Eastern Orthodox Catholics, Old Catholics, Liberal Catholics, Polish National Catholics etc.

I personally see all the catholics and protestants as one. Why? Since you interfaith with a particular religion, sect, denonination, you are part of it. Catholics interfaith. that is a seal of approval.

Catholic is a part of CAN for example, at least for some time (though they withdraw temporarily, this not being cos interfaith miffs them).

Someone may say this is not a point, but it is. If a way leads to death, you wouldn't have fellowship with them. That doesn't mean you hate its members, but you have no fellowship with them religiously. 2Cor. 6:14-16.

What difference does it make when you point out the different theological interpretations in Protestantism when you still think interfaith with them isn't bad?

After all, among protestants, they have different churches with different General Overseers/Heads and different headquarters with its individual independents. They are Protestants does not mean they have one General Overseer. No. There teachings do not issue from one headquarter also.

You cant come together to form a body or interfaith with someone you know his teachings are heresy, yet you still view him as false. thats hypocrisy.

Imagine you excommunicated someone who teach heresy, and you still think is fine to interfaith with him. Does it make sense bro? Dont you think you will share in there punishment if you interfaith wth them? Read Rev 18:4.

I do group protestants together with Catholics cos there is no reason to believe they are different. If they are serious, let them separate entirely, no interfaith. if not, they ll share with the plague of the other. Rev 18:4.

Some corrections, the Catholic Church does not have any sects.the sects u mentioned separated from the church and are not in communion with the pope. The Eastern Orthodox was part of the Catholic Church until the schism ca. 1045AD. CAN is not a church but an association. The Catholic Church is very clear on its teachings and is not afraid to let others know. However,It doesn't currently call nor treat other churches as heretics because the current followers are not at fault for their actions. Heresy would apply more to those from an earlier age and the reformers. This is why after Vatican II council, the Catholic Church softened its approach in its dealings with separated brethren whilst sticking with the truth. The church acknowledges that there are SOME truths in other churches and other religions however the fullness of truth lies in the Catholic Church. This is why it opened up ecumenism as a way of bringing this truth to others and not excommunicate everybody. I don't know what u mean by interfaith but the churches are definitely separate with differing understanding of Christian doctrines.

JMAN05: Have you guys forgotten that members of the catholic church have contradictory doctrines? Do all catholic scholars agree with the teaching of the catholic church, and yet are they not viewed as catholics by the church?

Dont catholic have groups with differing theology?

I wonder how you guys prey on prostestants, while you have the same problem.

The Catholic Church's doctrines and dogmas are defined and not contradictory. the catechism lays these out simply.yes, there are some members who may pick and choose what to believe but this doesn't change the church's teaching. in fact every catholic has to say the profession of faith (Apostolic or Nicene Creed) during mass to attest to all the church teaches.also you have to examine your conscience every time a catholic goes to receive the eucharist. Catholics do not prey on protestants, it's usually the other way round as made obvious by the word 'protest'

adsonstone: The same that commissioned the Apostle Paul.

....and you haven't still shown how his teachings contradict what Christ and the Apostles taught.

you'll find that St Paul had to check his teachings with the established Apostles to ensure his teachings were correct and also stayed with Peter.this practice continues today with bishops meeting the pope regularly as well as the mandatory 5 year ad limina visit.

binary123: why?.because of the beautiful picture display here or what?; here in nigeria i know most evil and cultist people hide under the name ("i am a catholic"pls dont be proud of it. i rather be a pagan than be catholic. if you reality need salvation go to bible believing church and stop this (:I was born a Catholic and will die a Catholic rubishhhhhhhhhhhh.

I detect an air of jealousy here.the Catholic Church has been persecuted for so long that people stand proud to part of it.you'll find that over 100 Koreans were killed because of this faith . you'll do well to research the faith rather that spewing rehashed anti catholic material . It's time for ecumenism.

If we the people could change our attitude and mentality then everything will change for the better. We can’t keep waiting for Government. The level of dishonesty in Nigeria is just mindboggling, from the market person to public service officials. If we could only be honest and not hypocrites! But will people do this. Developed Nations whether religious or not have been able to develop due to a high level of integrity from the people. This cuts into every sphere of the society.

ayooluniran: And how are u sure the so called historical facts are to be followed?
The bible was written by holy men of God who were inspired by the holy spirit. These men wrote at different places and surprisingly wrote d same thing.....men like luke, john, mark etc.....daniel wrote end time prophecies, john wrote d same thing in d book of revelation.
The bible we carry now is what they wrote...put together.

Your response is very simplistic and this is because you’re taking things for granted centuries after the persecutions, debates and meetings. The historical facts are recorded in ecumenical councils, letters (from as early as the 1st century), papal ratifications, drawings, excommunications here and there. Topics like the Bible, Trinity, the nature of Jesus Christ, baptism etc. had to be discussed in councils and ratified before becoming articles of Christian faith. Assumption of Mary likewise had been debated for centuries before been officially defined by the pope. [color=#000099]Your assertion of ”holy men writing the bible …put together” did not just miraculously occur!!

David0: So if the church say put ur hand for fire, u go put am without asking questions abi? Follow follow christianity...open ur Bible and find the truth. The Church only guide u not tell u what to do. The Bible holds the truth, let it be ur guide in making decisions.

Unfortunately, your argument is based on sentiments rather than historical fact. How about the point about the Church being the pillar & Bulwark of truth? The whole point of Christianity is that our Lord Jesus tasked a group of people (Apostles > the Church) to go out and spread the Gospel, baptising them etc. He did not say, everybody open your bible and decide for yourself (I alluded to what this has led to in my previous post). You’ll also find that St Peter guards against this in 2Peter 1:20. Please remember our Lord’s last words ---- And Surely I am with you always, to the end of the age - Matt 28:18 onwards. The Church that Jesus established will not teach error in matters of faith and morals. – My question to you is – How do you even know that the bible is to be followed and how do you think the Christian faith was formed?

ayooluniran: Jesus is the only access to the father Acts 4:12, it's only in his blood that we have redemption....hebrews 12:25......Jesus name is d only name God honours in prayer phil2:9-10....

Any other name in which we pray to God is idolatry.....PERIOD!

I've gone through the bible and yet to see where we were asked to pray through or to mary......it's just like d jews claiming to be abraham's children and saw clearly the truth of christ being d messiah, but where not willing to accept and still stuck to d 'law'.

SUMMARY.....that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and d fellowship of his suffering, being made conformed even unto his death, if by any means....I might attain unto resurrection from d dead.......and I know dat I will.....John 3:16-19, 10:10

COME LORD JESUS,........we are waiting for you!
BE PREPARED....start 'packing', drop d xtra 'luggages'

The bolded is precisely why we require the church's guidance in matters of faith and morals. Otherwise we could all pick up the bible interpreting ourselves (equals 33,000+ denomations!!). The Church is the pillar and bulwark of truth(1Tim 3:15) and was sent out to teach and spread the Gospel, bind & loose etc. If the church has decided that this dogma is to be believed, who are we to question its authority? Questioning its authority is what has led to countless scisms. By the way, it is not complusory to ask Mary to pray for us, however, if you look at the Apostles Creed(Church's faith) posted earlier, you'll find that we believe in the communion of saints.

superior1: Assumption of Mary

Another demonic and ridiculous doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church

Please let us know what authority/proof you are relying on to make this statement. If it's the bible, please let us know what authority allows you believe in the writings. Perhaps it's your pastor, again let's know the authority.

emmyskies: Your Bible and the guidance of the Holy Spirit

Unfortunately, this idea is what has led to a plethora of churches with differing doctrines. So can't be right. there always has to be a body that is entrusted with interpreting laws,customs and tradition.the same is true with Christianity. From antiquity and through historical fact you'll find a particular church has always laid claim to be this body.it appears other churches have come about via schism from this church.

OP sorry to learn about your experience. The whole passport renewal and visa application process needs to be streamlined and made a lot smoother.How will Nigeria ever become a tourist destination if people are condescended so much and the application process so complicated. It can certainly be run a lot easier but I wonder why unnecessary bottlenecks have been created! I'm sure we know the answer.

5000Megawatts today, 180000Megawatts in 200 years!! A load of useless numbers since 1960.Why does the govt obsess about the number of MW. What Nigerians require is steady power supply at point of need.Rather than MW, it should update us on percentage of households with steady power.