₦airaland Forum

advocate666: You can twist and turn whichever way you want, but you are in a losing position.

You can accuse me of twisting without providing proof and declare yourself a winner without being able to prove your point; it won't make it true.

replying to your post will only be tantamount to repeating myself.

Replying dishonestly! Replying honestly will be tantamount to admitting to my position.

now it is about your religion. lol.

*Now he's going to pretend like he didn't reading my first post to him, even though I quoted it again*

except this religion of yours, whatever it is, depends on the bible like hundreds of others, which makes your following assertion false:

"...whatever it is..." That's an admission that you don't know what you are even arguing about. You say science disproves MY religion...and you don't know what my religion is. For your information, my religion was in existence before the Bible ever existed (unlike your hundreds of others). To inform you further, my religion created the Bible (unlike your hundreds of others). My religion has the sole authority to explain and teach what the Bible says (unlike your hundreds of others). How then can it be dependent on the Bible? So my assertion is not false. It is your assumption of what my religion teaches that is false.

I would ask you to research the meaning of "fossil" but i guess you will just go into the same fallacy as you did with death.

I never told you what "death" meant to me so how could have ended up with a fallacy on that. I just worked with the definition you gave me so if we ended up with a fallacy, I achieved my objective: to show you how fallacious your argument is.

But for the sake of others reading this thread. Consider this, when you put petrol in your car, you are using fuel generated by decomposed dead animals (and humanoids) that lived on this earth millions of years ago. How does this reconcile with the first story very first book of your religion?

Before I answer your question, for the sake of people reading this thread, I think you should first answer 3 questions I asked you which you haven't answered:

What have I made up (you accused me of making things up)?

Weren't you referencing what the Bible says when you talked about "rising from the dead"? Why can't I do same? *this is even more relevant because you are asking me a question which will make me tell you what the Bible says, then you'll say afterwards that I shouldn't reference the Bible*

Who is the final authority on 'what Science says'?

Boomark: So since the wafer is now Jesus, anybody can say put the remaining Jesus in side waterproof, see Jesus inside stainless plate, pick him on the floor.

My brother, don't you think using the body OF Christ is better? This is a kind of insult but you don't know.

My brother, since you admit that the wafer bocomes Jesus, I don't see any further reason for argument. Jesus is Jesus. I think you should rather spend your energy fighting against those who call Jesus "wafer", "biscuit", "bread" etc, rather than he who calls Jesus "Jesus!"

...And I suspect, many of them are your friends.

[quote author= yah]Now that will be unnecessary, because i am none other than pastormustwacc/pastormustwac.[/quote]In order words you are contradicting yourself. How can you then argue with others when you haven't sorted the argument within yourself?

advocate666: Italo, your arguments may work for those brainwashed in your congregation but to all right thinking people, it is full of fallacies:

-we can't argue against religion because it is beyond the scope of ...

That's your assumption and distortion of what my argument is. My argument is: you can't use science to prove or disprove faith because faith transcends the scope of science. Science deals with the physical; faith goes way beyond it.

advocate666: -you can't disprove my faith because the bible said such and such

Not my argument. You are desperately building up arguments that are not mine and tearing down your arguments yourself. My point is: if you must make an attempt to disprove my faith (which is inseparable from what the Bible says), then we must at least mention what the Bible says. When you mentioned "rising from the dead", weren't you referencing what the Bible says? Why can't I do same?

advocate666: -i can't debate you so i'll make stuff up as we go along.

Another dubious effect of your desperation. What have i made up? If I couldn't debate you, I'd not debate you. Simple as that. However, what I am after is not to win any debate. What I'm after is TRUTH.

advocate666: -a doctor is an authority as long as i agree with him, if not, then science is a farce.
etc etc.

Yet another dubious effect of your desperation. If you will oppose me, at least oppose what is truly my position. Don't make up what you wish were my opinions and oppose them. I consider every doctor and scientist as an authority of some sort when it comes to the matter we are discussing. But, of course they cannot all agree. So to whom do we go as the final authority on what science says? Its just a question brother, not an ascertion. In fact it is you who tries to deride one doctor's view because it is contrary to yours when you said Dr Tobin was just "carried away."

advocate666: I can do the reverse argument and tell you that there is no authority thus in any religion as different sections of different thousands of religions have their own specific idea of god.

How can you do that when my first statement to you was:

italo: There is nothing in MY religion that teaches against fossils or anything that's true in science.

Did you catch that or did you miss it? MY religion. MY religion!!!

...And my religion has an authority - The Magisterium.

advocate666: You see, we come round to your initial statement about true science and true faith: Science to you is only acceptable if it conforms to your faith.

Science is only acceptable if it is true and sincere.

advocate666: What we are telling you is that science doesn't give a fck about your faith.

That is NOT what you were first saying. At first you said science says certain things about my faith are false and I was telling you that science cannot say so because faith is beyond its scope. Now what you are saying seems to be a shift in position.

You might say that science doesn't care about my faith (I wonder what that means), but there are many scientists who are people of faith (including mine). Many of them have even been some of the great pioneers in many areas of science.

You tend to forget half the arguments you and I made initially... Or could it be that you didn't think our statements through before posting?

[quote author= yah]It might not be confusion, he might be called to actually save some people from folly.[/quote]From the article, it seems like the only folly he's trying to save people from is being away from the Catholic Church.

[quote author= yah]Either that, or he must have listened to the voice of seducing spirits, or he has finally been convinced by his wife (his wife might have threatened him - women can control men like eve). Again, he is a man and so is not infallible.[/quote]Your Pastormustwacc said he was listening to the Holy Spirit, you might want to correct him.

mollie12: Whoa

Man if you believe this story you will believe ANYTHING!

First, you don't believe the story...

mollie12: There's nothing spectacular about this guy's conversion. Confusion can set in at any time or age of a person's life. God help this guy, because that's what has happened to him - serious confusion.

...Then you believe the story

In just one post?

[quote author= yah]Thank you esere826, it seems italo is always skipping the most important message, but looking for a way to paint his perceived "adversaries" like "pastormustwacc" as being bad.
@italo, concentrate on your real enemies (devil and his agents) and stop wasting time arguing all over the board.[/quote]You just make accusations against me without backing them up.

First you said I was twisting something on this thread, I asked you what I twisted, you haven't said anything (you probably have nothing to say).

Instead you come back with more accusations. What is "the most important message" that I have skipped now and how have I painted anyone as bad. You know fully well that it is you people that go around painting catholics as bad and now you're accusing me. You even called me "the devil" somewhere else, to my amazement now, you tell me to "concentrate on my real enemies), the devil and his agents.

Which one am I now? The devil, his agent or his enemy?

[quote author= yah]It is clear you have no brains, that is why you try to twist things so.


This italo's foolishness is enough to kill person.[/quote]All you do is insult me all over nairaland, even without making any arguments of your own.

God bless you.

pastormustwacc: ^^^Since when did you become the church, that you are answering for the whole RCC, you be pope? LWTMB. Na wa o - see the type of psychotic christians i have to deal with?

*dies*

Anybody who knows and understands the teaching and position of the Church can answer for the Church. It doesn't have to be the Pope. And if you think it is only the Pope that can answer the question, why did you post the question here?

...And you call me "psychotic"...

[quote author= yah]No wonder they call you the twister, you are really devil in disguise.[/quote]Thank you. God bless you.

But what is it that I twisted here, and what makes me the devil?

You see why I generalized? Look how much time we've spent on "rising from death" alone.

advocate666: You just repeated yourself while exposing gross ignorance.
You seem to have a problem with the definition of the word, "permanent". When you understand that word, you'll understand death.

It's understandable you have to say something like this to save face now that the heat is on.

advocate666: According to you,
a clinically dead person is dead.
a person in a coma is dead.
a person in a vegetative state is dead.
a body function shut off is death.
even a person holding his breath is dead.

And I am telling you that although some of these situation are not reversible with our technology today, they are not death.

Those are your assumptions, not my views.

advocate666: No. The mummies can never be brought back to life because of many reasons which I won't go into now. But if you had studied ancient egypt mummification procedure, you should have known that the guts of the dead are removed before the drying process. This includes the brain which is liquefied first, then the stomach, liver, heart, kidneys, eyes, etc. The mummies are only dried flesh and bone. Such cannot be brought back to life.

Well, perhaps they can be brought to life in future if all these organs are transplanted into them or by any other means that might not be known to us today. Who are you to say "never". And if you insist that they can "never" be brought to life, then we must wait till the end of time to find that out. Simple.

advocate666: You want to use the bible to justify an argument to me? This is what I mean by gross display of ignorance. I started by telling you that the bible is full of inaccuracies, but to justify these falsehoods, you use a disputed biblical falsehood of rising from the dead to justify rising from the dead. Try to think outside the bible. It's like telling everybody in the morning that the time is 10pm and showing them a broken watch to justify the wrong time.

Its you who is ignorant of the fact that you were the one who kept bringing the Bible into the discussion.

Firstly, this argument is to determine if science declares as false what religion says is true. So how can we then omit what religion says through the Bible from the discussion.

Secondly, you said your definition of death has been the only definition of death from time immemorial (a clear lie) so I showed you through the Bible that it has not been the definition for religious people including Martha.

Besides, who is displaying gross ignorance here. Didn't I also tell you that faith is beyond the scope of science? How then do you intend to use science to prove or disprove what is beyond its scope?

advocate666: Concerning your obsession with Dr. Tobin, I want to know: if another doctor confirms everything I said about death, would you agree with him?

Dr Tobin's view is not necessarily my view. However, its the view of someone I'd consider a scientist. Now if Dr Tobin's view is contrary to this your doctor's view, how then can you conclude that science declares rising from the dead as false. Who is the authority to go to in Order to know exactly what 'science' says.

pastormustwacc: You do not understand english, that is one of your fundamental problems, and i really cant help you, so sorry. And i also have doubts of your level of understanding when you read stuffs (again, i cant help).


If cant really understand difference between scanning and reading, i wonder if this scripture can help you

James 1:5


I might stop responding to your posts totally - it is precious waste of time, since you dont seem to even have something reasonable to say.

You cannot know if it is jargons or not without reading it. Period.

You say it is a waste of time talking to me; then you invite me to comment on your lies in another thread.

Again, hypocrisy!

Matt 16:18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

pastormustwacc: My view is that it is always good to pray so that you dont make the wrong choices in these matters. Your choice of life partner can affect your life in many ways and your destiny in many ways.

pastormustwacc: ^^^Oh i understand you clearly now. But i must warn you that it is not everything that is written in the bible. I dont think it is biblical, but i do believe that still a christian must always pray about everything, not only spiritual things.

So the answer is No - as far as i know.



Source: http://www.actsweb.org/articles/article.php?i=840&d=2&c=3

So it is now okay to do things that are not scriptural. Yesterday any thing that wasn't found in scripture was a pagan act.

Your doctrine changes everyday, unlike God's unchanging doctrine.

pastormustwacc: Now this is interesting. I wonder why italo and the other catholics not post anything on this thread?

I have never met a hypocrite like this one.

When I challenge your positions by asking you simple questions about what you say, you refuse to answer under the guise of avoiding trouble...

Then you accuse me of not wanting you to talk about them...(Why then do I ask you questions about them?)

Now you come here and act as if you are always eager to face up to any challenge to your opinions.

Are you no longer trying to avoid trouble?

Okay. Let me start to debunk you right from the top. The very topic of your post.

Do you have any proof that Mary Ann Collins really exists and is an ex-nun?

Please provide it.

*you are looking for Italo; you have seen Italo*

No matter how many times you shout the lies or how many words you use, they will never become true.

@ Ijawkid.

You haven't said anything.

Who is the woman?

pastormustwac: Sorry, too long so i did not bother to read it.

pastormustwacc: to reply it, i must read all those jargons written there

There is always at least one LIE in your post.

You cannot know if it is "jargons" or not if you have not read it.

pastormustwacc: First: *Why did he call the church a sleeping giant*? Why is the church sleeping?

Because the Church can do more than it is doing.

...And that is only human and normal.

pastormustwacc: Great article indeed.

Notice the following:
1. The man has been saved already, and was led by the holy spirit to RCC (and he has a mission)

3. He received the holy spirit and was already being led by God before he came to RCC

Interesting!

According to Pastormustwacc,

The Holy Spirit led him into Praying through Mary and the Saints.
The Holy Spirit led him into bowing before statues.
The Holy Spirit led him into believing in purgatory.
The Holy Spirit led him into believing in the Rosary.

And the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth, not of deception.

But, perhaps Pastormustwacc might disagree...

pastormustwac: Sorry, too long so i did not bother to read it.

I understand your french. You mean 'so contrary to your opinion' and 'so impossible to answer to with honesty without exposing your error.'

Boomark: Matthew 6:7-8
New King James Version (NKJV)

7 And when you pray, do not use
vain repetitions as the heathen do.
For they think that they will be
heard for their many words.
8 “Therefore do not be like them.
For your Father knows the things
you have need of before you ask
Him.

Matt. 26:
39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”

42 He went away a second time and prayed, “My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.”

44 So he left them and went away once more and prayed the THIRD TIME, saying the SAME THING.

Jesus sounded very Catholic there, didn't he?

Boomark: Italo, my friend, don't you know the difference between praise and prayer?

I know.

What was Jesus doing in the Garden of Gethsemane. Praying or Praising?

Boomark: Christ followers are Christians that's what we are.

Idol worshippers are idolistians.

They can't be Christians even though they claim to be.

Service to the only true God is in truth and spirit. Don't go and corrupt your self with carved woods/stones/metal images and what you think is not written in the bible which you have written for your self.

If you shout a lie a million times, it will still remain a LIE.

truthislight: where did the son/baby came from?

Is it not a very simple question?

Lol. Pope Italio indeed.

Mary's womb.

truthislight: The woman in revelation is Yahweh's heavenly organization from where the baby came from.

@Italio
Do you know who the baby is?

What in God's name do you mean by "Yahweh's heavenly organization" and where did you find that phrase from, the Bible?

So "Yahweh's heavenly organization "cried out in pain" - (Rev 12:2)?
Yahweh's heavenly organization did not include God and his throne which "snatched up" the child when it was born by "Yahweh's heavenly organization" - (verse 5)?
"Yahweh's heavenly organization" fled into the wilderness.(Verse 6)?
Michael and his angels were not part of "Yahweh's heavenly organization" that fled, because they fought against the dragon in heaven. (Verse 7)?
When the dragon was hurled down to earth, he pursued "Yahweh's heavenly organization" (which by now was on earth) again? (Verse 13)?
"Yahweh's heavenly Kingdom" had to flee from to the wilderness again.(Verse 14)?

Is this what you are telling me?

afam4eva: Men have the authority to forgive but not retain sin. By Men i think the bible was referring to Christians.

John 20: 19 On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jewish leaders, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 20 After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord. 21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

After reading this do you still think that men cannot retain sins?

I'm assuming you now agree that men can retain sin, but which men? Do you think it is every Christian that was given the authority to forgive and retain sin? *bear in mind that Jesus breathed on the disciples and gave them the Holy Spirit in other to empower them with that authority*

afam4eva: Who are the Apostles and who are the priest. Do you know that you have those powers that you accord to some people?

The apostles are the 12 that Jesus chose as his first priests and the priests of today are their successors. Is it me that accorded the powers to the apostles by breathing on them or is it Jesus? I don't think I have the power or authority to forgive a fellow man's sins, do you think you have the power?

truthislight: if it was not a straith forward thing it is because people like you wanted to add books that were not from the apostles and it was rejected.

"If it was not a straight forward thing..."

You don't know about it, yet you are making accusations instead of being quiet about it and learning.

What kind of "christians" are you people?

F00028: and i don't even like italo

What did I do to make you dislike me?

Perhaps it is something I can be sorry for...

You say that "science has already declared 'rising from DEATH' false."

Then you say that "DEATH is a PERMANENT (lasting for eternity or till the end of time) cessation of all biological functions.

How could science have declared it false when science has to wait till the end of time to be sure of "death."

advocate666: If it is permanent, then it is permanent. If jesus's death was permanent, the he couldn't have risen. If he did rise, then it was not permanent and then not death according to that definition. Logic is really very hard for the godly.

..."According to that definition." But not everybody thinks that death is always a permanent cessation of all biological functions.

advocate666: I like your argument about mummies. It is even possible to bring some "to life" today via cloning of their cells. That, however is not rising from the dead. It simply is reproduction. That is how everyone of us was made.

Cloning of cells is possible today even though it was unimaginable yesterday. Now do you know what other unimaginable thing today will be possible tomorrow? Possibly, the mummies could actually be brought back to life. Not just cloning their cells.

advocate666: If the definition of death changes tomorrow, then it wouldn't be death as we know it today and certainly will not be death as narrated in the bible. However this definition change is highly unlikely as it has been the sole definifition from time immemorial.

There is no proof that it has been the SOLE definition from time immemorial. In the Bible, Martha and many others didn't see death as you see it. She believed her brother was dead and she believed he could live again.

advocate666: Here we go again with the appeal to authority argument against documented evidence. We know the method:argumentum ad verecundiam. Look it up.

...And doctor Tobin had both! - authority and documented evidence.

afam4eva: If the person does not forgive you then you should go directly to God. It's not compulsory you even go to the person you offended but it's recommended.

You ask God to forgive your sins because what you've done is not pleasant to him.

Do you believe that men have authority to forgive and retain sins?

If you do, which men, everybody?

*we Catholics believe that Christ gave the Apostles and their successors this authority, and todays priests are the successors of the apostles*

afam4eva: From a bile passage that someone posted on this thread, it posits that once that person has forgiven your sin then it's automatically forgiven.

You believe that? Okay, what if the person never forgives you (as so many people do), you are damned forever?

afam4eva: Are we assuming that Masturrbation is a sin? Even if it is, you just have to ask for forgiveness.

From who? Who did you wrong?