₦airaland Forum

[quote author=Mr_Anony]My friend, why are you picking a fight where there is none? I have not in any way said baptism is not important. We can both quote scriptures till our faces turn blue where baptism is mentioned or isn't mentioned. I think my analogy of a wedding sits well enough. It can be argued that the without the rings and the vows there is no wedding but the rings and the vows still symbolic and are not the core ingredients of marriage.[/quote]Answer my question: is it love that made/will make you married? If you and your lady have all the love in the world for each other, would it make you husband and wife?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Remember when you first brought up baptism, I totally agreed with you. What I don't agree with is when you begin to claim that baptism literally washes away sin. No my friend that is figurative speech much like the communion is not literally the body and blood of Christ. I could say to my bride "this ring binds us together as one". It doesn't mean that that our wedding ring literally binds anyone.[/quote]I had no problem with your explanation to the OP, except that Baptism is salvific but you dont think so. Holy Communion IS the body and blood of Christ, literally. "This is my body...this is my blood", said Jesus. I'll listen to him.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Now in the context of this thread, remember she was asking about saying a last minute prayer before the plane crash and my answer was that reciting a prayer holds no water but it is believing in your heart and truly repenting of one's sins that saves a person.
You agree with this however you also want to claim that physical water literally washes away sin? Let me ask you in the situation of a plane crash, let us say someone got born-again (i.e. believed and repented of his sins) just before boarding the plane. Unfortunately the plane crashed and he died. Do you want to tell me that God will send him to hell because he didn't dip himself in water?[/quote]I agree that one can be excused if there was no opportunity to be baptized. To be born-again is to be baptized. Baptism is not just italo pouring water on the head of Mr_Anony, no. It is a priest pouring water upon you in the name of the Father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit to consecrate you to the Lord, wash away your sins and give you a new life in Christ. It involves the work of the SPIRIT.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Now above was my logical answer, what follows below is my somewhat illogical answer to show you how your arguments sound (this is because you accused me of not reading your responses but blindly pushing my propaganda) .........so here goes:-

You said:


1John 1:7 But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin

[Every one must literally bathe in Jesus' blood or else no salvation? ........By the way, that was St. John speaking.........and please do you have any of Christ's blood with you so I can sprinkle?][/quote]You will find it in every Catholic Church all around the world.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]John 6:54-58 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me. This is the bread which came down from heaven not as your fathers ate the manna, and are dead. He who eats this bread will live forever.

[Is cannibalism the christian way now?.........By the way that was Jesus himself speaking........Please while you are bringing Jesus' blood, bring his flesh so that I can eat and literally live forever.][/quote]You sound exactly like the Jews that were listening to Jesus, and that should be worrying to you. That means you doubt the power of the Spirit to turn bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. The Jews knew what he meant literally and what he didnt. Notice that they took offence with him saying they should eat and drink his flesh and blood ("how can this man give us his flesh to drink" but they never queried his saying "you will live forever" because they knew he didnt mean that literally. Jesus kept reiterating his statement and never corrected their impression of what he said.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]My friend the above may have sounded like I was mocking but please don't be offended. I was only trying to show you how we can overemphasize figurative speech. There is no way a physical event can transform your soul, Change happens on the inside.[/quote]I'm not offended at all, because it doesnt sound as if you're mocking me. On the contrary, I feel sorry for you because you are more than mocking yourself. You are depriving you self of the body and blood of Christ. You study the recipe but never eat the meal. You are refusing the CONSUMMATION of your love for Christ.

These physical events involve both the work of the Holy Spirit and your interior spirit. If a physical event could not cause transformation, Jesus would have simply remained in heaven and willed that the world be saved; he would not have come to physically suffer and die.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]I still maintain that All Christians MUST Be Baptized but it is not baptism itself that saves us but Jesus Christ and Him alone.[/quote]Him alone, through baptism! If it doesnt save then why must all Christians be baptized? What's the point?

And come to think of it, are you implying that your interpretation of the scriptures is infallible and cannot be wrong?

If your interpretation is fallible and can be wrong, that means you admit that I could be right.

If your interpretation is infallible and cant be wrong, then what about all the billions of people who might have a different view with you on various areas of the faith. Are you saying that they are all wrong?

Cheers. No offence intended.

deleo16: @italo that shows that u re a good listener we can't really say mary was died or alive during paul ministry bible didn't tell us. The last time mary was mention in the bible was in ACT 1vs 13 vs 14. I will only type verse 14 with one accord all these. Were persisting in prayer together with some women and mary the mother of jesus and with is brother. Yes stephen prayed as a christian and the only ref that the bible told us and manner that he prayed is what we must follow ACT 7 vs 59. And to rev 5 vs 8 u didn't read it from the begin don't just bring the verse just to defend your argument REV 5 told us how God show John things to come there was this stroll in which no one was able to open it. Sealed. Vs 3 neither in heaven nor upon heaven nor upon earth was able to upon it. John wept then one of the elders said why cry the lion of the tribe of judah the root of David can open it. VS 8 they prayed after the the stroll was taken. then comes then they prayed using harps revelation is a prophet chapter God show to to john .john didn't pray asking the saint to pray on behalf of him he saw shown this to come a prophesy don't misquote it MY QUESTION IS THAT SINCE THEY WERE GATHERING AS SAINT WHY DID THEY ASK MARY TO INTERCEDE FOR THEM?OR JESUS WOULD HAVE TOLD US THAT Everybody SHOULD ASK MARY TO INTERCEDE FOR THEM WHY NOT OTHER SAINT? This is new doctrine. Which is false a dogma by the. Catholic .remember jOHN 14vs14 u can read all if you want. These is not an argument to Win is just a good advice for you and other christian also is to know the word yourself if any body tell u contrary to what is in bible is a false doctrine.

Mr man, answer my questions. Idont have time for long stories.

I don't what you mean by 'adding or removing', I only asked if that was the only prayer St. Stephen prayed in his life as a Christian. The answer should be "yes", "no" or "I don't know". Simple!

You said that all those who prayed for people were alive?

Then look at Rev 5:8:

The prayers of the saints (on heaven and earth) are presented to God by the angels and saints in heaven. This shows that the saints intercede on our behalf before God, and it also demonstrates that our prayers on earth are united with their prayers in heaven. (The “24 elders” are said to refer to the people of God – perhaps the 12 tribes and 12 apostles - and the “four living creatures” are said to refer to the angels.)

So tell me, these 24 elders and four living creatures, are they "alive" like your pastor or are they "dead" like Mary?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]What you are asking is unreasonable because you are playing on words. We both know that the bible was compiled at a point later than when the books were written so there is no way any of the books will mention the "bible". It is like asking for a pre-1912 document that specifically mentions "Nigeria" Knowing that Nigeria got it's name in 1914. If you still think your question is reasonable, then I'm afraid I'll have to question your ability to reason.[/quote]I'm not playing on words. You said the Bible is the final authority in matters of faith, and I said where is that in the Bible. What do you want me to say? Do you just want me to accept it because you say so?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]No I haven't self-answered anything.

I agree with sacred tradition referred to in 2Thess 2:15 but I suspect that Mary's "immaculate conception" was not part of those traditions so to prove to me that it was you have to show me a document written either before or during the time of Paul's writing that affirms what you are claiming. If not it stands to reason that such a doctrine was not one of those traditions Paul was referring to and might as well have been introduced by a mischievous church leader much like some of the pastors and priests we have with us today.[/quote]You talk about questioning my ability to reason, yet after reading 2Thess 2:15 which clearly says some of the Traditions were taught by "word of mouth" and others by letter, you are asking me to provide written evidence from that era. I think you should rather question YOUR ability to reason.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]I can argue for the Trinity from the scriptures by referring to instances where Jesus Christ was worshipped as God and hence make an inferrence. There is not even the slightest reference in scripture for Mary's "immaculate conception" and yet you claim it is one of the "church traditions" Again you bring up a bible that didn't exist at that time and try to imply that it was rejected............Yeah and "Nigerians" were not accepted as Africans in 1910 (There was nothing like Nigeria in 1910)
All the books that make it a bible were accepted by Christians so stop making silly statements and argue properly.[/quote]You cannot prove convincingly that there are three distinct persons - Father, Son and Holy Spirit - existing co-eternally, from scripture.

And you cannot use scripture to prove that all the books in the Bible are "scripture" (written by holy men of God and Apostles of Jesus inpired by the Holy Spirit. E.g what is your proof that the book of Mark and Luke were written by Sts. Mark and Luke and that they were inspired by the Holy Spirit? Those books weren't titled. When you see "The gospel according to Mark", it was put there by the publishers of the book. It is not part of scripture. You only agree that Mark wrote Mark and Luke wrote Luke because The Catholic Church said so.

All the books of the Bible (New Testament) were not widely accepted within the early Church, some of them were almost thrown out. And there are some books that were thrown out that were initially accepted as scripture within the Church. You only accept the 27 books of the New Testament because the Catholic Church said they were the inspired ones out of the many books that were in existence.

I didn't imply that the Bible was rejected, I said it wasn't accepted because it didn't exist. Read and understand before you get touchy.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Here we go again. because Jesus Christ personally instituted popes and cardinals and monasteries, convents, nuns, priests etc. (sarcasm; in case you missed it)
Jesus Christ came so that we could have each a personal relationship with God and not so we can gather into buildings and listen self-glorified men making speeches whether they call themselves pastors, bishops, priests and whatever have you. The true church of Christ is believers doing God's will and not individual branding of "christian" sects.[/quote]There is nothing like "Christian sects" as far as I'm concerned. Christ founded ONE Church. The one that was built on Peter, the rock. The one that the gates of hell cannot prevail against. The one that Christ promised he would be with and give the keys to the kingdom of heaven. The one that binds and looses on earth and its bound and loosed in heaven. Christ never said that the Apostles would be without sin yet he put his Church in their care. What matters is not the sanctity of its leaders but the divine origin and purpose of the Church.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Back on topic: Please validate your claim concerning the "immaculate conception of Mary". If you cannot do that then accept that it may well have been a later invention.[/quote]I accept The Immaculate Conception because it was divinely revealed by the Church and there is nothing in scripture that is contrary to the the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Just as I accept The Canon of Scriptures (Bible) because the Church chose it with divine authority and guidance.

validate your claim concerning the "the Bible as final authority". If you cannot do that then accept that it is your own invention.

ijawkid: So u wanna use the ""not everytin"" was written in d bible analogy to run away from this 1....

I'm a bible student...

Me, run away? Never! Rather you're the one running away from my simple questions as usual.

How do you know the early Christians didn't pray through Mary? Does the Bible have records of everything the early Christians did?

And why are you a Bible student when the early Christians didn't have the Bible.

ijawkid: Ok if u say all what d apostles did culd nt be contained in d bible,historians are well available to tell us how those men lived there lives......

So no escape route on this....

It is not "if I say." Could everything the apostles did be contained in the Bible? Answer! Yes or no.

And if you take the word of historians, that means you are affirming that we can refer to extra-biblical sources on matters of faith. Agreed?

So no escape route on this....

ijawkid: We all know exactly when this mary worship dogma was instigated...lol

Since you are the only one that knows, then you are the worshipper

simon2x1: what is your understanding of these verse

John 14 :13-14
13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Then why do you ask other people to pray for you?

simon2x1: Exodus 20 : 4
4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth

Exodus 25:18-22; 26:1,31 - for example, God commands the making of the image of a golden cherubim.

Num. 21:8-9 - God also commands the making of the bronze serpent.

Did God command them to commit idolatory?

simon2x1: Cos it is so clear from this world that I just pasted now. see we r not fighting or trying to condemn your church but we what u to see and know the truth the problem with u people is dat u leave everything to ur bishop n church u do not read more of the bible urself God what to have a relationship with u one on one also.

No, I have shown you that you have made nothing clear. The problem with you people is that you confuse yourselves when you read the Bible and ignore the interpretations of our Bishops even though they were the ones that created, compiled and canonized the Bible. God wants you to be a part of his Church, not the church of one crook who lies that God told him in a dream to open a church so that he can scam ignorant and foolish people, collect their money and make them sheep without shepherd.

simon2x1: The probability to we will land in heaven is this verse Romans 10:9

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Does that mean that demons will go to heaven? They also believe that God raised Jesus and confess that Jesus is Lord.

simon2x1: See what a former catholic discover and wrote
www.biblebelievers.com/bennett/bennett_mary-worship.html

You believe that because that is what suits you gullible thinking. If I gave you a link to what a convert from protestantism to catholicism said, would you believe it?

ijawkid: And u bow down to her image too...

I guess that's what christianity is about too??

My lil prob is all these mary pray for us,bow down to her image,mary this ,mary that all started just because paganism has enveloped christendom....

Wanting to allign paganism with christianity...

If not what is mary doing in worship procedures??

If d early christians didn't do it,then why are professed christians doing it.??

How many times was mary's name mentioned amongst d 1st century christians more or else she been worshipped or acting as a mediator for Christ??

Its tiring...

All this is just to satisfy mans quest for idolatry......

Abeg I tire!!!

How do you know the early Christians didn't do it? Does the Bible contain the records of everything the early Christians did?

Besides, the early Christians didn't have the Bible, much less read it, why do you read it?

Oh sorry, you're not a Christian, are you?

luvinhubby: The second commandment of Moses in Ex. 20 vs 4 says u shall not make for yourself any graven image of the likeness of anything in heaven above, on earth beneath or in waters beneath the earth.
But the catholic church removed that completely as the second commandment and replaced it the third and split the the ninth commandment into two to make it ten.
Check the roman catholic cathecism booklet u will see it there.

Sometimes you wonder if people are so blind that they cannot see the topic of discussion or they are so illiterate that they see it but cannot read it or they are so daft that they see and read it but cannot understand it.

The topic is "MARY INTERCEDING on behalf of Catholics"

deleo16: @italo dont add to what has been writing in the bible by telling us is that the only prayer steven prayed we must not add or remove from what has been stated or the instruction given to us already in the bible not contradicting anthing here get my point accept it that is a new doctrine the question i am asking you is why ask mary that is dead physically to intercede on your behalf ? does that prayed for people then were alive paul,anainas,steve.why did paul ask mary to intercede for him then but mary has died already then when paul began his ministry or teaching.

I don't what you mean by 'adding or removing', I only asked if that was the only prayer St. Stephen prayed in his life as a Christian. The answer should be "yes", "no" or "I don't know". Simple!

How do you know Mary had died when Paul began his ministry? Is that written in the Bible?

You said that all those who prayed for people were alive?

Then look at Rev 5:8:

The prayers of the saints (on heaven and earth) are presented to God by the angels and saints in heaven. This shows that the saints intercede on our behalf before God, and it also demonstrates that our prayers on earth are united with their prayers in heaven. (The “24 elders” are said to refer to the people of God – perhaps the 12 tribes and 12 apostles - and the “four living creatures” are said to refer to the angels.)

So tell me, these 24 elders and four living creatures, are they "alive" like your pastor or are they "dead" like Mary?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]You are trying to ask me a trick question so as to trap me knowing full well that the bible is a compilation and hence cannot mention it self. I can mention scripture and references to the gospel all I want but you will not accept.
It is like asking you where is the catholic church mentioned in the bible as the one true church? No matter how many times you refer me to places where the church was mentioned, I can always say that is not there is no "catholic" specifically mentioned hence it is wrong.
Do you now see how unreasonable your demand is?[/quote]I dont see my demand as unreasonable because I dont preach that the Bible is the final authority, I preach that God's word comes to us through sacred scripture and sacred tradition. So if you ask me where the word "Catholic" came from, I'll tell you "from sacred tradition".

But it's you who preaches that the Bible is the final authority on matters of faith, and this topic, "whether or not the Bible is the final authority on matters of faith", is a matter of faith, so let us refer to the Bible as final authority as you claim.

Where does the Bible say that the Bible is the final authority on matters of faith?

And if the Bible does not mention itself as you say, where did you get the word Bible from?

Sacred Tradition?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Now I agree with traditions that were taught but note this; we are arguing about a particular tradition i.e. the supposedly immaculate conception of Mary. First of all no indication of this is in the bible that "the catholic church" compiled. For the immaculate conception of Mary was one of these traditions referred to in 2Thess2:15, it must have been accepted by Christians before or during the time 2nd Thessalonians was written. If you are going to quote any text or "church father", he must have been alive at this time or prior to it. If this is not so then the tradition is just as good as all other traditions invented today by pastors everywhere. Do you agree?[/quote]Firstly, you have pretty much answered you own question.

If you agree with sacred tradition, then you should agree with all sacred tradition, including The Immaculate Conception. You agree with The Trinity, The Bible, The Incarnation - all not mentioned or explicitly taught in the Bible, but from Sacred Tradition, then you should agree with The Immaculate Conception which is not mentioned or explicitly taught in the Bible but from Sacred tradition.

You dont know for sure if The Immaculate Conception and The Trinity were "accepted by Christians before or during the time 2nd Thessalonians was written" because you dont have a written record of all the traditions that were accepted at that time. Even the Bible, a product of sacred tradition, was not "accepted by Christians before or during the time 2nd Thessalonians was written" because it didnt exist until 400yrs after Christ. Do you reject it then?

If the pastors belong to the one true Church that was founded by Christ himself, then I'll accept their tradition; but if they just slept and woke up and said that they saw a vision in their dream telling them to found their own Churches, then I'll reject their tradition.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Using the example you gave, do you mean to tell me that they received the Holy Spirit and they spoke in tongues without them being saved? (Acts10:44-48)[/quote]What about Paul who 'God had chosen to know his will, to see the Upright One and hear his own voice speaking, because he was to be his witness before all humanity, testifying to what he had seen and heard.'--Acts 22:14,15

Yet, Ananais says to him: "Hurry and be baptised and wash away your sins." Why did he need baptism to "wash away his sins?"

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Yes baptism is very important. Every christian must be baptized but the dipping in water is not what saves. It is the believing and the repenting. John 3:16, Romans 10:9-10[/quote]John 3:16 says whoever believes in him will have eternal life... But of course whoever believes in Jesus will be baptized because he will believe Jesus' word in Mark 16:16 which says he who believes AND IS BAPTIZED WILL BE SAVED.


Romans 10:
9 that if you declare with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and if you believe with your heart that God raised him from the dead, then you will be saved.

Does this really mean that all I have to do to go to heaven is to say "Jesus is Lord" and believe that he ressurrected? Notice that the verse doesnt even mention "repentance" (because you can do these without repenting and believing and loving God as Lord and saviour). This of course would mean that every professed Christian is destined for heaven because practically all of us say "Jesus is Lord" and believe in the ressurection.

10 It is by believing with the heart that you are justified, and by making the declaration with your lips that you are saved.

Are we really justified by believing in the heart that God raised Jesus, and saved by declaring with the lips that "Jesus is Lord?"

That would mean that the demons are justified and saved, because they believe and declare with their lips that Jesus is Lord.

You see that your analysis is terribly flawed.

Though "repentance" and "baptism" are not mentioned in the passage, but one who believes in his heart that God raised Jesus and declares with his mouth that Jesus is Lord SHOULD REPENT AND BE BAPTIZED... Then, he will be saved, just as Peter said in Acts 2:38.

So also, John 3:16 doesn't mention "repentance" and "baptism", but he who believes SHOULD REPENT AND BE BAPTIZED... Then, he will be saved, JUST AS PETER SAID IN ACTS 2:38.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]No no no no noooooooooooo!!!

Baptism is a symbolic ritual. for instance If a man and a woman are in love and get married. The exchange of the rings (insert baptism) and the marriage vows (insert sinner's prayer) are not what makes it a marriage. The true marriage ingredient is love (insert believing) and commitment to the partner (insert repentance).[/quote]No amount of love can make me married if the union is not solemnized in the Catholic Church, what about you? Is it loves that made you/will make you married?

Love is an essential ingredient but consecration as a married couple is what makes a Christian couple married. Repentance and faith are essential ingredients but baptism saves.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Don't get it twisted, all are very important, but as it is not the ring that makes you married but it is a symbol of marriage so in the same way is baptism a symbol of repentance. it is not baptism that saves us. Jesus saves us.[/quote]Sometimes I wonder if you dont read our posts or you read them but you are just adamant on forcing you fallible opinion on us even after they have been reasonably debunked.

St. Peter says "...baptism that now SAVES you..."

Who should I believe, you or him?

deleo16: assuming is your bishop to pray for using jesus name is ok and at least we see your bishop,and he is still alive jesus died and rose from the died and sent the holyspirit in our mist to lead us and guide us, as we meditate on his word. he never told paul to pray in this manner"holy mary mother of jesus pray for us" lets me give you a typical way Steve prayed Act 7 vs 59 he siad lord jesus receive my spirit then he knees down he cried out with a strong voice "jehovah do not charge this sin against them after saying this he slept .now tell me why did he tell mary to pray for him steve prayed for does that stone him .Anainas prayed for saul to receive is sight act 9 did ananias told mary to pray for him so as to heal paul, we have direct access to God ourself dont ask mary she is dead physically to pray on our behalf, we see our own pastor before we tell me to pray for us . Ask me why cant we also ask for prophet elisha or samuel or noah or abraham to pray for us?

You are contradicting yourself.

You say we have direct access to God, but you say it's okay for bishops or pastors to pray for us.

Since you have direct access to God, why do you still ask your pastor to pray for you?

And why didnt Paul pray for himself to receive his sight?

How do you know the Holy Spirit never told St. Paul to say "holy Mary, mother of Jesus, pray for us?" When everything that happened wasn't written in the Bible?

Was that St. Stephen's only prayer in his lifetime? How do you know whether he did or did not pray through Mary at other times in his life when the Bible didnt record everything that happened?

ijawkid: Italo the defender...

U too much..lol

My brother, wetin I go do?

As attackers come too much nko...lol

@ Mr_Anony,

All your questions will be answered, but we should first deal with the fundamental issues that affect all others.

We all agree that the Bible is the authoritative word of God. But we Catholics know that God's word is given to us through Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

2nd Thessalonians 2:15: Stand firm, then, brothers, and keep the TRADITIONS that we taught you, whether by WORD OF MOUTH or by letter.

But if you insist on going contrary to what St. Paul said, you should at least provide proof that you are right and he is wrong.

You say the Bible is the FINAL authority in matters of faith (correct me if I'm wrong), and we say "where can you find that in the Bible?"

You are yet to show us where it says that the Bible is the FINAL authority. All scripture is profitable... Yes! We agree and believe that too. Do not add or remove to/from the book of Revelation... We agree and affirm that too.

But these do not mean that the Bible is the final authority and if you cannot give us Biblical proof of the Bible being the final authority, you would have to concede that you were wrong, for us to move forward.

Except you want to force the Bible to say what you want it to say... And if so, how can we engage in a meaningful and honest dialogue with you?

frosbel: No , absolutely not true.

To be born again means to be born again in the strict sense of the word, albeit spiritually and by the Spirit of God.

John 3:3,5 - Jesus says, "Truly, truly, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." When Jesus said "water and the Spirit," He was referring to baptism (which requires the use of water, and the work of the Spirit).

John 3:22 - after teaching on baptism, John says Jesus and the disciples did what? They went into Judea where the disciples baptized. Jesus' teaching about being reborn by water and the Spirit is in the context of baptism.

frosbel: Baptism is important as has been commanded in the bible , it is an identification with Christ that we have died to this world ( when immersed in water, not some sprinkling on a baby's forehead ) and we now live a new life in Christ Jesus ( when we come out of the water ).

" Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life." - Romans 6:3-4

There is nothing in that verse that shows that baptism is MERELY an identification with Christ, as your fallible interpretation suggests. Rather, the verse shows that baptism ENABLES us to live a new life just as Jesus was RAISED from the dead.

1 Peter 3:21

New International Version (NIV)

21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now SAVES you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God.[a] It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Peter expressly writes that “baptism, corresponding to Noah's ark, now SAVES you; not as a removal of dirt from the body, but for a clear conscience. “ Hence, the verse demonstrates that baptism is salvific (it SAVES us), and deals with the interior life of the person (purifying the conscience, like Heb. 10:22), and not the external life (removing dirt from the body). Baptism is now the “circumcision” of the new Covenant (Col. 2:11-12), but it, unlike the old circumcision, actually saves us, as Noah and his family were saved by water.

[quote author=mcstan_18]That is idolatory a its peak. God does not permit such worship. Only through Jesus can you have access to the father(John14:6) and for those of t dat believe your Mary will go to Jesus on your behalf(because she was His earthly mum), why wouldn't u read ur bible and leave those bulletins. Jesus has given a direct invitation to all that is heavy ladden...(matt 11:28) and nt thru some 'Mary'. Remember, Jesus made us to understand that there's nothing like father, mother, wife,... in heaven, so why worship blindly? These were demonic doctrines that origingated from Rome long ago, I was an ardent catholic before now so I know what I'm sayinh. Besides, the apostles of old never prayed these rosaries you pray today thinking you're worshipping God. As a matter of fact, you ignorantly worship a powerful demon called the queen of heaven. BE WISE BRETHREN!!!![/quote]We do not only ask for the intercession of Mary. We ask for the intercession of all saints and angels, holy people and even unholy people e.g: priests, sisters, pastors, friends and relatives.

So what is your problem? Is it that we ask for 'intercession', or that we ask MARY for intercession?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Sin isn't necessarily in our actions on their own but more in our mindset. To be born -again means to be born of God, to have our minds renewed and to be guided by the Holy Spirit. The bible says that out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. Not to sound insensitive but consider this: Why would anyone who truly believes in God make statements like "God if you truly exist....."?



Sorry to say this, but saying the sinners' prayer does not save anyone. The misconception that saying those words makes one born-again will lead a lot of people to hell.
What makes someone born again is when you believe in Jesus Christ then you confess your sins and repent from them (Romans 10:9-11). The emphasis is first on believing. saying the sinners' prayer without this is like doing a mere recital and it means nothing.

The sinners' prayer is not scriptural. It is just something evangelists use to make it easier for people to come to God. Don't get me wrong, the sinner's prayer is not bad but it is repenting and believing in your heart that really counts not the words.



I hope I have been able to answer your question. God bless[/quote]Well said, but just to add something. To be "born again", in a strict sense, means to be baptized.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Wow, I never knew that a day would come when I would have to argue with someone who claims to be a christian over the authority of the bible.
If the bible is not the the final authority on the Word of God, then what is?
What is the validity of our faith? If the bible is not the final authority, What then do we agree on?
How can we possibly discuss as christians since we don't even agree on the bible's authority?

I happen to be a bible believing christian, I cannot be anything else.

If you say Mary was immaculately born but it wasn't recorded in the bible, I may as well say that Abraham, David, King Herod, Job, Nebuchadenezar, Esther and Judas Iscariot e.t.c. were all immaculately concieved. Afterall the details of their conception isn't recorded in the bible and the bible is not the final authority.

@Italo and chukwudi44, No christian will ever imply what you are both trying to imply that the bible is not our final authority. I thought I was speaking with brothers but i am afraid you are not christians. Please repent! God loves you.[/quote]Notice that you neither answered our questions nor addressed the issues we raised.

deleo16: We have only one mediator between God and man jesus christ 1timothy2vs 5-6 and jesus even told us in is word to cast out problems and sickness in is name Mark 16Vs17, so did peter in Act 3vs 6 since mary was not alive then peter should also have ask mary to pray for them which none of the them did not or mentioned in the bible from peter to paul,nowhere in the bible is an expection made for mary,jesus had to die on the cross to obtain salvation for mary just has he did. For everybody else and to the doctrine stating that mary was

We do not only ask for the intercession of Mary. We ask for the intercession of all saints and angels, holy people and even unholy people e.g: priests, sisters, pastors, friends and relatives.

So what is your problem? Is it that we ask for 'intercession', or that we ask MARY for intercession?

What about "true science?" You seem unconcerned about that.

thehomer: I guess it is a good thing that Anon. is quoted as saying that there is true religion because I would really like to know what this true religion that describes reality is. Who can speak for Anon.?

Catholicism.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]We agree that the bible is the final authority.[/quote]Who agrees with you that the Bible is the final authority? Is that in the Bible?

1st Tim 3:15 in my Bible says: "...the Church (not the Bible) is the pillar and bulwark of truth." What does it say in your Bible?


[quote author=Mr_Anony]Please show us where the bible says that Mary Jesus' mother was born without sin.

Once you do that, this case will be settled. If you cannot do that then it is not true. This should be fair enough don't you agree?[/quote]You really think it's fair enough? You are implying that if something is not stated in the Bible, it is false. You are in effect, saying that St. John lied when he said that many things were not recorded. Nothing was actually left unrecorded - according to you. I take you as a reasonable man; but I have also found that people who oppose the Catholic faith tend to be criminally unreasonable. Please prove me wrong on the latter.

ijawkid: Please how wuld u explain these scripture regarding those who'll rule with christ in heaven

Revelation 14:4 $ 5

Rev 14:4
These are they which were not defiled with
women; for they are virgins. These are they
which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth.
These were redeemed from among men,
[being] the firstfruits unto God and to the
Lamb.
Rev 14:5
And in their mouth was found no guile: for they
are without fault before the throne of God......

My point there is VIRGIN...

How are these candidates for heaven VIRGINS?

Is it that they never had wives of there own they had sex with or that they never got married @ all.....

Or is that even in marraige they never slept with there wives and husbands

I know little about that, please teach me.

logicboy: Yet, you claim that you're more christian than the catholics.

Madness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@ logicboy, sometimes I feel sorry for you. The kind of confusion that must be going on in your head. i wish you had the kind of certainty that i have. Cheers

@ Olaadegbu,

I see that you, as usual, deliberately dodged 90% of my post and made a hapless response to only the last paragraph. Whenever you're confronted with questions that obviously expose the fallacy in what you're saying, you either muster some unintelligible post or you pretend not to see it and try to change the topic. So I repost!

italo: You are in contradiction with Heb. 5:12: "For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need SOMEONE to TEACH you again the basic elements of the oracles of God."

The oracles of God do need interpretation afterall... So says the Holy Spirit!


But nothing in Scripture tells us what Scriptures are inspired, what books belong in the Bible, or that Scripture is the final authority on questions concerning the Christian faith. Instead, the Bible says that the Church, not the Scriptures, is the pinnacle and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15) and the final arbiter on questions of the Christian faith (Matt. 18:17).

You use 2 Tim. 3:16-17 to prove that the Bible is the sole authority of God's word. But examining these texts disproves your claim. Here, Paul appeals to apostolic tradition right before verse 2 Tim. 3:16-17. Thus, there is an appeal to tradition before there is an appeal to the Scriptures, and you generally ignore this fact.

2 Tim. 3:15 - Paul then appeals to the sacred writings of Scripture referring to the Old Testament Scriptures with which Timothy was raised (not the New Testament which was not even compiled at the time of Paul's teaching). This verse also proves that one can come to faith in Jesus Christ without the New Testament.

2 Tim. 3:16 - this verse says that Scripture is "profitable" for every good work, but not exclusive. The word "profitable" is "ophelimos" in Greek. "Ophelimos" only means useful, which underscores that Scripture is not mandatory or exclusive. You unbiblically argue that profitable means exclusive.



The Bible contains 73 books! But let us leave that matter for now because I can see that you are desperately trying to deviate from the topic of discussion. Let us handle them, one after the other.



*Smiles* I have not even started posting and you are already terrified. Anyway, it is good to see that you accept things that are not found in the Bible as "truth." Since you quoted John Foxe and St. Justin Martyr, let me quote some other early Church fathers.

Origen calls her (Mary) "worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, most complete sanctity, perfect justice, neither deceived by the persuasion of the serpent, nor infected with his poisonous breathings" ("Hom. i in diversa"

Ambrose says "she (Mary) is incorrupt, a virgin immune through grace from every stain of sin."

Do you believe them, or do you just pick and choose quotes from Church fathers that suit you?



I will accept anything in the Bible, but not as the final authority in all matters of doctrine. Unless you can show me where the Bible says we must accept it as the final authority in all matters of doctrine. Last time I checked the Bible said "the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth" but you seem hell-bent on re-writing the Bible. It was not the Bible that created and canonized the Church, it was the other way round, so how can the Bible have authority over the Church?

And you came up with this lame excuse:

OLAADEGBU: I could show you evidence from the Scriptures but I don't see the need since you don't accept it as your final authority in all matters of faith.

However, I'll leave you to reflect on Mark 7:5-13 Where it confirms what the OT said about the Messiah who would magnify the Law of God and make it honourable (Isaiah 42:21). Here, we see how the Pharisees have been dishonouring the Law by merely giving lip service to it just as you guys are doing here. They made the Commandment void through their tradition, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Jesus Christ our Saviour brought honour back to the Law by teaching that the Law was spiritual by nature, and that outward observance was not enough. God required truth in our thought-lives, intentions and motives.

In my post, I said I would accept the Bible as the final authority if you can show me where the Bible says we should do so, so if I have not accepted it as such, it is due to your failure to produce evidence of such authority from the Bible.

I will answer to your talk about the Pharisees' and Jesus' teaching and all your other attempts to deviate, but, even you will agree that you should answer to the issues I have raised.

We have to hit the nail on the head.

...And a virgin forever.

logicboy: Logic boy nko?

Of course, you too. *smiles*

Ptolomeus: No! Not you!
Italo likes men older than you!
Hahahaha!
(This is a joke, I hope nobody is offended!)
@ Italo, thanks for the greetings, get your mine.
I have also a very busy life, but it is good to make a space to share with friends and joke a bit.

You're welcome. Sure, its fun sometimes, also informing.

OLAADEGBU: Thanks for wishing us a happy belated solemnity (whatever that means), I certainly accept the peace of the Lord Jesus Christ and wish you the same.

Thanks. The "solemnity" part of my greeting was actually directed specifically at Ubenedictus.

Just been too busy to be on nairaland. You know say nairaland sabi carry time go well well...

It's neither a sin nor a crime to accept that you're wrong, people. What's a sin is to know the truth and run away from it or refute it.

Those who do so commit the same sin Judas and Peter committed. Jesus is the truth, so to deny or turn your back on truth is to deny or turn your back on Jesus.

Weep, embrace the truth and repent, like Peter.

Do not end up like Judas.

But then, your pride will not let you.

Ubenedictus: he is a jehova witness, he doesnt like christmas. Happy solemity of the holy trinity, may the mystery we celebrate continue to bear fruits in our lives.

Sorry, I have not been on nairaland for a while. Happy solemnity in arrears.

The peace of the Lord be with you...

...And with Ijawkid, Olaadegbu, Ptolomeus etc.

ijawkid: @italo....
If u say d catholics wrote d new testament then ur implying paul,peter and d apostles even Jesus was a catholic..........

Jesus, in a sense, being the head of the Church, yes. The apostles, surely.

ijawkid: U gÙys wrote the new testament and u culdnt find a way to sneak in d immaculation theory of mary.....

Did that thought escape from ya popes memory??

There's no need to sneak anything. Whether it is written plainly or not, truth is truth.

ijawkid: U guys urself wrote mary had other sons ,now ur finding away to refute what u guys wrote.......

Sometin must be wrong with u all............

It was you that wrote that in your sub-standard brain.

ijawkid: D same bible u claim u wrote tells us nobody bowed down before mary or made an image of her to idolize,but u guys do d opposite...........

In what verse does the Bible say all that? And what is the meaning of "idolize?"

ijawkid: U guys don't follow what u wrote centuries ago.........

If u want me to remind u of when this immaculation crap was instigated by ur popes I'll gladly do that....

You don't know when.

ijawkid: No bible verse to back it up but ya popes forced it to u guys to swallow and here u are defending the crap.....

Is there any Bible verse to back up the canonization of the Bible?

So our Pope forced it on the world and you guys accepted that one. You choose what you like from our Pope and discard what you don't like.

ijawkid: That's how christmas and ya other pagan craps came too.....

Rubbish!!!!!!!

What's wrong with christmas?