₦airaland Forum

A bible literally means a collection of books/scrolls. However we are not discussing a random collection or anthology, we are referring to the foundational guide of Christianity.

prairie: atheists have faith in a lot of things just like religious people in more ways than one

Faith is specifically appealed to by Abrahamic faithfuls, it would be disingenious to claim atheists have faith.

And the Pope insisting on the most impracticable reproductive policies in Africa,

And the continuous loss of a national moral conscience

Enigma: ^^^ On this thread, I have not got involved with the issue of the origin of the Roman Catholic Church. If I have done so, quote me and I will apologise.

2. You did not and still do not know the meaning of "the Bible"; alas even after I gave you a clue that "the Bible" was first used for The Septuagint which of course does not include the New Testament.

1. It became an issue when you tried making a distinction btw Roman Catholic Church and Catholic Church.

2. Ok, even if I conceded with your Septuagint Bible story, what would it prove? That any book remotely called a Bible is satisfactorily a foundational guide for christianity?

Enigma

1. You brought it up yourself when you started making references with capital c and small letter c in Catholic Church. You were to draw a line btw the universal and Catholic Church, and roles in bible compilation.

2. The Bible I had in mind is the most original bible, as intently compiled in the past as Christianity foundational guide. Substractions from the Bible (the original one earliest compiled for Christians) are fatal to the book and intents of the compilers. If Apocrypha or New Testament is removed, then aspects of Christianity or the Christian experience become missing

@ OP

If life is automated and tied to God's wishes, and has a value other than an intrinisic one, is that nihilisitic?

Can a man fight a purpose or a destiny which isn't favourable to him?

And to what purpose is Worship to God the independent and undying Being? Does worship keep God longer or to tend his ego? Of what satisfaction can be offered to the insatiable being?

Enigma has still failed to show us at what point in History, did the Roman Catholic begin. He keeps implying an obscure date which none of us know about.

Cos of the subtraction.

^^
And Mormons with their Mormon Bible? ?

Enigma: ^^^ So, the book being used by the vast majority of non Roman Catholic Christians is not "the Bible", then?

But Apocrypha books are missing!

The one popularly known as the Catholic Bible.

@enigma

The Bible is the merged message of both the old testament and the New testament, in that both are intended to give life to one another. The Hebrew Bible patently lacks the New testament, and suffers from being a single dimensional testament.

Mftivi: God said the wisdom of men is foolishness. u think the scripture is what u interprete carnaly,so foget all diz jagon udrop here,u can only understand when the spirit rests on u. u sound sooo empty. dont mean to upset anyone just teling u how u look

You'd be guilty of circular reasoning. Who told you that the Holy Spirit exists and that it helps you interpret the Bible correctly??

^^ loool!

Good point. Once we can establish that The Church is the primary axiom of christianity, Pentecostal Churches can declare the Bible to be a foundational guide subject to the Church's interpretational rules and the Church itself.

Enigma: ^^^^ And he is wrong about the absence of the Bible in 40 AD, anyway.

True, we did not then yet have the New Testament but we did have what is still called the Hebrew Bible, certainly the Old Testament including even the Greek translation called The Septuagint.

Of course you could give an expanded meaning to the word "church" to include people of the Old Testament era or to go as far back as Abram/Abraham (or even further if you like) . . . . . . .

The Hebrew Bible isn't the Bible.

By the 144k ppl they don't mean the rest drop into hell, rather a new earth will be created. The 144k are merely in heven for sightseeing

In the absence of the bible as at AD 40, a Church still subsisted, that only implies the primacy of the Church over the Bible

Also the Church is "inspired" to provide the correct rules of interpretation of the Bible. It draws the context and degree in which words and sentences in the Bible are to be read. An example is the Commandment "thou shall not kill" a literal reading suggests an absolute BAn on killing, even non humans, which God himself violates.

Rubbish!

You didn't answer my question still

Mr joe

Can you lock your child in an oven for stealing an orange?

engrtee: Faith does not hinder scientific enquiry. Referring to Charles Darwin theory of evolution, the reason why it is rejected is because it simply does not make sense! It has nothing to do with religious people not becoming receptive to it!

Lool! However it conflicts with religion.

She should be proud.

truthislight: This is what makes the belivers or followers of christ:

(1 Timothy 2:3-4).
"For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:3-4).
..................

And to get the knowledge you follow this:

(1 Thessalonians 2:13).
"For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." (1 Thessalonians 2:13).
...................

Stop saying what you know nothing about please.


Is it humans that set the rules? No.

The rules are all there in the bible.

Where are the interpretational rules of Bible??

truthislight: this ^^^ statement is made out of ignorance.

Hmmm

@regy and italo

The Church structure is still intact today in form of the Catholic Church. All other churches find their therefrom.

The OP does make lots of sense. If God is Love, then how is that attribute reconciled with Hell. Its like placing your child's head in an oven

truthislight: and who should christians follow if not christ and his apostles? Atheist? .

However the Church came before the Bible

I'm going to treat this thread as a matter of history not theology

Enigma: ^^^ Yep, it is very misleading and even fraudulent to say that the [Roman] Catholic Church "created" or "canonized" the Bible or whatever.

Only if one can establish the same structure overseeing the Church is the same with the Catholic Church now.

Reyginus: Kay, the thing is, the moment we begin to focus on the roles the bible plays, and not as I put it, we deviate from 'my problem with catholism'.

That is your real problem with Catholics actually. The foundation of Faith.

@Regy

I just feel the discourse will be more focussed if the role of the Bible is talked about. Cos you seem to base all your criticism on the foundations of Catholicism for failing to adhere entirely to the Bible.

Enigma: Rubbish! "Freethinkers" my leg! That is why atheists' thinking is shaped by prats like Harris, loonies like Barker (appropriate name) and dunces like Dawkins.

Look, evangelical atheists now clearly have doctrines and an evangelical atheist who departs from the line is warned to beware of 'heresy'. I don't even need to go outside Nairaland for an example. Just one example follows where a normally brash evangelical atheist quickly fell in line when warned by another evangelical atheist that what he said is not "the default atheist position" i.e. what he said is heterodoxical or heretical. See here https://www.nairaland.com/999529/paul-kokoski-new-atheism-enigmas/2#11578089

In fact it is so bad for the evangelical atheist religionists that when someone renounces atheism they brand him an apostate guilty of apostasy ----- just as with other religions. A clear example is what happened to them when Antony Flew renounced atheism. For most of the 20th century Flew was the atheist's chief and foremost apostle --- even senior to the mumu Dawkins. When Flew renounced atheism and turned to Deism/Theism, some of the evangelical atheists went into apoplexy. Dawkins accused Flew of "Apostasy" but disguised it in a big word -- 'tergiversation'. Look in the dictionary and see that the word is just a fancy or pompous way of saying ------ apostasy.

Evangelical atheists are the dumbest sheeple there is ---- blind being led by the blind. Mumu followers of fools calling themselves "freethinkers". Yeah right.

I'm really eager to see the _evangelical theists!

I didnt intend to say much, however Regy, you are making a single mistake: the role of the Bible. You seem to judge the Catholics for not strictly following the Bible to the letter as Pentecostals are expected to.

So you ought to have started explaining what the appropriate role of the Bible ought to be and why. And then your regular critique should have followed.