₦airaland Forum

I saw this passage in different parts of the thread and had to ask something. It speaks of twelve thrones, but who exactly is the twelfth guy? Judas?

No, it is Matthias. The apostles held offices, offices can be replaced or transferred. If not then Matthias wouldn't have taken the place of Judas.

Some smart Alec is about to tell you the 12th guy is Paul dumbo

I really wish someone would so I'd laugh. But no it's not Paul either. Paul was never one of the 12.

OK I agree. The Church is the New Isreal? Which of the Church(bodies of Christ as you guys love to put it)? The over 30,000 sects or bodies? Nice try.

There is only one church, the Catholic Church, don't forget that I'm Catholic, I don't speak of the other churches when referring to Church.

Are you the one to tell the Jew what is inside their Bible(Tanakh)? They have their Original hebrew bible to show. What do you have? The Septuagint that is riddled with mistranslation and delibrate mischaracterization of some passages?

I have spoken to the Jews about it, and so I do know. The Jews used the septuagint until after the death of Jesus and the birth of the Church. Infact it was because of the Christians that they changed their Bible. So the septuagint is very credible.

If you notice Tacitus refers to it as a "most mischievous superstition," not really suggesting that he is stating something he considers fact here. I said there is no where in history where Jesus narrative was reported as it is in the bible(or other books that were banned from the bible). Tacitus did not report that Jesus was killed according to how it was written in the bible did he? Tacitus offers no source to corrobaorate any of the things written about Jesus in the bible, other than Christian troublemakers. He's like one of the atheist members of this board making a comment about Jesus being a hippy and an insurgent. Quoting him in favour of proving the events of the bible  is like you quoting one of us because we mentioned what Christians believe in.So all this passage offers us is a statement about Christianity by somoene who believes its false and lived long after the supposed time of Jesus. ie. it proves nothing beyond the fact that Romans didn't like Christians.

That is exactly why I chose to give you these sources, if I were to have given you Christian sources you would say it is biased, I gave harsh non-christian sources to show that what is in the Bible is historically true.
We see him as the messiah and as God, they see him as a man who was causing trouble, but all sources tell that he was crucified historically and that he did teach people and that he founded a new sect, called Christianity.

I wasn't trying to show that Jesus is God, I am trying to show that it is historically true that he did teach that he is God, and that he did die, and that he did live and walk this earth.

As for the Talmud we have a passage in the Talmud that says a man named Yeshua was hanged for sorcery. It's not Jesus of the Bible, then, is it? Let's be honest here. Yeshua was a VERY common name in Judea. This is like saying there was a man named John, who lived in England and was hanged for sorcery, sometime in the middle ages. Chances are, it was probably true, simply based on the name being so blinking common!. Talmud doesn't say anything about this man claiming to be the son of God or rising from the dead, either. He was hanged and went bye-bye.All the other sources like Josephus,  Pliny the Younger etc never made mention of any of the stories of the bible, they only talked about Christains as followers of a man called Jesus. By the way most of their accounts were written about 100-200 years after the alleged death of Jesus.

There's more than one Yeshua mentioned in the Talmud, so this is not the only Yeshua

They aren't bad, and they are no threat to religion, Christianity at least.
When people misunderstand Christianity, and underestimate science they get disappointed in at least one area, and that leads them to loosing faith. They didn't loose faith in what Christianity actually is, they loose faith in what they thought Christianity is.

Olabowale

I never gave you permission to say my name. You are restricted as everyone here is, you do not have the permission to say my name thanks.

Carl, ignore the old man, he is anxious for attention.

St. Faustina. Have you seen her dolls?

"All sects of heretics are condemned and various punishments are appointed for them and their accomplices." --Pope Alexander IV, --p. 135

Brothers and sisters in Christ I want you to note the evil and deception, and the degree of cruelty that prevailed then. Here is a historical piece of interest

You see you did good when you cited the catechism as your source in the posts above this one, but here you derail as a bad scholar where you post a historical fact without facts or citations. Show us where you got it from. Thanks.

You see, lady - you do not seem to understand what the Bible is teaching here when it says 'the Church is the pillar, ', The Bible meant Jesus Christ is the pillar and foundation of truth, ok! That's what is meant here and not ordinary Church building or worshippers in it as you saw it. The Church is Christ foundation, Without Christ there is no Church, ok! Take your Bible to pastors who can interprete it very well for you as I can see you don't seem to understand it fully.

I see english lessons are in order here.

15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

The above verse is talking about a Church and is describing the Church as the pillar and foundation of truth. it talks about the house of God, and it tells us that the house of God is the Church of the living God, and then it goes on to describe it as the pillar and foundation of truth. This whole verse is about the Church ok.

But let's use your interpretation, since to you this verse is talking about Jesus as the pillar and foundation, then St. Paul must be telling us how to behave in Jesus Christ.
Infact let's insert your interpretation here.

But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the Jesus Christ, which is the Jesus Christ of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.

So tell me how do you behave yourself in the Jesus Christ of the living God?


but this isn't the only verse that talks about the church in that way.

Well Bobbyaf, if that's truely the Catholic church doctrine - it's a lie because Mary and Joseph had six other children after Christ (four boys and two girls) in total they had seven children. So, Jesus had 4 brthers and two sisters conceived and born by Mary and Joseph. The Bible named them as: James, Joseph, Simon and Judas but the names of his sisters were not mentioned (Matthew 13 v.55 - 56). They were Jesus half-brothers. So I suggest every Catholic get a Bible and read it yourselves or join other churches that truely teaches the word of God. As you can see Christ came from a large family and a poor one for that matter. His mother was a house-wife and his father a carpenter. He had no Flash cars (as preachers of today do) and wore no designer cloths neither his brothers. Today, most preachers are doing the opposite. Some, not only have Flash cars a luxury lifestyle - Flasy homes in every city of this world , their wives and relatives too. I leave it to them to justify. We will all be answerable one day. It is true that God does not want us to be poor but there's a difference between poverty and wealth/luxury. I rest my case.

I bet I can show you that those weren't the brothers and sisters of Jesus.
You also mentioned that they were Jesus' half siblings. Did it ever occur to you that Joseph had children before he married Mary, and that those could be his children and still leaving Mary as an ever virgin as she truly is?

Why can't you people think and read and try to understand the Bible.

So, there's no way Catholic tradition would be above the word of God.

The Word of God IS Catholic tradition

If you like believe in Jesus Christ and believe the words of God and if you don't like, believe in your Catholic teachings.  On the judgement day only true believers would be saved.  If Mary went to heaven without death and the only son of God, Jesus Christ died and rose again on the third day,  I wonder and I am so sorry for the Catholic church and the many souls it seems to me they are decieving with that kind of teaching.

Yeah I feel sorry for those who believe that Mary went to heaven without death.

Because, Mary's death was not recorded in the Bible should not lead us to assume or conclude that Mary escaped death and went straight to heaven.

Gee those people who believe that Mary skipped death, sure need to check their Bible again.

Go and learn what the Church teaches before you post o. You will end up posting rubbish, confusing yourself and everybody.

Also, many incidents or events that happened during Jesus Ministery/time were not recorded nor mentioned in the Bible e.g. the passing of Joseph, Mary's husband was not recorded in the Bible and, does it mean that he too escaped death and went straight to heaven? At the wedding ceremony in Cana where Christ turned water into wine because the wedding guests ran out of wine and his mother - Mary suggested he do something , Joseph his father was absent and was not mentioned rather Mary and Jesus disciples (John 2:1-11). What does this suggest to you? Still, his absence in Jesus other crusades was never confirmed to us. This does not mean he did not die nor went straight to heaven. Yes the Bible is the word of God however, not every detail of the words that came out of God's mouth that the Bible recorders were able to capture or documented at the time. We are all humans and we forget things. For example, have you taken lectures in a lecture hall before? Is it every word that came out of the lecturer's mouth that you are able to jot down? You jot down what you consider essential and necessary probably that's what happened and, the Bible recorders at the time may not have considered certain events very important. Therefore if you listen to or follow your Catholic teachings without believing in Jesus Christ, confessing your sins, truely repenting and be Born Again - you will miss HEAVEN and, hell you dare not think of.

God bless you!

I know I said this before, but I will say it again. GO AND FIND OUT WHAT YOU'RE FIGHTING AGAINST FIRST BEFORE YOU FIGHT O.

Calling Lady, we need you to respond to our query about baptism! We need your support on this teaching. Incidentally, why does the Catholic organization baptize babies, when they have no idea of right and wrong? Babies can't repent can they?

Did you not read in Acts of the apostles that the people wer baptised with their wholo household?

John 3:22 after speaking of baptism to Nicodemus, St. John tells us that Jesus and his disciples went into Judea, baptising them.

Acts 8:36 – the eunuch recognizes the necessity of water for his baptism. Water and baptism are never separated in the Scriptures

Acts 10:47 - Peter says "can anyone forbid water for baptizing these people, ?" The Bible always links water and baptism

Acts 22:16 – Ananias tells Saul, “arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins.” The “washing away” refers to water baptism

Acts 2:38 - Peter commands them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in order to be actually forgiven of sin, not just to partake of a symbolic ritual.

Matt. 28:19-20 - Jesus commands the apostles to baptize all people "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

Mark 16:16 - Jesus said "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." Jesus says believing is not enough. Baptism is also required. This is because baptism is salvific, not just symbolic

Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3 - these texts show the circumcision of eight-day old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant - Col 2:11-12 - however, baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. Therefore, baptism is for babies as well as adults. God did not make His new Covenant narrower than the old Covenant. To the contrary, He made it wider, for both Jews and Gentiles, infants and adults

Matt. 18:2-5 - Jesus says unless we become like children, we cannot enter into heaven. So why would children be excluded from baptism?

Matt 19:14 - Jesus clearly says the kingdom of heaven also belongs to children. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.

Mark 10:14 - Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. Jesus says nothing about being too young to come into the kingdom of God.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus says to the crowd, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." But in reference to the same people, Jesus immediately follows with "He who does not believe will be condemned." This demonstrates that one can be baptized and still not be a believer. This disproves the Protestant argument that one must be a believer to be baptized. There is nothing in the Bible about a "believer's baptism."

Luke 18:15 – Jesus says, “Let the children come to me.” The people brought infants to Jesus that he might touch them. This demonstrates that the receipt of grace is not dependent upon the age of reason.

Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized, " Protestants use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.”) This, contrary to what Protestants argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.

Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants

Luke 1:59 - this proves that "teknon" includes infants. Here, John as a "teknon" (infant) was circumcised. See also Acts 21:21 which uses “teknon” for eight-day old babies. So baptism is for infants as well as adults

Acts 10:47-48 - Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius, which generally included infants and young children. There is not one word in Scripture about baptism being limited to adults

Acts 16:15 - Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word "household" comes from the Greek word "oikos" which is a household that includes infants and children
further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia's faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents' faith, not the children's faith

I am beginning to think you guys are doing this for sport. You completely forget the Bible that you claim to read. Anyway I have to run, have a test in 6 mins, bye

Jesus used water in a figurative sense of Salvation. Such as was used in John 4:14 and Isa.12:3;


But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. - John 4:14


Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation. - Isaiah 12:3

It was also used of cleansing by the Word of God in John 15:3 and Eph.5:26.


Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. - John 15:3
That He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, - Ephesians 5:26

Since men are cleansed and born again by the Word of God as in James 1:18 and 1Peter 1:13


Of His own will begat He us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures. - James 1:18


Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. - 1 Peter 1:23

Therefore, we can safely conclude that being born of water as spoken by Jesus to Nicodemus meant being born again by the Word of God and not by water baptism. QED

So when John the Baptist was baptizing with water, he was doing it for the fun of it? ANd when Jesus permitted John to baptise him with water, he was playing around and just wanted to wash himself?

When the apostles baptised households with water they were just messing around too?

My question is this, what if a person repented with Godly sorrow, and truly felt remorse for past sins, and was making preparations to get baptized, but died unexpectedly, are we to believe based on catholic doctrines, that such a person cannot be sealed? The bible makes it unequivocally clear, that the first step to being sealed occurs when we believe the gospel under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

You must have also missed the part in the Catholic doctrine where it says that those who are preparing for the Sacrament of Baptism but die abruptly without it are also saved because of their intentions.

Seriously before you post and show your ignorance why don't you make sure you've convered every part of your point first to make sure that it cannot be opposed credibly.

But for those who refused to get baptised because they think they don't need it, they won't be saved.

@ ttalks

Exactly correct! If a person fails to repent when he or she hears the saving gospel of Jesus Christ, which incidentally is the keys that Jesus refers to, there remains no forgiveness of sins. Such sins are retained both on earth as well as in heaven

then in that case we all have the power to forgive sins as God does.

@lady,

the following below should give a very good explanation for why Jesus asked us to retain sins:

Luke 17:3(KJV)
(3) Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.

The above verse gives the condition for forgiving sin; and that is repentance!
So,it is safe to conclude that without repentance, there is no forgiveness of sin but a retention.
It's just like our case with God. God is willing to forgive us our sins but requires us to repent to get the forgiveness.
Also, Christ died for the sins of mankind, but the forgiveness of sins provided by his sacrifice is not available unless mankind first repents.

The point in the above verse is much clearer in the CEV bible:

Luke 17:3(CEV)
(3) So be careful what you do. Correct any followers of mine who sin, and forgive the ones who say they are sorry.

We can see that it is those who are sorry/repentant that get forgiveness.

The point being driven here is very evident through careful reading of 1 Corinthians 5 and 2 Corinthians 2. The two chapters are talking about an issue of sin(1 Corinthians 5) and forgiveness(2 Corinthians 2) concerning a particular person.

A repentant person gets forgiveness; an unrepentant person does not get forgiveness but has his sins retained.

So, when a person sins, we as Christians have the right to withold forgiveness(not with any form of malice but a clear indication of knowledge of the sin) if the person has not repented. But if he repents, forgiveness is willingly and cheerfully given.

1) Ok let's look at the context in which Christ was giving his apostles the power to forgive. Christ breathes on them and tells them "AS THE FATHER SENDS ME SO I SEND YOU" Christ tells us that he has the power to forgive sins, the Jews were surprised at this because they knew that only God can forgive sins, so the forgiving us sins by Christ is different from the forgiving of sins by man. The forgiving of sins you speak of is that which doesn't include the divine forgiving of sins by God, but the one which Christ is speaking of is the divine forgiving of sins, as in a person's sins are washed away in the sight of God, this also ties to Christ giving his apostles the power to bind and loose, they're the only ones who have this power (we'll talk about that later). So when the Priests forgives they so as Christ forgives, because Christ commissioned them as the Father commissioned Christ. The forgiving in this verse is different from the forgiving you are speaking of.

Also let's look at 2 Corinthians 2:10
This particular verse actually is in support of the Catholic view of forgiveness, because here Paul himself forgives in the person of Christ.

10 And to whom you have pardoned any thing, I also. For, what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ.

The offense wasn't done to Paul and yet he does the forgiving here and not only does he do it, he does it in the person of Christ, he is standing as Christ in this situatuion, so you see there is evidence in the Bible that the apostles forgive sins as Christ.

So actually in light of 2 Corinthians the interpretation of the Church is correct.

Don't forget when Christ gave the power to his apostles, he sent them in his person, they are to do just as he does, and with his power.

nah I take it back, I don't feel sorry for ppl like you.

You leave job for woman, na wa o.

Which kind woman she be sef? Ahn ahn she no wan chop?

And na pounds we dey talk. Chei I carry baby for London, e go stay there work o. 1 pound equals 2 dollars, it adds up, na beemer me I go get. Wetin, who no wan chop na mumu?

Hi nairalanders. I was head over heels in love with my ex. So much in love I actually gave up a good job in the UK and came back because she wasnt able to come over. Pitifully to say she dumped me six months after i got back and my $$$$ ran out. All of the friends on both sides were really insensitive towards me and i sort of disappeared. That was 3 years ago. Got a call today from one of the "friends" telling me she was getting married. I thought I was over it but it hurt bad. people am I just weak or is it natural?

Why would you leave your job for a woman?
She saw you as someone weak, and she played you well
Sorry o jare.

Israel is now the church? the extent to which you guys will go to rationalize you delusion is really funny. What does the Church mean according to the bible?I thought it meant the Body of Christ, If the Church which is Israel is now the body of Christ as you have said then what now happens to your argument in favor of the gentiles? What has Jesus talking to one woman from samaria got to do with him warning his disciples not to go to the cities of the gentiles? He told them categorically that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel(Israel here is not the Church as you will want us to believe). If Samaria is considered among the lost sheep of Israel why did Jesus not say so? He told his disciples no to go into the lands of the gentiles and samaritans but to the lost sheep of Israel. Show me a passage in the bible where Jesus went to the land of the canaanites and offered a single person salvation.(without them coming to him). Remeber he was reluctant and did not want to heal the child of the canaanite woman because he said that it was not right to take what belongs to the children(Israel) and give it to their dogs(Gentiles).

Yes Israel is now the Church, there are twelve tribes of Israel, all of which after centuries were diminished. Jesus chose 12 disciples to parallel the 12 tribes of Israel. This wasn't a coincidence.
Jacob is the Patriarch of Israel, he actually is Israel of the Old Testament, his name was changed to Israel and he had 12 sons, hence the 12 tribes of Israel. Jesus is the Patriarch of Israel, he actually is the Israel of the New Testament, he had 12 disciples, the 12 tribes of Israel. Jesus the New Israel, Body of Christ the Church, The Church Israel.

If Jesus was trying to rebuke the canaanite woman he wouldn't have healed her daughter. Also take note of the words used by Jesus, when Jesus was speaking of dogs, back then they had house dogs, and they were fed after the children were fed, what the children refused to eat went to the dogs. Remember above when I said, Jesus sent his disciples to the Jews first and then to the gentiles, when the Jews rejected his message he sent his message to the gentiles.

If he was trying to include the gentiles why did he tell his disciples to stay away from the gentiles when preaching that the kingdom of heaven is near? why did he say that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel? Why did he say that he was going to judge only the twelve tribes of Israel?

What is your definition of gentile? Because you have shifted it twice. Remember you gave the passage that has Jesus saying that his disciples shouldn't go to the gentiles and in that he included the samaritans, and then when I showed you that he went to the samaritan woman, you included the samaritans as the lost sheep of Israel. You're going to have to choose one definition of gentiles and stick to it.

The twelve tribes of Israel is the Church now.
Remember the 12 apostles. He chose 12 for a reason.

What does this passage tell you? All you did was just copy a part of it that agrees with your thoughts and present it as Jesus telling his disciples to preach unto the gentiles but you have it all wrong. Here is Jesus in his own words from the beggining when he was sending his disciples out to preach about the kingdom of heaven that was at hand

No what I was doing is showing you that you don't just pick one verse of the Bible and run with it, you look at it collectively, what does it tell you about the gentiles. You can't have one verse that says don't go to the gentiles and another that says you will be a light to the gentiles, the only conclusion that can be gotten is that at the beginning when he said he was to the house of Israel he meant to them first and then when they rejected him his message will go to the gentiles, and even at that, it still stands that the Church is the New Israel.

Here is the whole passage in its full context, all you did was cherry pick what made sense to you to prove your point.

And the whole passage in full proves my point and not yours. In the same instance he tells them not to go to the gentiles he also tells them they will be witness to the gentiles. What does that tell you?

The Jews knew what that the messiah was not meant to be a messiah to the Israelities but to the whole world according to your Christain bible or theirs(Hebrew bible)? By the way no where is the story of Jesus'death ever reported as it was reported in the bible, there are no records to show that the Jews or Romans killed Jesus as it was reported in the bible but that is a different argument entirely

According to them and us, they do not believe Jesus to be the messiah, for two reasons, they expected Mary to be of the house of Judah, David, Joseph was of the house of David and so is Mary and Jesus by marriage and adoption. People considered Jesus a son of David, they didn't know he was of a virgin birth. Mary and Joseph were married when Jesus was born. SO he's of the house of David. Also because they think the messiah will be on earth physically for forever.
But everything else still stands. Ask the Jews for Jesus and they'll tell you.

There are also non-christian sources that show that Jesus was killed. We've provided it to the muslims too many times, they turn a blind eye to it, hopefully you won't do the same. Here are the sources:

Tacitus:
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired

It is really hard to find their writings online, but another one is seutonius, and verellius (think that's how it's spelt), but will research more for their books outside of the internet and get the info to you. The Jewish Talmud is also a good source. Why do I choose these sources? Because they speak negatively about Christians and boast about killing the man the christians called God.

They will be his witness in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth that he died and rose up. This part is ambiguous and could be taken to mean a lot of things, He only said that they will be his witness, he didn't say that they should go and preach to the entire world about him according to the passage but when Jesus was telling his disciples to preach about the kingdom of heaven that was at hand he said it in unambiguous terms that they should not go into the cities of the gentiles. He also said that he was sent only to the lost tribe of Israel. He did not want to heal the child of the gentile woman because he believes that it was wrong for the gentiles to enjoy what was meant for the children of Israel alone.

um that is what witnessing to Christ is, going and preaching about him, duh. If they are not witnesses to him, they wouldn't talk about him, but if they are as he told them to be, they would talk about him, and that is preaching.

Of course he was not listening to Christ? Why did Jesus say that he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel? Why did he refer to the gentiles are "dogs" for wanting to partake in the Food(Miracles and healing) of the people of Israel? Why did he never say that he was going to Judge the Jews and Gentiles in any of the Gospels? Why did he say that he was going to Judge only the 12 tribes of Israel?

Because the 12 tribes of Israel is now the Church. Are you even listening or do you just want to argue of arguments sake? Because I will leave this topic, if that's the case. You've proven time and time again that you don't want to learn, so why should anyone even bother with you?

This are not the words of Jesus but the words of the(unknown) writer of John.

Those are the words of Jesus, let me give you the full passage.

John 3

1 And there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews.
2 This man came to Jesus by night, and said to him: Rabbi, we know that thou art come a teacher from God; for no man can do these signs which thou dost, unless God be with him.
3 Jesus answered, and said to him: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith to him: How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born again?
5 Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That which is born of the flesh, is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit.
7 Wonder not, that I said to thee, you must be born again.
8 The Spirit breatheth where he will; and thou hearest his voice, but thou knowest not whence he cometh, and whither he goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
9 Nicodemus answered, and said to him: How can these things be done?
10 Jesus answered, and said to him: Art thou a master in Israel, and knowest not these things?
11 Amen, amen I say to thee, that we speak what we know, and we testify what we have seen, and you receive not our testimony.
12 If I have spoken to you earthly things, and you believe not; how will you believe, if I shall speak to you heavenly things?
13 And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him, may not perish; but may have life everlasting.
16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him.
18 He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the judgment: because the light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the light: for their works were evil.
20 For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved.

So you see that is Jesus speaking, John isn't an unknown writer, he identifies himself clearly at the end.

That is it, right there!! If anyone is still in doubt as to the idolatory in the RCC, you have read it from the horse's mouth. That the Mary they worship and bow down to is called the Queen of heaven. Do you now see how the Babylonian goddess referred to in Jeremiah has now metamorphosized into the so called virgin Mary in the RCC? He that has an ear let him hear what the Spirit of the Lord is saying and quickly make amends before it is too late

How the hell is calling Mary Queen make her an Idol? Queen Elizabeth exists but is she an idol now?
Don't be a menace to society with your ignorance, get educated.

But if it kills you so much, I will say it again and again and again.

MARY QUEEN OF HEAVEN

Infact let me put the Litany here.

Lord, have mercy on us. Christ have mercy on us.

Lord, have mercy on us. Christ, hear us. Christ graciously hear us.

God, the Father of heaven, have mercy on us.

God the Son, Redeemer of the world, have mercy on us.

God the Holy Ghost, have mercy on us.

Holy Trinity, one God, have mercy on us.

Holy Mary, pray for us.

Holy Mother of God, pray for us.

Holy Virgin of virgins, pray for us.

Mother of Christ, pray for us.

Mother of divine grace, pray for us.

Mother most pure, pray for us.

Mother most chaste, pray for us.

Mother inviolate, pray for us.

Mother undefiled, pray for us.

Mother most amiable, pray for us.

Mother most admirable, pray for us.

Mother of good counsel, pray for us.

Mother of our Creator, pray for us.

Mother of our Savior, pray for us.

Virgin most prudent, pray for us.

Virgin most venerable, pray for us.

Virgin most renouned, pray for us.

Virgin most powerful, pray for us.

Virgin most merciful, pray for us.

Virgin most faithful, pray for us.

Mirror of justice, pray for us.

Seat of wisdom, pray for us.

Cause of our joy, pray for us.

Spiritual vessel, pray for us.

Vessel of honor, pray for us.

Singular vessel of devotion, pray for us.

Mystical rose, pray for us.

Tower of David, pray for us.

Tower of ivory, pray for us.

House of gold, pray for us.

Ark of the covenant, pray for us.

Gate of heaven, pray for us.

Morning star, pray for us.

Health of the sick, pray for us.

Refuge of sinners, pray for us.

Comforter of the afflicted, pray for us.

Help of Christians, pray for us.

Queen of Angels, pray for us.

Queen of Patriarchs, pray for us.

Queen of Prophets, pray for us.

Queen of Apostles, pray for us.

Queen of Martyrs, pray for us.

Queen of Confessors, pray for us.

Queen of Virgins, pray for us.

Queen of all Saints, pray for us.

Queen conceived without original sin, pray for us.

Queen assumed into heaven, pray for us.

Queen of the most holy Rosary, pray for us.

Queen of Peace, pray for us.

Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world,
spare us, O Lord.

Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world,
graciously hear us O Lord

Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world,
have mercy on us.

V. Pray for us, O holy Mother of God.
R. That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

LET US PRAY

Grant, we beseech Thee, O Lord God, unto us Thy servants, that we may rejoice in continual health of mind and body; and, by the glorious intercession of Blessed Mary ever Virgin, may be delivered from present sadness, and enter into the joy of Thine eternal gladness. Through Chrsit our Lord. Amen.


NOW GO AND EAT YOUR HEART OUT!!!

She is Our Queen and Our Mother, She is the Mother of Our Lord, nothing will ever change that. GBAM!!!

So now you're calling us liars.

You guys have been lying from the beginning, and you expose nothing but your deceit. Everyone on this forum already knows the hatred you guys have for us. There hasn't been a thread about Catholics that you guys do not insult us.

But you don't own the older catechisms in which most of the teachings and dogmas are found.

The teachings and dogmas have not changed, do you even know what a dogma is? Do you know that the Trinity is a dogma?
That is what you're denying when you start denying the Church and the dogma. You don't even know what you're fighting against, as long as it's something from the Church it is bad. You hear dogma and without knowing what it is you fight against it. You're fighting against the Trinity.

As I said the teachings and dogmas have not changed, they cannot be changed, it is not up to us to change it. We cannot change that the Trinity exists o, biko nu, we cannot. The newer catechisms contain the same thing as the older catechisms, it is only in a different translation or vernacular, but it still says the same thing. We haven't changed in 2000 years. Sorry but we won't change the teachings of Christ and the apostles simply because you guys don't understand them.

Its funny how your actions betray you. Isn't it funny how Catholic priests don't tell their members its wrong to smoke and drink, and its fine to live anyhow as long as you confess and say a few hail Mary's, all is well. Penance is just around the corner you see, so don't worry.

Where the hell did you get this from? When will you guys stop adding your assumptions and passing it off as our belief. Everyone that has stepped foot into the Catholic Church comes and tells how everything we do is from the Bible, the Mass has everything from the Bible. Our prayers are prayers from the Bible. I know some non catholics who pretended to be catholic and went to confession and not once did the Priest tell them go and sin and drink and smoke and all will be alright as long as you confess.
That is a lie from you guys, I know this because I converted, thank you. I went to confession pretending to be a Catholic, and I came out of there a renewed person.

Priest do not encourage anyone to drink and smoke, that is your own imagination, and your stupid assumption.

And what actions, dude you don't know me, you've never met me in your life, and if you did you would be a Catholic. SO don't even try to insult me.

You keep repeating the same old stuff that applies to the RCC. It is they who continue to nullify God's words with their pagan traditions. The deception is so deeply rooted that no one is qualified to see the obvious variation from truth. Revelation rightly speaks of spiritual drunkenness on the part of those who see the many wrongs being committed, and still continue to defend it.

No babe it doesn't apply to us, it is you guys that fail to understand the Bible, and if you think you do know the Bible, how come you guys dodge our questions and refuse to interpret the passages we provide for you. Stop deceiving yourselves. We have not added a single pagain ritual to the Church. Stop letting yourselves be deceived by the devil, he is winning with you.

I dare say not just in your catechisms, but here is just a part of the Jesuit oath, "I furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity present, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition; and that I will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants' heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of the poniard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agent of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of Jesus, "

Lol, you know what I will leave this one for Imhotep to rip apart, he is a jesuit.

Wise old king if you ask me who was prepared to defend his people against all evil. Besides, there is a vast difference between defending against inquisitions, than say killing people based on their right to choose the bible. Protestant monarchs, God bless their souls, were insightful enough to see what the RCC was up to.

Wow, ofcourse wise old king that wanted to divorce his wife (catherine) because she couldn't produce a male heir for him. The Church denied him the divorce, and so he decided to start his own church, wise old king that committed adultery because he was sleeping with his future wife (anne) before he got divorced. Wise old king who beheaded his wife. Wise old king who locked up his wife (catherine) and refused her daughter Mary to see her.
Yup wise old king who started his own church becaue he wanted to f**k a woman, THAT IS TRULY WISE.

He is such the epitome of a christian. Don't you agree?

There was no inquisiton, dude just wanted a divorce, maybe you should learn history first eh.

When last have you heard on the news that Catholic priests were being killed in vast numbers? There can be no comparison to the vast amount of murders that were waged agaiinst bible-believing Christians. The latest round of sexual scandals is all we have heard of, and nothing more. Name a period as far back as you can recall. If anything its both protestants and Catholics that are killed alike in those regions of political instability. Hardly do we hear that priests are killed because of their faith.

Does it have to be in the media for it to be true? Countless of priests are murdered and also catholics are persecuted left and right by so called Bible believing christians.

Welcome to the club. Being disagreed with in strong terms doesn't qualify you as the truth bearer. The Witnesses, and others have been discriminated against, but does that make them out to be bearers of God's oracles?

Don't change my statement, it shows that you guys are still persecuting us. How many bible believing Christians loose their friends for their faith, actually it's you guys that are so judgmental and think anyone who doesn't have your faith is not worth living.

Its quite the opposite! The Moslems prevented the expansion of the inquisitions. Revelation describes them as the locusts from the pit. The Arabs then, as against the extreme forms of Islam today became God's tool in sparing the untold anhilation that would have befallen bible-believing Christians.

Before you make a stupid statement such as this, you might want to check your facts with the facts of history. Tell me the time the inquisition started and then tell me when the muslims massacred Christians.

I will just allow you to show facts in this case. Um there were no "bible-believing" christians, protestanism didn't start until 1500s the crusades and war with the muslims were much earlier than that. Go and check your facts.

History says otherwise Lady. Pope John Paul apologized did he not? History makes it abundantly clear that the popes initiated the inquisitions to quell the growing reformation. You're not talking to the average poster lady. Please don't insult our intelligence. While many people associate the Inquisition with Spain and Portugal, it was actually instituted by Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) in Rome. A later pope, Pope Gregory IX established the Inquisition, in 1233, to combat the heresy of the Abilgenses, a religious sect in France. By 1255, the Inquisition was in full gear throughout Central and Western Europe; although it was never instituted in England or Scandinavia

Ok I am seriously dying to know where you got your facts from. Please provide us with these facts, thank you.

What utter nonsense! Who would excummunicated Catholics commit their wicked acts on may I ask?

On muslims and catholics alike, protestants didn't exist.

Rest assured we are doing it out of love for Catholic members.

love does not hurt, it does not insult, it does not hate, it does not degrade people, and it does not give others ammo to kill a set of people. You guys do not love, you are full of hate.

Reporting the murders of innocent people for having expressed their desire to read the bible is just a fraction of the many evils committed by the RC leadership. The point is were it not for the sinister traditions of the RCC in the first place, none of these things would be up for discussion now.

were it not for the RCC in the first place, you wouldn't know the Trinity, were it not for the RCC you wouldn't have a Bible, were it not for the RCC you wouldn't exist as a Christian.

Now let's get on to the Bible, why did you not interpret the verse where Jesus asked us to retain sins?

dgreatrock:
Lady, my Lady, must we tear ourselves over this?

i respect whatever any denomination does within the confines of the scriptures and leave the others for God to help them.

what i feel about is, when one tries to better itself at the cost of the others.

the roman catholic or romish church, like every other church had its short comings and will continue in such till the day of Jesus christ. what it has failed to do is stand against the errors of her days.

we anglicans are faced with a serious problem - homosexulism, we are not going to fold our hands and let this error overtake us! we will not legalise or allow it to be ritualised by any one.

Am I tearing u apart? Sorry o, I didn't know. What did I tear, your leg, arms what so I can fix it.

Well truly there is only one non-denominational church, and you know exactly what it is.
But I do feel for you guys with the homosexuality thing, I guess that's why the Anglican Church is trying to unite with the Roman Rite. Welcome Home, ppl.

We do truly love you and pray that one day we will all commune together as it was always meant to be.

If I were to cast my vote for a miracle it would definitely be how lady manages to post without seeing the obvious contradictions in her musings, its like using duct tape, any thing can be joined together
Save some mojitos for me senorita!

Show me my contradictions, maybe you misunderstand me.

And no I didn't save any mojitos for you. I drank it all.

take it up with Christ . . . my own is to remind the people of what the bible has to say. As long as you have heard the gospel at one point in your life . . . the decision is totally up to you. If you feel Christ cant be that "wicked" to mean what he said in John 3:18 then by all means throw away ur bible and wait for eternity . . .

Ahn ahn but you are a messenger of Christ abi, why can't you tell us what will happen to muslim children that die as muslims? shouldn't they be condemned too.

God can grant grace to whomever he wishes to, it is not up to you to do so, so don't act like you know who will and won't make it heaven, and then patting yourself on the back.

You believe in Christ and yet you do that which he doesn't like, will you make it to heaven?

Again you completely avoid any of the points made to simply indulge in another "bash David" fest. If it suits your empty shell then pls by all means continue.

Don't give yourself way too much credit, sometimes I wish to ignore you so your head won't get too big. But as usual, you will never admit you've done something wrong. That is called pride.

You basically havent said anything that makes sense here. Read his books and pls find me anything that is supported by the bible there. It is one thing to PREACH THE WORD, it is another thing to CAMOUFLAGE PSYCHOLOGY WITH THE BIBLE (aka preaching from the bible).

So there's a particular method of preaching the Bible? I didn't know that, show me where in the Bible it says there's a particular method.

Does he have to scream "Holy Ghost fire" to be preaching the Bible? Does he have to run up and down shouting to be preaching the Bible? Are there particular words you must use to preach the Bible? If there is please show me.

Again i repeat . . . it is one thing to preach the word as the apostles preached it and another thing to speak psychology coating it with misinterpreted bible verses. Most of you wont know the difference even if it hit you in the face.

Let me guess you are the one with the correct interpretation of the Bible.

when next you meet brother Paul pls admonish him about his "judgemental" statement. Many of you cant endure sound doctrine . . . to you hypocrites = judging. By all means ignore me and do as your heart tells u.

oh so you're a preacher now, and you've delivered Osteen up to the devil? Dude you judged him, start recongising that you judge people.

this is utter rubbish. He denied Christ on worldwide TV, it is the duty of the "serious christian" (as defined by the bible) to speak out against such. These generation of "serious christians" seem to have developed new unbiblical rules for themselves. Imagine Paul making such a public statement like Osteen at a square in Antioch . . . Peter and co would have excommunicated him with immediate effect . . . today we are could care less

Oya tell me how he denied Christ.

And um why are you on nairaland and not on the televagelist network telling him he has erred <---that looks so wrong, why are you here jusging him, go and tell him so his blood won't be on your hands.

Again pls argue with the Lord . . . i'm not His speech writer . . . if His words annoy the hell out of you pls feel free to make up your own gospel.

Ha you make this statement as if it holds weight.
And it isn't the Lord's word here, it is your word. Unless you're trying to say you're the Lord.

Rubbish.

the bible is VERY CLEAR . . . he that believeth not

you cant believe in something you have not heard. Pure common sense. which is why the Lord said He would delay His coming until the gospel had reached the uttermost parts of the earth.

Ok now what about muslim children or non-christian children. should they be condemned too?

If it annoys u pls take your case to Christ . . . i am merely quoting his words. Rationalise it to suit you if you wish but dont insult me . . . i'm not Jesus Christ's speech writer.

Do not use the word of Christ to suit yourself please. Does that include those who have not heard the message of Christ?

davidylan:
The problem is you rarely think things through before speaking. you simply see the name "david" and feel you must needs oppose.

The problem is not that we are worried that he doesnt flip the bible enough . . . NO! tunde Bakare does not flip the bible forever in church so do many many pastors who simply come in, pick their text from a verse of the bible and then proceed to preach from it. The problem is that Osteen doesnt even pretend that any of the things he preaches have any root in the bible . . . you can watch 10 tapes of his sermons and NOT ONCE is the bible mentioned except to mutilate one or two verses to say what it did not teach.

He didnt need to flip his bible on CNN but he sat there and DENIED the very Lordship of Christ . . . it was not me alone . . . millions of Christians were equally apalled.

I have watched him countless times before coming to my conclusions, i have read comments from others, i have weighed his actions against that of the bible, i have perused through some of his books searching for spiritual meat . . . i find him empty and full of dead mens bones . . .

unlike you lady, i'm not just opposing (or judging) . . . i am doing so based on concrete evidence.

Well if this isn't your self righteous rant, I don't know what is.

Dude you made a ridiculous statement, even if you researched till they kingdom come, you need to watch how you say things before you send the wrong message, and no I am not opposing you, so stop being so defensive. I am pointing out to you that you need to watch how you say things, because you are on a forum and those who did not watch the interview will run on your very word. and because we have people like you who are easily influenced by crap, they will immediately run with that statement, as if the dude doesn't preach from the Bible.
I have also listened to him, and he does speak from the Bible, he doesn't have to quote ten thousand passages for him to be speaking the truth, your statement was along the lines of "if you don't flip through plenty of passages during a sermon you are not using the Bible"
I am only getting you to see that you can use one verse in the Bible to preach a lifetime of messages. Your statement was judgmental, and I am pointing that out to you. It is also not only myself who've seen the judge in you.

If he denied Jesus then that's his palava and the people that support his business. Serious Christians would be able to discern for themselves, and even at that it is not up to you to judge him, God is his judge, if he leads people the wrong way, God will judge him not you. Vengeance is the Lord's and not yours.
Got it?

davidylan:
The bible is very plain - He that believeth not is CONDEMNED ALREADY.

Go and argue with that verse and leave me in peace.

So those who never heard of Jesus but do good all their life, and believe that there is a God, but did not know that this God is Jesus, would be condemned? I didn't know God was so heartless.
What about the children? Should they be condemned too?

I don't know about you, but I don't serve a God that is heartless like that. I also know that I serve a God that is merciful and provides us with his grace, and grace is a gift, and not earned so stop thinking that because you believe in Jesus you have earned your grace.

Self-righteous christians annoy the hell out of me.

You are sounding very authoritative with your assertions but your basic premise for these assertions is belief and not fact and that is the issue with them, it is also unfortunate that the line between belief and fanatism is a very thin one

Dude it is a fact, that the Bible consists of the Old Testament and the New Testament. It is a fact that the Old Testament contains prophecies about the salvation of the world (the New Testament). It is a fact that the Old Testament contains information about the legal system of the Jewish people. It is a fact that there were only 10 laws that were oversimplified into 600andsomething laws.
It is not an assumption, it is a fact. This isn't about belief, this is what any historian or researcher or anyone who combs carefully through the Bible will see. Geez this is what you said too.

Belief is fine if not fanatical, but leave that room for the possibility of it being untrue (wholly or in part). I will still allow my kids to read the bible and bring them up on bible stories (would even allow them to go to church with the wifey who will be a christian) it is good for building up their characters but as they grow older we will sit together as a family and think things through

okey dokey (sorry just came from Texas)

I saw hispanics there, I turned to them and said "Hey I can speak spanish, MARGARITA!"

Hmmm, sorry I made that wild accusation (possibly a relic of my past pentecostal affiliations), you did give a genuine enough explanation of why the early catholic church appeared not to encourage the reading of the bible by the laity though I must say that as a result, it must have given quite some power to the church clergy to control other people. Some major power those guys had, they must have actually felt like God most times as they even knew the innermost secrets of people's minds and knew the gory details of what was going on with their church members very easy to become tyrannical with such power don't you think?

True, there are those clergy who abuse their power. The office is to serve the laity not abuse them, fortunately there are Catholic laity like myself, who will be quick to remind them that they are servants and not gods. You'll be amazed how many Catholics do that, especially after the sex scandals, we took control after that.
I do thank God for my Priest though. And I pray for him, and do pray for laborers in the field, no one can appoint themselves, they have to be chosen by God, unfortunately few are not heeding that call.
God help us all.

I would like to hear your view of what the forbidden fruit in the garden meant, though I doubt if it was completely symbolic cos of the reference to the Euphrates river which implied some sort of physical location. The sex angle is quite plausible with all the nudity and stuff, seems God ended up directing the first Indecency flick or started up the first nudist resort.

Lol, you have quite an imagination. The garden of eden isn't an actual physical place, but a state of mind or spirituality if you wish to call it that. The forbidden fruit is knowledge, it is not an apple or mango or orange, I am trying to see the best way of explaining it, so bear with me. Ok I'll try using the devil's words to explain it (lol).
The devil talking to the woman tells her that if she eats of the tree she will have knowledge like gods, knowledge of what is good and what is bad. The woman wanting to eat the fruit desired wisdom, this fruit was going to give her wisdom, and she wanted it. Immediately they ate it their eyes became open and then they realised they were naked, they could now tell wrong from right, and they were no longer pure as they were made to be. They no longer trusted God as they were created to do.
When God came to converse with them they hid and God asked them why they were hiding, and they told him and he asked them how they knew, everything points to the knowledge of them, knowledge, knowledge, knowledge. Unfortunately they already had perfect knowledge, what they thought would be knowledge ended up being destruction, instead of knowledge they gained pain and death. So the wisdom they were looking for wasn't actually wisdom it was foolishness and they didn't know it until they got it.

And sex is not a bad thing, infact it is very good. It is one of the most beautiful gifts we have, imagine being able to give life, and to bring life into th world, I mean that is just beyond great. Do you know how precious that is?
The problem is that it is abused, it is a beautiful gift that has been tainted. It has become pornography, masturbation, homosexual acts, pedophilia, prostitution, and fornication.
It is a beautiful gift that should be shared with one person, how can you give the same gift to plenty of people? It is no longer a gift, it no longer has any worth.
So don't believe all those people that say sex is bad, it is actually good, and it is beautiful, beauty shouldn't be abused.

Wouldn't we all, rather than having to watch all those bombs falling in Gaza or some looneys blowing themselves up with a lot of bystanders all in the name of an imaginary entity no one has ever seen.
Man usually messes up everything anyway and (according to you) God did make us stubborn when he gave us a free will, what is the purpose of giving a free will if it is not exercised?

Lol, he didn't make us stubborn o, we chose to be stubborn. We can use our free will to do good u know. You can do good for the rest of your life, free will isn't exercised because we do bad. Free will is exercised in a decision making process, a person can do good all his life and that would be free will.

Babe, yu must be living the life taking a vacay in the midst of all these job redundancies. Take it easy though and watch your calories, don't want that exquisite figure 8 balloon out into a figure 30.

Ah no o, me i dey suffer, but I don't work as much, so i enjoy life more. I am still a student. I don't believe in watching calories, I believe in eating amala with okro ad stew all day and night. Seriously, I just make it to the gym every morning, I am not one of those girls who desire to be skinny, I choose to be healthy, and toned up. I do admit I am not as toned as I used to be, after my accident I couldn't do as much as I used to so my body pretty much isn't the same, but I am getting there again. Don't worry they figure 8 is still there, it just needs some toning that's all. But who cares my baby loves me this way, and I love myself, and my mama loves me.

i strongly disagree with you! these were the same lies the roman catholics told anglican converts when the gospel was just brought to nigeria. they lied that the catholic church which is said in the creeds means the roman catholic church!
this is not true. check your dictionary, 'catholic' means 'universal' as well as 'a church denomination'. in the context of the creed, it is referring to 'a universal church'

actually it does mean the Catholic Church, when the creeds were written there were no protestants, there was only one Church, and that's what you call the Roman Catholic Church today. So honestly it is about the Roman Catholic Church. Now what does that tell you? It tells you that the Roman Catholic Church is not a denomination, and is only called the Roman Catholic Church because protesants (lutherans, anglicans, calvinists, and others) exist. If there was no break we will all be The Church. You call us Roman Catholic today so that those who wish to be a part of the Orthodox Church founded by Christ would know where to go. It is not because we are denomination, it is only because you guys exist. To us, the rest of you are the sheep in wolves clothing that were to come and challenge the teaching of Christ.

So actually the Church is ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, and APOSTOLIC just as Christ intended for her to be. These are the descriptions of the Church that Christ founded, and that Church is what you call the Roman Catholic Church today, better known to us Catholics as THE CHURCH.

Also when you speak of the Church, you can't honestly think that we are all one church iwth different denominations, that goes against what the Church is meant to be. We are not meant to have different teachings and different beliefs, we are to be of one mind and spirit. Today there are different minds and spirit, so in all honesty all christians are not the Church.

the sacraments you mentioned are not properties or trademarks of the roman catholic church, but practices which are rooted in the scriptures and of spiritual and material benefits to the church.

Exactly. I am not trying to say that they are trademarks of the Roman Catholic Church, I am saying you guys believe what we believe. It is the same thing. You guys are persecuting us for believing in what you believe. You're downgrading your own belief.

we dont believe in the real presence of christ in the Lord's supper, hence we dont refer to it as a 'mass'.

Ok sweetheart you might want to check, you guys definitely believe in the real presence. Even Luther couldn't deny that.

[url]http://anglicansonline.org/basics/catechism.html#The%20Holy%20Eucharist[/url] scroll down to the one about the eucharist.

Did you know that you guys have a catechism?

we believe in in saints but dont revere and rely on them for prayers and spiritual support. they were as we are and as they are we will be someday. only CHRIST can save us.

um actually you do, and if you didn't you're going against the Bible, as we are one church (in heaven and on earth), and all have special gifts and the prayers of the saints and powerful (St. Paul in one of the books of the Bible, Corinthians maybe, too lazy to look it up now, but ofcourse as you say, only Christ saves, just as we believe. duh.

and concerning Mary, emmmm!!!
we thank God she was the vessel God used to give birth to Jesus, but that does not give her any place in the Godhead! praying to her and or the saints is idolatery, it is unscriptural and error. Anglicans dont and will never pray to her!

Actually you guys do pray to her and you do see her as the Mother of God, some anglicans pray the rosary, they finally learnt what it actually is not what protestants claim it is. And who the hell gave Mary a place in the Godhead?

thank God for the roman catholic church - God used her to herald the gospel, but she is in error today. such errors should be corrected and not applauded.

If this is true then God is not able to guide his Church into all truths. And isn't faithful on his promise. And by the way you mean the same errors that you believe in ehn.

That is very doubtful because the only time Osteen uses "God's words" in his preaching is at the begining where he has them hold their bible and recite meaningless words, after that you may as well sit on your bible . . . you wont be needing it for the rest of the service

Where in the Bible does it say you must be flipping throug it to be a true preacher? Did it ever occur to you that the message he wants to speak of comes form one passage?
Did Jesus carry a Bible and start flipping through it to be a true preacher?


You're so buried in your own method that you think everyone must be like you to be honest (which you are the biggest intruder of honesty on this board after olabowale)

You fail to realise that we are a diverse people and that each one of us have our own gifts, don't insult the gifts God has given to the man.
Stop judging ppl.

viee:
HEY PEEPS. . .
hapi new month!
Kar, how naw?
i fyn ooo, thankx for keeping this thread alive. . .
Carl, fancy meeting you here. .
kedukwanu?
Oby, hw bodi.

lets do the count down to my fav time in the year. . . lenten season.
itz abt 3wkz away and i hope we will all be able do it as we always do.

Lady, Nne, kedu?

Odinma

lenten season is your fav too?

Guys thank you so much for your prayers, I really appreciate it, I am putting my trust in God, and entertaining myself on nairaland in the meantime, lol.

Hope you are all doing well. You are also in my prayers.